PHYSICS EDUCATION RESEARCH SECTION

The Physics Education Research Section 共PERS兲 publishes articles describing important results from
the field of physics education research. Manuscripts should be submitted using the web-based system that
can be accessed via the American Journal of Physics home page, http://www.kzoo.edu/ajp/, and will be
forwarded to the PERS editor for consideration.

Integrating electrostatics with demonstrations and interactive teaching

Wheijen Chang
Physics Teaching and Research Center, Feng-Chia University, 100 Wen-Hwa Road, Taichung 407, Taiwan
共Received 13 May 2008; accepted 20 October 2010兲
Teaching electrostatics is challenging due to its complexity and high degree of abstraction. To
facilitate students’ understanding of the meanings and relations of the key terms, this paper describes
a series of demonstrations and conceptual questions based on an interactive teaching approach. The
context was an introductory university physics course for engineering and science students in
Taiwan. Features of the teaching intervention include the utilization of a series of demonstrations for
repeated practice applying the important concepts, the incorporation of derivations of equations and
verbal elaboration of concepts, and the engagement of students in thinking and discussing. Data
show that the teaching intervention benefited the students’ academic performance and their
satisfaction with the learning achievement. © 2011 American Association of Physics Teachers.
关DOI: 10.1119/1.3533342兴

I. INTRODUCTION perhaps because of the similarity between the forces between

Electrostatics is challenging to teach in part because key
terms such as electric field, electric flux, and electric poten-
tial are not commonly used in everyday life.1 The concepts
are not independent but are closely related. Each quantity
may be derived in multiple ways, depending on the given
information. For example, the electric field can be derived
from charges, electric flux, electric force, or electric poten-
tial. The selection of appropriate equations may be challeng-
ing for students when solving problems.2 The provision of
many contextualized questions is necessary for many stu-
dents to overcome the abstractness and complexity of the
topic.3
In recent decades we have learned that treating students as
passive receivers of knowledge is ineffective for learning
physics.4 Students need to engage cognitively to comprehend
the meanings and the usages of the key concepts.5
This paper describes a series of demonstrations and con-
ceptual questions in the context of an interactive teaching
approach. The goal is to facilitate students’ understanding of
the meanings and relations of the key terms and to help them
gain an overall understanding. Assessment of the outcomes
of the intervention is discussed, as are the features of the
teaching design.
II. LITERATURE SURVEY
The literature suggests four main difficulties in learning
electrostatics: 共1兲 The concepts of electricity are more ab-
stract than mechanics, for example, and the required math-
ematics is more complicated.6,7 共2兲 Students often confuse
field lines, equipotential lines, and trajectories.6,8 共3兲 Stu-
dents are likely to overlook the electric field. For example,
many students identify the electric field E with the electric
force F.1 In addition, students tend to ignore the field model
two charges and two masses. 共4兲 Many students are unfamil-
iar with the limits of the application of Gauss’ law and Cou-
lomb’s law.2,9
The use of demonstrations must be coupled with an under-
standing of contemporary learning theories to achieve the
desired outcomes. The conceptual change model states four
conditions for achieving conceptual change, that is, the intel-
ligibility, plausibility, and fruitfulness of the new model and
dissatisfaction with the existing concepts.10 Demonstrations
may help students to encounter cognitive conflict and trigger
a shift from their preconceptions toward scientific models.
Real-life examples usually comprise multiple principles and
provide an opportunity to students to integrate the related
ideas and strengthen their conceptual framework.11
Based on a sociocultural view, scientific tools, including
cognitive tools 共for example, words, symbols, and diagrams兲
and physical tools 共for example, equipment兲,12 are mostly
either new to the students or discrepant in meaning or usage
compared with everyday life.13 University instructors are of-
ten unaware that the meanings of these tools are not readily
understandable by students from their everyday
experiences.14 Understanding of university physics needs to
be illuminated by multimodal scaffolding, for example, lan-
guage, images, apparatus, and mathematics, and repetitive
practice is necessary for students to become fluent in the
disciplinary discourse.15 Vygotsky12 claimed that higher
mental functioning and human action are mediated by cul-
tural tools. Scientific tools are not merely for facilitating cog-
nition but entail thinking. They serve as the essential “ve-
hicle of thought.”16 To comprehend and apply scientific
knowledge, students are required to become acquainted with
these tools and grasp scientific ways of thinking.13 Kuhn17
suggested that scientific tools can be acquired by students by
exposing them to examples of their use rather than by sym-
bolic definitions. While discussing demonstration phenom-

