Vol. 16 No. 2 (2025):
Research Article

Critical Spots and Misconceptions in Students’ Understanding of Problems and Challenges in Europe

PDF
Martina Škodová
Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica, Slovakia
Tibor Madleňák
Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica, Slovakia
Michaela Mihoková
Matej Bel University in Banská Bystrica, Slovakia
Methodological framework for identifying critical spots and misconceptions in selected topics of European regional geography. Source: Own elaboration
DOI: https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.m.sko.16.2.406.418
Categories

Published 2025-11-28

Keywords

  • regional geography education,
  • critical spots,
  • misconceptions,
  • questionnaire survey,
  • Slovakia

How to Cite

Škodová, Martina, Tibor Madleňák, and Michaela Mihoková. 2025. “Critical Spots and Misconceptions in Students’ Understanding of Problems and Challenges in Europe”. European Journal of Geography 16 (2):406-18. https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.m.sko.16.2.406.418.

Copyright (c) 2025 Martina Škodová, Tibor Madleňák, Michaela Mihoková

Creative Commons License

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

Received 2025-07-21
Accepted 2025-11-22
Published 2025-11-28

Abstract

Europe is currently undergoing dynamic change. European countries, regions, and populations face numerous economic, social, political, and environmental challenges. Reflection within the educational process plays a key role in understanding and responding to these developments. Teaching regional geography offers a suitable framework for such reflection. The regional geography of Europe holds strong potential for fostering understanding of diverse, complex, and often difficult issues. The aim of this study is to identify critical spots and common misconceptions in students’ understanding of problems and challenges in Europe. The study addresses the following research question. What critical spots and misconceptions appear in students’ understanding of European issues? The paper presents results from research focused on the most frequent misconceptions related to selected problematic topics in European geography. The research sample consisted of 304 students from selected secondary schools in Slovakia. Data were collected using a testing method applied after completion of a thematic unit on the regional geography of Europe. Statistical analysis conducted in RStudio confirmed the persistence of several misconceptions. These concerned perceptions of Russia, democracy, nuclear energy, and population ageing. For example, 89.1% of respondents did not perceive Russia as a country with a relatively high share of Muslims. In addition, 71.7% believed Switzerland has the highest level of democracy in Europe, without considering that Nordic countries often rank higher. Misconceptions also appeared in relation to nuclear energy, with 67.6% viewing nuclear power as highly environmentally unfriendly, and population ageing, where 57.9% believed ageing occurs more slowly in Southern Europe than in Northern Europe.

Highlights:

  • Teaching European issues should consider students’ key difficulties and misconceptions.
  • Slovak students exhibit several misconceptions in the examined topics of the regional geography of Europe.
  • The revealed misconceptions underline the need for contextualized and critical geography education.

 

