Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Perspective on the Resolution of Confusions in the Teaching of Electricity

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Physics continues to be widely regarded by students as difficult and therefore unattractive. Electricity is a particular problem, as it involves extremely complex and highly abstract concepts and is thus totally dependent on models/analogies/metaphors. Research consistently shows very poor student understanding after the teaching of electricity. We consider this research and draw two broad conclusions of central relevance to the teaching of electricity (which are both also argued to be significant contributors to student learning difficulties): there is an absence of any systemic consensus about what models etc. are appropriate for students at different year levels and for different intended learning outcomes; there is no consensus about appropriate learning outcomes for electricity at different levels.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ameh, C., & Gunstone, R. (1985). Teachers' concepts in science. Research in Science Education, 15, 151-157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, B., & Karrqvist, C. (1979). Electric circuits (EKNA Report No. 2). Sweden: University of Gothenburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arons, A. (1995). Generalisations for research on teaching and learning. In C. Bernardini, C. Tarsitani, & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Thinking physics for teaching (pp. 1-7). New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borges, A., & Gilbert, J. (1999). Mental models of electricity. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 95-117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, R., Eylon, B.-S., & Ganiel, U. (1983). Potential difference and current in simple electric circuits: A study of students' concepts. American Journal of Physics, 51, 407-412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosgrove, M. (1995). A study of science-in-the-making as students generate their own analogy for electricity. International Journal of Science Education, 17, 295-310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosgrove, M., Osborne, R., & Carr, M. (1985). Children's intuitive ideas on electric current and the modification of those ideas. In R. Duit, W. Jung, & C. von Rhöneck (Eds.), Aspects of understanding electricity (pp. 247-256). Kiel, Germany: Schmidt, & Klaunig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dagher, Z. (1997). The case for analogies in teaching science for understanding. InJ. Mintzes, J. Wandersee, & J. Novak (Eds.), Teaching science for understanding (pp. 195-211). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver, R., & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duit, R. (1991). On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Science Education, 75, 649-672.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duit, R., Goldberg, F., & Niedderer, H. (Eds.). (1992). Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and classroom studies. Kiel, Germany: IPN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duit, R., Jung, W., & von Rhöneck, C. (1985). Aspects of understanding electricity. Kiel, Germany: Schmidt, & Klaunig.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupin, J.-J., & Joshua, S. (1987). Conceptions of French pupils concerning electric circuits: Structure and evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 791-806.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eylon, B.-S., & Ganiel, U. (1990). Macro-micro relationships: The missing link between electrostatics and electrodynamics in student reasoning. International Journal of Science Education, 12, 79-94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fensham, P. (1999, Sept.). Science content as problematic: Issues for research.Invited paper given at the Second International Conference of the European Science Education Research Conference, Kiel, Germany.

  • Fensham, P., Gunstone, R., & White, R. (Eds.). (1994). The content of science. London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredette, N., & Lochhead, J. (1980). Student conceptions of simple circuits. The Physics Teacher, 18, 194-198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, R., Brownlee, R., & Baker, D. (1937). First principles of physics. NewYork: Norwood Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gauld, C. (1986). Models, meters and memory. Research in Science Education, 16, 49-54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunstone, R. (2000). Constructivism in the classroom. In D. Philips (Ed.), Constructivism in education: Opinions and second opinions on controversial issues (pp. 254-280). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilbron, J. (1979). Electricity in the 17th and 18th centuries: A study of early modern physics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heller, P., & Finley, F. (1992). Variable uses of alternative conceptions: A case-study in electricity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 259-275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopmann, S., & Riquarts, K. (Eds.). (1995). Didaktik and/or curriculum. Kiel, Germany: IPN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, M. (1972). The use and abuse of historical teaching in physics. In S. Brush, & A. King (Eds.), History in the teaching of physics (pp. 12-18). Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loughran, J. J., Gunstone, R. F., Berry, A., Milroy, P., & Mulhall, P. (2000, April). Science Cases in Action: Developing an understanding of science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans.