226 Am. J. Phys. 79 共2兲, February 2011 http://aapt.org/ajp © 2011 American Association of Physics Teachers 226
Table I. The assessment tools, participants, time of evaluation, and method of data analysis to evaluate the outcomes of the teaching design.
Assessment tools Experimental group Control group
Academic test N = 60 N = 83
Open-ended survey N = 52 Not applicable
Closed-form survey N = 40 N = 41
ena, students may gradually become acquainted with the
meanings, functions, and relations of the scientific tools.3
Demonstrations should not only engage students and pro-
vide entertainment but should also help students to visualize,
focus, and think about the physics.11,18 A spiral structure is
suggested, allowing students to repeatedly revisit the ideas in
different contexts to distinguish the similarities and differ-
ences among related terms, concepts, and formulas.19
The goal of enhancing understanding via demonstrations
may be difficult to achieve. Students may be unaware of the
key phenomena that the teacher wants to illustrate in the
demonstration and that the students may be confused by
the representational tools that the teacher adopts for
explanation.20 Demonstrations are usually perceived as inter-
esting but irrelevant to the “official” learning agenda.21 Some
students completely ignore the anomaly that the instructor
has demonstrated and use only equations to interpret their
conceptions, which implies isolation between “real-life”
demonstrations and school physics.22 Demonstrations should
provide instruction on the scientific tools and highlight the
signals for students to undertake effective reasoning, encom-
pass questions in demonstrations to engage thinking and dis-
cussion, and show the direct links of demonstration questions
to official learning tasks, such as solving textbook problems
and examination questions.
Examples related to electrostatics are far fewer than for
other topics such as mechanics and optics. Guilbert23 has
introduced the technique of constructing a plasma globe, ver-
bally explaining the principles of why it glows, and a few
tricks that teachers can show in class, “just for fun.” Doty et
al.24 introduced a lightning machine to illustrate the rel-
evance and difference of the electric field E and the electric
potential V and to show that the ionization of air is due to E
rather than V. Some studies describe attempts to facilitate
students’ visualization of key concepts, such as E, mainly
through computer simulations.25 Sokoloff and Thornton26 de-
vised interactive lecture demonstrations to engage students in
observation, thinking, and discussion, confronting anomalies,
and triggering conceptual development. Designing questions
to engage thinking and discussion is not easy because it re-
quires instructors to continuously modify the question state-
ments according to the responses of the students.27
Table II. Content structure and time allocation of the control and experi-
mental classes in electrostatics.
Topics
Coulumb’s law Gauss’ law
Classes 共h兲 共h兲 V and U
Control 4 4 4h
Experimental 3 3 Integrating the 3 units: 6 h
227 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 79, No. 2, February 2011
Timing of evaluation Data analysis
2 weeks after the unit Quantitative
1 week after the unit Qualitative
4 months after the end of the semester Quantitative
III. METHODOLOGY
This study included the design of the teaching interven-
tion, including a series of demonstrations involving a plasma
globe and other equipment, the implementation of the teach-
ing sequence, and an evaluation of the outcomes. The study
was conducted over 2005–2007, which allowed for ongoing
modifications. We will present the design and outcomes of
the most recent implementation, along with a brief discus-
sion of the modifications.
During the three years, the author taught the unit six times
in an introductory physics course for science and engineering
students at a large university in Taiwan, with about 2000
students enrolled in the course each year. The course struc-
ture is similar to that in the U.S., and American versions of
the calculus-based textbooks are commonly adopted. In the
intervention class, the distribution of teaching time was 65%
lecturing, 10% assessment, and 25% discussion. Given the
same number of teaching hours as traditional classes, the
intervention adopted two strategies to reallocate time for in-
class discussions. The intervention reduced the time spent
solving problems, which was compensated by quizzes 共to
reinforce the students’ commitment to practicing problems
outside of class兲. The use of handouts saved the time usually
spent copying notes. The teaching style adopted by the au-
thor was the same during the entire academic year,28 so that
students would perceive that learning electrostatics was simi-
lar to learning other physics topics.
Both the students’ academic achievements and their per-
ceptions of the course were investigated. The assessment
tools, the participants, the timing of evaluations, and the
types of analyses are tabulated in Table I.
Academic achievement was evaluated by a written exami-
nation consisting of nine questions with 15 subquestions in
total, which were either written by the author or modified
from the resources such as textbooks29 and the standardized
Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism 共CSEM兲
test.7 The academic achievement test devised by the author
was given 2 weeks after the unit was completed and served
as a quiz. The experimental class included 60 students taught
by the author, and the control class had 83 students taught by
another instructor. A one-tailed t-test and ␹2 test were applied
to examine differences between the two groups. The Pearson
product-moment correlation r was adopted for analysis of the
subquestions between the two groups to evaluate the reliabil-
ity of the academic achievement test. The two instructors did
not discuss the test questions prior to the assessment.
Most students in Taiwan are placed according to the Uni-
fied Entrance Examination and are allocated to a specific
department of a university. For the introductory physics
course, students in the same class have the same major. For
Wheijen Chang 227
some popular departments, students with the same major are
randomly allocated to two to three classes. To ensure a simi-
lar background between the two groups, students in the con-
trol class all had the same major as the experimental class,
that is, electrical engineering, in the most recent implemen-
tation 共2007兲. The average scores 共standard deviations兲 in the
physics entrance examination of the experimental and con-
trol groups were 37.1 共8.8兲 and 36.1 共10.5兲, respectively. A
two-tailed t-test showed no difference between the two
groups on the entrance examination.
electric field due to a point charge 共Coulomb ’ s law兲,
definition of electric field by electric force, E = F/q,
flux ⌽E due to charge q 共Gauss ’ law兲, 冖 E · dA = ⌽E = q/␧0 ,
definition of potential energy difference, ⌬U = −
definition of electric potential difference ⌬V by ⌬U,
electric potential due to a point charge, V = kq/r 共assuming zero potential at r = ⬁兲,
relation between E and ⌬V, ⌬V = − 冕 E · dr,
Following a brief introduction of Eqs. 共1兲–共3兲 and the so-
lution of a few related problems, the teaching sequence pre-
sented in this paper was adopted. This sequence serves not
only to introduce V and U but also to review Coulumb’s and
Gauss’ laws. About 12 teaching hours 共4 weeks兲 were de-
voted to electrostatics for both the control and experimental
classes, of which the teaching sequence took 6 h.31 The dis-
tribution of the teaching hours used in each group is com-
pared in Table II, which shows that the control class adopted
the three topics of electrostatics with a unidirectional ap-
proach and the experimental class adopted a spiral structure
allowing for the review and integration of the three topics.
The teaching intervention starts with three demonstrations
aimed at introducing the meanings, functions, and relations
of F, E, ⌬U, and ⌬V. Then, with the guidance of the instruc-
tor, the students assemble a “formula diagram” to further
consolidate the conceptual relations of the four terms. Details
of how to assemble the formula diagram are discussed later.
When the formula diagram is completed, more questions are
needed to help the students to further comprehend the terms,
formulas, and concepts associated with the formula diagram.
Small group discussions were then undertaken with a series
of demonstrations involving the plasma globe.
A. Initiating key terms: Three demonstrations
The three demonstration examples are conducted through
whole-class discussion, during which the instructor poses the
228 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 79, No. 2, February 2011
IV. DESIGN OF THE TEACHING SEQUENCE
Electrostatics usually consists of discussions of Coulomb’s
law, Gauss’ law, electric potential, and potential energy. Key
concepts include the electric charge q, the force F, the field
E, the electric flux ⌽E, the electric potential V, and the po-
tential energy U. Understanding the definitions and meanings
of each concept and the relations among them is a major goal
of learning electrostatics. Equations can be effective tools for
defining concepts and linking their relations. The key rela-
tions, following the usual sequence, include30
E = kq/r2 , 共1兲
共2兲
共3兲
冕 F · dr, 共4兲
⌬V = ⌬U/q, 共5兲
共6兲
E=−
dV
dr
r. 共7兲
questions and recruits students to answer. Instruction and
dialog are flexibly interchanged in the three examples.
The first demonstration utilizes Wimshurst’s electrostatic
generator to introduce the concepts of charge, potential field,
force, and potential energy and the relations between them.
As shown in Fig. 1, Wimshurst’s electrostatic generator has
Fig. 1. A Wimshurst generator is used to illustrate the five key terms of
electrostatics, including q, V, U, E, and F, to illustrate the meaning of each
term and to link relations among them.
Wheijen Chang 228
wheels attached to leather plates, which rub against the metal
brushes while rotating. Electric charges are thus separated
and then accumulated on the two metal poles. The questions
and answers 共including formula derivation and verbal de-
scriptions兲 are as follows, along with some typical student’s
responses.
Question 1. Why does the electrostatic generator spark
when the wheel is rotated? Answer: Rotating the wheel al-
lows the materials to rub, separating charges. The charges
gradually accumulate and result in intense electric fields be-
tween the poles.
Common student responses indicate the causality of Fig. 2. A stun gun is used to illustrate the dielectric strength of air and to use
rub→ charging→ high V → sparking. The inappropriate link the relation between E and V.
between high V to sparking was similar to the finding of
Doty et al.24 This question highlights the critical factor of E
共rather than V兲 to trigger sparks. a person with an electric shock.32 共b兲 To estimate the mini-
Question 2. If the sparks do not appear after rotating, how mum electric potential of the stun gun, which quantity of the
can they be subsequently created? How can this discharging gun should be measured, and how can you calculate the elec-
phenomenon be explained using the relations and concepts tric potential? Answer: 共a兲 To create sparks the electric field
of electrostatics? Answer: This question highlights the differ- E needs to exceed the breakdown threshold. Because ⌬V of
ence between E and V. This question can be answered as the stunner is very high, the value of E between the poles is
follows: 共a兲 Reducing the distance ⌬r between the two poles high 共⌬V = E⌬r兲. 共b兲 The distance between the two poles
increases E because E = ⌬V / ⌬r; E ⬀ 1 / ⌬r when ⌬V is fixed. needs to be measured 共⌬r = 3.6 cm兲. The dielectric strength
共b兲 Because the potential V depends only on the amount of of dry air 共E ⱖ 3 ⫻ 106 V / m兲 can be utilized to estimate the
charge ⫾q accumulated on each spherical pole minimum electric potential of the equipment, ⌬V ⱖ E⌬r
共⫾V = ⫾ kq / r兲, ⌬V = V+ − V− is fixed when the charge q of the ⬇ 1.1⫻ 105 V.
two poles is fixed. 共c兲 The electric force exerted on the ions Although the students applied the same ideas in Question
within the two poles increases when the electric field in- 2 a few days earlier, Question 4 is very challenging. The
creases 共F = qE, which implies that F ⬀ E兲, which can trigger students tend to link high V to sparking and fail to use
sparks when the magnitude of the field is greater than the ⌬V = E⌬r.
threshold of ionizing air. Question 5. An electric insect eliminator 共shown in Fig. 3兲
A few students were able to answer with “shortening the is composed of parallel metal wires. Each neighboring pair
poles,” but most could not invoke the electric field by linking of wires possesses a potential difference of a few kilovolts,
V using E = ⌬V / ⌬r. Wimshurst’s electrostatic generator is a which delivers high electrical power to eliminate insects,
popular demonstration in Taiwan; thus, students may recall such as mosquitoes. 共a兲 Explain why this potential can elimi-
the phenomenon from high school but fail to grasp the key nate insects. 共b兲 Why cannot an electric insect eliminator
underlying concepts. produce sparks in the same way a stun gun does? 共c兲 How
At this stage in the sequence, the term “dielectric strength” can we trigger sparks between neighboring wires without
is introduced. For dry air, the dielectric strength 共referred to connecting them to conductors? 共d兲 If the potential difference
as the breakdown threshold兲 is E = 3 ⫻ 106 N / C. between the neighboring wires is 5000 V, estimate how close
Question 3. If sparks have not yet appeared, the electric they should be to trigger sparks. Answer: 共a兲 While the in-
potential remains very high. How could a high potential dif- sects get an electric shock, the transferred energy ⌬U 共or
ference ⌬V exist between the two poles without transferring electrical power P, which is the transferred energy rate,
electrical energy ⌬U? What mechanism allows a transfer of P = ⌬U / ⌬t兲 determines the level of harmfulness. The electric
electrical energy to occur? Answer: Based on the definition potential between the two wires results in insects, which be-
of potential difference 共⌬V = ⌬U / q兲, the energy transferred is have as conductors with a small resistance R, receiving a
fatal electric shock 共P = V2 / R兲. 共b兲 The potential difference of
⌬U = q⌬V. So, the high potential difference does not transfer
energy because it lacks charge 共sparks indicate charge flow兲
to act as the vehicle to transport energy.
The purposes of this sequence include showing that the
electric potential is determined by the accumulation of
charge 共V ⬀ q兲, the distance ⌬r between the two points with
potential difference ⌬V plays a significant role in linking E
and ⌬V 共兩⌬V兩 = E⌬r兲, E is different from F, charge serves as
the vehicle to transport energy 共⌬U = q⌬V兲, and the role of E
is highlighted by the breakdown threshold. Equations and
verbal explanations are tightly incorporated to clarify the
concepts. Because the concepts are demanding, two more
demonstrations and questions are given to students after they
have worked on a few traditional problems.
Question 4. 共a兲 Why does the stun gun 共shown in Fig. 2兲 Fig. 3. An electric insect eliminator is used to illustrate to distinguish the
produce sparks? Stun guns produce an electric potential dif- concepts of E and V and to highlight the key role of E in determining
ference from 200 to 300 kV, which can momentarily disable sparking.

