Building New Understanding Through Experiments: Students' Conceptual Shifts on Projectile Motion
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33394/j-ps.v13i4.15627Keywords:
Direct Instruction, Conceptual Change, Projectile Motion, Students’ UnderstandingAbstract
Students' understanding of the concept of projectile motion is often hindered by misconceptions that are difficult to change through conventional teaching methods. This research explores how direct instruction, which remains relevant and effective in physics education, can be key to fostering conceptual change in students through a qualitative approach involving 39 elementary education teacher students as participants. Data was collected using two main instruments: in-depth interviews and student reflection journals, conducted during active and interactive learning processes. The research findings revealed that direct instruction not only helps students identify and correct misconceptions but also enriches their understanding by connecting the concept of projectile motion to real-life phenomena. Based on the reflection journals, students demonstrated increased awareness of conceptual errors and stated that direct involvement in experimental activities facilitated the internalization of concepts. In-depth interviews also indicated that group discussions, demonstrations, and direct observations of the motion trajectories of objects significantly reinforced their conceptual understanding. This transformation in understanding shows that direct teaching methods can bring abstract physics material to life, turning it into meaningful and applicable learning experiences. The conclusion of the research emphasizes that direct instruction is an effective strategy for improving the quality of students' conceptual understanding, particularly on the topic of projectile motion, and strengthening the foundation for sustainable physics education.
References
AL-RSA ’ I, M. S., Khoshman, J. M., & Tayeh, K. A. (2020). Jordanian pre-service physics teacher’s misconceptions about force and motion. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 17(4), 528–543. https://doi.org/10.36681/tused.2020.43
Amin, T. G. (2015). Conceptual metaphor and the study of conceptual change: research synthesis and future directions. International Journal of Science Education, 37(5–6), 966–991. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1025313
Banda, H. J., & Nzabahimana, J. (2021). Effect of integrating physics education technology simulations on students’ conceptual understanding in physics: A review of literature. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.023108
Bao, L., & Koenig, K. (2019). Physics education research for 21st century learning. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0007-8
Batuyong, C. T., & Antonio, V. V. (2018). Exploring the effect of Phet ® interactive simulation-based activities on students’ performance and learning experiences in electromagnetism. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 6(2), 121–131. www.apjmr.com
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2015). Qualitative case study methodology: study design and implementation for novice researchers. the qualitative report, 13(4), 544–559. https://. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559.
Benacka, J. (2011). On high-altitude projectile motion. Canadian Journal of Physics, 89(10), 1003–1008. https://doi.org/10.1139/p11-084
Bigozzi, L., Tarchi, C., Fiorentini, C., Falsini, P., & Stefanelli, F. (2018). The influence of teaching approach on students’ conceptual learning in physics. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02474
Bradshaw, C., Atkinson, S., & Doody, O. (2017). Employing a qualitative description approach in health care research. Global Qualitative Nursing Research, 4, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/2333393617742282
Cai, B., Mainhood, L. A., Groome, R., Laverty, C., & McLean, A. (2021). Student behavior in undergraduate physics laboratories: Designing experiments. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.020109
Chinaka, T. W. (2021). The effect of PhET simulation vs. phenomenon-based experiential learning on students’ integration of motion along two independent axes in projectile motion. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 25(2), 185–196. https://doi.org/10.1080/18117295.2021.1969739
Corvo, A. (2022). Comment on projectile motion with quadratic drag using an inverse velocity expansion. American Journal of Physics, 90(11), 861–864. https://doi.org/10.1119/5.0097411
Cross, R. (2014). Physics of overarm throwing. American Journal of Physics, 72, 305–312. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1634964
Dessie, E., Gebeyehu, D., & Eshetu, F. (2023). Enhancing critical thinking, metacognition, and conceptual understanding in introductory physics: The impact of direct and experiential instructional models. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(7), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13273
Dilber, R., Karaman, I., & Duzgun, B. (2009). High school students’ understanding of projectile motion concepts. Educational Research and Evaluation, 15(3), 203–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803610902899101
Ding, Y., Zhu, G., Bian, Q., & Bao, L. (2024). Analysis of students’ conceptual change in learning Newton’s third law with an integrated framework of model analysis and knowledge integration. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 20(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.20.020141
Dull, E., & Reinhardt, S. P. (2014). An analytic approach for discovery. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 1304, 89–92.
