problem solving for conceptual physics

Problem Solving for Conceptual Physics

By paul g. hewitt and phillip wolf.

• 2 Want to read
• 0 Currently reading
• 0 Have read

My Reading Lists:

Use this Work

Create a new list

My book notes.

My private notes about this edition:

Check nearby libraries

• Library.link

Buy this book

• Better World Books
• Bookshop.org

When you buy books using these links the Internet Archive may earn a small commission .

This edition doesn't have a description yet. Can you add one ?

Showing 1 featured edition. View all 1 editions?

Add another edition?

Book Details

Classifications, community reviews (0).

• Created August 21, 2020

Wikipedia citation

Copy and paste this code into your Wikipedia page. Need help ?

Physical Review Physics Education Research

• Collections
• Editorial Team
• Open Access

Conceptual problem solving in high school physics

Jennifer l. docktor, natalie e. strand, josé p. mestre, and brian h. ross, phys. rev. st phys. educ. res. 11 , 020106 – published 1 september 2015.

• Citing Articles (49)

Supplemental Material

• INTRODUCTION
• RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
• GENERAL DISCUSSION
• ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Problem solving is a critical element of learning physics. However, traditional instruction often emphasizes the quantitative aspects of problem solving such as equations and mathematical procedures rather than qualitative analysis for selecting appropriate concepts and principles. This study describes the development and evaluation of an instructional approach called Conceptual Problem Solving (CPS) which guides students to identify principles, justify their use, and plan their solution in writing before solving a problem. The CPS approach was implemented by high school physics teachers at three schools for major theorems and conservation laws in mechanics and CPS-taught classes were compared to control classes taught using traditional problem solving methods. Information about the teachers’ implementation of the approach was gathered from classroom observations and interviews, and the effectiveness of the approach was evaluated from a series of written assessments. Results indicated that teachers found CPS easy to integrate into their curricula, students engaged in classroom discussions and produced problem solutions of a higher quality than before, and students scored higher on conceptual and problem solving measures.

• Received 30 April 2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.11.020106

This article is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 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

Authors & Affiliations

• 1 Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin–La Crosse, La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601, USA
• 2 Department of Physics, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 61801, USA
• 3 Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 61801, USA
• 4 Department of Educational Psychology, University of Illinois, Champaign, Illinois 61820, USA
• 5 Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, Champaign, Illinois 61820, USA
• * [email protected]

Article Text

Vol. 11, Iss. 2 — July - December 2015

Authorization Required

Other options.

• Buy Article »
• Find an Institution with the Article »

Download & Share

Sample problem and strategy (principle-justification-plan).

Sample two-column solution.

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 3.0 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.

• Forgot your username/password?
• Create an account

Amazon Prime includes:

Fast, FREE Delivery is available to Prime members. To join, select "Try Amazon Prime and start saving today with Fast, FREE Delivery" below the Add to Cart button.

• Cardmembers earn 5% Back at Amazon.com with a Prime Credit Card.
• Unlimited Free Two-Day Delivery
• Instant streaming of thousands of movies and TV episodes with Prime Video
• A Kindle book to borrow for free each month - with no due dates
• Listen to over 2 million songs and hundreds of playlists
• Unlimited photo storage with anywhere access

Important:  Your credit card will NOT be charged when you start your free trial or if you cancel during the trial period. If you're happy with Amazon Prime, do nothing. At the end of the free trial, your membership will automatically upgrade to a monthly membership.

Buy new: $41.77 $41.77 FREE delivery: Friday, Nov 17 Ships from: Amazon.com Sold by: Amazon.com

• Free returns are available for the shipping address you chose. You can return the item for any reason in new and unused condition: no shipping charges
• Learn more about free returns.
• Go to your orders and start the return
• Select the return method

Buy used: $22.07

Other sellers on amazon.

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required .

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

Image Unavailable

• To view this video download Flash Player

Problem Solving for Kirkpatrick/Francis' Physics: A Conceptual World View, 7th 7th Edition

• Paperback $22.07 - $41.77 8 Used from $18.09 4 New from $31.29
• Product Bundle $88.84 - $88.89 8 Used from $88.84 7 New from $88.89

Purchase options and add-ons

• ISBN-10 0495828246
• ISBN-13 978-0495828242
• Edition 7th
• Publisher Cengage Learning
• Publication date June 3, 2009
• Language English
• Dimensions 8.5 x 0.54 x 10.88 inches
• Print length 238 pages
• See all details

Customers who viewed this item also viewed

From the Publisher

Spend less on your course materials with a subscription to cengage unlimited..