229 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 79, No. 2, February 2011 Wheijen Chang 229
 Fig. 5. A formula diagram linking F, E, U, and V and the key relations
between them.
Fig. 4. A magnified photo of sparking to facilitate its visibility in class.

a few kilovolts is insufficient to give the breakdown thresh-

old 共E = ⌬V / ⌬r ⬃ 103 / 10−2 ⬃ 105 V / m兲. 共c兲 The key to trig-
gering sparks is the electric field, which can be increased by
decreasing the distance between the wires 共E = ⌬V / ⌬r; E
⬀ 1 / ⌬r for fixed ⌬V兲. 共d兲 From the threshold of dry air and
E = ⌬V / ⌬r, the gap between the gates must be ⌬r ⱕ ⌬V / E
= 1.7⫻ 10−3 m. A photo can be provided to confirm this es-
timate 共see Fig. 4兲.
The purposes of Questions 4 and 5 include reinforcing the
concept of E in electrostatics and distinguishing between E
and V and the relations between them. Immediately after
Question 4, many students were able to answer Questions
5共c兲 and 5共d兲. Repeated practice is required to help the stu-
dents’ conceptual understanding and reinforce their confi-
dence in learning electrostatics.

B. Structuring key terms and relations: Assembling the

formula diagram
After the definitions and relations of the four key terms of
electric force F, electric field E, electric potential energy
⌬U, and electric potential ⌬V have been introduced and Fig. 6. Pattern and colors of the glow of a plasma globe.
practiced, the instructor guides the students to draw a “for-
mula diagram” 共see Fig. 5兲, which can serve as a way to
activate students in their thinking and interactions.12–16 To
draw the formula diagram, the students were guided by the
instructor by the following three steps: 共1兲 locate the four
terms: the instructor placed F in the upper left corner and ⌬U
in the lower left, then asked the students to locate E and ⌬V
in the two right corners, respectively, based on their rela-
tions; 共2兲 select a formula to connect each pair of key terms
in the corners; and 共3兲 modify the formulas to improve their
precision and sophistication. For example, replace ⌬V
= E · ⌬r by ⌬V = −兰E · dr; clarify the meanings of the terms
and formulas, for example, q means the source of E in Eq.
共1兲 but a detector of E in Eq. 共2兲; and add the reverse for-
mulas, for example, F = qE implies E = F / q.
While assembling the formula diagram, common difficul-
ties faced by the students are the equations linking F and ⌬U
and E and ⌬V. These relations were less recognized than
those linking F and E and ⌬U and ⌬V. Also the relations
E = F / q and ⌬V = ⌬U / q were more frequently adopted than
their reverse, for example, F = qE. Inadequate causal asser-
tions were made, for example, attributing q as the cause of
E in E = F / q, and the forms of some expressions were
incomplete. Fig. 7. The safety of touching high voltage equipment.

230 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 79, No. 2, February 2011 Wheijen Chang 230
Fig. 8. High potential difference of the plasma globe can successfully light Fig. 9. Shifting the left hand on the globe can reduce the electric potential
up the fluorescent tube. difference of the tube, thus extinguishing the fluorescent tube.

C. Further practice: Demonstration of plasma globe

After completing the formula diagram, a demonstration
involving a plasma globe was included in the teaching.23 The
questions are assembled into a worksheet for small group
共three to four students per group兲 discussion. After a brief
introduction of the questions by showing demonstrations, the
instructor gave the students about 40 min to work on the
worksheet. The questions, answers, and students’ responses
are provided in Appendix A, comprising Questions 6–11,
along with Figs. 6–11.

