Exploring Senior Secondary School Two Students ... - SAUSSUREA

SAUSSUREA (ISSN: 0373-2525), 2016 Volume 6(4):PP. 257-274

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Exploring Senior Secondary School Two Students’ Alternative Conceptions of Current Electricity in Physics in Nigeria B.C. Madu1 and Anastasia Udoh2 1

Department of Science Education, University of Nigeria, Nsukka

2

Department of Physics, Nwafor Orizu College of Education, Nsugbe Abstract

Students begin to construct sets of ideas, expectations and explanations about natural phenomena to make meaning of their everyday experiences. The ideas and explanations that the students generate form a complex framework for thinking about the world and are frequently different from the views of scientists. These differing ideas and explanations are referred to in the literature as misconceptions, alternative conceptions, or alternative framework. However, research in science education and cognitive science has enhanced the understanding of the importance of the ideas and explanations that students possess prior to instruction. Therefore, it is pertinent to systematically investigate students’ conceptions concerning specific concepts of current electricity. This research has direct implications concerning the nature of learning physics as well as the process of teaching physics. The sample size of the study was fifty senior secondary two physics students. The test which comprised thirty questions was used to collect the relevant data. The focus of data analysis for this study was on the qualitative data from the students responses. The result indicated that physics students held many alternative conceptions concerning the concepts related to current electricity. For instance, the students had the notions that (i) primary cells are used in chemical changes while secondary cells are used in battery (ii) the flow of current from one place to another is called electric current (iii) Electromotive force is produced in a cell by the conversion of chemical energy to electrical energy (iv) resistance is the rate of potential differential difference across the conductor to the current flowing through it (v) potential difference is a kind of electrical pressure difference between two points in an electrical circuit (vi) electric circuit is the process showing connection of some qualities so current can flow. These could have led to the evidence and prevalence of students’ poor performance in physics. Key words: Alternative Conceptions, Physics, Current Electricity, Secondary School, Students.

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

1.0 Introduction. Research in science education in the recent times in Nigeria has shown that students enter physics classes with many preconceived ideas about the behaviour of the natural world. These ideas obtained from previous physical and social experiences, often lead the students to make predictions and build explanations different from those derived by currently accepted scientific theories and practices. This indicates that, learners do not come to the classroom with empty minds, because they develop beliefs about things that happen in their environment from the early days of their lives and from previous life experiences or observations. Based on their everyday experiences and observations, students have their own conceptions on different subjects of science education such as physics and they bring their conceptions along to the classroom (Tanner & Allen, 2005). From literature, there are many terms for students own conceptions, such as preconception (Novak, 1977), alternative conceptions (Driver & Easley, 1978), misconception (Helm, 1980), alternative framework (Driver, 1981); common-sense concepts (Halloun & Hestenes, 1985); initial conception (Chi, Slotta & De leeuw, 1994) or everyday conception (Lewis & Kattmann, 2004). In this paper, the researcher uses alternative conceptions as a natural term for labelling students’ conceptions. According to Cortzee and Imenda (2012), these conceptions once formed, influence the learners’ senses, and tend to be resistant to change and this leads to a number of learners holding on to naive notions despite formal science education they receive (Driver, 1983). According to Da Silva, Mellado, Ruiz and Porlan (2007), the alternative conceptions originated from the individual’s previous experience and observation, language, cultural influence and the way teachers and textbooks present information. Student might hold on to false notion that arises from one or more forms of improper teaching, parents’ peers, teacher’s false or misleading statements, inaccurate or deceptive giving of drawings or misunderstanding of technical terms (Wenning, 2008). According to Cortzee and Imenda (2012), irrespective of the source, alternative conceptions that the learners hold can hinder experimentation. These conceptions may be strongly held by learners, instead of acting as a source of ideas to text, they restrict empirical observations (Driver, 1983). Wessel (1999) distinguishes between two types of knowledge students have, and emphasizes that science requires both types of knowledge – namely experiential knowledge and conceptual knowledge. Wessel explained experiential knowledge as the one that students bring to class as a result of their life experiences. This knowledge includes all experiences they have had during their lives and the thinking that they have done to organize this knowledge to help them operate in their world. According to Wessel (1999), conceptual knowledge is theoretical in nature. Conceptual knowledge is the abstract part of science which serves to organize knowledge using laws and theories, and in turn influencing the concept of such laws and theories. This knowledge is formed