Elby, A. (2001). Helping physics students learn how to learn. American Journal of Physics, 69(S1), S54–S64. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1377283
Escobar, I., Arribas, E., Ramirez-Vazquez, R., & Beléndez, A. (2022). Projectile motion revisited: Does the distance between the launcher and the object always increase? Journal of King Saud University - Science, 34(3), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jksus.2022.101842
Eser Ültay. (2017). Examination of context-based problem-solving abilities of pre-service physics teachers. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(1), 113–122.
Franco, A. B. (2003). Avempace, Projectile Motion, and Impetus Theory. Journal of the History of Ideas, 64(4), 521–546. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhi.2004.0004
Giavazzi, F., Spini, S., Carpineti, M., & Vailati, A. (2021). Optimal leap angle of legged and legless insects in a landscape of uniformly distributed random obstacles. ROYAL SOCIETY OPEN SCIENCE, 8, 1–8.
Grigore, I., & Stefan, E. (2015). Using excel spreadsheets to study the vertical motion in a gravitational field. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 2769–2775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.259
Hall, S., & Liebenberg, L. (2024). Qualitative description as an introductory method to qualitative research for master’s-level students and research trainees. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 23, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241242264
Hudha, M. N., Batlolona, J. R., & Wartono, W. (2019). Science literation ability and physics concept understanding in the topic of work and energy with inquiry-STEM. AIP Conference Proceedings, 020063, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5141676
Jaber, G. A. H. (2014). Study projectile motion with different initial conditions using digital image. Advances in Physics Theories and Applications, 32(1), 80–88.
Jeong, J. S., & Gonzalez-gomez, D. (2019). Effects of active learning methodologies on the students’ emotions, self- efficacy beliefs and learning outcomes in a science distance learning course. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 9(2), 86–96. https://doi.org/10.3926/jotse.530
Karpudewan, M., Ponniah, J., & Ahmad, A. N. (2016). Project-based learning: an approach to promote energy literacy among secondary school students. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 25(2), 229–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-015-0256-z
Kovačević, M. S., Kuzmanović, L., Kovačević, S., & Milošević, M. M. (2024). An experiment for the study of projectile motion. Revista Mexicana de Fisica E, 21(2), 5–9. https://doi.org/10.31349/RevMexFisE.21.020217
La Rocca, P., & Riggi, F. (2009). Projectile motion with a drag force: Were the Medievals right after all? Physics Education, 44(4), 398–402. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/44/4/009
Lichtenberger, A., Kokkonen, T., & Schalk, L. (2024). Learning with multiple external representations in physics: Concreteness fading versus simultaneous presentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 61(9), 2258–2290. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21947
Lim, W. M. (2025). What Is Qualitative Research? An Overview and Guidelines. Australasian Marketing Journal, 33(2), 199–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/14413582241264619
Linthorne, N. P. (2001). Optimum release angle in the shot put. Journal of Sports Sciences, 19(5), 359–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/02640410152006135
Liu, G., & Fang, N. (2016). Student misconceptions about force and acceleration in physics and engineering mechanics education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 32(1), 19–29.