V. MODIFICATIONS AND PEGADOGICAL

PURPOSES
Major modifications included adding more questions, ex-
plicitly addressing key variables in the questions or giving
more hints, shifting questions from requiring explanation to
problem solving, and merging derivations and verbal elabo-
rations in answering the questions.
Extra questions were added to correspond to the identified
learning difficulties. For example, because Question 11 共in Fig. 10. Failure to indirectly light up the tube due to an insufficient electric
field.
Appendix A兲 共indirectly lighting up the tube兲 was very chal-
lenging, the task of extinguishing the fluorescent tube 共Ques-
tion 10兲 was added. Both questions are aimed at overcoming
the same pitfall, that is, confusing the potential V with the
potential difference ⌬V. During early implementations, a
popular invalid strategy to light up the tube 共Question 11兲
suggested by students is letting the other hand of the second
共left兲 person touch the globe to form a “closed loop” 共see
Fig. 10兲. Although the strategy reflects the notion of “current
appears in a closed circuit only,” the strategy is incorrect due
to the zero potential difference. After adding Question 10,
the students become more capable of solving Question 11.
When seeing the tube successfully lit up, as they predicted,
they usually cheer out loud, providing a thrilling ending to
the unit.
Information was supplemented by the instructor to facili-
tate discussions as well as to strengthen the integration of
related principles. For example, explanations of the pattern
and colors of the glow of the plasma globe 共shown in Fig. 6兲
were initially given as two separate questions, which were
difficult and irrelevant. Question 7 is now aimed at connect-
ing the pattern and colors of the glow to help link the electric
flux ⌽E and potential energy difference ⌬U by showing the Fig. 11. Shortening the distance between the two hands increases the elec-
glow to help visualize ⌽E, explicitly relating phenomena to tric field of the tube, thus successfully lighting up the tube.

231 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 79, No. 2, February 2011 Wheijen Chang 231
 Table III. Summary of the demonstrations and questions and their pedagogical purposes.

Pedagogical purpose/principle Demonstrations Questions

E 共rather than V兲 as the threshold

to ionize dielectric Figures 1, 2, 10, and 11 2, 4, and 11共a兲
⌬V 共rather than V兲 in determining E and ⌬U Figures 9–11 10 and 11共b兲
Equation 共2兲: F = qE Figures 1 and 6 2共a兲, 7共a兲, and 7共b兲
Equation 共3兲: E = ⌽E / A Figure 6 7共b兲
Equation 共4兲: ⌬Ue = −兰Fe · dr Figures 6 and 8 6共b兲, 7共b兲, and 9共a兲
Equation 共5兲: ⌬V = ⌬U / q; ⌬U = q⌬V Figures 1 and 7 3 and 8
Equation 共6兲: V = kq / r Figure 1 2共b兲
Equation 共7兲: ⌬V = −兰E · dr;
dV
E=− r
dr Figures 1–3, 6, 10, and 11 2共c兲, 4共a兲, 5共c兲, 6共a兲, and 11共a兲

the key terms. In other words, the pattern of the glow illus-
trates the distribution of the electric field E, and the colors
indicate the energy difference ⌬U. A follow-up task
is to guide students to connect E and ⌬U, which is
共pattern→ ⌽E → E → F → work→ ⌬U → color variations兲.
In addition to the usual questions asking students to ex-
plain why specific phenomena occur, I modified two ques-
tions from requiring explanation to problem solving, includ-
ing extinguishing the tube 共Question 10兲 and indirectly
lighting up the tube 共Question 11兲. Problem solving ques-
tions are beneficial to stimulating curiosity and engaging
cognition, as is discussed later based on the students’ com-
ments.
The role of incorporating equations and verbal interpreta-
tions in explaining the demonstrations was promoted. During
the modifications, the students were asked to incorporate the
two tools of derivations and verbal elaboration to answer
Questions 6–11. The formula diagram was added to illustrate
the relations of the key terms. The formula diagram serves as
mediated scaffolding to facilitate the effectiveness of small
group discussion.
In summary, the modifications were done mainly to pro-
vide more guidance in terms of specifying the required sci-
entific tools and identifying the key phenomena, which are
essential for effective reasoning.
The pedagogical purposes of the complete demonstrations/
questioning teaching sequence aim at highlighting the sig-
nificance of E 共rather than V兲 as the direct threshold of the
conducting dielectrics; illustrating the notion of potential dif-
ference ⌬V rather than V in determining both the electric
field E and electrical energy ⌬U; and demonstrating the
meanings, functions, and uses of Eqs. 共2兲–共7兲, for example,
the pattern of the plasma glow 共Fig. 6兲 helps students visu-
alize the meanings of ⌽E and E and the relation between
them and the meanings of Eq. 共3兲; Questions 4共b兲 and 5共d兲
help relate E and ⌬V in Eq. 共7兲.
A summary of how the demonstrations and questions re-
peatedly reflect each pedagogical purpose/principle is pre-
sented in Table III, which shows that most pedagogical pur-
poses are addressed and practiced repeatedly with questions
in different contexts. For example, the relation between E
and ⌬V 关Eq. 共7兲兴 is used five times with five different phe-

Table IV. Percentages of correct response to each question and ␹2 test of the experimental and control groups.

Percentage of correct response

Question Experimental group 共N = 60兲 Control group 共N = 83兲 ␹2 test Significance Learning demandsa
b
1 85.0 66.2 15.7 共7兲
2 56.7 49.4 2.11 n.s CC
3共a兲 86.7 88.5 0.10 n.s. CC
b
3共b兲 38.3 8.4 116 共5兲
b
3共c兲 65.0 10.8 303 共4兲/共2 and 7兲
4共a兲 75.0 68.7 1.86 n.s. RF
b
4共b兲 63.3 26.5 69.6 共2兲
b
5共a兲 63.3 39.7 23.2 共7兲
b
5共b兲 80.0 43.3 54.6 RF
b
6共a兲 30.0 8.4 60.2 共5兲
b
6共b兲 66.7 33.7 48.5 共6兲
b
7 75.0 56.6 13.7 RF/共5兲
8 51.7 45.8 1.39 n.s. CC
b
9共a兲 91.7 50.6 67.5 共7兲
b
9共b兲 75.0 44.6 37.5 共2兲
a
The learning demands entail conceptual clarification 共CC兲, representational familiarity 共RF兲, and invocation of
the equations in Sec. IV.
b
Significant at probability⬍ 0.001; n.s.: not significant at probability= 0.10.

232 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 79, No. 2, February 2011 Wheijen Chang 232
 Table V. Evaluation of instructor’s teaching: Average score in a five-point Likert scale and probability of t-test.

Experimental 共N = 41兲 Control 共N = 40兲 Probability 共two tailed t-test兲

1. Solid knowledge in physics 4.5 4.0 2.1⫻ 10−4

2. Lucid instruction 4.5 3.9 2.5⫻ 10−4
3. Introduces real-life examples 4.8 3.7 3.4⫻ 10−8
4. Enthusiastic about teaching 4.7 4.0 3.1⫻ 10−5
5. Integration of formulas 4.6 4.0 2.0⫻ 10−4
6. Monitors learning outcomes 4.2 3.6 4.5⫻ 10−4
7. Promotes in-class interaction 4.7 3.8 4.0⫻ 10−8

nomena. In addition, the integration of multiple principles is A. Academic performance

