Why Physics Students in Singapore Know Physics Terms But Cannot Use Them — And What Teachers Must Do Differently
Here is something every physics teacher knows but rarely talks about openly: a student can correctly define electric current, recite Snell's law from memory, and still have absolutely no idea what is happening when a torch fails to light up.
This is not a rare exception. According to a major research study on secondary and university student physics understanding, this is the norm. Students are entering university physics courses loaded with terminology and isolated facts — but without the conceptual physics understanding needed to actually use that knowledge in real situations.
If you are a physics teacher, a curriculum designer, a university educator, or a student wondering why physics feels so disconnected from reality — this research speaks directly to your experience. At Make Physics Easy, we have built our entire teaching philosophy around closing exactly this gap. And this research points to a clear, evidence-based path forward.
What the Physics Misconceptions Study Actually Investigated
The study examined 84 students across three distinct groups, giving researchers a rare cross-section of physics learners at different stages:
- 29 final-year secondary science students still in school
- 20 university bridging-course students transitioning into higher education
- 35 primary science student teachers who had already completed their school education
Every student completed seven open-ended "draw and write" questions in 40 to 45 minutes. The topics covered the full range of foundational physics: electricity, magnetism, light and sound, optics, matter, energy, and the seasons.
Here is what makes this study particularly powerful: the researchers deliberately removed all formulas and numerical calculations from the questions. The goal was to examine qualitative physics understanding — how students actually think about physics concepts — not their ability to plug numbers into equations.
What they found changed the way we should think about physics education and student misconceptions. If you want to see how this research shapes the way conceptual physics is taught in practice, explore our teaching methodology.
The Central Finding: Knowing Physics Words Is Not the Same as Understanding Physics
The headline conclusion of this research is both simple and deeply uncomfortable for anyone involved in physics teaching:
Students often know physics terminology and isolated facts but cannot reliably apply those concepts to real or unfamiliar situations.
Students in all three groups showed understanding that ranged widely — from scientifically accurate explanations to intuitive guesses to outright misconceptions. About one-third of students failed to answer the second part of two-part questions — not because they did not know the answer, but because they read questions superficially or lost track of what was being asked.
This pattern of surface-level physics knowledge — knowing the words without owning the understanding — is the central crisis this study identifies. It has enormous consequences for how we teach and assess physics at both secondary and university level. You can read more insights like this on our physics education blog.
Seven Physics Topics Where Students Consistently Go Wrong
The study tested students across seven core physics areas. The results reveal consistent, predictable patterns of physics student misconceptions that teachers encounter every year — but rarely address directly.
Electric Circuits and Real-World Application
Students could describe what an electric circuit is in general terms. But when asked to draw a complete circuit for a real torch, 39% could not do it correctly. They knew the concept existed — they just could not apply it to an actual physical object.
This is a textbook example of memorisation without conceptual transfer in physics education. The circuit existed as an abstract idea, disconnected from the real world it describes. Our O Level physics course tackles electric circuit understanding through real-world application tasks from the very first lesson — precisely because this gap shows up so early and so consistently.
Magnetism and the Confusion With Electric Forces
Many students in the study confused magnetic forces with electric forces, treating magnetic north and south poles as equivalent to positive and negative electric charges. This is one of the most common and persistent physics misconceptions in secondary education — and one that formal instruction rarely addresses head-on.
The confusion makes intuitive sense. Both involve attraction and repulsion, and everyday language treats them similarly. But in physics, the distinction is fundamental — and students who miss it carry the error through years of further study, including A Level physics and beyond.
Light, Sound, and the Wave Distinction Students Miss
A striking 91% of students correctly recognised wave behaviour when asked about light and sound — an encouraging surface statistic. But beneath it, the picture was far less positive. Not a single student clearly identified light as an electromagnetic wave and sound as a mechanical wave.
Students knew both were waves. They did not understand what kind of waves, or why that distinction matters. This is precisely the gap between knowing physics and using physics that this research is built around. If your child or student is preparing for IB Physics, where wave behaviour is examined at depth, this conceptual gap becomes a serious obstacle.
Refraction: Memorised Rules Without Real Understanding
Refraction is a topic most physics students encounter multiple times across their education. Yet when asked about a specific, slightly unusual case — a ray of light entering a medium at a normal angle — many students applied memorised refraction rules without recognising that this was a special case where refraction does not occur.
Even more telling: over 40% of students incorrectly showed light dispersing in water, applying a rule they had memorised for prisms to a completely different context. This is exactly what poor conceptual transfer in physics looks like in practice — a rule applied without understanding the conditions it requires. Explore our study resources for worked conceptual examples on refraction and optics that go beyond formula recall.