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

in the mind as a result of reflection about experiences and has principles that can be used to explain a number of experiences. Often, students struggle with conceptual knowledge, its use and development. It is the discrepancy between alternative conceptions constructed, by the learners (from experiential knowledge) and those held by the community of scientists (conceptual knowledge) which educators seek to address (Imenda, 2005). However, there is an active interaction that exists between experiential and conceptual knowledge in every student resulting in a steady state of equilibrium between the two for the student not to experience dissonance. Hence, in order for new conceptual understanding to develop, a new conception must meet up with certain conditions postulated by Posner, Strike, Hewson and Gertzog (1982). It must be intelligible (students understanding its meaning), plausible (students believing it to be correct) and fruitful (students finding it useful) (Posner et al, 1982). Wardersee, Mintze & Novak (1994) in an extensive review of research came up with the following research-based assumptions relating to alternative conceptions in science of which physics is one. 

Learners come to formal science instruction with a diverse set of alternative conceptions concerning natural objects and events.



The alternative conceptions that learners bring to formal science instruction cut across age, ability, gender and cultural boundaries.



Alternative conceptions are tenacious and resistant to extinction by conventional teaching strategies.



Alternative conceptions offer parallel explanations of natural phenomena offered by previous generations of scientists and philosophers.



Alternative conceptions have their origins in a diverse set of personal experiences including direct observation and perception, peer culture and language, as well as in teachers’ explanations and instructional materials.



Teachers often subscribe to the same alternative conceptions as their students.



Learners’ prior knowledge interacts with knowledge presented in formal instruction, resulting in a diverse set of unintended learning outcomes.



Instructional approaches that facilitate conceptual change can be effective classroom tools (pp. 195).

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

These assumptions on the alternative conceptions provided the premise upon which this study was anchored. However, many of the sources of confusion in classes are not identified in the classroom as instruction occurs. Students may be aware of some conceptual hindrances, especially those that hinder learning completely, but may remain unaware of other hindrances because knowledge construction continues, but in a wrong direction, leading to some forms of alternative conceptions (Cortzee & Imenda, 2012). That is, students can experience the same phenomenon and still draw different conclusions as in the case of demonstration where there is a lack of critical observation and appropriate follow up discussion. Studies indicate that there is much in common in students’ alternative conceptions; although there is indications that different social and cultural influence have an effect on the development of these conceptions. Therefore, investigating the alternative conceptions held by students could contribute to teachers’ ability to effect conceptual change, as well as benefit and inform science curriculum planners (Driver, 1989:484 in Cortzee and Imenda 2012). This study was, therefore, an attempt to formally and systematically explore the most common alternative conceptions presented by secondary school students concerning current-electricity, so that subsequently appropriate instructional intervention can be made. 1.1. Research Question 

What are the students’ conceptions of concepts related to current electricity?

2.0 Methods The research 2.1Participants.

methods

are

presented

under

the

following

sub-headings.

The study involved fifty senior secondary school two (SSII) students (50) from two schools purposively sampled from the 12 schools in the area of the study. The reason for the choice of purposive sampling technique was because the two schools selected enjoy common characteristics which are not in other schools. These characteristics are: well equipped physics laboratory, experienced physics teachers, and two intact classes with an appreciable number of students who had selected physics as part of their subject for their external examination. One instrument was used for the study. The instrument named Current Electricity Concept Evaluation (CECE), which consisted thirty short essay questions, was used for the test to measure students’ conceptual change in Current Electricity. The instrument was subjected to trial testing. 20 copies of the instruments were used for the trial testing. Three schools in Uzo- Uwani Local government Area that were not among the sampled schools of the study were used. This was to avoid biasness and test-wise effect on the subjects

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

and to get an appreciable number (i.e. 20) of physics students since physics is not a compulsory subject in school system. After the trial testing, the reliability of CECE was determined using Cronbach Alpha Statistics. The choice of this reliability estimate was because the instrument was polytomously scored items ( i.e. each item of the instrument has no preferred answer (right or wrong). With this formula, the internal consistency index of the instrument was calculated to be 0.79. The internal consistency analysis was done using Statistical package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 15 2.2 Data Analysis The researcher administered the 30 open essay questions to be answered in one hour. Students were prompted to explicitly describe their conceptions about specific concepts or principles related to current electricity. The researcher interactively categorized the students’ descriptions into six major concepts namely; electric cell, electric current, electromotive force, resistance, potential difference and electric circuit. In analyzing the students’ conceptions quantitatively, the researcher frees himself from his ways of perceiving the world so that the researcher is able to “see” things from the point of view of the students (Imenda, 2005). This way the researcher places himself in a natural position to be able to present the original views of the students with minimum distortion and adulteration, thereby understand the experiences of the students better within the content of their lived world. So in this regard, researcher searched for patterns of meanings from the statements and explanations and interpretations of the students’ experiences were constructed and organized. 3.0 Discussion of Results. 3.1Students’ Conceptions and Students’ Learning This discussion was from the point of view of conceptual framework that characterizes physics (or better from the point of view of physics) and from the point of view of students’ ways of looking at aspects of current electricity, which can be pre-existent to formal teaching or the results of their interactions with school teaching. The focus of discussion was on the cognitive processes involved in the construction of concepts and relationship among concepts in physics. Therefore, the students’ perspective and the disciplinary perspective will not only be compared in terms of “what students do not understand” but also in terms of “why they do not understand”. Therefore, the’ discussion was organized into six categories into which the concepts/principles in the 30 questions were combined because reporting on the 30 different conceptions may be difficult to follow and also many of the conceptions are related.

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

3.2 Electric Cell To understand and explain the working of an electric cell, students need to develop some basic understanding of the nature of the cell, types and its function (Garnet and Treagust (1992). Prior to formal instruction, most students were not acquainted with the cell as a scientific term. Others define the term intuitively based on sensory perceptions often with statements such as “an electric cell is the cell that conduct heat” this is the cell that is transmitted by electricity”. These intuitive definitions did not help the students to distinguish reliably between electric cell and conductor. The scientific definition of an electric cell is ‘ a device which supplies an electric current when two charged conducting rods at different potentials are connected by mean of conducting medium called electrolyte”. Some students thought, for instance that “electric cell is the rate of flow of current round the circuit”. Others thought that “electric cell is a chemical device which converts electrical energy to electric current” without thinking of other conditions which must he satisfied before a current flows. For instance, the issue of a cell having two charged conducting rods at different potentials connected by means of conducting medium is lacking. The implication of this is that some students still had difficulties. For instance, some students thought that, “a cell is an electric conductor that has two terminals only”. Students’ performance on the paper-and-pencil tests prior to instruction showed that only a small number understood the aspects of types of cells and their differences. When students were asked to explain what primary and secondary cells are, some explained in terms of reversibility as in the following examples:  

Primary cells are those that cannot be reversed while secondary cells are those that can be reversed. Primary cells are used in chemical changes while secondary cells arc used in battery.

Those who had these misconceptions believed that when the cells are reversed, they are being charged. The nature of reversibility in this case is not explained. This exposed the students’ lack of scientific language to express them. This tends to agree with the findings of Rollink and Rutherford (1993) that language ability of the students affect them in the understanding of scientific concepts, and that performance of students on science task is influenced by context, mode, and language task presentation and by subject matter. However, when asked how the secondary cells are charged, they said “secondary cells are recharged by passing a charged body or conductor through them or by bringing near a charged body”. In this case they likened the charging of cell to electrostatic charges where no motion of charges is felt. Charges are not moving in electrostatics, they are just deposited.

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

Another student had this to say; 

The secondary cell can be recharged by passing it in a given circuit or in the sun to get energy.

This category of students, however, believed that recharging of a cell means putting new energy, but obtaining our energy from the sun does not imply that secondary cells could also be recharged by keeping it in the sun as opposed to the scientific conception that recharging of a cell is done by passing an electric current in opposition to its e.m.f. such that the original materials are reformed.. 3.3 Electric Current When students were asked to explain the concept of electric current, they often described it in terms of a device that converts one form of energy to another or as that that produces electricity such as “electric current is the current that converts mechanical energy’ into light energy; is that current that produces electricity”. This result is in agreement with the studies of Heller and Finley (1992) that when students were asked to define current they provided the imprecise and inconsistent notions about the relationship between current electricity charges and energy. This observation is noticed in some students’ explanation of the concepts of current as:   

An electric current is a charge produced by electric cell in other to operate electric home and laboratory devices. The flow of current from one place to another is called electric current. This is the rate of flow of current round the circuit.

