• Open Access

Comparing conceptual understanding across institutions with module analysis

Christopher Wheatley, James Wells, David E. Pritchard, and John Stewart
Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 18, 020132 – Published 14 November 2022
PDFHTMLExport Citation

Abstract

The Force Concept Inventory (FCI) is a popular multiple-choice instrument used to measure a student’s conceptual understanding of Newtonian mechanics. Recently, a network analytic technique called module analysis has been used to identify responses to the FCI and other conceptual instruments that are preferentially selected together by students; these groups of responses are called communities. This study uses module analysis to explore the misconception structure of the FCI at five U.S. institutions with varying undergraduate populations (sample sizes of N=9606, 4360, 1496, 466, and 213). Students from these universities had a broad range of prior knowledge in physics and of general high school academic preparation, resulting in large differences in FCI normalized gain, pretest, and post-test scores. In the current work, modified module analysis partial was applied and communities of consistently selected responses within the FCI were identified at the five institutions studied. There was substantial similarity between the communities identified postinstruction; somewhat less similarity preinstruction. This suggests that consistently applied Newtonian misconceptions exist both before and after instruction at a wide range of institutions. The most frequently applied misconceptions were “largest force determines motion,” Newton’s third law misconceptions, and “motion implies active forces.” These misconceptions were still consistently applied even after instruction by a substantial number of students at all but the highest performing of the five institutions.

  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Figure
  • Received 30 April 2022
  • Accepted 17 October 2022

DOI:https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.18.020132

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Physics Education Research

Authors & Affiliations

Christopher Wheatley1, James Wells2, David E. Pritchard3, and John Stewart1,*

  • 1West Virginia University, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Morgantown, West Virginia 26506, USA
  • 2University of Connecticut, Department of Physics, Storrs, Connecticut 06269, USA
  • 3Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Physics, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA

  • *jcstewart1@mail.wvu.edu

Article Text

Click to Expand

Supplemental Material

Click to Expand

References

Click to Expand
Issue

Vol. 18, Iss. 2 — July - December 2022

Reuse & Permissions
Author publication services for translation and copyediting assistance advertisement

Authorization Required


×
×

Images

×

Sign up to receive regular email alerts from Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

×

Log In

Cancel
×

Search


Article Lookup

Paste a citation or DOI

Enter a citation
×