required to explain many demonstrations, for example, inte-
gration of Eqs. 共2兲–共4兲 and 共7兲 to explain the patterns and
colors of the glow in Fig. 6.
VI. OUTCOMES OF THE TEACHING
INTERVENTION
Two questionnaire surveys were administered to investi-
gate the participants’ opinions about the teaching interven-
tion. One week after the completion of the unit, an open-
ended questionnaire was distributed to the experimental
group. The students were invited to anonymously comment
on the equipment, question design, and features and quality
of the teaching performance, what and how well they learned
from the unit, how university and high school learning in
electrostatics compare, and suggestions for modifying the
teaching intervention. There were 52 students 共out of 60兲
who completed the questionnaire. The students’ comments
were qualitatively categorized in terms of cognitive out-
comes, affective outcomes, and learning engagement. 共Affec-
tive outcomes mean the students’ subjective judgment of
their emotional feeling about the nature of the teaching and
their own learning, such as feelings of interest, usefulness,
confidence, and effectiveness.兲
Three months after the end of the semester, an anonymous
closed-form survey was administered to both the experimen-
tal 共N = 40兲 and control 共N = 41兲 groups. The instructor’s
competency and the students’ learning achievements were
investigated. The questions were devised by the author and
used a five-point Likert scale, ranging from “strongly agree”
共five points兲 to “strongly disagree” 共one point兲. The average
score and two-tailed t-test were used to examine the signifi-
cant differences between the degrees of satisfaction of the
two groups.
The test was designed to encompass the major pedagogi-
cal purposes of the intervention design, summarized in Table
III, involving conceptual clarification, representational famil-
iarity, and use of formulas. Appendix B and Table IV present
the test, the demands of each question, the percentage of
correct responses, and the chi-square test between the experi-
mental and control groups.
The results of the experimental group were found to be
significantly superior to those of the control group on the
test. For example, students were required to determine the
direction of the electric field given a pattern of equipotential
lines 关Question 5共b兲兴, for which 80% of the experimental
group answered correctly compared to 43% of the control
group. The average scores 共standard deviation兲 of the experi-
mental and control groups were 66.9共18.5兲 and 42.6共18.5兲,
respectively. A one-tailed t-test yielded t = 4.46, indicating
that the experimental students outperformed their counter-
parts at a significant level of p ⬍ 0.001. In addition, the order
of difficulty of individual questions with respect to each
group was evaluated, and the Pearson product-moment cor-
relation r was adopted for the difficulty order between the
two groups. The correlation coefficient is r = 0.753, indicat-
ing consistency among the questions for the two groups.
Thus, the superiority of the experimental group as measured
by the average score can be attributed to the outperformance
of most questions rather than excellence in particular ques-
tions.
The ␹2 test was utilized to analyze the difference for each
subquestion between the two groups. The experimental
group performed significantly better at p ⬍ 0.001, in 11 out
of the 15 subquestions. Three out of the four questions that
showed insignificant differences asked for conceptual clari-
fications only. Questions 2, 3共a兲, and 8 require a qualitative
understanding of individual concepts, that is, the meaning of

Table VI. Students’ self-evaluation of learning achievements: Average scores in a five-point Likert scale and
probability of t-test.

Experimental Control Probability 共two tailed t-test兲

1. Understanding of physics concepts/principles 4.5 3.5 3.1⫻ 10−9

2. Cultivates thinking/reasoning ability 4.5 3.3 1.6⫻ 10−10
3. Enhances mathematical ability 4.0 3.4 5.4⫻ 10−4
4. Adoption of flexible learning strategies 4.1 3.3 1.1⫻ 10−5
5. Solidifies foundation for advanced courses 4.4 3.5 1.7⫻ 10−5
6. Promotes interest in learning 4.2 3.1 1.4⫻ 10−7
7. Enriches knowledge of applications 4.6 3.6 2.1⫻ 10−8

233 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 79, No. 2, February 2011 Wheijen Chang 233
F, E, V, and U, where use of formulas and integration of
multiple concepts is unnecessary. Although both groups ap-
pear to perform equally well in terms of conceptual clarifi-
cation, the teaching intervention seems to benefit the tasks of
invoking key formulas and familiarity of representation. The
performance of the control group was slightly better than
their peers in the U.S. for the questions from CSEM.33
B. Results of closed-form survey
The experimental group 共N = 40兲 responded significantly
more positively than the control group 共N = 41兲 in evaluating
the teaching competency and their own learning achieve-
ments on the closed-form questionnaire survey 共see Table V兲.
The strengths of the instructor/teaching were significant in
introducing real-life examples and promoting interactions
共Questions 3 and 7兲, reflecting the key strategies that the
teaching intervention adopted. The students’ praise of the
teaching competency was consistent with their satisfaction
with their learning achievement, as shown in Table VI. The
experimental group ranked higher in learning achievement in
all aspects. Outcomes were found to be particularly signifi-
cant in terms of cultivating thinking/reasoning ability, con-
ceptual understanding, informing application knowledge, and
promoting interest, while mathematical ability was not sac-
rificed.
C. Responses to open-ended survey
The open-ended survey showed that 83% of the experi-
mental group self-reported positive cognitive outcomes, af-
fective outcomes, and learning engagement, reflecting the
goals of the teaching design. For example,
“Super! Exploring the 共plasma globe兲 experiment
can help us understand many concepts in electric-
ity and learn how to apply the four key formulas
共of the formula diagram兲.” 共S1兲
“I have a better understanding of the principles and
their application. High school 共physics兲 only
teaches us to recite many formulas, which become
very confusing. Whereas now, due to the under-
standing, 共I can兲 adopt the formula I need by rea-
soning.” 共S2兲
“Compared with high school, 共university physics兲
is no more suffering with lots of cold formulas;
rather, 共I have兲 practiced many real-life questions,
共and兲 come to understand electricity step by step.”
共S3兲
“The plasma globe has made electric field visible,
and I can sense that electric field really causes
electric force.” 共S4兲
These quotes imply that the students understand the con-
cepts by means of reasoning 共S2兲, revisiting 共S3兲, and visu-
alizing 共S4兲 the ideas, and an understanding of the concepts
helps them to grasp the meanings and functions of using the
key formulas 共S1 and S2兲. Their comments reflect the strat-
234 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 79, No. 2, February 2011
egies of the teaching intervention, which is effective in fa-
cilitating understanding and becoming acquainted with the
scientific tools. In addition, meaningful learning was found,
in contrast with the “confusing” and “suffering” experience
in high school.
In addition, 62% of the students commented on the affec-
tive outcomes of the innovation teaching. For example,
“The atmosphere in the class is active. I feel happy
learning, and I have learnt a lot.” 共S5兲
“The relaxed way of teaching relieves my stress
共with physics兲, helping me learn more, and recover
my confidence.” 共S6兲
“The concepts that we have learnt in electrostatics
will be very useful for 共our兲 advanced courses,
such as circuit design.” 共S7兲
When students responded to the affective outcomes of the
teaching intervention, some of them linked it with their sat-
isfaction with either their current learning achievement or as
a foundation for advanced courses. Reinforcing the value of
the course and cultivating a supportive classroom atmo-
sphere are both critical ingredients for promoting learning
motivation.
71% of the participants commented that they were highly
engaged in thinking and discussing the questions proposed
by the instructor. For example,
“Everyone tried so hard to think about and discuss
how to 共indirectly兲 light up the tube. Every group
was highly engaged in the discussion. During the
break time, many of us crowded around the equip-
ment to try out our methods. That was really fun!”
共S8兲
“Amazing equipment, engaged everyone to think
deeply. But I feel sorry that there is only one set 共of
the plasma globe兲, so that I can’t explore it by
myself.” 共S9兲
These quotes suggest that the combination of appealing
equipment and inspiring questions effectively engages the
students in thinking and discussion.
In summary, appealing equipment and demonstrations, rel-
evant and inspiring questions, and a friendly classroom at-
mosphere all contribute to facilitate learning engagement and
benefit learning outcomes.
Despite the positive comments regarding the teaching in-
tervention, 28% of the experimental group expressed their
need for more guidance/information. For example,
“I wish that the questions can provide more hints,
because, for students like me with little imagina-
tion, we often don’t know in which direction to
start thinking.” 共S10兲
This quote suggests that conducting effective discussion is
not easy. Although the teaching unit has been modified many
times over the three years of implementation, mainly by add-
Wheijen Chang 234
ing more hints to the questions, further guidance is still re-
quired for some students. Despite the repeated practice of
each principle 共illustrated in Table III兲, most of the students
still perceive the questions as very challenging, and none of
them complained about the repetition.
VII. CONCLUSION
To help students understand electrostatics, we introduced a
teaching intervention involving a series of demonstrations
and questions. The positive learning outcomes may be due to
three features of the intervention. First, the intervention inte-
grates everyday phenomena via demonstrations with official
learning tasks, such as understanding the principles and solv-
ing examination questions. This connection helped to high-
light the status of demonstration in physics classes.21 Second,
while explaining the questions included in the demonstra-
tions, verbal clarifications was given along with mathemati-
cal derivations. Formulas serve as tools to enhance the pre-
cision, consistency, and sophistication of verbal
interpretations, and the latter helps to shape the meanings of
the formulas. Third, while the teaching strategy aims at en-
gaging students in thinking and discussion, guidance by the
instructor, such as initiating the required scientific tools or
identifying the key features, was not overlooked. Before pos-
ing questions to students, instructors need to ensure that the
students are equipped with the tools 共for example, terms,
principles, and formulas兲 and mathematical abilities suffi-
cient for effective thinking and discussion.12–16
This study illustrates how demonstrations can facilitate
physics teaching. Demonstrations were found to help the stu-
dents visualize abstract and novel concepts, such as the elec-
tric flux and field. A combination of demonstrations and
questions was found to be effective in engaging thinking and
promoting interaction.26 In addition to conventional ques-
tions asking for explanations of the observed phenomena, we
found that problem solving questions 共for example, Ques-
tions 10 and 11兲 are especially effective in engaging thinking
and discussion 共commented on by S8 and S9兲. Providing
equipment for each group to allow hands-on work is recom-
mended 共corresponding to S9’s request兲 if the time con-
straints are not too tight. The demonstrations were found to
include several physical principles 共commented on by S1兲,
agreeing with Ref. 3. While explaining a phenomenon, stu-
dents practice the connections of the related principles and
distinguish their differences. Lastly, by means of a series of
demonstrations, multiple opportunities were provided for
students to practice and revisit the concepts/formulas 共shown
in Table III兲,3,15 which helped them to clarify the meanings
and uses and to highlight the functions and significance of
the key concepts, such as E, V, and the related formulas.34
That is, multiple opportunities to practice in different con-
texts facilitate the students to become acquainted with the
key tools.
Although this study describes the positive outcomes of the
intervention, the author does not intend to provide a “pre-
scription” for physics instructors to directly copy the se-
quence. The feasibility and outcomes of the teaching design
may vary due to different contexts. A mature teaching se-
quence design may not be obtained until after several years
of implementation and modifications.28 Grasping the appro-
priate level of difficulty of the questions to suit the students
can be challenging. Continuous modifications by instructors
based on the evaluations of prior implementations are
235 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 79, No. 2, February 2011
necessary.27 Saving a few minutes before the end of the class
to ask the students to write down their questions and sugges-
tions is highly recommended.35
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The author is grateful to the anonymous reviewers for
their valuable comments and productive suggestions. The
many comments on the original paper by one reviewer is
particularly appreciated. This paper was supported by the
National Science Council in Taiwan, Grant Nos. NSC-94-
2511-5-035-001 and NSC-96-2511-5-035-001.
APPENDIX A: QUESTIONS, ANSWERS, AND
STUDENTS’ RESPONSES OF THE
DEMONSTRATION OF THE PLASMA GLOBE
Question 6. The technology required to make a plasma
globe glow 共see Fig. 6兲 includes 共a兲 high V at the center to
conduct the globe and 共b兲 low gas pressure 共of Ne or Ar兲 to
allow glowing. Select appropriate formulas and use both a
mathematical derivation and verbal description to explain
this technology. Answer: 共a兲 Based on E = ⌬V / ⌬r, high ⌬V
allows strong E 共E ⬀ ⌬V兲, which reaches the breakdown
threshold and thus makes the plasma globe conduct. 共b兲 Low
gas pressure implies low density of the gas, which allows
large distances for acceleration of gas particles between col-
lisions. In the “free” acceleration region 共⌬r兲, the electric
potential energy 共⌬U = F⌬r兲 is transformed into kinetic en-
ergy, which leads to the emission of photons with visible
wavelengths 共⌬U = Ek ⬎ Uphoton兲.
Question 7. The glow 共see Fig. 6兲 indicates the path of the
free electrons, which illustrates the pattern of the electric flux
⌽E in the globe. 共a兲 Derive the electric field as a function of
r, where r is the distance from the center of the globe. 共b兲
According to the dependence of E on r, explain the colors of
the glow. Why is the inner part purple and the outer part red?
Answer: 共a兲 The path of the free electrons is determined by
the electric force, which is parallel with the direction of the
electric fields 共when the initial velocity is negligible兲. Here,
r = 21 at2 = 21 共F/m兲 = 21 共qE/m兲t2 . 共A1兲
Therefore, the path of the glow 共r兲 is parallel to the elec-
tric field 共E兲. Because the pattern of the glow shows a radial
dependence, E 共the density of flux兲 gradually weakens along
the radial direction and the relation between E and r is
⌽E 1 1 1
E= ⬀ ⬀ 2 ⇒ E ⬀ 2. 共A2兲
A A r r
共b兲 By connecting electric force and electric field,
1
F = qE ⇒ F ⬀ . 共A3兲
r2
The glow of the globe is “stimulated light” based on the
photon theory of light Uphoton = hf 共h is Plank constant and f
is the frequency兲. Due to the electric force, the free electrons
are accelerated, accumulate kinetic energy, and then transfer
the kinetic energy to emit a photon 共Uphoton兲,
Uphoton ⱕ 兩⌬U兩 = 兩 冕 F · dr兩 ⇒ Uphoton ⬀ F. 共A4兲
From Eqs. 共A3兲 and 共A4兲,
Wheijen Chang 235

Fig. 12. Problem figure to compare the electric fields and work from differ-
ent distributions of equipotential lines.
1 E between the two hands on the tube needs to be increased.
Uphoton ⬀ F ⬀ . 共A5兲
r2
Therefore, the glow changes from purple 共inner兲 to red
共outer兲.
Question 8. Because there is a high potential difference
⌬V across the body, why is the globe not harmful to the
person handling it 共see Fig. 7兲? Answer: Whether it is harm-
ful or not depends on the amount of electrical energy 共⌬U兲
delivered. According to ⌬U = q⌬V, a high potential differ-
ence ⌬V may be safe if the charge q transferred is very
small. Although the globe shows an intensive beam passing
through the hand, the current I transmitted to the hand should
be rather low 共q = I⌬t兲. When reasoning about energy trans-
ferred, students tend to invoke P = IV rather than ⌬U = q⌬V.
Question 9. How can a plasma globe 共a兲 light up a fluo-
rescent tube 共see Fig. 8兲 but 共b兲 fail to light up a bulb?
Answer: 共a兲 A fluorescent tube is based on the nature of
photons. The energy of a photon 共Uphoton = hf兲 is transformed
from the kinetic energy of the colliding free electrons, that is,
free electrons are accelerated by the electric force, accumu-
lating their kinetic energy, which can be transformed to a
photon while stimulating the gas atoms,
冕
Uphoton ⱕ Ek = 兩 F · dr兩 ⇒ Uphoton ⬀ F. 共A6兲
To light up the tube, E needs to be strong enough to ionize
the mercury vapor. The high ⌬V of the globe refers to suffi-
cient E 共E = ⌬V / ⌬r兲. 共b兲 The light of the bulbs is due to the
thermal radiation of the filament, which needs sufficient elec-
trical power 共P = IV兲 to be heated to ⬃102 ° C to radiate vis-
ible light. The current of the globe is too low to obtain the
required power.
After instruction, the students raised two questions: If we
wait longer, will the bulb accumulate enough heat to radiate
visible light? Is not glass an insulator? How could an electric
current pass through glass to the tube? Accordingly, further
explanation was provided on the quick balance between the
electrical power and the rate of dissipation of bulb
filaments36 and the inappropriate separation of conductors
and insulators. That is, for strong electric fields, insulators
such as glass or air can become conductive.
Question 10. How can one extinguish the tube without
Fig. 13. Problem figure to determine the electric fields, potential, and po-
tential energy due to two point charges.
236 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 79, No. 2, February 2011
moving the tube away? Answer: Reducing the potential dif-
ference is a way to extinguish the tube. This reduction can be
achieved by touching the globe with the left hand, that is,
increase the potential of the right end to reduce the potential
difference of the two ends 共E = ⌬V / ⌬r ⬀ ⌬V = Vleft − Vright兲
共see Fig. 9兲. The task of extinguishing the tube highlights
the significance of the potential difference ⌬V and the poten-
tial V.
Question 11. If the tube is not touching the globe but is
being held by two people, where the person on the right is
touching the globe 共see Fig. 10兲 and what strategies can help
light up the tube? What are the principles 共formulas兲 under-
lying the strategies? Answer: To indirectly light up the tube,
Possible strategies include shortening the gap between the
two hands 共E = ⌬V / ⌬r兲 共see Fig. 11兲 or increasing ⌬V of the
two hands by “isolating” the person touching the globe. A
method of isolating is jumping. With careful trials 共including
selection of appropriate shoes兲, both strategies can be
effective.
APPENDIX B: THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
OF THE ACHIEVEMENT TEST
1. The dotted lines show the equipotential lines of the
electric field, as shown in Fig. 12. What is the magnitude of
electric field at B for the three cases?
共a兲 I ⬎ III⬎ II. 共b兲 I ⬎ II⬎ III. 共c兲 III⬎ I ⬎ II.
共d兲 II⬎ I ⬎ III. 共e兲 I = II= III.
Answer: 共d兲 共E = ⌬V / ⌬r ⬀ 1 / ⌬r兲.
2. Point a is at the center between the two charges ⫾Q and
point b is anywhere between point a and +Q, as shown in
Fig. 13. Determine whether the electric field Ea and poten-
tial Va are zero.
共a兲 Ea = 0 and Va = 0. 共b兲 Ea = 0 but Va ⫽ 0. 共c兲 Ea ⫽ 0 but
Va = 0. 共d兲 Ea ⫽ 0 and Va ⫽ 0.
Answer: 共c兲 共Ea is vector sum; Va is scalar sum兲.
3. As shown in Fig. 14, a proton is at rest at the center of
a parallel-plate capacitor, and the potentials on each plate
and distance between the plates are given. 共a兲 What is the
direction of the electric force exerted on the proton? 共b兲
Evaluate the kinetic energy of the proton when colliding with
the plates 共neglect Fg兲. 共c兲 Determine the magnitude of the
electric force on the proton during the acceleration.
Answer: 共a兲 Upward; 共b兲 Ek = 兩⌬U兩 = e⌬V = 25 eV;
共c兲 Fe = eE = e共⌬V / ⌬r兲 = 2.67⫻ 10−15 N.
Fig. 14. Problem figure to determine the electric force and the kinetic en-
ergy of the proton located in a parallel-plate capacitor.
Wheijen Chang 236
 4. A charged particle of m = 3 ⫻ 10−6 g, q = 25 nC is at rest
due to the uniform electric field and gravitational field. The
particle is in equilibrium when the inclined angle to the ver-
tical axis is ␪ = 30°, as shown in Fig. 15. 共a兲 Draw the free-
body force diagram on the charged particle. 共b兲 Evaluate the
electric field of the space.
Answer: 共b兲 E = Fe/ q = 0.679 N / C.
5. The dotted lines show the equipotential lines in Fig. 16.
Evaluate the electric field at the center dot, including 共a兲 its
magnitude and 共b兲 direction.
Answer: 共a兲 E = 兩⌬V / ⌬r兩 = 关200− 共−200兲兴 / 2 ⫻ 10−2 = 2.0
⫻ 104 V / m; 共b兲 pointing to the lower left, perpendicular to
the equipotential lines.
6. As shown in Fig. 17, a ring with radius r carries a
uniform positive charge, located at the y-z plane and cen-
Fig. 15. Problem figure to evaluate the electric field from force equilibrium.
tered at point o. If the electric potential at point P is Vp, 共a兲
what is the change of potential energy when an electron is
moved from infinite distance to point P? 共b兲 Compare the
electric potential between points o and p.
Answer: 共a兲 ⌬U = eVp; 共b兲 Vo ⬎ Vp共Vo = kQ / r ⬀ 1 / r兲.
7. The dotted lines in Fig. 12 show the equipotential lines
of electric field. A positive charge is moved from point A
directly to point B. How does the amount of work to move
this charge compare for the three cases?
共a兲 Most work required in I. 共b兲 Most work required in II.
共c兲 Most work required in III. 共d兲 I = II⬍ III. 共e兲 I = II= III.
Answer: 共e兲.
8. As shown in Fig. 13, points a and b are located between
the two point charges ⫾Q. When shifting an electron from b
to a, how the does potential energy change?
共a兲 Increased. 共b兲 Decreased. 共c兲 Unchanged.
Answer: 共a兲.
9. Fill in the blanks to form a unit of electric field: E:
共a兲 ÷ m = 共b兲 ÷ coul.
Answer: 共a兲 Volt; 共b兲 N.

