Cognitive conflict-based learning improved understanding of momentum and collisions in Grade 10 students, suggesting effective teaching strategies.
A solid conceptual understanding of physics is essential for students to internalize fundamental principles and engage effectively in higher-order scientific thinking. Recognizing the importance of this, the present study aimed to enhance students’ conceptual understanding of Momentum and Collisions using Cognitive Conflict-Based Learning (CCBL). This study collected data from Grade 10 students using a two-tier conceptual understanding test, comprising multiple-choice questions and corresponding open-ended items that required reasoning. The test assessed seven sub-concepts: Momentum, Force and Change in Momentum, Impulse and Impulsive Force, the Law of Conservation of Momentum, Elastic Collisions, Inelastic Collisions, and Explosion. The results showed that 30 students (76.92%) achieved Partial Understanding (PU) or Complete Understanding (CU), and 9 students (23.08%) achieved Partial Understanding with Specific Alternative Conception (PS). Out of all the sub-concepts, the most significant number of students achieving Complete Understanding (CU) was for the concepts of Momentum and Explosion, with 22 students (56.41%) for each. Conversely, the fewest number of students with a Complete Understanding (CU) was in the concept of Impulse and Impulsive Force, where 14 students (35.90%) were found. Cumulatively, the findings confirm the potential of CCBL for addressing misconceptions and enabling conceptual learning in physics. Practical implications include designing lessons that integrate discrepant events, guided discussions, and technology-based tools such as simulations and video analysis, alongside focused support for difficult sub-concepts. These insights highlight the value of CCBL as a constructivist approach for enhancing physics education.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kongmai et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: