This study investigates how prospective teachers analyzed the behavior of charged particles in electrical and magnetic fields. A test consisting of eight questions each related to five sub-concepts and involving the analysis of the path followed by a charged particle moving into a uniform electrical or magnetic field was prepared. Three different categories of assessment were applied to the data obtained from the test: detailed, Combined, and Associated. The study was carried out with 80 prospective physics teachers. It was found in the study that difficulties begin with insufficient understanding relating to the nature of vector quantities and the structure of the Lorentz force. Some prospective teachers overlooked the relationship between the direction of the force and the type of the charge in the electrical field. Thus, there were significant errors related to the direction of the force. Further, prospective teachers failed to determine that magnetic force would cause the charged particle to follow a circular path in the magnetic field. Difficulties experienced by the prospective teachers in relation to force were reflected in acceleration and velocity, as well. The rest of the difficulties were related to Newton’s second law. The prospective teachers either did not understand Newton’s second law or could not apply it in other areas of physics. Difficulties relating to mechanics were observed to continue in electricity and magnetism as well. One of the surprising findings of the study was that the prospective teachers had significantly more success in questions relating to the concept of work. According to the combined results, the prospective teachers were found to follow the conceptual order force, acceleration, velocity, and path when answering questions.

The purpose of this study is to examine and discuss published studies in the field of physics education in National Science and Mathematics Education Congress proceedings from 1994 to 2012. The research trends in these proceedings were analyzed through content analysis method. In line with the purpose, 282 studies were analyzed with a total of 735 studies in terms of demographic information of the authors (number, gender, institutions, etc.), general themes and physics topics, research types, sample size and methods, instruments, statistical methods, and use 1 Bu çalışmanın ilk sonuçları 9. Ulusal Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresinde sunulmuştur. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongrelerindeki… 128 of covariance and retention test. It is thought that the current analysis will provide deeper insights to researchers in the field as it shows trends and patterns in physics education. Moreover, the need to conduct similar research studies in the field is emphasized.

The aim of this study is to analyze physics students’ problem solutions related to calculus-based physics problems. The sample of this study consists of 41 third-year university students studying in a physics education program. Two physics problems were posed to the students in the study. The students’ problem solutions were analyzed descriptively. According to one of the results obtained from the study, most of the students calculated the curl of the force field and proved whether it is conservative or not. However, the students had difficulties while calculating the work done in the force field. In relation to this, some students tried to calculate the work using mathematical equations which are incompatible with the analysis of the unit systems and contrary to the nature of the vector quantities. Besides, it has been determined that students have difficulties with the limits and variables of integrals.

The purpose of this research is to determine the effects of different laboratory approaches on students' understanding of wave concepts. For this purpose, three experiments and experiment instructions have been designed for each of the three approaches (verification, hypothesis testing, and the 5E laboratory approach). Quantitative aspects of the research are based on a grouped semiempirical model. A random sampling has been done to develop the basic concepts of a waves test (BCWT), a multiple-choice test that was used in the quantitative part of the research. However, participants (physics teacher candidates) of the main study have been selected using purposeful sampling for the purposes of the qualitative research. At the same time, students have been specially chosen from students who have not taken the theoretical course titled 'Vibrations and Waves' and laboratory lecture titled 'Vibrations and Waves Laboratory'. BCWT pre-test and post-test results, as well as interviews with students and the experiment reports of the students, were used as data resources. Despite the time and effort spent, the laboratory approaches that we utilized did not provide convincing results.

In physics lectures on electromagnetic theory and mathematical methods, physics teacher candidates have some difficulties with curvilinear coordinate systems. According to our experience, based on both in-class interactions and teacher candidates’ answers in test papers, they do not seem to have understood the variables in curvilinear coordinate systems very well. For this reason, the problems that physics teacher candidates have with variables in curvilinear coordinate systems have been selected as a study subject. The aim of this study is to find the physics teacher candidates’ problems with determining the variables of drawn shapes, and problems with drawing shapes based on given variables in curvilinear coordinate systems. Two different assessment tests were used in the study to achieve this aim. The curvilinear coordinates drawing test (CCDrT) was used to discover their problems related to drawing shapes, and the curvilinear coordinates detection test (CCDeT) was used to find out about problems related to determining variables. According to the findings obtained from both tests, most physics teacher candidates have problems with the ϕ variable, while they have limited problems with the r variable. Questions that are mostly answered wrongly have some common properties, such as value. According to inferential statistics, there is no significant difference between the means of the CCDeT and CCDrT scores. The mean of the CCDeT scores is only 4.63 and the mean of the CCDrT is only 4.66. Briefly, we can say that most physics teacher candidates have problems with drawing a shape using the variables of curvilinear coordinate systems or in determining the variables of drawn shapes.