Liu, T., Lou, H., & Huang, H. (2023). Optimal design and verification of the 6-DOF Stewart structure used in vehicle-mounted automatic assembly. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2591, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2591/1/012010
Ma, X., Jia, Y., Fan, C., & Jiang, X. (2021). An empirical study on improving the learning effect of physics experiment course in high school by simulation experiment software. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 09(11), 309–331. https://doi.org/10.4236/jss.2021.911023
Mahmud, P. N. S. M., Balian, S. R. C., Mustafa, M. F., Johari, N. ’Aisyah, Ibrahim, S., & Nazri, N. A. A. (2024). Pilot study: investigating the effects of the low-cost projectile launcher experimental kit on student learning. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 14(4), 1691–1698. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v14-i4/21173
Mansyur, J., & Darsikin, D. (2016). Enhancing direct instruction on introductory physics for supporting students’ mental-modeling ability. International Education Studies, 9(6), 32. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v9n6p32
May, J. M., De Grandi, C., Gerton, J. M., Barth-Cohen, L., Beehler, A., & Montoya, B. (2022). Bringing three-dimensional learning to undergraduate physics: Insight from an introductory physics laboratory course. American Journal of Physics, 90(6), 452–461. https://doi.org/10.1119/10.0009715
McLure, F., Won, M., & Treagust, D. F. (2020). A sustained multidimensional conceptual change intervention in grade 9 and 10 science classes. International Journal of Science Education, 42(5), 703–721. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1725174
Mehta, A. (2022). Analytical Solution of Projectile Motion in Mid-Air with Quadratic Resistance Law Using Taylor Series Method. IOSR Journal Of Applied Physics, 14(6), 25–33. https://doi.org/10.9790/4861-1406012533
Mills, S. (2016). Conceptual understanding: A concept analysis. Qualitative Report, 21(3), 546–557. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2016.2308
Mudau, A. V. (2014). Pragmatic review of literature associated with projectile motion perceived as difficult to teach by some South African teachers. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(8), 441–445. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n8p441
Mufit, F. (2018). The study of misconceptions on motion’s concept and remediate using real experiment video analysis. Asean Comparative Education Research Network Conference, 1–7.
Munfaridah, N., Avraamidou, L., & Goedhart, M. (2021). The use of multiple representations in undergraduate physics education: what do we know and where do we go from here?. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/9577
Naylor, B. R. H. (1980). Galileo’s theory of projectile motion. Isis, 71(4), 550–570. https://doi.org/10.1086/352592
Neergaard, M. A., Olesen, F., Andersen, R. S., & Sondergaard, J. (2009). Qualitative description-the poor cousin of health research? BMC Medical Research Methodology, 9(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-9-52
Okur, M., & Güngör Seyhan, H. (2025). Mobile technology-enhanced 5E learning model in physics labs: an analysis of graph drawing and interpretation skills. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-025-10222-3
Özkan, G., & Selçuk, G. S. (2013). The use of conceptual change texts as class material in the teaching of “sound” in physics. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 14(1), 1–22.
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., Hoagwood, K., Angeles, L., & Northwest, K. P. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(2), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y.Purposeful
Palmerino, C. R. (2004). Galileo’s Theories of Free Fall and Projectile Motion as Interpreted by Pierre Gassendi. 137–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2455-9_8
Park, M. (2020). Students’ problem-solving strategies in qualitative physics questions in a simulation-based formative assessment. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 2(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0019-4
Piloto, L. S., Weinstein, A., Battaglia, P., & Botvinick, M. (2022). Intuitive physics learning in a deep-learning model inspired by developmental psychology. Nature Human Behaviour, 6(9), 1257–1267. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01394-8
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
Putnam, C. A. (1993). Sequential motions of body segments in striking and throwing skills: descriptions and explanations. Journal of Biomechanics, 26, 125–135.
Romanvican, M. G., Mundilarto, Supahar, & Istiyono, E. (2020). Development learning media based traditional games engklek for achievements mastery of the material and tolerance attitude. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1440(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1440/1/012044
Rowlands, S., & Graham, T. (2005). What is conceptual change in mechanics? Proceedings of the Sixth British Congress of Mathematics Education, 144–151. www.bsrlm.org.uk.