With Cengage Unlimited you’ll get:

• All your Cengage access codes for platforms like MindTap, WebAssign, CengageNowv2, SAM, and OWLv2
• Access to the online version of your textbook + our full library
• New study tools including online homework, flashcards, test prep and study guides
• A career center where you can boost your job skills and explore career options
• A lower-cost hardcopy textbook rental for eligible access codes, available within the 50 states

Editorial Reviews

About the author, product details.

• Publisher ‏ : ‎ Cengage Learning; 7th edition (June 3, 2009)
• Language ‏ : ‎ English
• Paperback ‏ : ‎ 238 pages
• ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 0495828246
• ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-0495828242
• Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 13.6 ounces
• Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 8.5 x 0.54 x 10.88 inches
• #2,264 in Arts & Humanities Teaching Materials
• #6,496 in Decision-Making & Problem Solving
• #23,932 in Physics (Books)

Videos for this product

Click to play video

Save with Cengage Unlimited

Merchant Video

Important information

To report an issue with this product, click here .

Customer reviews

Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.

To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.

• Sort reviews by Top reviews Most recent Top reviews

Top review from the United States

There was a problem filtering reviews right now. please try again later..

• Amazon Newsletter
• About Amazon
• Accessibility
• Sustainability
• Press Center
• Investor Relations
• Amazon Devices
• Amazon Science
• Start Selling with Amazon
• Sell apps on Amazon
• Supply to Amazon
• Protect & Build Your Brand
• Become an Affiliate
• Become a Delivery Driver
• Start a Package Delivery Business
• Advertise Your Products
• Self-Publish with Us
• Host an Amazon Hub
• › See More Ways to Make Money
• Amazon Visa
• Amazon Store Card
• Amazon Secured Card
• Amazon Business Card
• Shop with Points
• Credit Card Marketplace
• Reload Your Balance
• Amazon Currency Converter
• Your Account
• Your Orders
• Shipping Rates & Policies
• Amazon Prime
• Returns & Replacements
• Manage Your Content and Devices
• Your Recalls and Product Safety Alerts
• Conditions of Use
• Privacy Notice
• Your Ads Privacy Choices

• Previous Article
• Next Article

35 Years of “Conceptual” Physics: Problem Solving in Conceptual Physics : Paul G. Hewitt and Phillip R. Wolf; Conceptual Physics Alive!: The San Francisco Years : Paul G. Hewitt

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data
• Peer Review
• Reprints and Permissions
• Cite Icon Cite
• Search Site

John L. Hubisz; 35 Years of “Conceptual” Physics: Problem Solving in Conceptual Physics : Paul G. Hewitt and Phillip R. Wolf; Conceptual Physics Alive!: The San Francisco Years : Paul G. Hewitt. Phys. Teach. 1 April 2006; 44 (4): 253–254. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2186247

Download citation file:

• Ris (Zotero)
• Reference Manager

Article PDF first page preview

Sign in via your institution, citing articles via.

• Online ISSN 1943-4928
• Print ISSN 0031-921X
• For Researchers
• For Librarians
• For Advertisers
• Our Publishing Partners  
• Physics Today
• Conference Proceedings
• Special Topics

pubs.aip.org

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use

Connect with AIP Publishing

This feature is available to subscribers only.

Sign In or Create an Account

• LOGIN & Help

Conceptual Problem Solving in Physics

Research output : Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Students taking introductory physics courses focus on quantitative manipulations at the expense of learning concepts deeply and understanding how they apply to problem solving. This proclivity toward manipulating equations leads to shallow understanding and poor long-term retention. We discuss an alternative approach to physics problem solving, which we call conceptual problem solving (CPS), that highlights and emphasizes the role of conceptual knowledge in solving problems. We present studies that explored the impact of three different implementations of CPS on conceptual learning and problem solving. One was a lab-based study using a computer tool to scaffold conceptual analyses of problems. Another was a classroom-based study in a large introductory college course in which students wrote conceptual strategies prior to solving problems. The third was an implementation in high school classrooms where students identified the relevant principle, wrote a justification for why the principle could be applied, and provided a plan for executing the application of the principle (which was then used for generating the equations). In all three implementations benefits were found as measured by various conceptual and problem solving assessments. We conclude with a summary of what we have learned from the CPS approach, and offer some views on the current and future states of physics instruction.

• Conceptual assessment
• Conceptual problem solving
• High school
• Introductory physics
• Problem solving
• Science assessment
• Science cognition
• Science education
• Strategy writing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

• Social Psychology
• Developmental and Educational Psychology

Online availability

• 10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00009-0

Library availability

Related links.

