Various studies indicate that high school physics students and even college students majoring in physics have difficulties in qualitative understanding of basic concepts and principles of physics.1–5 For example, studies carried out with the Force Concept Inventory (FCI)1,6 illustrate that qualitative tasks are not easy to solve even at the college level. Consequently, “conceptual physics” courses have been designed to foster qualitative understanding, and advanced high school physics courses as well as introductory college-level courses strive to develop qualitative understanding. Many physics education researchers emphasize the importance of acquiring some qualitative understanding of basic concepts in physics as early as middle school or in the context of courses that offer “Physics First” in the ninth grade before biology or chemistry.7 This trend is consistent with the call to focus the science curriculum on a small number of basic concepts and ideas, and to instruct students in a more “meaningful way” leading to better understanding. Studies7–10 suggest that familiar everyday contexts (see Fig. 1) are useful in fostering qualitative understanding.

1.
Richard R.
Hake
, “
Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses
,”
Am. J. Phys.
66
,
64
74
(Jan.
1998
).
2.
Jim
Minstrell
, “
Getting the facts straight
,”
Sci. Teach.
50
,
52
54
(Jan.
1983
).
3.
Edward F. Redish, “Diagnosing students' problems using the results and method of physics education research,” Paper presented at the International Conference on Physics Teaching, Guilin, China (Aug. 1999).
4.
Ibrahim
Halloun
and
David
Hestenes
, “
The initial knowledge state of college physics students
,”
Am. J. Phys.
53
,
1043
1055
(Nov.
1985
).
5.
Lillian C.
McDermott
, “
Research on conceptual understanding in mechanics
,”
Phys. Today
37
,
24
32
(July
1984
).
6.
Richard N.
Steinberg
and
Mel S.
Sabella
, “
Performance on multi-choice diagnostics and complementary exam problems
,”
Phys. Teach.
35
,
150
155
(March
1997
).
7.
Physics First site, http://members.aol.com/physicsfirst.
8.
Project 2061 site, http://www.project2061.org/default.htm.
9.
Kevin
Pugh
, “
Newton's laws beyond the classroom walls
,”
Sci. Educ.
88
,
182
195
(March
2004
).
10.
Luli
Stern
and
Andrew
Ahlgren
, “
Analysis of students' assessment in JHS curriculum materials: Aiming precisely at benchmarks and standards
,”
J. Res. Sci. Teach.
39
,
889
910
(May
2002
).
11.
Lou
Turner
, “
System schemas
,”
Phys. Teach.
41
,
404
408
(Oct.
2003
).
12.
White and Gunstone, Probing Understanding (The Falmer Press, New York, NY, 1992).
13.
Frederick
Reif
, “
Millikan Lecture 1994: Understanding and teaching important scientific thought processes
,”
Am. J. Phys.
63
,
17
32
(Jan
1995
).
14.
B.
White
and
J.
Frederiksen
, “
Causal model progressions as a foundation for intelligent learning environments
,”
Artificial Intelligence
24
,
99
157
(
1990
).
15.
M. T. H.
Chi
,
M.
Bassok
,
M. W.
Lewis
,
P.
Reimann
, and
R.
Glaser
, “
Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems
,”
Cogn. Sci.
13
,
145
182
(
1989
).
16.
David
Hestenes
,
Malcom
Wells
, and
Greg
Swackhamer
, “
Force Concept Inventory
,”
Phys. Teach.
30
,
141
158
(March
1992
).
17.
Edward F.
Redish
,
Jeffery M.
Saul
, and
Richard N.
Steinberg
, “
On the effectiveness of active-engagement microcomputer-based laboratory
,”
Am. J. Phys.
65
,
45
54
(Jan.
1997
).
This content is only available via PDF.
AAPT members receive access to The Physics Teacher and the American Journal of Physics as a member benefit. To learn more about this member benefit and becoming an AAPT member, visit the Joining AAPT page.