  • McDermott, L., & Shaffer, P. (1993). Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part I: Investigation of student understanding. American Journal of Physics, 60, 994-1003 (erratum 61, 81).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mulhall, P., Milroy, P., Berry, A., Gunstone, R., & Loughran, J. (2000, June). Enhancing understanding of science pedagogical content knowledge for teachers and researchers. Paper presented at the conference of the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Fremantle.

  • Niedderer, H. (1999, Sept.). Personal communication, Kiel.

  • Niedderer, H., & Goldberg, F. (1994, April). An individual student's learning process in electric circuits. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Anaheim, CA.

  • Osborne, R. (1983). Modifying children's ideas about electricity current. Research in Science and Technological Education, 1, 73-82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, R., & Freyberg, P. (Eds.). (1985). Learning in science: The implications of children's science. Auckland: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, P. (1982). Even honors students have conceptual difficulties with physics. American Journal of Physics, 50, 501-508.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfundt, H., & Duit, R. (1994). Bibliography–Students' alternative frameworks and science education (4th ed.). Kiel, Germany: IPN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Psillos, D. (1997). Teaching introductory electricity. In A. Tiberghien, E. L. Jossem, & J. Barojas (Eds.), Connecting research in physics education with teacher education. International Commission on Physics Education. Published electronically at URL http://www.physics.ohio-state.edu/jossem/ICPE/BOOKS.html

  • Psillos, D., Koumaras, P., & Tiberghien, A. (1988). Voltage presented as a primary concept in an introductory teaching sequence on DC circuits. International Journal of Science Education, 10, 29-43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer, P., & McDermott, L. (1992). Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from current electricity. Part II: Design of instructional strategies. American Journal of Physics, 60, 1003-1013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepardson, D., & Moje, E. (1999). The role of anomalous data in restructuring fourth graders' frameworks for understanding electric circuits. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 77-94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipstone, D. (1984). A study of children's understanding of electricity in simple DC circuits. European Journal of Science Education, 6, 185-188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipstone, D., & Gunstone, R. (1985). Teaching children to discriminate between current and energy. In R. Duit, W. Jung, & C. von Rhöneck (Eds.), Aspects of understanding electricity (pp. 287-297). Kiel, Germany: IPN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stocklmayer, S., & Treagust, D. (1996). Images of electricity: How do novices and experts model electric current? International Journal of Science Education, 18, 163-178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwedes, H., & Dudeck, W.-G. (1996). Teaching electricity by help of a water analogy (how to cope with the need for conceptual change). In Research in science education in Europe (pp. 50-63). London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tabanera, M. (1995). The impact of tertiary teachers' understanding of electricity on their teaching. Unpublished PhD thesis, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treagust, D., Duit, R., & Fraser, B. (Eds.). (1996). Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treagust, D., Duit, R., Joslin, P., & Lindauer, I. (1992). Science teachers' use of analogies: Observations from classroom practice. International Journal of Science Education, 14, 413-422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viennot, L. (1993). Fundamental patterns in common reasoning: examples in Physics. In P. Linjse (Ed.), European research in science education (pp. 33-47). Den Haag, Netherlands: Gegevens Koninkluke Bibliotheek.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viennot, L., & Rainson, S. (1992). Students' reasoning about the superposition of electric fields. International Journal of Science Education, 14, 475-487.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Rhöneck, C., Grob, K., Schnaitmann, G., & Völker, B. (1998). Learning in basic electricity: How do motivation, cognitive and classroom climate factors influence achievement in physics? International Journal of Science Education, 20, 551-565.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, Monash University, Canada

    Pamela Mulhall, Brian McKittrick & Richard Gunstone

Authors
  1. Pamela Mulhall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brian McKittrick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Richard Gunstone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mulhall, P., McKittrick, B. & Gunstone, R. A Perspective on the Resolution of Confusions in the Teaching of Electricity. Research in Science Education 31, 575–587 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013154125379

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013154125379

Keywords

Search

Navigation