Research Article

Assessing elementary understanding of electromagnetic radiation and its implementation in wireless technologies among pre-service teachers

Leonidas Gavrilas 1 * , Konstantinos T. Kotsis 1
More Detail
1 Department of Primary Education, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, GREECE* Corresponding Author
International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 5(2), 2023, ep2309, https://doi.org/10.30935/ijpdll/13191
Published Online: 12 April 2023, Published: 01 July 2023
OPEN ACCESS   984 Views   416 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The research on the knowledge and perceptions of electromagnetic radiation among teachers who will teach these topics in primary and secondary education is relatively limited. According to existing literature, electromagnetic radiation is a challenging and complex concept for students to comprehend. Despite the widespread use of radiation-emitting devices like cell phones and wireless networks, the misuse of the term “radiation” has resulted in various misconceptions. This study aimed to examine the elementary understanding of electromagnetic radiation and its application in wireless technologies among prospective primary and secondary education teachers from different specialties. 427 pre-service teachers participated in the survey, and the data was gathered through a closed questionnaire. The study’s overall conclusion was that teachers’ knowledge regarding electromagnetic radiation was insufficient. The curricula of their departments, their interests in high school courses, and their gender significantly affect their understanding of electromagnetic radiation and its application to wireless technologies.

CITATION (APA)

Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2023). Assessing elementary understanding of electromagnetic radiation and its implementation in wireless technologies among pre-service teachers. International Journal of Professional Development, Learners and Learning, 5(2), ep2309. https://doi.org/10.30935/ijpdll/13191

REFERENCES

  1. Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2015). Strategies for teaching students to think critically: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85(2), 275-314. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314551063
  2. Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamim, R., & Zhang, D. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1102-1134. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308326084
  3. American Academy of Pediatrics. (2019). Cell phone radiation & children’s health: What parents need to know. HealthyChildren.org. https://www.healthychildren.org/English/safety-prevention/all-around/Pages/Cell-Phone-Radiation-Childrens-Health.aspx
  4. Andreou, Y., & Kotsis, K. T. (2005). The estimation of length, surface area, and volume by blind and sighted children. International Congress Series, 1282, 780-784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ics.2005.05.027
  5. Baste, V., Riise, T., & Moen, B. (2008). Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields; male infertility and sex ratio of offspring. European Journal of Epidemiology, 23(5), 369-377. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-008-9236-4
  6. Behar-Horenstein, L. S., & Niu, L. (2011). Teaching critical thinking skills in higher education: A review of the literature. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 8(2), 25-42. https://doi.org/10.19030/tlc.v8i2.3554
  7. Beijaard, D., Meijer, P. C., & Verloop, N. (2004). Reconsidering research on teachers’ professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 107-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2003.07.001
  8. Boyes, E., & Stanisstreet, M. (1993). Children’s ideas about radioactivity and radiation: Sources, mode of travel, uses and dangers. Research in Science & Technological Education, 11(2), 137-146. https://doi.org/10.1080/0263514930110203
  9. Burcin, S., & Ince, E. (2010). Internet as a source of misconception: “Radiation and radioactivity”. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(4), 94-100.
