Development of the Heat and Energy Concept Inventory: Preliminary Results on the Prevalence and Persistence of Engineering Students' Misconceptions

BACKGROUND Students frequently hold a number of misconceptions related to temperature, heat and energy. There is not currently a concept inventory with sufficiently high internal reliability to assess these concept areas for research purposes. Consequently, there is little data on the prevalence of these misconceptions amongst undergraduate engineering students. PURPOSE (HYPOTHESIS) This work presents the Heat and Energy Concept Inventory (HECI) to assess prevalent misconceptions related to: (1) Temperature vs. Energy, (2) Temperature vs. Perceptions of Hot and Cold, (3) Factors that affect the Rate vs. Amount of Heat Transfer and (4) Thermal Radiation. The HECI is also used to document the prevalence of misconceptions amongst undergraduate engineering students. DESIGN/METHOD Item analysis, guided by classical test theory, was used to refine individual questions on the HECI. The HECI was used in a one group, pre-test-post-test design to assess the prevalence and persistence of targeted misconceptions amongst a population of undergraduate engineering students at diverse institutions. RESULTS Internal consistency reliability was assessed using Kuder-Richardson Formula 20; values were 0.85 for the entire instrument and ranged from 0.59 to 0.76 for the four subcategories of the HECI. Student performance on the HECI went from 49.2% to 54.5% after instruction. Gains on each of the individual subscales of the HECI, while generally statistically significant, were similarly modest. CONCLUSIONS The HECI provides sufficiently high estimates of internal consistency reliability to be used as a research tool to assess students' understanding of the targeted concepts. Use of the instrument demonstrates that student misconceptions are both prevalent and resistant to change through standard instruction.

The Repairing of Misconceptions through the Use of Inquiry-Based Activities

Misconceptions exist in all fields of learning and develop through a person’s preconception of how the world works. Students with misconceptions in chemical engineering are not capable of correctly transferring knowledge to a new situation and will likely arrive at an incorrect solution. The purpose of this thesis was to repair misconceptions in thermodynamics by using inquiry-based activities. Inquiry-based learning is a method of teaching that involves hands-on learning and self-discovery. Previous work has shown inquiry-based methods result in better conceptual understanding by students relative to traditional lectures. The thermodynamics activities were designed to guide students towards the correct conceptual understanding through observing a preconception fail to hold up through an experiment or simulation. The developed activities focus on the following topics in thermodynamics: “internal energy versus enthalpy”, “equilibrium versus steady state”, and “entropy”. For each topic, two activities were designed to clarify the concept and assure it was properly grasped. Each activity was coupled with an instructions packet containing experimental procedure as well as pre- and post-analysis questions, which were used to analyze the effect of the activities on the students’ responses. Concept inventories were used to monitor students’ conceptual understanding at the beginning and end of the semester. The results did not show a statistically significant increase in the overall concept inventory scores for students who performed the activities compared to traditional learning. There was a statistically significant increase in concept area scores for “internal energy versus enthalpy” and “equilibrium versus steady state”. Although there was not a significant increase in concept inventory scores for “entropy”, written analyses showed most students’ misconceptions were repaired. Students transferred knowledge effectively and retained most of the information in the concept areas of “internal energy versus enthalpy” and “equilibrium versus steady state”.