PDF

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Adjin-Tettey, T. D. (2022). Combating fake news, disinformation, and misinformation: Experimental evidence for media literacy education. Co-gent Arts & Humanities, 9(1), 2037229. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2022.2037229
  2. Alesina, A. F., Miano, A., & Stantcheva, S. (2022). Immigration and redistribution. The Review of Economic Studies. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdac011
  3. Angelucci, D., Rojon, S., & Vittori, D. (2024). Do populist parties promote direct democracy? An empirical assessment in 29 countries in the last two decades. Contemporary Politics, 30(4), 473–493. https://doi/full/10.1080/13569775.2023.2296748
  4. Arthurs, L., Hsia, J. F., & Schweinle, W. (2015). The oceanography concept inventory: A semicustomizable assessment for measuring student understanding of oceanography. Journal of Geoscience Education, 63, 310–322. https://doi.org/10.5408/14 061.1
  5. Avery, P. G., Levy, S., & Simmons, A. M. M. (2013). Deliberating controversial public issues as part of civic education. The Social Studies, 104(3), 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/00377996.2012.691571
  6. Balciogullari, A. (2017). Geographical thinking in geography education. Research Highlights in Education and Science 2017. http://createwecommons.org/licenses/by-ne/4.01
  7. Bergmann, E. (2018). Conspiracy and populism: The politics of misinformation. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978‑3‑319‑90359‑0
  8. Blândul, V. C. (2009). Applications of interactive didactic evaluation in pre–academic learning system. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 17, 10–15. https://www.scientiasocialis.lt/pec/node/files/pdf/vol17/10-15.Blandul_Vol.17.pdf
  9. Bryan, A., & Tippett, C. (2006). Teaching controversial environmental issues in the science classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 28(4), 363–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500339093
  10. Caleon, I. S., & Subramaniam, R. (2010). Development and application of a three-tier diagnostic test to assess secondary students’ understanding of waves. International Journal of Science Education, 32(7), 939–961. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902769169
  11. Campbell, D. E. (2008). Voice in the classroom: How an open classroom climate fosters political engagement among adolescents. Political Behav-ior, 30(4), 32–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-008-9063-z
  12. Celikler, D., & Kara, F. (2011). Determining the misconceptions of pre-service chemistry and biology teachers about the greenhouse effect. Pro-cedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2463–2470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.209
  13. Chang, C. H., & Pascua, L. (2016). Singapore students’ misconceptions of climate change. International Research in Geographical and Environmen-tal Education, 25(1), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2015.1113564
  14. de Guzman, M. F. D. (2017). Difficulties faced in teaching geography lessons at public secondary schools, Division of Zambales, Philippines. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science (IOSR-JHSS), 22(9), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.9790/0837-2209076470
  15. Desfandi, M., Abdi, A. W., Gadeng, A. N., & Sofia, I. (2020). Identification of misconceptions in geography using the three-tier diagnostic test. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 561. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/561/1/012011
  16. Desservettaz, M., Pikridas, M., Stavroulas, I., Bougiatioti, A., Liakakou, E., Hatzianastassiou, N., Sciare, J., Mihalopoulos, N., & Bourtsoukidis, E. (2023). Emission of volatile organic compounds from residential biomass burning and their rapid chemical transformations. Science of The Total Environment, 903, 166592. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.166592
  17. Donovan, T., & Karp, J. A. (2006). Popular Support for Direct Democracy. Party Politics, 12(5), 671–688. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068806066793
  18. Dove, J. (2016). Reasons for misconceptions in physical geography. Geography, 101, 47–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/00167487.2016.12093983
  19. Durkin, K., & Johnson, R. B. (2015). Diagnosing misconceptions: Revealing changing decimal fraction knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 37, 21–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.08.003
  20. Fleming, W., Hayes, A. L., Crosman, K. M., & Bostrom, A. (2021). Indiscriminate, irrelevant, and sometimes wrong: Causal misconceptions about climate change. Risk Analysis, 41(1), 157–178. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13587
  21. Flynn, D. J., Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2017). The nature and origins of misperceptions: Understanding false and unsupported beliefs about politics. Advances in Political Psychology, 38, 127–150. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12394
  22. Francek, M. (2013). A compilation and review of over 500 geoscience misconceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 35(1), 31–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.736644
  23. Gapminder (2025, Jun). You are probably wrong about. www.gapminder.org
  24. Gautier, C., Deutsch, K., & Rebich, S. (2006). Misconceptions about the greenhouse effect. Journal of Geoscience Education, 54(3), 386–395. https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-54.3.386
  25. Gorecek Baybars, M., & Can, S. (2018). Middle school students’ misconceptions about the concepts of astronomy. International Education Stud-ies, 11(11), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v11n11p34
