Assessing Assessment of Thermodynamics Concept Understanding: A Systematic Review

Authors

  • Delilah Nur Maisyaroh Universitas Negeri Malang
  • Sutopo Universitas Negeri Malang
  • Parno Universitas Negeri Malang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37891/kpej.v8i2.942

Abstract

This study presents a systematic review of scholarly articles examining the development of thermodynamics concept assessment tools in physics education from 2010 to 2025. The review aims to analyze the characteristics, scope, and quality of existing instruments while offering guidance for future improvements. Eleven assessment tools were identified and reviewed using a structured protocol aligned with PRISMA and the guidelines of Petticrew & Roberts. The findings reveal a strong reliance on multiple-choice formats and a primary focus on fundamental thermodynamics concepts, chiefly heat, temperature, and the laws of thermodynamics. However, key conceptual areas such as entropy in open systems, real gas behavior, and statistical interpretations of thermodynamic laws are often overlooked. Furthermore, although many instruments report content validation by experts, only a few provide evidence of construct validity or internal consistency. The review recommends that future thermodynamics assessments align with students’ cognitive development, maintain a balance between item depth and efficiency, and include underrepresented conceptual domains. Overall, the review advocates for the creation of more comprehensive and effective assessment tools in the field of thermodynamics.

References

Almanasreh, E., Moles, R., & Chen, T. F. (2019). Evaluation of Methods Used for Estimating Content Validity. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 15(2), 214–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.03.066

Beck, K. (2020). Ensuring Content Validity of Psychological and Educational Tests–The Role of Experts. Frontline Learning Research, 8(6), 1–37.

Bhakti, Y. B., Astuti, I. A. D., & Prasetya, R. (2022). Four-Tier Thermodynamics Diagnostic Test (4T-TDT) to Identify Student Misconception. KnE Social Sciences, 106–116. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v7i14.11958

Boone, W. J., & Scantlebury, K. (2006). The Role of Rasch Analysis When Conducting Science Education Research Utilizing Multiple-Choice Tests. Science Education, 90(2), 253–269. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20106

Bozzi, M., Ghislandi, P., Tsukagoshi, K., Matsukawa, M., Wada, M., Nagaoka, N., Pnev, A. B., Zhirnov, A. A., Guillerme, G., & Zani, M. (2019). Highlight Misconceptions in Physics: A TIME project. INTED2019 Proceedings, 2520–2525. https://doi.org/10.21125/inted.2019.0689

Brown, B., & Singh, C. (2021). Development and Validation of a Conceptual Survey Instrument to Evaluate Students’ Understanding of Thermodynamics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(1), 010104. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010104

Brown, B., & Singh, C. (2022). Student Understanding of Thermodynamic Processes, Variables and Systems. European Journal of Physics, 43(5), 055705. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6404/ac7af2

Brundage, M. J., Meltzer, D. E., & Singh, C. (2024). Investigating Introductory and Advanced Students’ Difficulties with Entropy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics Using a Validated Instrument. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 20(2), 020110. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.20.020110

Brundage, M. J., Meltzer, D. E., & Singh, C. (2025). Investigating the Impact of Problem Properties on Introductory and Advanced Student Responses to Introductory Thermodynamics Conceptual Problems. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 21(1), 010127. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.21.010127

Brundage, M. J., & Singh, C. (2023). Development and Validation of a Conceptual Multiple-Choice Survey Instrument to Assess Student Understanding of Introductory Thermodynamics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 19(2), 020112. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.19.020112

Connell, J., Carlton, J., Grundy, A., Taylor Buck, E., Keetharuth, A. D., Ricketts, T., Barkham, M., Robotham, D., Rose, D., & Brazier, J. (2018). The Importance of Content and Face Validity in Instrument Development: Lessons Learnt From Service Users when Developing the Recovering Quality of Life measure (ReQoL). Quality of Life Research, 27(7), 1893–1902. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1847-y