• Link to publication in Scopus
• Link to the citations in Scopus

Fingerprint

• Physics Medicine & Life Sciences 100%
• physics Social Sciences 68%
• Students Medicine & Life Sciences 19%
• physics instruction Social Sciences 13%
• Learning Medicine & Life Sciences 13%
• Psychology Retention Medicine & Life Sciences 10%
• classroom Social Sciences 9%
• student Social Sciences 6%

T1 - Conceptual Problem Solving in Physics

AU - Mestre, Jose P.

AU - Docktor, Jennifer L.

AU - Strand, Natalie E.

AU - Ross, Brian H.

N1 - Funding Information: Work in part supported by the Institute of Education Sciences of the US Department of Education under Award No. DE R305B070085. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Institute of Education Sciences.

N2 - Students taking introductory physics courses focus on quantitative manipulations at the expense of learning concepts deeply and understanding how they apply to problem solving. This proclivity toward manipulating equations leads to shallow understanding and poor long-term retention. We discuss an alternative approach to physics problem solving, which we call conceptual problem solving (CPS), that highlights and emphasizes the role of conceptual knowledge in solving problems. We present studies that explored the impact of three different implementations of CPS on conceptual learning and problem solving. One was a lab-based study using a computer tool to scaffold conceptual analyses of problems. Another was a classroom-based study in a large introductory college course in which students wrote conceptual strategies prior to solving problems. The third was an implementation in high school classrooms where students identified the relevant principle, wrote a justification for why the principle could be applied, and provided a plan for executing the application of the principle (which was then used for generating the equations). In all three implementations benefits were found as measured by various conceptual and problem solving assessments. We conclude with a summary of what we have learned from the CPS approach, and offer some views on the current and future states of physics instruction.

AB - Students taking introductory physics courses focus on quantitative manipulations at the expense of learning concepts deeply and understanding how they apply to problem solving. This proclivity toward manipulating equations leads to shallow understanding and poor long-term retention. We discuss an alternative approach to physics problem solving, which we call conceptual problem solving (CPS), that highlights and emphasizes the role of conceptual knowledge in solving problems. We present studies that explored the impact of three different implementations of CPS on conceptual learning and problem solving. One was a lab-based study using a computer tool to scaffold conceptual analyses of problems. Another was a classroom-based study in a large introductory college course in which students wrote conceptual strategies prior to solving problems. The third was an implementation in high school classrooms where students identified the relevant principle, wrote a justification for why the principle could be applied, and provided a plan for executing the application of the principle (which was then used for generating the equations). In all three implementations benefits were found as measured by various conceptual and problem solving assessments. We conclude with a summary of what we have learned from the CPS approach, and offer some views on the current and future states of physics instruction.

KW - Assessment

KW - Conceptual

KW - Conceptual assessment

KW - Conceptual problem solving

KW - High school

KW - Introductory physics

KW - Problem solving

KW - Science assessment

KW - Science cognition

KW - Science education

KW - Strategy writing

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79960317668&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79960317668&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00009-0

DO - 10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00009-0

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:79960317668

SN - 0079-7421

JO - Psychology of Learning and Motivation - Advances in Research and Theory

JF - Psychology of Learning and Motivation - Advances in Research and Theory

Neuroscience Community

Student conceptual thinking about physics – how you think matters.

Related Content

Brain activity links performance in science reasoning with conceptual approach - npj Science of Learning

npj Science of Learning - Brain activity links performance in science reasoning with conceptual approach

Recent initiatives across the globe have sought to improve how we teach science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) in schools. Traditional teaching methods, where students typically spend class listening to a professor explain material, may not be effective for optimal learning. Students often exit these classes while still holding on to highly intuitive but scientifically incorrect ideas such as “seasons are caused from Earth’s distance away from the Sun” (they’re not), “blood is blue when its inside our veins” (it’s not), and “there’s no gravity in outer space” (there is). Persistent confusions such as these indicate students may not fully understand the science we ask them to learn. As teachers, it’s up to us to find more effective ways to help students overcome barriers to learning. In our recent npj Science of Learning article , “Brain activity links performance in science reasoning with conceptual approach”, Drs. Jessica Bartley, Angela Laird, Eric Brewe and collaborators at Florida International University used neuroimaging to understand how student’s approach to solving problems – including how they engage common misconceptions – may impact how they learn science, and we explored the lessons STEM teachers might take away from these insights. 

In our study, we recruited and enrolled 107 Florida International University undergraduate students who had completed a semester of introductory calculus-based physics. We recorded students’ brain activity while they solved multiple-choice physics problems from inside a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scanner. This allowed us to observe the parts of their brains that were active while the students completed successive steps of conceptual problem solving, and assess how their answers linked to these different patterns of brain activity. The problems were taken from a widely-used test called the Force Concept Inventory that probes for prevalent incorrect physics conceptions. The questions presented different physical scenarios and asked students to choose between a correct solution and several reasonable alternatives that portrayed commonly held incorrect ideas about force and motion. With this approach, we assessed if and how a student’s brain activity differed, based on the correct and incorrect answers they chose.

