Concept scaffolding in problem-based learning: Enhancing conceptual understanding of circular motion in a first-year physics module for engineering students

Concept scaffolding in problem-based learning: Enhancing conceptual understanding of circular motion in a first-year physics module for engineering students

Bibin Mohan George

Issue: Vol. 7 No. 1 2026 Article 12 pp.166 – 181
DOI : https://doi.org/10.38159/jelt.20267112 Published online 27th February 2026.

28 Downloads

DOWNLOAD PDF

ABSTRACT

First-year engineering students struggle to connect abstract physics concepts to real-world applications in complex topics such as circular motion and banking curves. Traditional lecture-based instruction often does not develop the deep conceptual understanding and problem-solving skills required for engineering tasks. This study examines the integration of concept scaffolding within a problem-based learning (PBL) framework to enhance students’ understanding and application of circular motion principles in a first-year physics module. The intervention involved an engineering design problem in which students calculated optimal banking angles for a highway exit ramp with minimal reliance on friction. To support students, a range of scaffolding strategies was embedded in the learning process. These included guided inquiry worksheets, dynamic simulations for visualising force vectors, structured peer collaboration, and continuous formative feedback in constructing and interpreting free-body diagrams, and critically evaluating their design decisions. A mixed-methods research approach was employed. Quantitative data from pre- and post-assessments of 60 students indicated a statistically significant improvement in conceptual understanding and problem-solving ability, with scores increasing from 42.3% (SD = 10.4) to 76.8% (SD = 9.1); a paired-sample t-test confirmed this gain (t(59) = 21.5, p < 0.001). Qualitative data from student reflections revealed greater engagement, improved confidence, and clearer articulation of design rationales. The findings highlight the value of structured scaffolding within PBL environments in fostering both conceptual mastery and the transfer of theoretical knowledge to applied contexts. This approach offers a scalable and effective strategy for improving learning outcomes in foundational STEM education, especially engineering-focused physics instruction.

Keywords: Concept Scaffolding, Problem-Based Learning, Guided Inquiry Worksheets

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Awonke, Mbangi, Ncobela Cyprial Ndumiso, Mbangi Hlumela Siyolise, Rapai Fred, Kavita Behara, and Msomi Alfred Mvunyelwa. “Supporting Underprepared Students through Technology and Inclusive Pedagogical Strategies.” In Proceedings of the Focus Conference (TFC 2024), 422–51. Springer Nature, 2024.

Banda, Herbert James, and Joseph Nzabahimana. “Effect of Integrating Physics Education Technology Simulations on Students’ Conceptual Understanding in Physics: A Review of Literature.” Physical Review Physics Education Research 17, no. 2 (December 21, 2021): 023108. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.023108.

Barth-Cohen, Lauren A, Hillary Swanson, and Jared Arnell. “Methods of Research Design and Analysis for Identifying Knowledge Resources.” Physical Review Physics Education Research 19, no. 2 (2023): 020119.

Bertram, C. “Scaffolding Academic Literacy in Higher Education: Making Disciplinary Reading and Writing Practices Explicit.” Journal of Education 87, no. 1 (2022): 1–20.

Braun, Virginia, and Victoria Clarke. “Reflecting on Reflexive Thematic Analysis.” Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health 11, no. 4 (2019): 589–97.

Brundage, Mary Jane, Alysa Malespina, and Chandralekha Singh. “Peer Interaction Facilitates Co-Construction of Knowledge in Quantum Mechanics.” Physical Review Physics Education Research 19, no. 2 (2023): 020133.

Caballero, Marcos D, Bethany R Wilcox, Leanne Doughty, and Steven J Pollock. “Unpacking Students’ Use of Mathematics in Upper-Division Physics.” ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:1409.7660, 2014.

Case, J. M., and D. Marshall. “Bridging the Gap Between Engineering Education Research and Practice: A Framework for Relational Mixed Methods Research.” Studies in Engineering Education 2, no. 1 (2016): 1–12.

Chen, O., S. Kalyuga, and J. Sweller. “Cognitive Load Theory, Instructional Design, and Learning from Worked Examples: A Review of the Literature.” Educational Psychology Review 28, no. 4 (2016): 831–52.

Chi, Michelene T H, and Ruth Wylie. “The ICAP Framework: Linking Cognitive Engagement to Active Learning Outcomes.” Educational Psychologist 49, no. 4 (2014): 219–43.

Creswell, John W, and Vicki L Plano Clark. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Sage publications, 2017.

Docktor, Jennifer L, and José P Mestre. “Synthesis of Discipline-Based Education Research in Physics.” Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research 10, no. 2 (2014): 020119.

English, Mary C, and Anastasia Kitsantas. “Supporting Student Self-Regulated Learning in Problem-and Project-Based Learning.” Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning 7, no. 2 (2013): 6.

Espinoza, Fernando. “Impact of Guided Inquiry with Simulations on Knowledge of Electricity and Wave Phenomena.” ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2012.05826, 2020.

Freeman, Scott, Sarah L Eddy, Miles McDonough, Michelle K Smith, Nnadozie Okoroafor, Hannah Jordt, and Mary Pat Wenderoth. “Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, no. 23 (2014): 8410–15.

Garraway, James Windsor. “Participatory Parity and Epistemological Access in the Extended Curriculum Programmes.” Education as Change 21, no. 2 (2017): 109–25.

Herrera, Luis A., Rosa M. Rodríguez, and Carlos R. Lopez. “The Role Of Digital Simulation in Enhancing Conceptual Understanding Of Physics Among University Students.” International Journal of Mathematics and Science Education 1, no. 1 (November 14, 2024): 62–68. https://doi.org/10.62951/ijmse.v1i1.82.