Gurel, D. K., Eryılmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2015). A Review and Comparison of Diagnostic Instruments to Identify Students’ Misconceptions in Science. http://dx.doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1369a

Harjuna, R., Sutopo, S., & Munfaridah, N. (2024). Learning Based on Central Idea on the Topic of Electrical Circuits to Improve Students’ Concept Understanding. Kasuari: Physics Education Journal (KPEJ), 7(2), 446–456. https://doi.org/10.37891/kpej.v7i2.781

He, Z., & Schonlau, M. (2020). Automatic Coding of Text Answers to Open-Ended Questions: Should You Double-Code the Training Data? Social Science Computer Review, 38(6), 754–765. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439319846622

Kaltakci-Gurel, D., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2017). Development and Application of a Four-Tier Test to Assess Pre-Service Physics Teachers’ Misconceptions About Geometrical Optics. Research in Science & Technological Education, 35(2), 238–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2017.1310094

Kamcharean, C., & Wattanakasiwich, P. (2016). Development and Application of Thermodynamics Diagnostic Test to Survey Students’ Understanding in Thermal Physics. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 24(2). https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/CAL/article/view/8710

Kibirige, I. (2021). Exploring the Prevalence of Misconceptions Regarding Heat and Temperature among Grade Nine Natural Science Learners. Unnes Science Education Journal, 10(3), 115–123. http://dx.doi.org/10.15294/usej.v10i3.47258

Kulkarni, V. D., & Tambade, P. S. (2013). Assessing the Conceptual Understanding About Heat and Thermodynamics at Undergraduate Level. European Journal Of Physics Education, 4(2), 9–16. https://doi.org/10.20308/EJPE.06598

Langley, A., & Meziani, N. (2020). Making Interviews Meaningful. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 56(3), 370–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886320937818

Larsen, K., Hossain, A., & Weiser, M. (2015). Optimizing the Curriculum in Thermodynamics and Heat Transfer with Better Labs, In-Class Demonstrations and Interesting Realistic Problems to Enhance Learning. ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, 57427, V005T05A028. http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2015-52264

Li, C., Li, B., Huang, J., & Li, C. (2020). Energy and Exergy Analyses of a Combined Infrared Radiation-Counterflow Circulation (IRCC) Corn Dryer. Applied Sciences, 10(18), 6289. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10186289

Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009). The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies that Evaluate Healthcare Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration. Bmj, 339. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2700

Liu, J. Z. (2022). Misconceptions in Thermodynamics. Stanford University. Archived (PDF). http://xenon.stanford.edu/~zjl/pdf/thermal.pdf

Loverude, M. E. (2023). Student Understanding of Thermal Physics. The International Handbook of Physics Education Research: Learning Physics, 3–1. https://doi.org/10.1063/9780735425477_003

Malik, U., Angstmann, E. J., & Wilson, K. (2019). Learning and Conceptual Change in Thermal Physics Concepts: An Examination by Gender. International Journal of Innovation in Science and Mathematics Education, 27(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.30722/IJISME.27.01.003

Melovitz Vasan, C. A., DeFouw, D. O., Holland, B. K., & Vasan, N. S. (2018). Analysis of Testing with Multiple Choice Versus Open‐Ended Questions: Outcome‐Based Observations in an Anatomy Course. Anatomical Sciences Education, 11(3), 254–261. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1739

Mohd Dzin, N. H., & Lay, Y. F. (2021). Assessing the Validity and Reliability of Science Multiple Choice Test Using Rasch Dichotomous Measurement Model. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 20(6), 927–941. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/21.20.927

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. Bmj, 339. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2535

Nugraha, D. A., Suparmi, A., & Winarni, R. (2017). Students’ Profile of Heat and Temperature Using HTCE in Undergraduate Physics. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 909(1), 012059. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/909/1/012059

Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470754887

Rainey, K. D., Vignal, M., & Wilcox, B. R. (2022). Validation of a Coupled, Multiple Response Assessment for Upper-Division Thermal Physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 18(2), 020116. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.18.020116