  10. Carlberg, M., & Hardell, L. (2012). On the association between glioma, wireless phones, heredity and ionising radiation. Pathophysiology, 19, 243-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pathophys.2012.07.001
  11. Cho, K., Imaoka, T., Klokov, D., Paunesku, T., Salomaa, S., Birschwilks, M., Bouffler, S., Brooks, A. L., Hei, T. K., Iwasaki, T., Ono, T., Sakai, K., Wojcik, A., Woloschak, G. E., Yamada, Y., & Hamada, N. (2019). Funding for radiation research: Past, present and future. International Journal of Radiation Biology, 95(7), 816-840. https://doi.org/10.1080/09553002.2018.1558303
  12. Christonasis, A., & Kotsis, K. T. (2022). Observing or performing actions? Understanding circular motion via two types of learning activities. European Journal of Education, 9(10), 101-120. https://doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v9i10.4493
  13. Chu, M. K., Song, H. G., Kim, C., & Lee, B. C. (2011). Clinical features of headache associated with mobile phone use: A cross-sectional study in university students. BMC Neurology, 11, 115. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2377-11-115
  14. Connell, P. P., & Hellman, S. (2009). Advances in radiotherapy and implications for the next century: A historical perspective. Cancer Research, 69(2), 383-392. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-07-6871
  15. Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher education around the world: What can we learn from international practice? European Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 291-309. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1315399
  16. Davis, D. L., Kesari, S., Soskolne, C. L., Miller, A. B., & Stein, Y. (2013). Swedish review strengthens grounds for concluding that radiation from cellular and cordless phones is a probable human carcinogen. Pathophysiology, 20(2), 123-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pathophys.2013.03.001
  17. Du, K.-L., & Swamy, M. N. (2010). Wireless communication systems: From RF subsystems to 4G enabling technologies. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511841453
  18. Eijkelhof, H. M. C., Klaassen, C. W. J. M., Lijnse, P. L., & Scholte, R. L. J. (1990), Perceived incidence and importance of lay-ideas on ionizing radiation: Results of a delphi-study among radiation-experts. Science Education, 74, 183-195. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730740205
  19. Engeström, Y. (1991). Developmental work research: A paradigm in practice. The Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition. https://lchcautobio.ucsd.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/LCHC-Report-1985-1992.pdf
  20. Farashi, S., Bashirian, S., Khazaei, S., Khazaei, M., & Farhadinasab, A. (2022). Mobile phone electromagnetic radiation and the risk of headache: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 95(7), 1587-1601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00420-022-01835-x
  21. Federal Communications Commission. (2020). Wireless devices and health concerns. https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/wireless-devices-and-health-concerns
  22. Gavrilakis, C., Stylos, G., Kotsis, K. T., Goulgouti, A., (2017). Environmental literacy assessment of Greek university pre-service teachers. Science Education: Research and Praxis, 61, 49-71.
  23. Gavrilas L., Kotsis K. T., & Papanikolaou M.-S. (2022c). Investigation of correlation between track study in high school with the attitudes and behaviors of students towards the electromagnetic radiation of mobile phones and wireless networks. Science and Technology Education Research, 2(1), 39-69. https://doi.org/10.12681/riste.30810
  24. Gavrilas, L. (2017). Perceptions of university students on electromagnetic pollution of information and communications technology equipment [Postgraduate dissertation, University of Ioannina]. https://doi.org/10.26268/heal.uoi.1923
  25. Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2023). Research for self-reported health problems after excessive talking time on mobile phones among university students. Eurasian Journal of Science and Environmental Education, 3(1), 7-15. https://doi.org/10.30935/ejsee/12958
  26. Gavrilas, L., Gontas, P., & Kotsis, K. T. (2018). University students’ perceptions of electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones and wireless networks. Science and Technology Issues in Education, 11(2), 93-106.
  27. Gavrilas, L., Gontas, P., & Kotsis, K. T. (2020a). The effect of gender on student perceptions of electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones and wireless networks. Science Teaching: Research and Praxis, 74-75, 88-107.
  28. Gavrilas, L., Gontas, P., & Kotsis, K. T. (2021). Investigating the correlation between the direction of studies in high school education and students’ perceptions of electromagnetic radiation of mobile phones and wireless networks. In I. Boikos, K. Stefanidou, K. Tsalapati, & K. Skordoulis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th Panhellenic Conference on the Teaching of Natural Sciences and New Technologies in Education: “The Role of Science Education in 21st Century Society”.