States of Matter and the Microscopic Model Problem
When it came to explaining what happens to particles during heating and phase changes, many students defaulted to the same oversimplified idea: particles just get farther apart. They lacked the microscopic particle model understanding needed to explain phase changes accurately — describing melting, boiling, or condensation in terms of what actually happens at the particle level.
This reflects a broader weakness the study identifies: students struggle to construct, use, and interpret simplified models of physical systems. Model-based thinking is fundamental to physics, but it is rarely taught explicitly. Our science programme places model-based reasoning at the centre of every topic from the very beginning.
Energy Chains and the Nuclear vs Chemical Confusion
Most students in the study understood the general idea of an energy chain — energy transfers from one form to another. But a notable number made a telling error: they identified the Sun's energy as chemical rather than nuclear.
This is not a trivial mistake. It reflects a gap in understanding the most fundamental energy source in our solar system — one with direct implications for understanding climate, life, and nuclear physics. Students had learned "energy chains" as a procedure, not as a conceptual framework grounded in physical reality. Our curriculum approach ensures energy concepts are always connected to their physical origins, not just their chain positions.
Seasons: The Distance Myth That Never Goes Away
One of the most well-documented misconceptions in all of science education appeared clearly in this study too: 28% of students believed seasons are caused by changes in the Earth-Sun distance — the idea that summer is hot because Earth is closer to the Sun.
Even students who correctly mentioned Earth's axial tilt struggled to take the next conceptual step — explaining how tilt affects the angle of incoming solar radiation and energy per unit area. They had the right word (tilt) without the right understanding (what tilt actually does to incoming energy). This is one of the most common misconceptions we address in our O Level and IB Physics programmes.
Why Physics Students Keep Making the Same Mistakes
The study does not just catalogue misconceptions — it identifies five deep reasons why physics students at secondary and university level keep struggling with the same conceptual problems year after year.
Memorisation without conceptual transfer is the first and most fundamental problem. Students learn physics as a collection of facts and procedures rather than as a connected system of ideas. When a situation does not exactly match the textbook example, the knowledge fails to activate.
Everyday language conflicts with physics language creates constant interference. Words like force, energy, current, field, and wave all have everyday meanings that are subtly — or dramatically — different from their scientific meanings. Students bring these everyday definitions into physics class, and without explicit correction, they persist.
Weak mental models undermine understanding at every level. Physics is built on simplified, idealised models of reality — the point mass, the ideal gas, the uniform field. Students who cannot construct, interpret, and work with these models are effectively locked out of genuine physics reasoning. Our teaching methodology addresses this directly through model-building exercises embedded in every unit.
Difficulty transferring knowledge to unfamiliar situations is where the gap between knowing and using physics becomes most visible. A student may correctly solve every problem in the textbook chapter on refraction and still fail to recognise refraction happening in a glass of water at dinner. The knowledge is there — but it is not flexible enough to travel.
Assessment drives shallow learning. When physics exams focus primarily on routine procedures and standard problem types, students rationally focus their energy on those procedures. This is why our courses include conceptual reasoning questions, diagram interpretation, and real-world explanation tasks alongside standard problem-solving.
What "Thinking Physics" Actually Looks Like in the Classroom
The researchers make a powerful argument: physics education must move from "knowing physics" to "using physics." This requires explicitly teaching students to think like physicists — not just to solve problems like students.
Based on the study's findings, students who genuinely understand physics can do seven things their peers cannot:
Identify fundamental physical relationships — recognising which physics principles are at work in a situation before reaching for a formula.
Interpret concepts qualitatively — explaining what is happening in physical terms, not just calculating an answer.
Use correct physics terminology — with precision, not just familiarity. Our skills development programme builds scientific language use explicitly at every level.
Construct and interpret physical models — building simplified representations of complex physical systems and reasoning from them.
Apply concepts to different contexts — taking an idea learned in one setting and recognising it in a completely different situation.
Distinguish fundamental principles from secondary details — knowing what is essential and what is incidental in a physical explanation.
Explain phenomena in scientific language — replacing everyday intuitive language with precise, accurate scientific descriptions.
These seven capabilities are not extras that come after mastering the curriculum. They are the curriculum — or they should be. See how we build them into every lesson in our methodology section.
The Finding That Should Alarm Every Physics Teacher
Perhaps the most striking single result in the entire study is this: secondary school students — still in school — performed slightly better than the student teacher groups who had left school years earlier.
