Bridging Cognitive Gaps in Physics Education: The Role of Age, Motivation, and Instructional Strategies
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70232/jrese.v3i1.21Keywords:
Age-Related Learning, Motivation, Instructional Strategies, Conceptual Understanding, Cognitive DevelopmentAbstract
This paper explores the intersection of age, motivation, and instructional strategies in shaping students’ understanding of physics concepts. A growing body of research suggests that effective physics education must account for the developmental differences among learners, particularly as they move through various cognitive stages. Drawing from Piaget’s theory of cognitive development, the paper emphasizes that while students typically transition from concrete to formal operational thinking during secondary school, this progression is not uniform and is influenced by several factors beyond age, including instructional methods and individual motivation. Some students may reach formal operational thinking earlier and show readiness for abstract reasoning, while others may require additional support and scaffolding. This variability presents a significant challenge for educators aiming to deliver content that resonates with all learners. Younger students often rely on tangible, hands-on experiences to understand physics, whereas older students gradually develop abstract reasoning skills necessary for engaging with more complex scientific principles. Motivation, both intrinsic and extrinsic, plays a critical role in student engagement and persistence, with high self-efficacy and interest in physics contributing significantly to conceptual mastery. The paper advocates for age-responsive instructional strategies that are tailored to students’ developmental readiness, including scaffolding, differentiated instruction, inquiry-based learning, and the use of technology to personalize and enrich the learning experience. Based on these insights, the paper presents practical recommendations for curriculum development and teaching, such as incorporating real-world applications, integrating cross-disciplinary content, promoting equity and inclusion, and enhancing teacher professional development. By aligning instructional practices with students’ cognitive stages and motivational drivers, educators can bridge learning gaps, foster deeper conceptual understanding, and create more inclusive and effective physics classrooms that support long-term academic success.
References
Chi, M. T., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP framework: Linking cognitive engagement to active learning outcomes. Educational Psychologist, 49(4), 219-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.965823
Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2008). Students’ questions: a potential resource for teaching and learning science. Studies in Science Education, 44(1), 1-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260701828101
Cusak, M., Wideen, M., & Sherwood, A. (1986). Teaching in junior secondary schools and its relationship to the development of formal operational thought. European Journal of Science Education, 8(1), 95-105. https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528860080111
De Jong, T., Sotiriou, S., & Gillet, D. (2014). Innovations in STEM education: the Go-Lab federation of online labs. Smart Learning Environments, 1(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-014-0003-6
Ding, L. (2014). Verification of causal influences of reasoning skills and epistemology on physics conceptual learning. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research, 10(2), 023101. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.023101
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active Learning Increases Students’ Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111, 8410-8415. http://www.pnas.org/content/111/23/8410.full.pdf
Grant, R. M. (1976). Relationships between concrete and formal operational physics concepts and the intellectual levels of high school students. University of Oklahoma. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED130865.pdf
Hestenes, D. (2010). Modeling theory for math and science education. Modeling Students’ Mathematical Modeling Competencies: ICTMA 13, 13-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0561-1_3
Koenig, K., Wood, K. E., & Bao, L. (2021). Development and evaluation of introductory physics lab curriculum to promote scientific reasoning abilities. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1929(1), 012060. IOP Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1929/1/012060
Krsnik, R., Pećina, P., Planinić, M., Sušac, A., & Buljan, I. (2002). What fraction of pupils really reach the stage of formal thinker in physics?. Developing Formal Thinking in Physics, 272-275. https://www.fisica.uniud.it/girepseminar2001/CS05/KRSNIK_05_FINAL.pdf
Moore, J. C. (2012). Transitional to formal operational: Using authentic research experiences to get non-science students to think more like scientists. European Journal of Physics Education, 3(1), 25-41. https://www.ajindex.com/dosyalar/makale/acarindex-1423880532.pdf
Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. D. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In O’Malley, C. (eds), Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 69-97). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-85098-1_5
Sever, R., & Güven, D. (2022). Enhancing engagement in secondary physics education through project-based learning and gamification. Physics Education, 57(2), 1-9.
Subban, P. (2006). Differentiated instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7(7), 935-947. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ854351.pdf
White, B. Y. (1993). ThinkerTools: Causal models, conceptual change, and science education. Cognition and Instruction, 10(1), 1-100. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1001_1
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Adeniyi Michael Adeduyigbe, Uchenna Kingsley Okeke, Sam Ramaila
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