  29. Gavrilas, L., Kotsis, K. T., & Papanikolaou, M.-S. (2022a). Attitudes and behaviors of university students towards electromagnetic radiation of cell phones and wireless networks. Aquademia, 6(2), ep22009. https://doi.org/10.30935/aquademia/12393
  30. Gavrilas, L., Kotsis, K. T., & Papanikolaou, M.-S. (2022b). Gender differences in attitudes and behaviors associated with electromagnetic radiation of mobile phones and wireless networks. International Journal of Educational Innovation, 4(5), 25-37.
  31. Gavrilas, L., Plakitsi, K., & Kotsis K.T. (2020b). Perceptions and attitudes of preschool and primary education teachers towards educational robotics and STEM. In K. Plakitsi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th Panhellenic Conference, Physical Sciences in Preschool Education: Mapping the New Twenty Years of Research and Teaching Practice (pp. 679-701).
  32. Gilbert, J. K., & Watts, D. M. (1983). Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conceptions: Changing perspectives in science education. Studies in Science Education, 10(1), 61-98. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057268308559905
  33. Gonen, S. (2008). A study on student teachers’ misconceptions and scientifically acceptable conceptions about mass and gravity. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(1), 70-81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-007-9083-1
  34. Gontas, P., Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2020). The impact of gender on Univeristy students’ perceptions about renewable energy sources. Science Teaching: Research and Praxis, 74-75, 9-24.
  35. Gontas, P., Gavrilas, L., & Kotsis, K. T. (2021). Prospective teachers’ perceptions of renewable energy sources. Science and Technology Issues in Education, 14, 37-48.
  36. Goswami, A., & Dutta, S. (2016). Gender differences in technology usage–A literature review. Open Journal of Business and Management, 4(1), 51-59. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojbm.2016.41006
  37. Goulgouti, A., Plakitsi, K., & Stylos, G. (2019). Environmental literacy: Evaluating knowledge, affect, and behavior of pre-service teachers in Greece. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 15(1), e02202. https://doi.org/10.29333/ijese/6287
  38. Government Advice. (2022). Wired child, protecting our children from wireless technology. http://wiredchild.org/government-alias.html
  39. Griffiths, D. (2017). Introduction to electrodynamics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108333511
  40. Guzman, A., Tziouvaras, D. A., Schweitzer, E. O., & Martin, K. (2006). Local- and wide-area network protection systems improve power system reliability. In Proceedings of the 2006 Power Systems Conference: Advanced Metering, Protection, Control, Communication, and Distributed Resources (pp. 174-181). https://doi.org/10.1109/PSAMP.2006.285387
  41. Heddy, B. C., Danielson, R. W., Sinatra, G. M., & Graham, J. (2017). Modifying knowledge, emotions, and attitudes regarding genetically modified foods. The Journal of Experimental Education, 85(3), 513-533. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2016.1260523
  42. Henriksen, E. K., & Jorde, D. (2001). High school students’ understanding of radiation and the environment: Can museums play a role? Science Education, 85(2), 189-206. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-237X(200103)85:2%3C189::AID-SCE60%3E3.0.CO;2-S
  43. Hepworth, S., Schoemaker, M., Muir, K., Swerdlow, A., Tongeren, M., & McKinney, P. (2006). Mobile phone use and risk of glioma in adults: Case control study. British Medical Journal, 332, 883-887. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38720.687975.55
  44. Horak, D., Hainoun, A., Neugebauer, G., & Stoeglehner, G. (2022). A review of spatio-temporal urban energy system modeling for urban decarbonization strategy formulation. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 162, 112426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.112426
  45. Hori, H., Orita, M., Taira, Y., Kudo, T., & Takamura, N. (2019). Risk perceptions regarding radiation exposure among Japanese schoolteachers living around the Sendai nuclear power plant after the Fukushima accident. PloS ONE, 14(3), e0212917. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212917
  46. International Agency for Research on Cancer. (2002). Non-ionizing radiation, part 1: Static and extremely low-frequency (ELF) electric and magnetic fields. In IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans.