Read that again. Students who had not yet finished their physics education outperformed people who had — not because they were smarter, but because they were still using their physics knowledge regularly.
The researchers interpret this as clear evidence of weak long-term retention of physics concepts when those concepts are not continuously used, applied, and revisited. Physics knowledge that is memorised for exams and then set aside does not last. It fades — quickly and substantially.
This is one of the core reasons we design our study programmes around spaced retrieval and regular application rather than one-time learning. Want to see what that looks like in practice? Visit our achievements page to see how our students retain and apply physics knowledge long after their first encounter with it.
Traditional Physics Teaching vs. Conceptual Physics Teaching: What the Evidence Shows
Approach Traditional Physics Teaching Conceptual Physics Teaching Primary focus Formula memorisation and standard problem types Qualitative understanding and real-world application Student role Passive recipient of procedures Active builder of mental models Assessment style Numerical calculations and routine procedures Conceptual questions, diagrams, and explanations Use of everyday phenomena Rare or incidental Central and deliberate Misconception handling Rarely addressed directly Diagnosed and explicitly corrected Long-term retention Poor — knowledge fades quickly Strong — understanding transfers and persists Real-world application Weak — students struggle outside textbook contexts Strong — students recognise physics in unfamiliar situations Our multiple learning pathways are built around the right-hand column of this table — because conceptual understanding is the only kind that lasts and transfers.
Frequently Asked Questions About Student Physics Misconceptions and Conceptual Learning
Why do physics students have so many misconceptions even after years of studying? Most physics misconceptions come from everyday experience and intuitive thinking that predates formal instruction. When physics teaching focuses on formulas and procedures rather than explicitly challenging these intuitions, the misconceptions survive alongside the formal knowledge. This is why our teaching approach begins every new topic by surfacing and directly addressing the most common student misconceptions before introducing formal content.
What is the difference between knowing physics terminology and understanding physics concepts? Knowing terminology means being able to state a definition or recall a fact. Understanding a concept means being able to recognise it, apply it, and explain it in a new situation. This study shows that most students are strong on terminology and weak on application — and our courses are specifically designed to close that gap.
Why do so many students think seasons are caused by Earth's distance from the Sun? This misconception comes from everyday intuition — if you move closer to a heat source, you feel warmer. Without explicit teaching that directly addresses this idea and replaces it with the correct explanation, students hold both simultaneously. We tackle this head-on in our O Level and IB Physics programmes.
How can physics teachers identify and address student misconceptions more effectively? The study supports using open-ended conceptual questions, draw-and-explain tasks, and real-world scenarios. Our resources section includes conceptual question banks and misconception diagnosis tools designed specifically for secondary and pre-university physics teachers.
Why did secondary students slightly outperform student teachers in this study? Physics knowledge fades when it is not regularly used. This is why continuous application and spaced practice matter as much as initial learning. Explore how we build retrieval practice into every study pathway to prevent exactly this kind of knowledge decay.
What does model-based thinking in physics mean, and why does it matter? Model-based thinking means constructing simplified representations of physical systems and reasoning from them. Without this skill, students cannot move beyond surface description to genuine physical reasoning. Our science programme makes model-based reasoning explicit in every topic rather than leaving students to discover it by accident.
What changes in physics assessment would most improve student conceptual understanding? Assessments need to include qualitative reasoning questions, diagram interpretation, real-world application scenarios, and explanation tasks — not just numerical problem-solving. Our A Level course incorporates all of these alongside exam preparation, so students build genuine understanding rather than exam technique alone.
The Bottom Line: Physics Education Must Shift From Knowing to Using
The most powerful message from this research is one that every physics teacher, curriculum designer, and education policymaker needs to hear:
A student who can state Snell's law, define electric current, and recall that seasons are caused by Earth's tilt may still lack genuine physics understanding — if they cannot recognise, explain, and apply those ideas in an unfamiliar real-world situation.
The goal of physics education is not to fill students with facts they can reproduce on demand. It is to develop minds that can see the physical world clearly — that can look at a torch, a rainbow, a changing season, or a boiling pot of water and understand, at a fundamental level, what is actually happening and why.
Getting there requires explicit misconception teaching, qualitative reasoning practice, model-based instruction, and assessments that reward genuine understanding over procedural recall. At Make Physics Easy, this is not an aspiration — it is how we teach every day. Explore our courses, read what our students say on our testimonials page, or get in touch to find out how we can help your student make the shift from knowing physics to genuinely using it.