Navigating Conceptual Struggles in Physics Teaching: Narratives of Junior High School Science Teachers

Authors

Ma. Danica M. Ocenar

Calapi National High School, Motiong, Samar; Graduate School, Samar State University, Catbalogan City (Philippines)

Rezy V. Mendaño, PhD

Graduate School, Samar State University, Catbalogan City (Philippines)

Article Information

DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS.2026.1026EDU0333

Subject Category: Education

Volume/Issue: 10/26 | Page No: 4270-4280

Publication Timeline

Submitted: 2026-05-15

Accepted: 2026-05-20

Published: 2026-06-15

Abstract

This study explored the lived experiences of secondary science teachers in teaching Physics, focusing on their conceptual struggles, coping strategies, and professional identity development. Using a qualitative narrative inquiry design, data were gathered through in-depth interviews with 15 Junior High School science teachers assigned to teach Physics in selected public secondary schools in Samar, Philippines. The narratives were analyzed using thematic narrative analysis guided by Clandinin and Connelly's three-dimensional narrative inquiry framework of temporality, sociality, and place. Findings revealed that teachers' conceptual struggles were multidimensional and shaped by disciplinary misalignment, mathematical demands, difficulties in representing abstract Physics concepts, and structural constraints, including limited instructional resources and inadequate laboratory facilities. The findings also showed that these challenges generated emotional tension and professional vulnerability among teachers. Despite these difficulties, participants demonstrated resilience and professional agency through adaptive strategies, including independent preparation, pedagogical simplification, contextualized instruction, simulations and demonstrations, and collegial and digital support systems. Moreover, the narratives revealed that teachers' struggles contributed to the development of growth-oriented professional identities characterized by reflective practice, continuous learning, and commitment to student understanding. The study concludes that conceptual struggles in Physics teaching are not merely indicators of individual inadequacy but reflections of broader instructional and systemic challenges that also contribute to teachers’ professional growth, resilience, and reflective practice. The findings highlight the need for aligned teaching assignments, strengthened content-focused professional development, improved instructional support, and sustained institutional assistance for teachers teaching Physics in resource-constrained contexts.

Keywords

Conceptual Struggles, Narrative Inquiry, Pedagogical Adaptation, Physics Education

Downloads

References

1. Ainsworth, S. (2018). Multiple representations and multimedia learning. International handbook of the learning sciences, 96–105. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Aprillya, S., Hafidudin, A., Nisa, W. A., & Malik, A. (2025). UNDERSTANDING RESISTIVITY THROUGH INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING IN PHYSICS EDUCATION: Penerapan Hukum Ohm dalam Pembelajaran Berbasis Kelas. EduFisika: Jurnal Pendidikan Fisika, 10(2), 324-332. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bolanio, J. C. R., & Mendaño, R. V. Simplified Wave Energy Converter: An Apparatus for Teaching Energy Transformation. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Boller-Aying, S., & Villegas-Mendaño, R. (2024). STUDENTS’PERFORMANCE ON THE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL COMPONENTS OF PROJECTILE MOTION USING PROJECT-BASED LEARNING. Ignatian International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 2(4), 1689-1704. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Clandinin, D. J., & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative inquiry: Experience and story in qualitative research. Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/product/effective-teacher-professional-development-report [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Docktor, J. L., & Mestre, J. P. (2014). Synthesis of discipline-based education research in physics. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 10(2), Article 020119. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.020119 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK summit. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 28–42). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Guerriero, S. (2017). Pedagogical knowledge and the changing nature of the teaching profession. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264270695-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Hannah B. Arceño, Rezy V. Mendaño, PhD (2026). Students’ Misconceptions and Learning Experiences in Linear Motion: Basis for an Evidence-Based Intervention Framework. , 10(26), https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2026.1026EDU0276. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hobbs, L., & Törner, G. (2019). Examining the Phenomenon of “Teaching Out-of-field”. Springer Singapore. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Ingersoll, R. M. (2018). Misdiagnosing America’s teacher quality problem. In G. K. LeTendre & M. Akiba (Eds.), International handbook of teacher quality and policy (pp. 79–96). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kind, V., & Chan, K. K. (2019). Resolving the amalgam: connecting pedagogical content knowledge, content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 41(7), 964-978. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. King, D. (2016). Teaching and learning in context-based science classes: A dialectical sociocultural approach. In Teachers creating context-based learning environments in science (pp. 71-85). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Li, H. (2025). Reflective practice for pre-service teachers’ professional development. SAGE Open, 15(3), 21582440251363136. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Mizzi, D. (2013). The Challenges Faced by Science Teachers When Teaching Outside Their Specific Science Specialism. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 6(4), 1-6. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., Kelly, D. L., & Fishbein, B. (2020). TIMSS 2019 international results in mathematics and science. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/international-results/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Navos, D. B., Ordoña, M. B., Llorente, J. M., & Camarao, M. K. G. (2024). Teachers Difficulty and Coping Strategies in Physics. International Journal of Multidisciplinary: Applied Business and Education Research, 5(4), 1384-1389. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019a). PISA 2018 results (Volume I): What students know and can do. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Pacadaljen, L. M. (2024). Hurdling obstructions on instructional management of science teachers in schools with challenging laboratory resources. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(10), 1-12. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Parsons, S. A., Vaughn, M., Scales, R. Q., Gallagher, M. A., Parsons, A. W., Davis, S. G., ... & Allen, M. (2018). Teachers’ instructional adaptations: A research synthesis. Review of educational research, 88(2), 205-242. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Rau, M. A. (2017). Conditions for the effectiveness of multiple representations in learning. Educational Psychology Review, 29(4), 717–761. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9365-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Sweller, J. (2020). Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational technology research and development, 68(1), 1-16. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Team, W. T. (2003). Lincoln, YS & Guba, EG (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverley Hills. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Van Merriënboer, J. J., Kirschner, P. A., & Frèrejean, J. (2024). Ten steps to complex learning: A systematic approach to four-component instructional design. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Vangrieken, K., Dochy, F., Raes, E., & Kyndt, E. (2015). Teacher collaboration: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 15, 17–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.04.002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

Metrics

Views & Downloads

Similar Articles