Resbiantoro, G., & Setiani, R. (2022). A Review of Misconception in Physics: The Diagnosis, Causes, and Remediation. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 19(2), 403–427. http://dx.doi.org/10.36681/tused.2022.128

Schneider, M., & Stern, E. (2010). The Developmental Relations Between Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge: A Multimethod Approach. Developmental Psychology, 46(1), 178. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016701

Smith, T. I., Christensen, W. M., Mountcastle, D. B., & Thompson, J. R. (2015). Identifying Student Difficulties with Entropy, Heat Engines, and the Carnot Cycle. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 11(2), 020116. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.11.020116

Soeharto, S., Csapó, B., Sarimanah, E., Dewi, F. I., & Sabri, T. (2019). A Review of Students’ Common Misconceptions in Science and Their Diagnostic Assessment Tools. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 8(2), 247–266. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v8i2.18649

Stylos, G., Sargioti, A., Mavridis, D., & Kotsis, K. T. (2021). Validation of the Thermal Concept Evaluation Test for Greek University Students’ Misconceptions of Thermal Concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 43(2), 247–273. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1865587

Thornton, R., & Sokoloff, D. (2001). Heat and Temperature Conceptual Evaluation (HTCE). PhysPort Supporting Physics Teaching with Research-Based Resources. https://www.physport.org/assessments/assessment.cfm?I=16

Toma, R. B., & Lederman, N. G. (2022). A Comprehensive Review of Instruments Measuring Attitudes Toward Science. Research in Science Education, 52(2), 567–582. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09967-1

Wattanakasiwich, P., Taleab, P., (2013). Construction and Implementation of a Conceptual Survey in Thermodynamics. International, Query date: 2025-04-23 19:24:01. https://openjournals.library.sydney.edu.au/cal/article/view/6459

Widyaningsih, S. W., & Yusuf, I. (2019, October). Effect of RMS models (reading, mind mapping and sharing) based on e-learning to the learning outcomes of students in the teaching and learning subject. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1321, No. 3, p. 032062). IOP Publishing. http://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1321/3/032062

Xie, L., Liu, Q., Lu, H., Wang, Q., Han, J., Feng, X., & Bao, L. (2021). Student Knowledge Integration in Learning Mechanical Wave Propagation. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17(2), 020122. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.020122

Xu, W., Liu, Q., Koenig, K., Fritchman, J., Han, J., Pan, S., & Bao, L. (2020). Assessment of Knowledge Integration in Student Learning of Momentum. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 16(1), 010130. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.010130

Yeo, S., & Zadnik, M. (2001). Introductory Thermal Concept Evaluation: Assessing Students’ Understanding. The Physics Teacher, Query date: 2025-04-23 19:24:01. http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.1424603

Young, J. C., Rose, D. C., Mumby, H. S., Benitez‐Capistros, F., Derrick, C. J., Finch, T., Garcia, C., Home, C., Marwaha, E., Morgans, C., Parkinson, S., Shah, J., Wilson, K. A., & Mukherjee, N. (2018). A Methodological Guide to Using and Reporting on Interviews in Conservation Science Research. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9(1), 10–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12828

Downloads

Published

26-12-2025

How to Cite

Maisyaroh, D. N., Sutopo, & Parno. (2025). Assessing Assessment of Thermodynamics Concept Understanding: A Systematic Review. Kasuari: Physics Education Journal (KPEJ), 8(2), 380–392. https://doi.org/10.37891/kpej.v8i2.942

Issue

Vol. 8 No. 2 (2025): December 2025

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Universitas Papua

Creative Commons License

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

License and Copyright Agreement

In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:

  • They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
  • The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal. Please also carefully read Kasuari: Physics Education Journal Posting Your Article Policy at http://journalfkipunipa.org/index.php/kpef/about
  • That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
  • That its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities tacitly or explicitly of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
  • They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
  • They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.

Copyright

Authors who publish with Kasuari: Physics Education Journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.