Sabo, H. C., Goodhew, L. M., & Robertson, A. D. (2016). University student conceptual resources for understanding energy. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010126
Said, A. A., Mshewa, M. M., Mwakipunda, G. C., Ngata, M. R., & Mohamed, E. A. (2023). Computational solution to the problems of projectile motion under significant linear drag effect. Open Journal of Applied Sciences, 13(04), 508–528. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojapps.2023.134041
Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description?. Research in Nursing & Health, 23, 334–340. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0009-9260(05)82940-X
Sandelowski, M. (2010). What’s in a name? Qualitative description revisited. Research in Nursing and Health, 33(1), 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20362
Saricayir, H., Ay, S., Comek, A., Cansiz, G., & Uce, M. (2016). Determining Students’ Conceptual Understanding Level of Thermodynamics. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(6), 69–79. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v4i6.1421
She, H. C., Chen, M. J., Huang, L. Y., & Hsueh, C. Y. (2025). Unfolding the cognitive process underlying computer-based scientific conceptual change with eye tracker: Behavioral performance and sequential analysis of attention. Education and Information Technologies, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13577-7
Siegel, P. B. (2017). Using Statcast to lift the discussion of projectile motion. American Journal of Physics, 85(4), 313–314. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4975302
Slocum, T. A., & Rolf, K. R. (2021). Features of direct instruction: content analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 14(3), 775–784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-021-00617-0
Stavrum, L. R. (2020). “ Never at rest ”: developing a conceptual fram- ework for descriptions of ‘ force ’ in physics tex - tbooks. Nordic Studies in Science Education, 16(2), 183–198.
Talanquer, V., Cole, R., & Rushton, G. T. (2024). Thinking and Learning in Nested Systems: The Classroom Level. Journal of Chemical Education, 101(2), 295–306. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.3c00839
Tang, Y. (2017). Facilitating learning of projectile problems with a unified approach. ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--28348
Usta, N. D., Ültay, E., & Ültay, N. (2020). Reading the concept map of physics teacher candidates: a case of light. Science Education International, 31(1), 14–21. https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v31.i1.2
Uwamahoro, J., Ndihokubwayo, K., Ralph, M., & Ndayambaje, I. (2021). Physics students’ conceptual understanding of geometric optics: revisited analysis. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(5), 706–718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-021-09913-4
van der Graaf, J., van de Sande, E., Gijsel, M., & Segers, E. (2019). A combined approach to strengthen children’s scientific thinking: direct instruction on scientific reasoning and training of teacher’s verbal support. International Journal of Science Education, 41(9), 1119–1138. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1594442
Villaruel, S. A. L. (2025). Physics Education Technology (PhET) Interactive simulations in learning selected topics in physics among college students. American Journal of Education and Technology, 4(3), 12–21. https://doi.org/10.54536/ajet.v4i3.4512
Vosniadou, S., & Skopeliti, I. (2014). Conceptual change from the framework theory side of the fence. Science and Education, 23(7), 1427–1445. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9640-3
Wadsworth, F. B., Vasseur, J., Foster, A., Smith, A. P. W., Byatt, N. A., Allgood, C., Loisel, A., Bintang, F., Squirrell, D., Paine, A., Bretagne, E., Brown, J., Winstanley, R., Lavallée, Y., Brown, R. J., & Kueppers, U. (2025). Projectile motion: experimental datasets and classroom exercises. Physics Education, 60(4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/add2c5
Wakhata, R., Mutarutinya, V., & Balimuttajjo, S. (2023). Exploring the impact of Stein et al.’s levels of cognitive demand in supporting students’ mathematics heuristic problem-solving abilities. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.949988
Warren, D. C. (2024). The hardest-hit home run? American Journal of Physics, 92(11), 834–840. https://doi.org/10.1119/5.0219325
Wiyono, K., Ismet, I., Andriani, N., Fitonia, A., Nadia, H., Meitasari, D., & Nazhifah, N. (2024). Exploration of physics concepts in local wisdom of south sumatera as an effort to develop students’ 21st-century skills. Jurnal Penelitian & Pengembangan Pendidikan Fisika, 10(1), 61–78. https://doi.org/10.21009/1.10106
Wu, X., Qiu, Y., & Kan, H. (2023). The application of conceptual change in physics experiment teaching : connotation, strategies and cases. Journal of Science Education, 24, 1–3.
Zhang, G., Zhu, Z., Zhu, S., Liang, R., & Sun, G. (2022). Towards a better understanding of the role of visualization in online learning: A review. Visual Informatics, 6(4), 22–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visinf.2022.09.002
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Jamaludin Jamaludin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- 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.
- 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 (See The Effect of Open Access).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
