Undergraduate physics students’ understanding of abstract and applied mathematics: A case study on vectors

Juulia Lahdenperä; Henna Kevarinmäki; Tommi Kokkonen; Teemu Hynninen

doi:10.31129/LUMAT.14.1.2993

Authors

Juulia Lahdenperä Department of Teacher Education, University of Turku, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2430-8811
Henna Kevarinmäki Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Turku, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4549-3542
Tommi Kokkonen Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Turku, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3324-2690
Teemu Hynninen Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Turku, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2592-9302

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.14.1.2993

Keywords:

vectors, mathematics as a service subject, physics students, intervention study

Abstract

Mathematical competence is considered crucial for physics learning; besides knowing abstract mathematics, students need to apply mathematical skills to different physical concepts. It is hypothesised that the development of this applied physical competence requires some threshold of mathematical competence. However, the relation between these two competences remains unclear. Furthermore, research on undergraduate physics education is scarce within the Finnish national context. To bridge these research gaps, this study addresses the development of both abstract mathematical and applied physical competence in a physics intervention course in a Finnish university. The focus is on the key mathematical concept of vectors, which is covered in introductory physics courses and considered highly difficult, as students tend to acquire misconceptions of the topic and struggle to apply the mathematical construct in the physical context. The pre- and post-test results show that most of the learning outcomes during the intervention course were related to improved applied physical competence. Furthermore, common misconceptions regarding vectors are identified. Analysing the joint development of mathematical and physical competencies supports the assumption that the improvement of applied physical competence depends on some foundational level of mathematical understanding. Furthermore, the students’ prevailing misconceptions and only modest overall improvement of their physics understanding highlights the need for more deliberate teaching practices.

References

Ainsworth, S. (2014). The multiple representation principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 464–486). Cambridge University Press.

Barniol, P., & Zavala, G. (2014a). Test of understanding of vectors: A reliable multiple-choice vector concept test. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 10(1), 010121. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.010121

Barniol, P., & Zavala, G. (2014b). Force, velocity, and work: The effects of different contexts on students’ understanding of vector concepts using isomorphic problems. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 10(2), 020115. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.020115

Barquero, B., Bosch, M., & Gascón, J. (2013). The ecological dimension in the teaching of mathematical modelling at university. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 33(3), 307–338.

Bergsten, C., & Jablonka, E. (2013). Mathematics as “meta-technology” and “mind-power”: Views of engineering students. In B. Ubuz, Ç. Haser, & M. A. Mariotti (Eds.), Proceedings of the eighth congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 2286–2295). Middle East Technical University.

Burkholder, E. W., Murillo-Gonzalez, G., & Wieman, C. (2021). Importance of math prerequisites for performance in introductory physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(1), 010108. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010108

Edelsbrunner, P. A., & Hofer, S. I. (2024). Examining and comparing the relation between representational competence and conceptual knowledge across four samples. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1459603. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1459603

Edelsbrunner, P. A., Schumacher, R., Hänger-Surer, B., Schalk, L., & Stern, E. (2024). Preparation for future conceptual learning: Content-specific long-term effects of early physics instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 116(8), 1479–1499. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000887

Flores, S., Kanim, S. E., & Kautz, C. H. (2004). Student use of vectors in introductory mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 72(4), 460-468. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1648686

Gueudet, G. (2008). Investigating the secondary–tertiary transition. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67(3), 237–254. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-007-9100-6

Harris, D., Black, L., Hernandez-Martinez, P., Pepin, B., Williams, J., & TransMaths Team. (2015). Mathematics and its value for engineering students: What are the implications for teaching? International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 46(3), 321–336. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2014.979893

Hothorn, T., Hornik, K., van de Wiel, M. A., & Zeileis, A. (2006). A Lego system for conditional inference. The American Statistician, 60(3), 257–263. https://doi.org/10.1198/000313006X118430

Kozma, R., & Russell, J. (2005). Students becoming chemists: Developing representational competence. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualization in science education (pp. 121–146). Springer.

Lichtenberger, A., Wagner, C., Hofer, S. I., Stern, E., & Vaterlaus, A. (2017). Validation and structural analysis of the kinematics concept test. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(1), 010115. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.010115

Liu, D., & Kottegoda, Y. (2019). Disconnect between undergraduates’ understanding of the algebraic and geometric aspects of vectors. European Journal of Physics, 40(3), 035702. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6404/ab0509

Macbean, J. (2004). Students’ conceptions of, and approaches to, studying mathematics as a service subject at undergraduate level. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 35(4), 553–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207390410001714885

Meltzer, D. E. (2002). The relationship between mathematics preparation and conceptual learning gains in physics: A possible “hidden variable” in diagnostic pretest scores. American Journal of Physics, 70(12), 1259–1268. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1514215

Mosorin, H. J. (2024). Tyypillisimpiä virheitä ylioppilaskokeen vektoritehtävissä [The typical mistakes in the matriculation examination’s vector tasks]. [Master’s thesis, University of Helsinki]. http://hdl.handle.net/10138/577461

Nguyen, N. L., & Meltzer, D. E. (2003). Initial understanding of vector concepts among students in introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 71(6), 630–638. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1571831

Niemelä, M. (2022). Subject matter specific curriculum integration: a quantitative study of Finnish student teachers’ integrative content knowledge. Journal of Education for Teaching, 48(2), 228–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2021.1989288

Palmgren, E., & Rasa, T. (2024). Modelling roles of mathematics in physics: Perspectives for physics education. Science & Education, 33(2), 365–382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-022-00393-5

Pietrocola, M. (2008). Mathematics as structural language of physical thought. In E. F. Redish & P. Cooney (Eds.), Connecting research in physics education with teacher education (Vol. 2). International Commission on Physics Education.

Redish, E. F. (2005). Problem solving and the use of math in physics courses. Proceedings of the world view on physics education in 2005 conference, Delhi, India. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.physics/0608268

Redish, E. F., & Kuo, E. (2015). Language of physics, language of math: Disciplinary culture and dynamic epistemology. Science & Education, 24(5), 561–590. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-015-9749-7

Sadler, P. M., & Tai, R. H. (2007). Advanced placement exam scores as a predictor of performance in introductory college biology, chemistry and physics courses. Science Educator, 16(2), 1–19.

Salehi, S., Burkholder, E., Lepage, G. P., Pollock, S., & Wieman, C. (2019). Demographic gaps or preparation gaps? The large impact of incoming preparation on performance of students in introductory physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(2), 020114. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.020114

Simonsmeier, B. A., Flaig, M., Deiglmayr, A., Schalk, L., & Schneider, M. (2022). Domain-specific prior knowledge and learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychologist, 57(1), 31-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2021.1939700

Tossavainen, T., Rensaa, R. J., Haukkanen, P., Mattila, M., & Johansson, M. (2021). First-year engineering students’ mathematics task performance and its relation to their motivational values and views about mathematics. European Journal of Engineering Education, 46(4), 604–617. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2020.1849032

Virtanen, H., Ernvall-Hytönen, A., & Laaksonen, A. (2024). Vector misconceptions in Finnish matriculation examination. FMSERA Journal, 6(2), 25–41. Retrieved December 19, 2025, from https://journal.fi/fmsera/article/view/127798