Students’ responses indicated that they fail to associate electric current in a circuit with the flow of charges over a period of time. The students tend to explain the concept of current in terms of matter category rather than as “constraint-based interaction” category (Chi, et al 1994). In other words, they described electric current from ontological perspective. Explaining the causes of current flow in conductors and electrolyte was a difficult task for some students. As opposed to the scientific conception that current flow in a conductor is caused by the existence of potential difference between its ends, while in electrolyte the simultaneous movement of positive and negative ions in the opposite directions brings about current flow. Students believed that:   

Current flow in a conductor if the conductor is positively charged. Current flow in a conductor when the electron gains more kinetic energy. Current flow is due to the bombardment of electron in the circuit and the electron will be heating one another causing continues movement.

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

These students apply the same reasoning to the conduction of heat in solids that is heat is conducted in solids as a result of the vibration of the molecules of the solid about their mean position when they gain enough kinetic energy. The explanation to this type of response may be attributed to classroom instruction where physics teachers always likened current flow to heat flow without drawing proper analogy between them. The above results are further supported by the findings of Osborne (1981) and Garnet and Treagust (1992) that students had misconception about current in metallic conductors and their confusion stemmed from the use of models to describe current - the electron flow model in chemistry and the use of conventional current in physics. In attempting to explain the cause of current flow in electrolyte; students focused on migration of electrons. For instance;  

Currents flow in an electrolyte is caused by the migration of electrons or charged from the electrolyte to the anode and cathode. Current flow in an electrolyte is caused by the negatively charged conductor.

From this type of response, it becomes obvious that some students could not differentiate electron from ions in electrolysis. The findings of Garnet and Treagust (1992) also supported this view by finding out that some students believed that moving protons and electrons were the current in solution, and several students thought of protons as the “opposite” of electrons rather than as hydrogen ions. They went further to say that some students had already stated that the protons and electrons move in opposite directions in wires and several of these students continued to apply this notion to the transfer of charge in electrolytes. However, prior to instruction, a very small number of students had an adequate understanding of scientific conception for causes of current flow in a conductor or electrolyte. The above finding supports the findings of Webb (1992) that constructivist-based approach which is activity-oriented activity should be adopted in changing the students’ understanding of electric current. 3.4 Electromotive Force (E.m.f.) The explanation of electromotive force (e.m.f.) requires the knowledge of energy conversion and distribution of charges in a cell. The e.m.f. of a cell is a measure of energy converted from electrical energy to other forms per coulombs of charge that pass through a cell. Students must understand that the charge distribution determines the e.m.f. of the’ cell. Some students did not understand that the e.m.f. enables the cell to maintain a flow of electricity in a circuit. However, some students explained an e.m.f of a cell as:  

The work done in moving a coulombs charge round the circuit. A force passing through current

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

 

A device used for causing current to flow A force, which propels the charge in an electrolyte. From the above responses, it becomes clear that most of the students could not distinguish ‘potential difference from electromotive force, hence they regarded e.m.f as a device. This implies that for students to understand the concept of e.m.f. they must change their view of concepts from belonging to an ontological group of matter to a constraint-based interaction category (Chi, et a! 1994). In explaining how e.m.f of a cell is produced, some students put the following down:     

E.m.f is produced in a cell by the Conversion of chemical energy to electrical energy. Emf is produced in a cell by driving a current from zinc to carbon through the cell Emf is produced when the external current combines with internal current Emf is produced in a cell just the same way current and voltage are produced and this is by varying the magnetic lines of force of a conductor. An Emf of a cell can be produced when a conductor is placed opposite the circuit and the conductor is in motion, that is, mechanical energy can be connected to electrical energy.

