Document Type : Original Article


1 Department of Physics, Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Educational Sciences, Shahid Rajaee Teacher Training University, Tehran, Iran


This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of the conceptual change model (CCM) on learning the basic concepts of Electrostatics. CCM is an active teaching method that puts emphasis on children's preconception. The underlying principles of CCM are derived from constructivist theory. The growing body of research shows that students’ knowledge about Physics has formal aspects rather than being useful and usable. Students encounter problems in understanding Physics concepts (such as static electricity), therefore their perception and understanding is often subject to misconception. Thus, Electrostatics was considered as the subject of this study. The study population comprised of female junior high school students. Design used in this study was the quasi- experimental method of Solomon four-group design. The samples selected conveniently and randomly were assigned to two experimental and two control groups. Researcher-made tests of academic achievement in three areas of knowledge, comprehension and application of concepts, were used as the data collection tools. Then, central and dispersion measures, the t-test and two-way analysis of variance were used to test the hypotheses. Research findings showed that CCM teaching methods are superior to the traditional way of teaching and learning physics concepts in detecting and correcting misconceptions


  1. Beeth, M.E. (1995). Conceptual change interaction: Some theoretical and pedagogical issues. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. San Francisco, CA.
  2. Bonwell, C.C., & Eison, J.A. (1991). Active learning: Creating excitement in the classroom. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement: U.S. Department of Education, 2-21.
  3. Burgoon, J.N., Heddle, M.L., & Duran, E. (2010). Re-examining the similarities between teacher and student conceptions about physical science. J Sci Teach Edu, 21, 859-872.
  4. Carey, S. (1991). Knowledge acquisition: Enrichment or conceptual change? In S. Carey, & R. Gelman, (eds.), Epigenesis of mind: Studies in biology and cognition. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 257–291.
  5. DiSessa, A. A. (2002). Why “conceptual ecology” is a good idea. In M. Limón, & L. Mason, (eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 29-60.
  6. Haglund, J., & Jeppsson, F. (2014). Confronting conceptual challenges in thermodynamics by use of self-generated analogies. Sci Edu, 23, 1505-1529.
  7. Hovardas, T., & Konstantinos, J. (2006). Word associations as a tool for assessing conceptual change in science education. Learn Instruc, 16, 416-432.
  8. Hudson, A.,  & Nelson, R. (1990). University physics, (2nd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Saunders.
  9. Lappi, O. (2013). Qualitative, quantitative and experimental concept possession, criteria for identifying conceptual change in science education. Sci Edu, 22, 1347–1359.
  10. Lee, C., & She, H. (2010). Facilitating students’ conceptual change and scientific reasoning involving the unit of combustion. Res Sci Edu, 40, 479–504.
  11. Machamer, P. (2007). Kuhn’s philosophical successes? In S. Vosniadou, A. Baltas, & X. Vamvakoussi, (eds.), Reframing the conceptual change approach in learning and instruction (35-45).Amsterdam: Elsevier.
  12. Mayer, R. E. (2002). Understanding conceptual change: A commentary. In M. Limón, & L. Mason, (eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in Theory and Practice. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 100-111.
  13. Mayer, R. E. (2003). Learning and instruction. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Merrill.
  14. Mazens, K., & Lautrey, J. (2003). Conceptual change in physics: Children’s naïve representations of sound. Cogn Develop, 18, 159-176.
  15. Michelene, T. H. Ch., & Rod, D. (2002). In M. Limón & L. Mason (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice. New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 3-27.
  16. Ohlsson, S., & Cosejo, D.G. (2014). What can be learned from a laboratory model of conceptual change? Descriptive Findings and Methodological Issues, Sci Edu, 23, 1485-1504.
  17. Posner, G.J., Strike, K.A., Hewson, P.W., & Gertzog, W.A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Sci Edu, 66, 211–227.
  18. Raduta, C. (1998). General students’ misconceptions related to electricity and magnetism. Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University.
  19. Redish E.F. (1994). Implications of cognitive studies for teaching physics, Am J. Phys, 62, 796-803.
  20. Reif, F. (1995). Millikan lecture 1994:  Understanding and teaching important scientific thought processes. Am J. Phys, 63, 17-32.
  21. Rusanen, A.M. (2014).  Towards an explanation for conceptual change: A mechanistic alternative. Sci Edu, 23, 1413–1425.
  22. Schmidt, D.L., Saigo, B.W., & Stepans, J.I. (2006). Conceptual change model. Minnesota: Saiwood Publications.
  23. Thagard, P. (2014). Explanatory identities and conceptual change. Sci Edu, 23,1531–1548.
  24. Turgut, Ü. (2011). An investigation on 10th grade students’ misconception about electric current. Proc Soc Behav Sci, 15, 1965–1971.
  25. Yenilmez, A., & Tekkaya, C. (2006). Enhancing students’ understanding of photosynthesis and respiration in plant through conceptual change approach. J Sci Edu Tech, 15 (1), 81-87.
  26. Vosniadou, S. (1992). Knowledge acquisition and conceptual change. App Psych, 41(4), 347–357.
  27. Vosniadou, S. (2007). The conceptual change approach and its re-framing. In Vosniadou, S.,  Baltas, A. & Vamvakoussi, X.  (eds.), Reframing the Conceptual Change Approach in Learning and Instruction (1-15). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
  28. Vosniadou, S. (2008). The framework theory approach to the problem of conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou,  X. Vamvakoussi, & I. Skopeliti, (eds.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (3-34). New York: Routledge.
  29. Walker, J. (2007). The flying circus of physics (2nd Ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, 233.