  47. International Agency for Research on Cancer. (2011). IARC classifies radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans. World Health Organisation. https://www.iarc.who.int/pressrelease/iarc-classifies-radiofrequency-electromagnetic-fields-as-possibly-carcinogenic-to-humans/
  48. International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. (2009). Exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields, biological effects and health consequences (100 kHz-300 GHz). International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. https://www.icnirp.org/en/publications/article/hf-review-2009.html
  49. Jacob, J. (2020). Reader response: Smartphone use and primary headache: A cross-sectional hospital-based study. Neurology Clinical Practice, 10(6), e51. https://doi.org/10.1212/CPJ.0000000000000997
  50. Jewett, T. Ο. (1996). “And they is us”: Gender issues in the instruction of science. Department of Curriculum and Instruction. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED402202.pdf
  51. Joanne, L., Yves, L., Mario, L., Francois, L., Gerard-Raymond, R., Carlo, S., & Mary, P. (2002). Past and current trends in the analysis of textbooks in a Quebec context. Curriculum Inquiry, 32(1), 51-83. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-873X.00215
  52. Kaliampos, G., Kotsis, K. T., & Kornelaki, A. C. (2023). A critical analysis of the democratic argument for teaching science: The case of cell phones. The European Educational Researcher. https://doi.org/10.31757/euer.621
  53. Kikas, E. (2004). Teachers’ conceptions and misconceptions concerning three natural phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 432-448. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20012
  54. Kotsis, K. T. (2011). Research approach to the timeless character of alternative ideas in the teaching of physics. University of Ioannina Publications. https://olympias.lib.uoi.gr/jspui/handle/123456789/26913
  55. Kotsis, K. T., & Panagou, D. (2023). The determination of the learning curve on the concept of energy using the alternatives ideas. Contemporary Mathematics and Science Education, 4(1), ep23011. https://doi.org/10.30935/conmaths/13022
  56. Kotsis, K. T., & Stylos, G. (2023). Relationship of IQ with alternative ideas of primary school students on the concepts of force and weight. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 4(1), 21-25. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2023.4.1.544
  57. Kotsis, K. T., Stylos, G., Houssou, P., & Kamaratos, M. (2023). Students perceptions of the heat and temperature concepts: A comparative study between primary, secondary, and university levels. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 4(1), 136-144. https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2023.4.1.577
  58. Kotulakova, K. (2019). Importance of teachers’ beliefs in development of scientific literacy. Chemistry-Didactics-Ecology-Metrology, 24(1-2), 77-87. https://doi.org/10.2478/cdem-2019-0006
  59. Kumar, L., Chii, K., Way, L., Jetly, Y., & Rajendaran, V. (2011). Awareness of mobile phone hazards among university students in a Malaysian medical school. Health, 3(7), 406-415. https://doi.org/10.4236/health.2011.37068
  60. Lawrence, S., & Giles, C. L. (1998). Searching the world wide web. Science, 280(5360), 98-100. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.280.5360.98
  61. Lee, R. P. (2016). Misconceptions and biases in German students’ perception of multiple energy sources: Implications for science education. International Journal of Science Education, 38(6), 1036-1056. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1176277
  62. Levitt, B., & Lai, H. (2010). Biological effects from exposure to electromagnetic radiation emitted by cell tower base stations and other antenna arrays. Environment, 18, 369-395. https://doi.org/10.1139/A10-018
  63. Lips, M., Anderson, E., Nakamura, T., Harris, F., Schneider, G., Zic, J., Sanders, C., Owen, J., Hondros, J., & De Ruvo, A. (2021). Reflections on low-dose radiation, the misconceptions, reality and moving forward. Journal of Radiological Protection, 41(4), S306-S316. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6498/ac1a5d
  64. Liu, G., & Fang, N. (2016). Student misconceptions about force and acceleration in physics and engineering mechanics education. International Journal of Engineering Education, 32(1), 19-29.