Hmelo-Silver, Cindy E. “Problem-Based Learning: What and How Do Students Learn?” Educational Psychology Review 16, no. 3 (September 2004): 235–66. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3.

Husnaini, Siti Jamiatul, and Sufen Chen. “Effects of Guided Inquiry Virtual and Physical Laboratories on Conceptual Understanding, Inquiry Performance, Scientific Inquiry Self-Efficacy, and Enjoyment.” Physical Review Physics Education Research 15, no. 1 (March 25, 2019): 010119. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010119.

Jawitz, J. “New Academics in South Africa: Entering the Teaching–Research Nexus.” Higher Education 71, no. 4 (2016): 557–73.

Kirschner, Paul A, John Sweller, Richard E Clark, P A Kirschner, and R E Clark. “Why Minimal Guidance during Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist.” Based Teaching Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching,(November 2014), 2010, 37–41.

Klerk, Danie de, Greig Krull, Tshepiso Maleswena, and Fiona MacAlister. Reimagining South African Higher Education: Towards a Student-Centred Learning and Teaching Future. African Sun Media, 2024.

Kohl, P. B., and E. A. Vincent. “Developing Mathematical Thinking in Physics: Insights from Introductory-Level Mathematics and Physics Courses.” Physical Review Physics Education Research 14, no. 2 (2018): 020120.

Koretsky, Milo, Jessie Keeler, John Ivanovitch, and Ying Cao. “The Role of Pedagogical Tools in Active Learning: A Case for Sense-Making.” International Journal of STEM Education 5, no. 18 (2018).

Lin, Shih-Yin, and Chandralekha Singh. “Effect of Scaffolding on Helping Introductory Physics Students Solve Quantitative Problems Involving Strong Alternative Conceptions.” Physical Review Special Topics—Physics Education Research 11, no. 2 (2015): 020105.

Maringe, Felix, and Nevensha Sing. “Teaching Large Classes in an Increasingly Internationalising Higher Education Environment: Pedagogical, Quality and Equity Issues.” Higher Education 67, no. 6 (2014): 761–82.

Meyer, Jan H F, and Ray Land. “Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge: An Introduction.” In Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding, 3–18. Routledge, 2006.

———. “Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge (2): Epistemological Considerations and a Conceptual Framework for Teaching and Learning.” Higher Education 49, no. 3 (2005): 373–88.

Meyer, Jan, and Ray Land. Overcoming Barriers to Student Understanding. Taylor & Francis Limited New York, 2005.

Pol, J. Van de, N. Mercer, and M. Volman. “Scaffolding Student Talk: Teachers’ Concurrent Use of Instructional Scaffolding Strategies in Whole-Class Discussions.” Learning and Instruction 60 (2019): 1–11.

Savery, John R. “Overview of Problem-Based Learning: Definitions and Distinctions.” Essential Readings in Problem-Based Learning: Exploring and Extending the Legacy of Howard S. Barrows 9, no. 2 (2015): 5–15.

Sedebo, Getachew T., Ajebush A. Shafi, Mammo Muchie, and Michael Y. Shatalov. “Inclusive STEM Education to Fight Poverty and Inequality: The Case of South Africa.” African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development 17, no. 1 (January 2, 2025): 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2024.2417779.

Talikan, Allen I, Rufaida Salapuddin, Jainalyn A Aksan, Roslina J Rahimulla, Adzhar Ismael, Rumida Jimlah, Nasra Idris, Rubina B Dammang, Dermayna A Jamar, and Emelyn Sarahadil. “On Paired Samples T-Test: Applications, Examples and Limitations.” Ignatian International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research 2, no. 4 (2024): 943–51.

Taufiqur Rahman, Nurul Fitria, Evi Nurhidayah, and Ika Yuliandani. “Effects of Project-Based Learning on Employability Skills.” Review of Islamic Studies 2, no. 1 (January 15, 2023): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.35316/ris.v2i1.473.

Vygotsky, L. S. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1978.

Wood, David, Jerome S Bruner, and Gail Ross. “The Role of Tutoring in Problem Solving.” Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 17, no. 2 (1976): 89–100.

Yadav, Aman, Megan Vinh, Gregory M Shaver, Peter Meckl, and Stephanie Firebaugh. “Case‐based Instruction: Improving Students’ Conceptual Understanding through Cases in a Mechanical Engineering Course.” Journal of Research in Science Teaching 51, no. 5 (2014): 659–77.

AUTHOR(S)

Mr. Bibin Mohan George is a Lecturer in Physics at Mangosuthu University of Technology (MUT), Durban, South Africa, where he has served since May 2013. He is currently completing his PhD in Quantum Molecular Optics (Physics) at the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN), with research focused on the theoretical study of the Cotton–Mouton effect in dense fluids. His academic background includes an M.Sc. and B.Sc. in Physics from M.G. University, as well as a Bachelor of Education from Kerala University. His research interests span quantum molecular optics, classical and quantum mechanics, electrodynamics, non-linear optics, atomic and molecular spectroscopy, and applied mathematical physics. He has also contributed to space physics research, including a project at the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) on remote sensing and atmospheric studies. Beyond disciplinary research, Mr. Mohan George is actively engaged in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL), publishing papers on STEM pedagogies, curriculum development, student success, and inclusive, innovative pedagogy in higher education. He has presented papers at multiple teaching and learning conferences and in theoretical physics research. His work integrates rigorous theoretical physics research with transformative STEM education practices, contributing to both scientific advancement and inclusive higher education in the South African context.

TO CITE ARTICLE

George, Bibin Mohan. “Concept scaffolding in problem-based learning: Enhancing conceptual understanding of circular motion in a first-year physics module for engineering students.” Journal of Education and Learning Technology 7, no.1 (2026): 166 – 181. https://doi.org/10.38159/jelt.20267112