The above responses indicated that the students failed to understand that emf is produced by the separation of charges brought about by the chemical action between the electrodes and the electrolytes. Rather, they regarded the production as energy conversion or as flow of current without taking into cognizance what must be done for energy to be converted or current to flow. Explanation of why emf of a cell is greater than the potential difference of a cell when a current is passed in an external circuit revealed that almost no student was able to give a sound explanation. Most students did not give proper explanations. Of those who gave explanation; some expressed it as:   

It is because the internal resistance is less than the external resistance It is because of the low resistance of the cell when compared to that of the external circuit. This is because current is lost in transmission of current and this causes that it is not all current or emf that is delivered from the cell is utilized in the external circuit.

Some students thought that emf is greater than potential difference because of low resistance of the cell only or low current transmission. They failed to understand that when a cell drives a current through an external resistor, some energy is converted from electrical to other forms in the cell as the cell offers resistance to the flow of current through it.

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

3.5 Resistance The explanation of resistance requires the knowledge of movement of free electron and the atoms the materials are made of. But when the students were asked to explain the concept of resistance, they gave series of responses that portrayed their conception of the resistance prior to instruction. Some of the responses include:    

Resistance is the rate of potential difference across the conductor to the current flowing through it. Resistance is the current flowing in the direction of key. It is the constant proportionality of ohm’s law that brings about resistance. Resistance is any material, which can offer an opposition to the movement of flow of an electric current.

The above first three responses indicated that students could associate the flow of current with the resistance but were not able to explain how the current is affected by the resistance. The fourth response indicated that students explain the concept of resistance in terms of matter category rather than as a constraint-based interaction category (Chi et al, 1994). In other words, they describe resistance as a material such as insulator rather than as a process. Some students failed to explain what brings about resistance in any material. As opposed to the scientific conception that resistance is caused by collision between moving free electrons and the atom of a material, student believed that:  Current brings about resistance.  Potential difference brings about resistance.  Eddy current brings about resistance.  Resistance is brought when there is incompatible how of current. From the above responses, it becomes clear that most students could not distinguish between the cause and effect as regard resistance and current flow. For them to fully understand the concept of resistance and its effect they should understand the particle that makes up a material. Evidence from literature that could support the students’ understanding of resistance in current electricity is lacking. 3.6 Potential Difference (Pd) The explanation of P.d. requires the knowledge about energy and charge (Cohen, Eylon and Ganiel, 1983). The P.d is a measure of the total energy available for driving charge round the circuit when the conducting part is provided. Some students did not realize that energy is

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

involved when work is done in moving a positive unit charge; rather they put their explanation of P.d as:   

The potential difference is a kind of electrical pressure difference between two points in an electrical circuit. Potential difference of a cell delivering currant to an external source circuit and the open key. This is the charge of flow of current between to terminals in a circuit.

This category of students confused potential difference with pressure difference and attributed the change of flow of current to this pressure. This confusion may be as a result of the students’ inability to change their conception when perhaps P.d is compared to pressure difference during physics instruction in the classroom. These responses are also in accordance with the misconception identified by Garnet and Treagust (1992) in their studies that students regarded potential difference between two points as solely due to differences in concentration of charge at the points, and that potential difference is created by charge imbalance. This supports the criticism earlier made on the use of analogy in teaching for conceptual change in physics (Heller and Fintey, I992). 3.7 Electric Circuit Explaining about electric circuit requires the integration of scientific ideas about electrical components and arrangement of these components. Arrangement of those components properly will bring about the flow of current as well as enabling them to explain the behaviour of the components when the cell drives current through them (Rhoneck 1985). Because this explanation requires these ideas, some students had difficulties giving adequate or sound explanation of’ the concepts/principles. This agrees with Summers, Kruger and Mant (1998) and Iloputaife (2001) who discovered that students have alternative conceptions of simple electric circuit. This is also observed in some students’ statement concerning electric circuit as fol      

Electric circuit is the process showing connecting of some quantities so that current can flow. An electrical circuit is any complete circuit that can be connected in series or parallel to produce current An electric circuit is a region where the current passes at a given time. An electric circuit is the point where current can leave from one end of the cell and travel to the other terminal. It is a region where the current passes at a given time. This is an electrical charge in motion.