  65. Lonn, S., Ahlbom, A., Hall, P., & Feychting, M. (2005). Long-term mobile phone use and brain tumor risk. American Journal of Epidemiology, 161, 526-535. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwi091
  66. Lopez, M.-L. (2003). Angular and linear acceleration in a rigid rolling body: students’ misconceptions. European Journal of Physics, 24(6), 553-562. https://doi.org/10.1088/0143-0807/24/6/001
  67. Magiera, A., & Solecka, J. (2020). Radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation from Wi-Fi and its effects on human health, in particular children and adolescents. Roczniki Panstwowego Zakladu Higieny [Yearbooks of the National Institute of Hygiene], 71(3), 251-259. https://doi.org/10.32394/rpzh.2020.0125
  68. Marin, L., & Halpern, D. (2011). Pedagogy for developing critical thinking in adolescents: Explicit instruction produces greatest gains. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2010.08.002
  69. Mater, N. R., Hussein, M. J. H., Salha, S. H., Draidi, F. R., Shaqour, A. Z., Qatanani, N., & Affouneh, S. (2022). The effect of the integration of STEM on critical thinking and technology acceptance model. Educational Studies, 48(5), 642-658. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2020.1793736
  70. Metioui, A. (2022). How elementary pre-service teachers use scientific knowledge to justify their reasoning about the electrification phenomena by friction. Knowledge, 2(1), 103-115. https://doi.org/10.3390/knowledge2010006
  71. Millar, R. (1994). School students’ understanding of key ideas about radioactivity and ionizing radiation. Public Understanding of Science, 3(1), 53-70. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/3/1/004
  72. Moodley, K., & Gaigher, E. (2019). Teaching electric circuits: Teachers’ perceptions and learners’ misconceptions. Research in Science Education, 49, 73-89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9615-5
  73. Morales López, A. I., & Tuzón Marco, P. (2022). Misconceptions, knowledge, and attitudes towards the phenomenon of radioactivity. Science & Education, 31, 405-426. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00251-w
  74. Moulder, J. E., Foster, K. R., Erdreich, L. S., & McNamee, J. P. (2005). Mobile phones, mobile phone base stations and cancer: A review. International Journal of Radiation Biology, 81(3), 189-203. https://doi.org/10.1080/09553000500091097
  75. Mubeen, S. M., Abbas, Q., & Nisar, N. (2008). Knowledge about ionising and non-ionising radiation among medical students. Journal of Ayub Medical College, Abbottabad: JAMC, 20(1), 118-121.
  76. Nakiboglu, C., & Tekin, B. B. (2006). Identifying student’s misconceptions about nuclear chemistry. A study of Turkish high school students. Journal of Chemical Education, 83, 1712-1718. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed083p1712
  77. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13165
  78. Neumann, S. (2014a). Three misconceptions about radiation–And what we teachers can do to confront them. The Physics Teacher, 52, 357-359. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4893090
  79. Neumann, S. (2014b). What students think about (nuclear) radiation–Before and after Fukushima. Nuclear Data Sheets, 120, 166-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nds.2014.07.036
  80. Neumann, S., & Hopf, M. (2012). Students’ conceptions about ‘radiation’: Results from an explorative interview study of 9th grade students. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(6), 826-834. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9369-9
  81. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2010). PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do: Student performance in reading, mathematics and science. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264091450-en
  82. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543062003307
  83. Papanikolaou, M.-S., Plakitsi, K., & Gavrilas, L. (2020). Development of environmental consciousness among preschool students through distance learning. In K. Plakitsi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th Panhellenic Conference, Physical Sciences in Preschool Education: Mapping the New Twenty Years of Research and Teaching Practice (pp. 1059-1082).
  84. Papanikolaou, M.-S., Plakitsi, K., Gavrilas, L. & Kotsis, K. T. (2021). Investigating preschool students’ ideas for science concepts on understanding modern environmental problems. In I. Boikos, K. Stefanidou, K. Tsalapati, & K. Skordoulis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th Panhellenic Conference on the Teaching of Natural Sciences and New Technologies in Education:”The Role of Science Education in 21st Century Society”.
