Literature on student ideas about circuits largely focuses on misunderstandings and difficulties, with seminal papers framing student thinking as stable, difficult to change, and connected to incorrect ontological categorizations of current as a thing rather than a process. In this paper, we analyzed 417 student responses to a conceptual question about electric circuits using a lens consistent with resources theory. We found that though indicators of substance-based reasoning about current are common in student responses, this reasoning is not predictive of other difficulties reported in the literature, such as “current is consumed” or “the battery is a constant source of current.” We also found that students use substance-based reasoning in resourceful ways, suggesting that substance-based reasoning may in fact be a productive starting place for instruction on circuits.

中文翻译：

---

关于电流的基于物质和顺序的推理：使用资源理论镜头的灯泡排名任务的示例

关于学生关于电路的想法的文献主要集中在误解和困难上，开创性的论文将学生的想法描述为稳定的、难以改变的，并与电流作为事物而不是过程的错误本体论分类有关。在本文中，我们使用与资源理论一致的视角，分析了 417 名学生对电路概念问题的回答。我们发现，尽管基于物质的电流推理指标在学生的回答中很常见，但这种推理并不能预测文献中报告的其他困难，例如“电流被消耗”或“电池是恒定的电流源”。我们还发现，学生以机智的方式使用基于实质的推理，这表明基于实质的推理实际上可能是电路教学的一个富有成效的起点。