Using Visual Media Based on Three Levels of Representation to Address Students’ Misconceptions About Parallel Resistor Circuits
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26618/ewgsyz18
conceptual change, parallel circuits, physics misconception, science learning, visual media
Abstract
Misconceptions about parallel resistor circuits remain a persistent problem in physics learning because students often rely on observable circuit behavior while failing to understand the invisible microscopic processes and symbolic relationships underlying current distribution. This study aimed to investigate the contribution of Conceptual Change Oriented Instruction (CCOI) supported by three-level representation-based visual media in remediating students’ misconceptions about parallel resistor circuits. A pre-experimental method with a one-group pretest–posttest design was employed. The participants were forty senior high school students in West Java, Indonesia, selected through purposive sampling based on the initial identification of misconceptions. Students’ conceptual states were measured using a validated Four-Tier Test consisting of conceptual questions, confidence ratings, reasoning choices, and confidence in reasoning. The remedial teaching process followed the CCOI stages and was supported by visual media representing macroscopic demonstrations, microscopic virtual simulations, and symbolic analogies. The study focused on two misconceptions: the belief that adding or removing branches affects the current in other branches, and the belief that changing the current in one branch affects the current in other branches. The results showed that 85% of students who initially held the first misconception shifted to scientific conception, while 80% of students who initially held the second misconception also shifted to scientific conception. The novelty of this study lies in integrating CCOI with a three-level, representation-based approach to visual media to explicitly remediate misconceptions in parallel resistor circuits. These findings suggest that representationally supported conceptual change instruction can help students reconstruct scientific understanding of current distribution. This study contributes to physics education by extending the application of Johnstone’s three-level representation framework to the remediation of misconceptions in electricity learning.
References
Achour, M., Khouna, J., & Tahiri, A. (2023). The use of serious games in physics: A review of selected empirical studies from 2012 to 2021. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 13(12), 1998–2003. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2023.13.12.2014
Achour, M., Khouna, J., & Tahiri, A. (2025). Can serious games reduce electric current misconceptions among 10th grade Moroccan science pupils. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 15(4), 795–802. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2025.15.4.2285
Addido, J., Burrows, A., & Slater, T. (2022). The effect of the conceptual change model on conceptual understanding of electrostatics. Education Sciences, 12(10), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12100696
Aiken, L. R. (1985). Three coefficients for analyzing the reliability and validity of ratings. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 45(1), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164485451012
Amiruddin, M. Z. B, Suhandi, A., Samsudin, A., Coştu, B., & Kaniawati, I. (2025). Perspectives on future research in conceptual change for science education: Systematic literature review. Africa Education Review, 21(2), 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2025.2503146
Amiruddin, M. Z., Suhandi, A., Fratiwi, N. J., Nurdini, N., Samsudin, A., & Coştu, B. (2026). Unveiling students’ conceptions of hydrostatic pressure: A cross-sectional analysis. Journal of Education and Learning (EduLearn), 20(2), 1120–1129. https://doi.org/10.11591/edulearn.v20i2.23710
Başer, M., & Geban, Ö. (2007). Effect of instruction based on conceptual change activities on students’ understanding of static electricity concepts. Research in Science & Technological Education, 25(2), 243–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140701250857
Bauman, L. C., Hansen, B., Goodhew, L. M., & Robertson, A. D. (2024). Student conceptual resources for understanding electric circuits. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 20(2), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.20.020128
Belova, N., & Zowada, C. (2020). Innovating higher education via game-based learning on misconceptions. Education Sciences, 10(9), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10090221
Duit, R., Treagust, D. F., & Widodo, A. (2013). Teaching science for conceptual change: Theory and practice. International handbook of research on conceptual change, 487–503. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203154472.ch25
Hahn, L., & Klein, P. (2025). The impact of multiple representations on students’ understanding of vector field concepts: Implementation of simulations and sketching activities into lecture-based recitations in undergraduate physics. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1544764
Halliday, D., Resnick, R., & Walker, J. (2014). Fundamentals of physics. John Wiley & Sons.