  85. Papoulis, A. (1977). Signal analysis. McGraw-Hill.
  86. Parno, P., Supriana, E., Widarti, A., & Ali, M. (2021). The effectiveness of STEM approach on students’ critical thinking ability in the topic of fluid statics. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1882, 012150. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1882/1/012150
  87. Pendse, N., & Zagade, T. (2014). Knowledge and attitude regarding health hazards of mobile phone users among the junior college students. International Journal of Science and Research, 3(5), 554-561.
  88. Penuel, W., Fishman, B. J., Gallagher, L. P., Korbak, C., & Lopez-Prado, B. (2009). Is alignment enough? Investigating the effects of state policies and professional development on science curriculum implementation. Science Education, 93(4), 656-677. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20321
  89. Piaget, J. (1983). Piaget’s theory. In P. Mussen (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology. Wiley.
  90. Piper, B., Daily, S., Martin, S., & Martin, M. (2019). Evaluation of a brief intervention to reduce cell phone use in college students. medRxiv, 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1101/19009241
  91. Plakitsi, K. (2013). Activity theory in formal and informal science education. An introduction. In K. Plakitsi (Ed.), Activity theory in formal and informal science education. Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-317-4
  92. Plotz, T. (2016). Students’ conceptions of radiation and what to do about them. Physics Education, 52(1), 014004. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6552/52/1/014004
  93. Rego, F., & Peralta, L. (2006). Portuguese students’ knowledge of radiation physics. Physics Education, 41(3), 259. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/41/3/009
  94. Romine, J., Buxner, S., Impey, C. D., Nieberding, M. N., Antonellis, J. C., & Scholars, C. O. (2014). Investigating science literacy: Students’ conceptions of radiation. American Astronomical Society.
  95. Rowlands, S., Graham, T., Berry, J., & McWilliam, P. (2005). Misconceptions of force: Spontaneous reasoning or well-formed idea prior to instruction? Research in Mathematics Education, 7(1), 47-65. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794800008520145
  96. Rupley, H., Garcia, J., & Longnion, B. (1981). Sex role portrayal in reading materials implications for the 1980s. The Reading Teacher, 34, 786-791.
  97. Sahin, Y. G., Balta, S., & Ercan, T. (2010). The use of the Internet resources by university students during their course projects elicitation: A case study. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(2), 234-244.
  98. Sainz, M., & López-Sáez, M. (2010). Gender differences in computer attitudes and the choice of technology-related occupations in a sample of secondary students in Spain. Computers & Education, 54(2), pp. 578-587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.007
  99. Salehan, M., & Negahban, A. (2013). Social networking on smartphones: When mobile phones become addictive. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(6), 2632-2639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.003
  100. Shih, J., & Fay, M. (2017). Pearson’s Chi‐square test and rank correlation inferences for clustered data. Biometrics, 73(3), 822-834. https://doi.org/10.1111/biom.12653
  101. Siersma, P. T., Pol, H. J., van Joolingen, W. R., & Visscher, A. J. (2021). Pre-university students’ conceptions regarding radiation and radioactivity in a medical context. International Journal of Science Education, 43(2), 179-196. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1864504
  102. Sneider, C. I., & Ohadi, M. M. (1998). Unraveling students’ misconceptions about the earth’s shape and gravity. Science Education, 82(2), 265-284. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199804)82:2<265::AID-SCE8>3.0.CO;2-C
  103. Stylos, G., & Kotsis, K. T. (2021). Use of a simple homemade apparatus to teach basic thermal concepts–Six qualitative demonstrations/experiments. The Physics Teacher, 59(6), 477-479. https://doi.org/10.1119/10.0006134
  104. Stylos, G., Evangelakis, G., & Kotsis, K. T. (2008). Misconceptions on classical mechanics by freshman university students: A case study in a physics department in Greece. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 1(2), 157-177.