1
C. Furió and J. Guisasola, “Difficulties in learning the concept of electric
field,” Sci. Educ. 82 共4兲, 511–526 共1998兲.
2
Fig. 16. Problem figure to evaluate the magnitude and direction of equipo- L. Viennot and S. Rainson, “Students’ reasoning about the superposition
tential lines. of electric field,” Int. J. Sci. Educ. 14 共4兲, 475–487 共1992兲.
3
M. C. Buncick, P. G. Betts, and D. D. Horgan, “Using demonstrations as
a contextual road map: Enhancing course continuity and promoting active
engagement in introductory college physics,” Int. J. Sci. Educ. 23 共12兲,
1237–1255 共2001兲.
4
L. McDermott, “How we teach and how students learn—A mismatch?,”
Am. J. Phys. 61 共4兲, 295–298 共1993兲.
5
D. Meltzer and K. Manivannan, “Transforming the lecture-hall environ-
ment: The fully interactive physics lecture,” Am. J. Phys. 70 共6兲, 639–
654 共2002兲; G. Wells, “Learning to use scientific concepts,” Cult. Stud.
Sci. Educ. 3, 329–350 共2008兲.
6
R. Chabay and B. Sherwood, “Restructuring the introductory electricity
and magnetism course,” Am. J. Phys. 74 共4兲, 329–336 共2006兲.
7
D. Maloney, T. O’Kuma, C. Hieggelke, and A. Van Heuvelen, “Survey-
ing students’ conceptual knowledge of electricity and magnetism,” Am. J.
Phys. 69 共S1兲, S12–S23 共2001兲 共Most students appear to be incapable of
deriving either energy differences or electric fields from a distribution of
electric potential.兲.
8
S. Törnkvist, K. Pettersson, and G. Tranströmer, “Confusion by represen-
tation: On student’s comprehension of the electric field concept,” Am. J.
Phys. 61 共4兲, 335–338 共1993兲.
9
C. Singh, “Student understanding of symmetry and Gauss’s law of elec-
tricity,” Am. J. Phys. 74 共10兲, 923–938 共2006兲.
10
G. J. Posner, K. A. Strike, P. W. Hewson, and W. A. Gertzog, “Accom-
modation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual
change,” Sci. Educ. 66 共2兲, 211–227 共1982兲.
11
Fig. 17. Problem figure to determine the potential energy difference and R. Di Stefano, “Preliminary IUPP results: Students reactions to in-class
electric potential of a uniform ring of charge. demonstrations and the presentation of coherent themes,” Am. J. Phys.

237 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 79, No. 2, February 2011 Wheijen Chang 237
 64 共1兲, 58–68 共1996兲.
12
L. S. Vygotsky, in Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psycho-
logical Processes, edited by M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, and E.
Souberman 共Harvard U. P., Cambridge, 1978兲.
13
R. Driver, H. Asoko, J. Leach, E. Mortimer, and P. Scott, “Constructing
scientific knowledge in the classroom,” Educ. Res. 23 共7兲, 5–12 共1994兲;
W.-M. Roth and K. B. Lucas, “From ‘truth’ to ‘invented reality’: A dis-
course analysis of high school physics students’ talk about scientific
knowledge,” J. Res. Sci. Teach. 34 共2兲, 145–179 共1997兲.
14
A. Northedge, in Learning for Life in the 21th Century: Sociocultural
Perspectives on the Future of Education, edited by G. Well and G. Glax-
ton 共Blackwell, Oxford, 2003兲, pp. 252–264.
15
J. Airey and C. Linder, “A disciplinary discourse perspective on univer-
sity science learning: Achieving fluency in a critical constellation of
modes,” J. Res. Sci. Teach. 46 共1兲, 27–49 共2009兲.
16
D. Perkins, in Distributed Cognitions: Psychological and Educational
Considerations, edited by G. Salomon 共Cambridge U. P., New York,
1993兲, pp. 88–110.
17
T. Kuhn, “On learning physics,” Sci. Educ. 9, 11–19 共2000兲.
18
C. Crouch, A. P. Fagen, J. P. Callan, and E. Mazur, “Classroom demon-
strations: Learning tools or entertainment?,” Am. J. Phys. 72, 835–838
共2004兲.
19
A. B. Arons, A Guide to Introductory Physics Teaching 共Wiley, New
York, 1991兲; J. Bruner, The Process of Education 共Harvard U. P., Cam-
bridge, 1978兲, pp. 17–32.
20
W. M. Roth, C. J. McRobbie, K. B. Kucas, and S. Boutonne, “Why may
students fail to learn from demonstrations? A social practice perspective
on learning in physics,” J. Res. Sci. Teach. 34 共5兲, 509–533 共1997兲.
21
S. Tobias and R. R. Hake, “Professors as physics students: What can they
teach us?,” Am. J. Phys. 56 共9兲, 786–794 共1988兲.
22
R. F. Gunstone and R. T. White, “Understanding of gravity,” Sci. Educ.
65 共3兲, 291–299 共1981兲.
23
N. R. Guilbert, “Deconstructing a plasma globe,” Phys. Teach. 37 共1兲,
11–13 共1999兲.
Level Tester. From a 1924 catalogue of the Gaertner Scientific Corporation of Chicago: An instrument used for the
calibration and testing of levels. The screw has a diameter of 6 mm and a pitch of 0.5 mm; the divided head has 100
parts, one division corresponding to 3 seconds. The instrument is furnished with an iron base fitted with leveling
screw. $50.00. The catalogue notes that for measuring small angles, a properly mounted level is often preferable to
sensitive optical methods. This instrument is in the Greenslade Collection. 共Notes and photograph by Thomas B.
Greenslade, Jr., Kenyon College.兲
238 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 79, No. 2, February 2011
24
S. D. Doty, M. Craggs, M. Jorgensen, S. Doty, and D. Hodd, “The ‘light-
ning machine’: A simple, interesting demonstration apparatus for intro-
ductory physics,” Am. J. Phys. 68 共6兲, 579–581 共2000兲.
25
See, for example, Y. Dori and J. Belcher, “How does technology-enabled
active learning affect undergraduate students’ understanding of electro-
magnetism concepts?,” J. Learn. Sci. 14 共2兲, 243–279 共2005兲; J. M.
Casperson and M. C. Linn, “Using visualization to teach electrostatics,”
Am. J. Phys. 74 共4兲, 316–23 共2006兲.
26
D. R. Sokoloff and R. K. Thornton, Interactive Lecture Demonstrations:
Active Learning in Introductory Physics 共Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2004兲.
27
B. Bell and B. Cowie, “The characteristics of formative assessment in
science education,” Sci. Educ. 85, 536–553 共2001兲.
28
W. Chang, “The rewards and challenges of teaching innovation in uni-
versity physics: Four years’ reflection,” Int. J. Sci. Educ. 27 共4兲, 407–425
共2005兲.
29
See, for example, R. D. Knight, Physics for Scientists and Engineers
(Student Workbook) 共Addison-Wesley, San Francisco, 2004兲.
30
See, for example, J. W. Jewett and R. A. Serway, Principles of Physics,
4th ed. 共Brooks/Cole/Thomson Learning, Singapore, 2006兲.
31
In addition to the demonstration-questioning sequence, the intervention
spent about 1 h to solve four to six traditional manipulated problems
within the 6 h teaching time.
32
具en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stun_gun典.
33
The percentages of correct response of the control group versus their U.S.
counterparts 共reported in Ref. 7兲 were 66% versus 49% on Question 1 and
57% versus 55% in Question 7, as shown in Appendix B.
34
C. J. Furió, J. M. Guisasola, M. Almudí, and M. Ceberio, “Learning the
electric field concept as oriented research activity,” Sci. Educ. 87 共5兲,
640–662 共2003兲.
35
R. C. Wilson, “Improving faculty teaching: Effective use of student
evaluations and consultants,” J. Higher Educ. 57, 196–211 共1986兲.
36
D. MacIsaac, G. Kanner, and G. Anderson, “Basic physics of the incan-
descent lamp 共lightbulb兲,” Phys. Teach. 37, 520–525 共1999兲.
Wheijen Chang 238