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

The above responses revealed that some students regarded electric circuit as involving connection but failed to realize that the connections involves one or more components across the terminals of a cell so that the cell drives a current through these components. The inability of the students to give a complete explanation of an electric circuit made them experience difficulties in differentiating between series and parallel connections and the behaviour of bulbs when they are connected either in series or parallel. This is in support with the result of Weller and Reif (1982) that students who lack appropriate connections among concepts or who do not understand the relative importance of the concepts have difficulties with the science subjects. Students’ responses when asked to differentiate between series and parallel connection are shown in the following statements:   

Series connection is directly proportional to the potential difference while parallel is in increase. Series connection is directly proportional to potential difference while parallel is inversely proportional. Series arc in straight line while parallel are parallel line.

These responses showed that some students prior to instruction failed to use the idea of current or voltage to differentiate them. That is, they failed to understand that in series connection the current is the same while the voltage drops is different depending on the value of each resistance, and in parallel connection voltage is the same while the value of current in each branch may be different. The above result is in agreement with Shipstone (1984) and Iloputaik (2001) on the children’s understanding of simple D.C. circuit. These difficulties encountered in integrating current and voltage in their scientific explanation of series and parallel circuits made them to regard bulb A to be brighter than bulb B when the two bulbs were connected in series across the terminals of a cell (question 26) (Heller and Finley 1992). For example,   

Bulb A is brighter than bulb B because the voltage across A is greater than the voltage across B Bulb A is brighter than bulb B because bulb A is nearer the cell than bulb B. The brightness is because current passes through A before reaching B and A will collect more current.

The application of’ parallel connection in household electrical seems to be difficult for the students to understand as evidenced in their responses thus. 

The reason for connecting household electrical circuits in parallel rather than in series is to reduce the flow of electron, which can cause electrical appliance to destroy.

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

 

This is to overcome the problem of complete blackout in the house This is to avoid neighborhood, getting light.

These students’ responses seem to be consistent with the study of Rylon and Helfman (1983) who found that physics students over generalize example problems in everyday life and apply that overgeneralization to new problems. Also some of the students failed to realize that parallel connection of household electrical will not disturb any of’ the electrical components when one of them is removed or damaged. Nevertheless, 15 percent of the students had scientific conception of the reason for the connection. 4.0 Educational Implications of the Findings. Educational implications for teaching that arises as a result of this study support researcher’s propositions that students need activities directly related to their initial conceptions and the goal conceptions. The results also showed that conceptual change model should be made to offer the students the opportunities to explain, predict and integrate new information into existing schemas supporting learning. When students achieve conceptual change they move closer to accepted scientific understandings and use these ideas to explain, describe and predict scientific phenomena. One of the ideas this study demonstrated is the usefulness of students’ explanations and descriptions in writing as a way for understanding changes. Students’ explanations in writing can show how they are thinking and struggling with concepts. Students’ writing may help them make sense of their own science knowledge and serve as a way of stimulating the reflection and feedback that facilitates knowledge, and clearly illustrating the potential of writing-to-learn physics. Written expression by the students in this study seemed to support and enhanced conceptual change as can be evidenced in the completeness of students written explanations. Answering the essay questions allowed students to express their current ideas about scientific concepts in a form they could look at and think about. The implication of this study is that the students were in the process of restructuring knowledge as a result of the instruction. Conceptual change and/or knowledge restructuring is often difficult for students to accomplish. Researchers have suggested that conceptual change knowledge restructuring is a developmental process that takes a long time in some domains, even under the conditions of good instruction (Nussbaum and Novick, 1982). The restructuring changes that the sample students in this study demonstrated supported these contentions. Students were in the process of understanding the new conceptions but the process of fully understanding abstract concepts developed over a longer period of time requires more experience than what these students were provided. Teaching physics involves providing a rational basis for a conceptual change. The fundamental conceptual change may involve changes in one’s fundamental assumptions about

