Constructing a Two-Tier Test about Source Current to Diagnose Pre-Service Elementary School Teacher’ Misconceptions

We discuss the alternative conceptions of students analysing the behaviour of electrical circuits. The present paper aims at, on one hand, studying the misconceptions of 80 elementary pre-service teachers from Quebec in Canada, in relation to the current source in DC circuits. To do this, they completed a two-choice questionnaire (true or false) with justification. Data analysis identifies many conceptual difficulties. For example, their majority considered a battery as a source of constant current: When a circuit composed of battery and resistors is modified, the current supplied by the battery remains unchanged. On the other hand, considering the alternatives conceptions identified we develop a two-tier test about source current. The aim of this two-tier test is to help teachers to diagnose rapidly their students’ misconceptions in order to consider in their teaching.   

• Abdeljalil Métioui

• Two-tier diagnostic test
• current source
• pre-service teachers
• alternative conceptions after teaching
• qualitative study.

[1] Closset, J. L. (1983). Sequential reasoning in electricity. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Research in Physics Education, La Londe les Maures. Paris: Editions du CNRS.
[2] Cohen, R., Eylon, B. and Ganiel, U. (1983). Potential difference and current in simple electric circuits. American Journal of Physics, 51 (5), 407-412.
[3] Dupin, J.-J. and Johsua, S. (1987). Conceptions of French pupils concerning electric circuits: Structure and evolution. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(9), 791-806.
[4] Engelhardt, P. V., and Beichner, R. J. (2004). Students’ understanding of direct current resistive electrical circuits. American Journal of Physics, 72(1), 98-115.
[5] Métioui, A., Brassard, C., Levasseur, J. and Lavoie, M. (1996). International Journal of Science Education, 18(2), 193-212.
[6] Métioui., and Levasseur, J. (2011). Analysis of the reasoning of pupils on DC and the laws of Kirchhoff. RDST, No 3, 155-178.
[7] McDermott, L. C., and Shaffer, P. S. (1992). Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part I: Investigation of student understanding. American Journal of Physics, 60 (11), 994-1003.
[8] Shipstone, D. (1988). Pupils’ understanding of simple electrical circuits. Physics Education, 23, 92-96.
[9] Métioui, A., and Trudel, L. (2015). The persistence of the alternative conceptions: The case of the unipolar model (pp. 117-127). Proceeding of the GIREP-MPTL 2014 International Conference, July 7-12, University of Palermo, Italy: Teaching/Learning Physics: Integrating Research into Practice, C. Fazio and R.M. Sperandeo Mineo (Eds.). ISBN: 978-88-907460-7-9.
[10] Tsai, C., Chen, H., Chou, C., and Lain, K. (2007). Current as the key concept of Taiwanese students’ understandings of electric circuits. International Journal of Science Education, 29(4), 483-496.
[11] Benseghir, A., and Closset, J. L. (2004). The electrostatics-electrokinetics transition historical and educational difficulties. International Journal of Science Education, 18 (2), 339-420.
[12] Coppens, N. and Munier, V. (2005). Monitoring Student Progress in Physics Using Double Multiple-Choice Questions. Didaskalia, 27, 41 64.
[13] Basil Mugaga Naah, B. (2015). Enhancing Preservice Teachers' Understanding of Students' Misconceptions in Learning Chemistry. Journal of College Science Teaching, 45 (2), pp. 41-47.
[14] Hildegard, U. (2017). Sequential Reasoning in Electricity: Developing and Using a Three-Tier Multiple Choice Test, Scientia in educatione (Special Issue), 285-292.
[15] Peşman, H. and Eryilmaz, A. (2010). Development of a Three-Tier Test to Assess Misconceptions about Simple Electric Circuits. The Journal of Educational Research, 103, 208–222.
[16] Chen, C. C., Lin, H. S., & Lin, M. L. (2002). Developing a two-tier diagnostic instrument to assess high school students’ understanding-the formation of images by a plan mirror. Proceedings of National Science Council, 12(3), 106-121.
[17] Hestenes, D., and Wells, M. (1992). A mechanics baseline test, The Physics Teacher, 30, 159-166.
[18] Coppens, N., Rebmann, G. and Munier, V. (2009). Suivre l’évolution des conceptions des élèves en mécanique : développement et évaluation d’exercices informatisés. Didaskalia, 35, 37-58.
[19] Griffard, P. B., and Wandersee, J. H. (2001). The two-tier instrument on photosynthesis: What does it diagnose? International Journal of Science Education, 23(10), 1039-1052.
[20] Gurcay, D. and Gulbas, E. (2015). Development of three-tier heat, temperature and internal energy diagnostic test. Research in Science and Technological Education, 33 (2), 197-217.
[21] Kamcharean, C. and Wattanakasiwich, P. (2016). Development and Implication of a Two-tier Thermodynamic Diagnostic Test to Survey Students’ Understanding in Thermal Physics. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 24(2), 14-36.
[22] Hermita, N et al. (2017). Constructing and Implementing a Four Tier Test about Static Electricity to Diagnose Pre-service Elementary School Teachers’ Misconceptions. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 895 012 167.
[23] Sin Loy Loh, A., Subramaniam, R., and Chwee Daniel Tan, K. (2014). Exploring students’ understanding of electrochemical cells using an enhanced two-tier diagnostic instrument. Research in Science & Technological Education, 32 (3), p. 229-250.
[24] Mutlu, A., and Burcin Acar Sesen, B. (2015). Development of a two-tier diagnostic test to assess undergraduates’ understanding of some chemistry concepts. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 174, 629 635.