  26. Gorodzeisky, A. (2013). Mechanisms of exclusion: Attitudes toward allocation of social rights to out-group population. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 36, 795–817. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2012.701125
  27. Gökmen, A., Atik, A. D., Ekici, G., Çimen, O., & Altunsoy, S. (2010). Analysis of high school students’ opinions on the benefits and harms of nucle-ar energy in terms of environmental values. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2350–2356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.335
  28. Hackett, C., Stonawski, M., Tong, Y., Kramer, S., Fengyan Shi, A., & Zanetti, N. (2025). Religious Composition by Country, 2010-2020. Pew Research Center. https://doi.org/10.58094/5shf-2d69
  29. Henriques, L. (2000). Children’s misconceptions about weather: A review of the literature. Paper presented at the National Association for Re-search in Science Teaching (NARST), New Orleans, LA. http://web.csulb.edu/~lhenriqu/NARST2000.htm
  30. Hestenes, D., & Wells, M. (1992). A mechanics baseline test. The Physics Teacher, 30, 159–166. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2343497
  31. Hirschauer, N., Grüner, S., Mußhoff, O., Becker, C., & Jantsch, A. (2020). Can p-values be meaningfully interpreted without random sampling? Statist. Surv. (14), 71–91. https://doi.org/10.1214/20-SS129
  32. Ishikawa, T., & Kastens, K. A. (2004). Why some students have trouble with maps and other spatial representations. Journal of Geoscience Educa-tion, 53(2), 184–197. https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-53.2.184
  33. Jeong, J. S., González-Gómez, D., Conde-Núñez, M. C., Sánchez-Cepeda, J. S., & Yllana-Prieto, F. (2021). Improving climate change awareness of preservice teachers (PSTs) through a university science learning environment. Educ. Sci., 11(2), 78. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11020078
  34. Kaltakci Gurel, D., Eryilmaz, A., & McDermott, L. C. (2015). A review and comparison of diagnostic instruments to identify students’ misconcep-tions in science. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(5), 989–1008. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1369a
  35. Kocová, T., & Marada, M. (2022). Perception of curriculum difficulty in geography teaching as a factor influencing the formation of misconcep-tions. Geography, 127(2), 169–193. https://doi.org/10.37040/geografie2022127020169
  36. Kriesi, H. (2014). The populist challenge. West European Politics, 37(2), 361–378. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2014.887879
  37. Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Jerit, J., Schwieder, D., & Rich, R. F. (2000). Misinformation and the currency of democratic citizenship. Journal of Politics, 62(3), 790–816. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-3816.00036
  38. Kulyk, V. (2011). Language identity, linguistic diversity and political cleavages: evidence from Ukraine. Nation and Nationalism, 17(3), 627–648. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8129.2011.00493.x
  39. Kuzio, T. (2015). The Russian annexation of Crimea and its implications. Journal of Eurasian Studies, 6(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euras.2014.11.002
  40. Lane, R. (2015). Experienced geography teachers’ PCK of students’ ideas and beliefs about learning and teaching. International Research in Geo-graphical and Environmental Education, 24(1), 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2014.967113
  41. Lane, R., & Coutts, P. (2012). Students’ alternative conceptions of tropical cyclone causes and processes. International Research in Geographical & Environmental Education, 21(3), 205–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2012.699146
  42. Lanosz, P. & Bitschnau, M. (2023). Misperceptions about immigration: Reviewing their nature, motivations and determinants. British Journal of Political Science, 53(2), 674–689. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123422000084
  43. Levinson, R., & Turner, S. (2001). Valuable lessons: Engaging with the social context of science in schools. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathemat-ics and Technology Education, 1(4), 451–464. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926150109556563
  44. Likavský, E., & Ružičková, M. (2004). Students’ Misconceptions in Science Education. Pedagogical Review, 4, 15–20.
  45. Liu, Z., Wang, Y., & Lin, J. (2014). Students’ misconceptions and conceptual changes about climate change. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 9(2), 193–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2012.699146
  46. Lutz, P., & Bitschnau, M. (2023). Misperceptions about immigration: Reviewing their nature, motivations and determinants. British Journal of Political Science, 53(2), 674–689. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123422000084
  47. Madleňák, T., Gajdoš, A., Škodová, M. & Žoncová, M. (2025). Aktuálne problémy Európy. https://www.aktualneproblemyeuropy.sk/uvod/
  48. Martín-Ramos, J., Becerril, J. M., López-Sánchez, M. A., & Ramos-Sánchez, M. C. (2020). Diagnosis of misconceptions in physical geography through an online test. Sustainability, 12(6), 2373. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12062373
  49. Maude, A. (2017). Applying the concept of powerful knowledge to school geography. In C. Brooks, G. Butt, & M. Fargher (Eds.), The power of geographical thinking, 27–40. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49986-4_3
  50. Meadows, M. E. (2020). Geography education for sustainable development. Geography and Sustainability, 1(1), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geosus.2020.02.001
  51. Mohrenberg, S., Huber, R. A., & Freyburg, T. (2021). Love at first sight? Populist attitudes and support for direct democracy. Party Politics, 27(3), 528–539. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068819868908