Johnstone, A. H. (2009). Multiple representations in chemical education, 31(16), 2271-2273. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903211393
Kaltakci-Gurel, D., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2016). Identifying pre-service physics teachers’ misconceptions and conceptual difficulties about geometrical optics. European Journal of Physics, 37(4), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1088/0143-0807/37/4/045705
Kaltakci-Gurel, D., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2017). Development and application of a four-tier test to assess pre-service physics teachers’ misconceptions about geometrical optics. Research in Science and Technological Education, 35(2), 238–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2017.1310094
Kaulu, G. (2015). Physics student teachers’ misconceptions about basic electronics: A case of BSc. Ed and BEDMAS students at UNZA. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 2(9), 155–160. https://www.allsubjectjournal.com/assets/archives/2015/vol2issue9/2-8-109.pdf
Korur, F., Korumaz, K., & Erduran Avci, D. (2025). Enhancing students’ conceptual understanding: An interventional study on the knowledge revision components framework using online materials. SAGE Open, 15(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251372501
Kurniawan, R., & Azwar, S. (2017). Konstruksi skala kepedulian terhadap penggunaan energi. Jurnal Ilmu Perilaku, 1(1), 22–32. https://doi.org/10.25077/jip.1.1.22-32.2017
Locatelli, S. W., Yeung, A., Mocerino, M., & Treagust, D. F. (2025). Student-generated diagrams showing salt dissolution: Patterns of levels of representation and an assessment rubric. International Journal of Science Education, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2025.2542988
Meijer, M. R. (2011). Macro-meso-micro thinking with structure-property relations for chemistry education: An explorative design based study. Utrecht University. https://research-portal.uu.nl/en/publications/macro-meso-micro-thinking-with-structure-property-relations-for-c/
Murni, H. P., Azhar, M., Ellizar, E., Nizar, U. K., & Guspatni, G. (2022). Three levels of chemical representation-integrated and structured inquiry-based reaction rate module: Its effect on students’ mental models. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(3), 758–772. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2022.148
Nakiboğlu, C. (2026). Senior pre-service chemistry teachers’ perceptions, alternative conceptions and knowledge structure regarding radiation and radioactivity. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 27(2), 793–827. https://doi.org/10.1039/D5RP00347D
Nkomo, S., & Bly, A. (2024). Developing a threshold concept assessment rubric: Using the Johnstone’s triangle framework for understanding intermolecular forces. Journal of Chemical Education, 101(11), 4694–4703. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.4c00236
Olaogun, O., & Hunsu, N. J. (2025). A systematic review of factors that predict and mediate conceptual change. European Journal of Psychology of Education,40(58). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-025-00959-1
Özmen, K. (2024). Health science students’ conceptual understanding of electricity: Misconception or lack of knowledge? Research in Science Education, 54(2), 225–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10136-3
Peşman, H., Arı, Ü., Karakaya Cirit, D., & Ayazgök, B. (2025). Effect of amount of guidance in inquiry-based physics laboratory on conceptual understanding and metacognitive awareness. Science & Education, 34, 3667–3687. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-024-00595-z
Pham, L., & Tytler, R. (2022). The semiotic function of a bridging representation to support students’ meaning-making in solution chemistry. Research in Science Education, 52(3), 853–869. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-021-10022-w
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211–227. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730660207
Putri, A. H., Suhandi, A., & Samsudin, A. (2024). Investigating the impact of three levels of representation-based visual media on students’ mental models. Physics Education, 59(6). https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/ad82cc
Ramnarain, U., & Moosa, S. (2017). The use of simulations in correcting electricity misconceptions of grade 10 South African physical sciences learners. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 25(5), 1-20. https://pure.uj.ac.za/en/publications/the-use-of-simulations-in-correcting-electricity-misconceptions-o/
Rexigel, E., Kuhn, J., Becker, S., & Malone, S. (2024). The more the better? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the benefits of more than two external representations in STEM education. Educational Psychology Review, 36(124), 1-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09958-y
Samsudin, A., Zulfikar, A., Saepuzaman, D., Suhandi, A., Aminudin, A. H., Supriyadi, S., & Coştu, B. (2024). Correcting grade 11 students’ misconceptions of the concept of force through the conceptual change model (CCM) with PDEODE* E tasks. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 21(2), 212–231. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2024.012
Sarwar, M. N., Shahzad, A., Ullah, Z., Raza, S., Wasti, S. H., Shrahili, M., Elbatal, I., Kulsoom, S., Qaisar, S., & Nazar, M. F. (2024). Concept mapping and conceptual change texts: A constructivist approach to address the misconceptions in nanoscale science and technology. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1339957
Sencar, S., Yılmaz, E. E., & Eryılmaz, A. (2001). Lise öğrencilerinin basit elektrik devreleri ile ilgili kavram yanılgıları. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21, 113–120. http://www.efdergi.hacettepe.edu.tr/shw_artcl-1041.html
Sianturi, I. N., & Abdurrahman. (2019). Exploring multiple representation preference to develop students misconception inventory in measuring of students science conception awareness. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1233(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1233/1/012039
Stojanovska, M., Petruševski, V. M., & Šoptrajanov, B. (2014). Study of the use of the three levels of thinking and representation. Contributions, Section of Natural, Mathematical and Biotechnical Sciences, 35(1), 37-46. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/318964698_STUDY_OF_THE_USE_OF_THE_THREE_LEVELS_OF_THINKING_AND_REPRESENTATION
Suhandi, A., Samsudin, A., Fratiwi, N. J., Nurdini, N., Feranie, S., Purwanto, M. G., Linuwih, S., & Coştu, B. (2025). Altering misconceptions: How e-rebuttal texts on Newton’s laws reconstructs students’ mental models. Frontiers in Education, 10, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1472385
Svoboda, J. (2023). Processing misconceptions: Dynamic systems perspectives on thinking and learning. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1215361
Taşlıdere, E. (2013). Effect of conceptual change oriented instruction on students’ conceptual understanding and decreasing their misconceptions in DC electric circuits. Creative Education, 4(4), 273–282. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2013.44041
Tehrani, M. (2021). Advanced electrical conductors: An overview and prospects of metal nanocomposite and nanocarbon based conductors. Physica Status Solidi (A), 218(8), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1002/pssa.202000704
Tipler, P. A., & Mosca, G. (2008). Physics for scientists and engineers (6th ed.). W. H. Freeman and Company.
Treagust, D. F., & Duit, R. (2008). Conceptual change: A discussion of theoretical, methodological and practical challenges for science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3, 297–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-008-9090-4
Tsui, C. Y., & Treagust, D. F. (2006). Understanding genetics: Analysis of secondary students’ conceptual status. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(2), 205–235. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20116
Xu, L. (2022). Towards a social semiotic interpretation of the chemistry triangle: Student exploration of changes of state in an Australian secondary science classroom. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 20(4), 705–726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-021-10190-1
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Havez Rasya Lega Serano, Dadi Rusdiana, Lathifa Nur Ramdhania, Lasmita Sari; Mohd Zaidi Bin Amiruddin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright:
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
Licence:
Authors are free to:
1. Share: Copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
2. Adapt: Remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as the authors follow the license terms, which include the following:
1. Attribution: You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
2. ShareAlike: If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
3. No additional restrictions: You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