  105. Stylos, G., Gavrilakis, C., Kotsis, T. K., & Goulgouti, A., (2017). Energy-related knowledge of Greek university pre-service teachers. Science Education: Research and Praxis, 61, 72-92.
  106. Subha, M. (2017). A survey on importance and challenges of radio waves in wireless communications. IOSR Journal of Computer Engineering, 5(7), 34-38.
  107. Temiz, B. K., & Yavuz, A. (2014). Students’ misconceptions about Newton’s second law in outer space. European Journal of Physics, 35(4), 045004. https://doi.org/10.1088/0143-0807/35/4/045004
  108. Tindall, T., & Hamil, B. (2004). Gender disparity in science education: The causes, consequences, and solutions. Education, 125(2), pp. 282-295.
  109. Tubiana M. (1996). Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen et la découverte des rayons X [Wilhelm Conrad Röntgen and the discovery of X-rays]. Bulletin de l’Academie Nationale de Medicine [Bulletin of the National Academy of Medicine], 180(1), 97-108.
  110. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2020). Reducing radio frequency exposure from cell phones. https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/cell-phones/reducing-radio-frequency-exposure-cell-phones
  111. Ursachi, G., Horodnic, I. A., & Zait, A. (2015). How reliable are measurement scales? External factors with indirect influence on reliability estimators. Procedia Economics and Finance, 20, 679-686. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(15)00123-9
  112. Valcke, M., Sang, G., Rots, I., & Hermans, R. (2010). Taking prospective teachers’ beliefs into account in teacher education. In P. Peterson, E. Baker, & B. McGaw (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (pp. 622-628). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.00668-0
  113. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press.
  114. Wadana, R. W., & Maison. (2019). Description students’ conception and knowledge structure on electromagnetic concept. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1185, 012050. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1185/1/012050
  115. Wahyudi, W., Verawati, N. N. S. P., Ayub, S., & Prayogi, S. (2019). The effect of scientific creativity in inquiry learning to promote critical thinking ability of prospective teachers. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 14(14), 122-131. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v14i14.9532
  116. Widodo, W., Rosdiana, L., Fauziah, A. M., & Suryanti. (2018). Revealing student’s multiple-misconception on electric circuits. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1108(1), 012088. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1108/1/012088
  117. World Energy Council. (2016). World energy resources. World Energy Council. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0262-1762(16)30085-2
  118. World Health Organization. (1946). Preamble to the constitution of the World Health Organization as adopted by the International Health Conference. World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/suggestions/faq/en/
  119. World Health Organization. (2014). Electromagnetic fields and public health: Mobile phones. https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/electromagnetic-fields-and-public-health-mobile-phones
  120. Yalvac, B., Smith, H. D., Troy, J. B., & Hirsch, P. (2007). Promoting advanced writing skills in an upper-level engineering class. Journal of Engineering Education, 96, 117-128. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2007.tb00922.x
  121. Yan, J., Agresti, M., Zhang, L., Yan, Y., & Matloub, H. (2009). Up regulation of specific mRNA levels in rat brain after cell phone exposure. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, 27(2), 147-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/15368370802072208
  122. Ye, X., Zhang, X., Zheng, S., & Du, Y. (2010). Discussion on teaching electromagnetic field and wave course. In Y. J. Guo, & R. Mittra (Eds.), Proceedings of Progress in Electromagnetics Research Symposium (pp. 229-232). EM Academy.
  123. Yeh, S.-C., Huang, J.-Y., & Yu, H.-C. (2017). Analysis of energy literacy and misconceptions of junior high students in Taiwan. Sustainability, 9(3), 423. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9030423
  124. Zohar, A., & Bronshtein, B. (2005). Physics teachers’ knowledge and beliefs regarding girls’ low participation rates in advanced physics classes. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 61-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000138798