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

the world, about knowledge and about knowing and that such changes can be strenuous and potentially threatening when the individual is firmly committed to prior assumptions. It has been observed in this study that students resist making such changes unless they are dissatisfied with their current concepts and find it intelligible and plausible alternative that appears fruitful for further inquiry. By involving the students in the carefully structured sequence of activities involved in the conceptual change pedagogy, the teacher would be providing conducive atmosphere in which equilibration can occur in the minds of the students. Similarly, this would create an instructional environment in which teachers and students can explore, experiment and take risks while constructing new physics knowledge. This study demonstrates that conceptual change research can and should play an essential role in curriculum development. Teaching materials based on conceptual research such as this can greatly enhance teachers’ effectiveness even under the less ideal conditions. The best prepared teachers face a long and difficult struggle if they wish to teach for meaningful understanding using currently available materials. Teachers should learn to transfer ownership of learning to the students. Further implication of this study, suggests that the teacher as clarifier of ideas and presenter of information is clearly not adequate for helping students achieve new conceptions. In order to facilitate conceptual change and retention, the teacher should assume further roles. In this role the teacher confronts the students with the problem arising from their attempts to assimilate new conceptions. The teacher would become a model of scientific thinking. Such model might be a ruthless demand for consistency among beliefs and between theory and empirical evidence. The findings of this study have important implications for all physics educators working in science education reform. Teaching is typically thought of as clarifying content presented in tests, explaining solutions to problems, demonstrating principles, providing laboratory exercises, and testing for recall of facts and ability to apply knowledge to problems. The fact that conceptual change process leads to a higher level of understanding and thus enhance conceptual change in physics implies that the physics educators should organize physics texts to include explanation and questions which would have great potential to render scientific theory intelligible and fruitful. It is argued that understanding what it means to reconstruct personal understanding of a concept will enable the teachers to change their instructional approach in order to develop creative abilities and critical thinking in students since they would duly benefit from the process.

5.0 Conclusion

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

Based on the findings of the study, one can therefore conclude that some of the students had alternative conceptions of concepts related to current electricity prior to instruction. This is evidenced in the overall response of students who demonstrated understanding of scientific conception on the paper and pencil test. Students’ responses show that most students learn to use scientific language while retaining some basic misconception they had prior to formal instruction. This study had therefore indicated that the constructivist based instructional model is required to facilitate SSS II physics students conceptual change from alternative/no conception to scientific conception of the physics concepts related current electricity than the traditional physics instructional method. Hence classroom physics teachers should consider conceptual change moel approach for use, as it is effective in increasing students’ conceptual change. Conceptual change model approach in the literature has demonstrated its effectiveness in increasing meaningful learning since it is an activity oriented learning strategy subsumed in mental activity that will bring about reconstructing of knowledge.. Therefore physics teachers need to adopt conceptual change model approach as their teaching strategy for meaningful learning in the classroom but first enabling environment should be created for effective use of the approach. 6.0 Recommendations Based on the finding of this study, the researcher made the following recommendations:   





 

The physics teachers should be encouraged to adopt a model in their repertoire to deal with student errors and moves that interfere with conceptual change. Teachers should be trained on the effective use of conceptual change pedagogy through seminars and workshops. Those involved with teacher education in the higher institutions should propagate the use of constructivist-based instructional model so as to promote constructivism and critical thinking among the student teachers of physics. Since students, naïve ideas should be replaced with scientific ideas, students ideas should be elucidated and be incorporated into instruction in such a way that alternative scientific ideas are seen as intelligible, plausible and fruitful. Physics teachers should be encouraged to include conceptual change pedagogy process in their instruction so as to motivate, stimulate and sustain students’ conceptual change thereby enhancing retention in physics. All those involved with curriculum development in science education should adopt constructivist perspective in restructuring physics curriculum in our secondary school. To design teaching strategies that can help students overcome difficulties in describing / interpreting physics concepts; we should focus our attention on the change process from the students’ perspective toward the disciplinary perspective.

