Commenced in January 2007
Frequency: Monthly
Edition: International
Paper Count: 30076
Constructing a Two-Tier Test about Source Current to Diagnose Pre-Service Elementary School Teacher’ Misconceptions

Authors: Abdeljalil Métioui


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.   

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

Digital Object Identifier (DOI):

Procedia APA BibTeX Chicago EndNote Harvard JSON MLA RIS XML ISO 690 PDF Downloads 238


[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.