We found that similar brain regions were used across all students to solve conceptual physics problems. These regions are known as the brain’s central executive network (CEN), which is a constellation of brain areas typically responsible for cognitive functions including reasoning, decision-making, attention, learning, and memory. In addition, different brain activity patterns were observed at different stages of problem solving. CEN activity supported how students initiated these problems, but shifts were observed during the middle and end of the problem solving process. These later networks were consistent with brain regions that are known to respond to increased attention-related demands and are normally used when people remember past events. These findings suggested, somewhat unsurprisingly, that students may draw on their own memories of physical processes to inform the answers that make most sense to them during reasoning.

To explore the role of the students’ conceptual approaches during problem solving, we examined how students responded to the multiple-choice questions and assessed their corresponding brain activity patterns. First, we tested if simply answering questions correctly vs. incorrectly showed any difference in brain activity. Next, we applied network science techniques to identify student sub-groups that answered using similar physics conceptions – that is, students who were similar physics thinkers. Finally, we compared the brain activity of these sub-groups of students who thought in incorrect but similar ways and assessed brain activity patterns based on how they approached the problems. 

What we found was that there was no brain activity linked to simply being correct or incorrect while students solved the physics problems. Rather than accuracy, our results indicated that student conceptual logic is important for understanding the learning process. When students held more coherent ideas about physics, even if those ideas were not correct, similar brain areas were activated across the CEN. On the other hand, when students used less coherent ideas – ideas that were less consistent across each question answered – they used brain areas that were more associated with vision and detecting pertinent information from the external world. This suggests that students who are unsure about how to think about problems may spend more time trying to find the important parts of a problem and less time actually reasoning towards a solution. At the same time, students who think they know how to solve problems (even if they aren’t correct) may use processes comparable to those that solve problems correctly. 

These findings suggest that how a student processes a concept is important to how they learn, or fail to learn, physics. An instructional focus on accuracy alone, over-simplifies the complex processes engaged during physics reasoning. Instead of asking students to simply pay attention to what teachers say, we should also ask teachers to listen to student feedback. When students use incorrect but coherent ideas, they still engage in making sense of a problem. A teaching approach that simply tries to replace a student’s robust but incorrect ideas by explaining the correct ones is not very effective. Rather, teachers might experience more success if they identify the reasonable aspects of a student’s thinking while problem solving. Using these existing ideas as resources may support both students and teachers while they build the correct ideas desired to assist successful learning. Teaching is like a conversation. Let’s invite students to have a place in it.

Please sign in or register for FREE

If you are a registered user on Neuroscience Community, please sign in

npj Science of Learning

An online open access peer-reviewed journal dedicated to research on all aspects of learning and memory – from the genetic, cellular and molecular basis, to understanding how children and adults learn through experience and formal educational practices.

Related Collections

With collections, you can get published faster and increase your visibility.

Implications of artificial intelligence in learning and education

Publishing Model: Open Access

Deadline: Jan 26, 2024

Latest Content

Podcast: a sneak-peek of sfn 2023.

Biopsychosocial models of stress-sensitive epilepsy needed to advance translation

Through the eye to the brain: modulating arousal via pupil-based biofeedback.

Powerhouses on the Edge: Unveiling the Connection between Mitochondrial Dysfunction and Bipolar Disorder

Application of wrist-wearable accelerometry for objective motor diary assessment in fluctuating parkinson’s disease, share this post.

Choose a social network to share with, or copy the shortened URL to share elsewhere

Share with...

...or copy the link.

neurosciencecommunity.nature.com

What can brain imaging tell us about how students solve physics problems?

We and selected partners, use cookies or similar technologies as specified in the cookie policy and privacy policy .

You can consent to the use of such technologies by closing this notice.

Cookie Control

Customise your preferences for any tracking technology

The following allows you to customize your consent preferences for any tracking technology used to help us achieve the features and activities described below. To learn more about how these trackers help us and how they work, refer to the cookie policy. You may review and change your preferences at any time.

These trackers are used for activities that are strictly necessary to operate or deliver the service you requested from us and, therefore, do not require you to consent.

These trackers help us to deliver personalized marketing content and to operate, serve and track ads.

These trackers help us to deliver personalized marketing content to you based on your behaviour and to operate, serve and track social advertising.

These trackers help us to measure traffic and analyze your behaviour with the goal of improving our service.

These trackers help us to provide a personalized user experience by improving the quality of your preference management options, and by enabling the interaction with external networks and platforms.