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE



If we aim to produce rationally based conceptual change in students, more emphasis should be given to assimilation and accommodation by students than to content coverage REFERENCES Chi, M.T.H., Slotta, J.D. & DeLeeuw, N. (1994). From Things to Processes a Theory of Conceptual Change for Learning Science Concepts. Learning and Instruction, 4 (1), 27 – 43. Cohen, R., Eylon, B. & Daniel, U. (1983). Potential difference and current in simple electric circuits. American Journal of Physics, 51, 407-412. Cohern, W.W. (1990). Constructivism and Non-Western Science Education Research. International Journal of Science Education, 4 (3), 287 – 302. Cortzee, A. & Imenda, S.N. (2012). Alternative conceptions held by first year physics students at a South Africa University of technology concerning interference and diffraction of waves. Research in Higher Education Journal (online) 16 July, 2012. www.aabri.com. Da Silva, C., Mellado, V., Ruiz, C., & Porlan, R. (2007). Evolution of the conceptions of a secondary education biology teacher: Longitidinal analysis using cognitive maps. Science education, 91 (3), 461-491. Driver, R & Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and Paradigms. A Review of Literature Related to Concept Development in Adolescent. Science Education 5, 61 – 84. Driver, R. (1981). Pyramids Alternative Framework in Science. European Journal of Science Education 3, 93 – 101. Driver, R. (1983). The Pupil as Scientist. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Driver, R. (1989). Students Conceptions and the Learning of Science. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 481 – 490. Driver, R., & Bell, B. (1986). Students’ thinking and the learning of science: A constructivist view. School Science Review, 67, 443-456. Garnet, P.J & Treagust, D.F. (1992). Conceptual Difficulties Experienced by Senior High School Chemistry Students of Electrochemistry: Electric Circuits and OxidationReduction Equations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29 (2) 121 – 142. Halloun, I. & Hestenes, D. (1985). The Initial Knowledge State of College Physics Students. American Journal of Physics, 53, 1043 – 1055. Heller, P.M & Findey, F.N. (1992). Variable use of Alternative Conceptions: A Case Study of Current Electricity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 29 (3), 259 – 275.

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

Helm, H. (1980). Misconceptions in Physics Amongst South Africa Students. Physics Education 15 (2), 92 – 105. Iloputaife, E.C. (2001). Effects of Analogy and Conceptual Change Instructional Model on Physics Achievement of School Students. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. University of Nigeria. Imenda, S.N. (2005). Zambian High School Students’ Alternative Conceptions and Spiritual/Cultural Beliefs about Environment. Proceedings of the International Conference on Education Singapore, 2005. World Scientific Publishing: 326 – 333. Lewis, J. & Katmann, U. (2004). Traits, Genes, Particles and Information: Re-Visiting Students’ Understandings of Genetics. International Journal of Science Education 26 (2), 195 – 206. Madu, B.C. (2004) Effect of Constructivist-Based Instructional Approach on Students’ Conceptural Change and Retention in Physics. Unpublished Ph.D Thesis, University of Nigeria. Novak, J.O. (1977). A Theory of Education. Cornell University Press. Ithaca, NY, USA. Nussbaum, J. & Novick, S. (1992). A Study of Conceptual Change in the Classroom. A Paper Presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Lake Genera W.I. Osborne, R.J. (1981). Children’s Ideas about Electric Current. New Zealand Science Teacher 29, 12 – 19. Rhoneck, C. V. (1985). Students’ conceptions of electric circuit before physics instruction. In research in physics education: proceedings of the First International Workshop, 303-312. Paris France: Rosier, S. Rollink, M. & Rutherford, M. (1993). The Use of Conceptual Change Model & Mixed Language for Remediating Misconceptions on Air Pressure. International Journal of Science Education, 15 (4), 363 – 381. Shipstone, D.M. (1984). A Study of Children’s Understanding of Simple DC Circuits, European Journal of Science Education, 6 (2), 185 – 198. Summers, M., Kruger, C. & Mart, J. (1998). Teaching Electricity Effectively in the Primary School: A Case Study. International Journal of Science Education, 20 (2), 153 – 172. Tanner, K & Allen, D. (2005). Approaches to Biology Teaching and Learning Understanding the Wrong Answers-Teaching Toward Conceptual Change. Cell Biology Education, 4, 112 – 117.

www.saussurea.org


RESEARCH ARTICLE

Wandersee, J.H, Mintzes, J.J & Novak, J.D. (1994). Research on Alternative Conceptions in Science. In Gabel, D.L (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and Learning. 177 – 210. New York: Macmillan. Webb, P. (1992). Primary Science Teachers’ Understanding of Electric Current. International Journal of Science Education, 14 (4), 423 – 429. Wenning, C.J. (2008). Dealing more effectively with alternative conceptions in science. Journal of Physics Teacher Education online, 5 (1), 11-19. Wessel, W. (1999). Knowledge Construction in High School Physics. A Study of Student Teacher Interaction. SSTA Research Centre Report #99 – 04 (Online). Canada: http://www.ssta.sk.ca/instruction/99-04.htm. Acknowledgement It is our pleasure to thank all our postgraduate students who assisted us in the collection of data for this study.

www.saussurea.org