Unlocking the Potential of Python-Based Simulations: Understanding the Needs and Expectations of Future Physics Educators

Apit Fathurohman, Esti Susiloningsih, Hadi Hadi

Abstract


Teaching wave phenomena and optics remains challenging due to their abstract and highly visual nature. Pre-service physics teachers often struggle to form accurate mental representations, which hinders conceptual understanding. This study examined the needs, learning challenges, and expectations of future physics educators regarding Python-based simulations for learning optical waves to support conceptual understanding through dynamic visualization, interactive parameter exploration, and multiple representations of wave phenomena. A convergent parallel mixed-methods design was employed, integrating course-task analysis and a needs-assessment form with classroom observations and semi-structured interviews involving 60 third-semester physics education students at a state university in Indonesia. The novelty of this study lies in its integration of students’ conceptual difficulties, technological readiness, and simulation expectations as a foundation for designing Python-based optical wave simulations tailored to physics teacher education. Quantitative findings showed that many students relied on procedural calculation without adequate conceptual explanation and experienced difficulties in interpreting interference and diffraction phenomena. Students strongly preferred dynamic visualizations and stepwise schematic explanations, while many also emphasized the importance of adjustable visual parameters and multiple representations in simulations. Qualitative findings highlighted expectations for slow-motion visualization, comparative parameter exploration, and introductory tutorial support. The study concludes that understanding students’ perspectives is critical to designing effective educational simulations that enhance conceptual understanding and improve learning of abstract optical wave concepts.


Keywords


Needs and expectations; Physics educators; Python-based simulations

Full Text:

PDF

References


Akour, M., & Alenezi, M. (2022). Higher education future in the era of digital transformation. Education Sciences, 12(11), 784. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12110784

Alenezi, M., Wardat, S., & Akour, M. (2023). The need of integrating digital education in higher education: Challenges and opportunities. Sustainability, 15(6), 4782. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15064782

Aregehagn, E., Lykknes, A., Getahun, D. A., & Febri, M. I. M. (2023). Representation of image formation—observation in optics in ethiopian textbooks: Student learning difficulties as an analytical tool. Education Sciences, 13(5), 445. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050445

Banda, H. J., & Nzabahimana, J. (2021). Effect of integrating physics education technology simulations on students’ conceptual understanding in physics: A review of literature. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(2), 023108.

https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.023108

Bao, L., & Koenig, K. (2019). Physics education research for 21st century learning. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0007-8

Becker, S., Klein, P., Gößling, A., & Kuhn, J. (2020). Investigating dynamic visualizations of multiple representations using mobile video analysis in physics lessons. Zeitschrift Für Didaktik Der Naturwissenschaften, 26(1), 123–142.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40573-020-00116-9

Bitar, N., & Davidovich, N. (2024). Transforming pedagogy: The digital revolution in higher education. Education Sciences, 14(8), 811. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14080811

Bouchée, T., Thurlings, M., de Putter - Smits, L., & Pepin, B. (2023). Investigating teachers’ and students’ experiences of quantum physics lessons: opportunities and challenges. Research in Science & Technological Education, 41(2), 777–799.

https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2021.1948826

Cheung, J. J. H., Kulasegaram, K. M., Woods, N. N., & Brydges, R.

(2019). Why content and cognition matter: Integrating conceptual knowledge to support simulation-based procedural skills transfer. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 34(6), 969–977. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-019-04959-y

Dervić, D., Đapo, N., Mešić, V., & Đokić, R. (2019). Cognitive load in multimedia learning: an example from teaching about lenses. Journal of Education in Science Environment and Health, 5(1), 102–118. https://doi.org/10.21891/jeseh.481698

Hontarenko, I., & Kovalenko, O. (2024). Enhancing teaching: The crucial role of effective preparation and delivery of lectures. Educational Challenges, 29(1), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.34142/2709-7986.2024.29.1.05

Kitagawa, M., Fishwick, P., Urquhart, M., Kesden, M., Guadagno, R., Gryder, K., Tran, N., Najera, A., & Ochoa, D. (2022). Scaffolding, state-based modeling, and multiple representation: User interface concepts implemented in an interactive online learning environment for synergistic learning of physics and computational thinking. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 57-64). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06391-6_8

Lamb, R. L., Annetta, L., Firestone, J., & Etopio, E. (2018). A meta-analysis with examination of moderators of student cognition, affect, and learning outcomes while using serious educational games, serious games, and simulations. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 158–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.040

Lane, W. B., Galanti, T. M., & Rozas, X. L. (2023). Teacher Re-novicing on the Path to Integrating Computational Thinking in High School Physics Instruction. Journal for STEM Education Research, 6(2), 302–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-023-00100-1

McKagan, S. B., Perkins, K. K., Dubson, M., Malley, C., Reid, S., LeMaster, R., & Wieman, C. E. (2008). Developing and researching PhET simulations for teaching quantum mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 76(4), 406–417. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2885199

Mills, K. A., Cope, J., Scholes, L., & Rowe, L. (2025). Coding and computational thinking across the curriculum: A review of educational outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 95(3), 581–618. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241241327

Mohamed Hashim, M. A., Tlemsani, I., & Matthews, R. (2022). Higher education strategy in digital transformation. Education and Information Technologies, 27(3), 3171–3195. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10739-1

Mohd Najib, M. N., Mat Ali, R., & Yaacob, A. (2022). Supporting secondary school students’ learning of physics: Exploring the effects of phet simulation and mopsif module. Practitioner Research, 4, 71–95. https://doi.org/10.32890/pr2022.4.5

Munfaridah, N., Avraamidou, L., & Goedhart, M. (2021). The use of multiple representations in undergraduate physics education: What Do we Know and Where Do we Go from Here? Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(1), em1934. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/9577

Rau, M. A. (2020). Comparing multiple theories about learning with physical and virtual representations: Conflicting or complementary effects? Educational Psychology Review, 32(2), 297–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-020-09517-1

Savenko, V., Babichev, S., Goncharenko, T., & Batenko, H. (2024). Simulating physical processes in education with python’s tools. In International Scientific Conference “Intellectual Systems of Decision Making and Problem of Computational Intelligence” (pp. 132-148). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-

-70959-3_7

Skulmowski, A., & Xu, K. M. (2022). Understanding cognitive load in digital and online learning: A new perspective on extraneous cognitive load. Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 171–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09624-7

Srisawasdi, N., & Kroothkeaw, S. (2014). Supporting students’ conceptual development of light refraction by simulation-based open inquiry with dual-situated learning model. Journal of Computers in Education, 1(1), 49–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-014-0005-y

Subramaniam, R. C., Morphew, J. W., Rebello, C. M., & Rebello, N. S. (2025). Presenting a STEM Ways of Thinking framework for engineering design-based physics problems. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 21(1), 010122. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.21.010122

Van Dusen, B., Vogelsang, C., Taylor, J., & Cauet, E. (2021). How to teach a teacher: Challenges and Opportunities in Physics Teacher Education in Germany and the USA. In Physics Education (pp. 55–81). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-87391-2_3

Vega, J., & Cañas, J. M. (2019). PyBoKids: An innovative python-based educational framework using real and simulated arduino robots. Electronics, 8(8), 899. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8080899




DOI: https://doi.org/10.20527/jmscedu.v6i1.18648

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

 

Creative Commons License

Journal Of Mathematics Science and Computer Education is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.