  52. Moshou, H., & Drinia, H. (2023). Climate change education and preparedness of future teachers – A review: The case of Greece. Sustainability, 15(2), 1177. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021177
  53. Mungiu-Pippidi, A. (2015). The Quest for Good Governance: How Societies Develop Control of Corruption. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316286937
  54. Neumann, K., & Fischer, H. E. (2022). Climate change education and the challenge of mis- and disinformation: Toward resilient learners. Envi-ronmental Education Research, 28(6), 745–764. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2022.2080637
  55. Nováček, A., Bláha, J., & Zajíčková, A. (2025). Border between West and East of Europe in the mental maps of European university students. Hun-garian Geographical Bulletin, 74 (1), 23–36. https://doi.org/10.15201/hungeobull.74.1.2
  56. Park, S., & Oliver, J. S. (2008). Revisiting the conceptualisation of pedagogical content knowledge (PCK): PCK as a conceptual tool to understand teachers as professionals. Research in Science Education, 38(3), 261–284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9049-6
  57. Plokhy, S. (2016). The Gates of Europe: A History of Ukraine. Penguin books.
  58. Pluháčková, M., Duffek, V., Stacke, V., & Mentlík, P. (2019). Critical points in geography teaching at secondary schools – Identified critical areas and their causes. Arnica, 9(1), 15–30. https://www.arnica.zcu.cz/images/casopis/2019/Arnika_2019_1-2-Pluhackova-Duffek-Stacke-Mentlik-web.pdf
  59. Posit team (2025). RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R. Posit Software. PBC. https://posit.co/
  60. R Core Team (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
  61. Reinfried, S. (2006). Conceptual change in physical geography and environmental sciences through mental model building: The example of groundwater. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 15(1), 41–61. https://doi.org/10.2167/irgee193.0
  62. Rodriguez Justicia, D., & Theilen, B. (2022). Immigration and tax morale: The role of perceptions and prejudices. Empirical Economics, 62(4), 1801–1832. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-021-02083-7
  63. Ruhs, M., Tamas, K., & Palme, J. (Eds.). (2019). Bridging the gaps: Linking research to public debates and policy making on migration and integra-tion. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198834557.001.0001
  64. Sam, A. G., & Gibson, J. (2011). Misconceptions in geography: Implications for teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 33(13), 1805–1819. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.546739
  65. Schoeman, S. (2015). Learners’ perspectives on what knowledge is most worthwhile in geography education in South Africa. Review of Educa-tion, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies, 37(4), 345–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714413.2015.1065618
  66. Smith, J. P., diSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115–163. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0302_1
  67. Standish, A. (2018). The place of regional geography. In M. Jones & D. Lambert (Eds.), Debates in geography education (2nd ed.), 62–74. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315562452-5
  68. Stecula, D., & Pickup, M. (2021). Social media, cognitive reflection, and conspiracy beliefs. Frontiers in Political Science, 3, Article 647957. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2021.647957
  69. Stylianou, L., & Plakitsi, K. (2021). Students’ misconceptions about the greenhouse effect and climate change by the lens of the activity theory. Teaching of Physical Sciences: Research and Practice, 59–60. https://doi.org/10.12681/psy_hps.23707
  70. Škodová, M., Madleňák, T., & Damek, A. (2022). Geography teachers’ and students’ perspectives on the relevance of introducing selected topics related to current problems and challenges of Europe. Geographical Information, 26(2), 124–135. https://doi.org/10.17846/GI.2022.26.2.124-135
  71. Škodová, M., Sabo, M., & Madleňák, T. (2024). Topics on Current Problems and Challenges of Europe in Geography Textbooks and Curriculum. Geographical Studies, 17, 122–134. https://doi.org/10.24040/2024.9788055721583
  72. Tippett, R., & Milford, T. (2017). The importance of teaching controversial issues: A systematic review of the literature. Educational Review, 69(3), 293–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2016.1159251
  73. Tolppanen, S., Claudelin, A., & Kang, J. (2021). Pre-service teachers’ knowledge and perceptions of the impact of mitigative climate actions and their willingness to act. Research in Science Education, 51(4), 1629–1649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-020-09921-1
  74. Vosniadou, S. (2020). Students’ misconceptions and science education. Oxford research encyclopedia of education. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.965
  75. Weingartner, M. K., & Masnick, M. A. (2019). Refutation texts: Implying the refutation of a scientific misconception can facilitate knowledge revision. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 58, 138–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.03.004
  76. Zucchetti, S., Marini, E., & Rossi, A. (2021). Media representation and public perception of demographic ageing in Europe. European Journal of Communication, 36(1), 34–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/02673231211000647
  77. Yaar-Waisel, T., & Leininger-Frézal, C. (2025). Bridging Geopolitics and Environmental Issues in Geography Education: Exploratory Teachers’ Insights from France and Israel. European Journal of Geography, 16(2), 184–196. https://doi.org/10.48088/ejg.t.yaa.16.2.184.196