As has been shown by previous research, students may possess various misconceptions in the area of thermal physics. In order to help them overcome misconceptions observed prior to instruction, we implemented a one-hour lecture-based intervention in their introductory thermal physics course. The intervention was held after the conventional lectures and homework sessions, and it consisted of three phases: individual working, hinting, and peer discussion. To probe students' conceptual understanding before, during, and after the intervention, use was made of a diagnostic test related to the multiphased process of an ideal gas [D. E. Meltzer, Am. J. Phys. 72, 1432(2004]. The students' conceptions were monitored by analyzing the explanations they provided and by recording the peer discussions of five voluntary pairs. The intervention helped students to realize the flaws in their explanations and increased the proportion of their scientific explanations, the increase being statistically significant in five tasks out of seven.

This study concentrates on analysing university students' pre-knowledge of thermal physics. The students' understanding of the basic concepts and of the adiabatic compression of an ideal gas was studied at the start of an introductory level course. A total of 48 students participated in a paper-and-pencil test, and analysis of the responses revealed that they had several kinds of problems. They did not differentiate between concepts, confusing in particular the concepts of temperature, internal energy and heat. The students also seemed to have serious problems in applying the first law of thermodynamics: they were frequently more likely to use the ideal gas law rather than the first law, e.g., in the case of adiabatic compression, even though it cannot provide a proper explanation of the phenomenon. More detailed analysis revealed that the underlying reasons for many of the problems detected were based on an inadequate understanding of micro-level models of substance. At the upper secondary level, students have acquired an impression of how particles move, vibrate and interact, but they have not learnt how to apply the ideas and concepts of the micro-models in a scientific manner. All of this means that university teachers need to exercise great care in designing their teaching. Explicit recommendations for teachers to take into account both the findings of this research project and also students' pre-knowledge are presented in the discussion section at the end of this paper.

No abstract

This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Upper Division Physics Courses.] This study concentrates on evaluating the consistency of upper-division students' use of the second law of thermodynamics at macroscopic and microscopic levels. Data were collected by means of a paper and pencil test (N ¼ 48) focusing on the macroscopic and microscopic features of the second law concerned with heat transfer processes. The data analysis was based on a qualitative content analysis where students' responses to the macroscopic-and microscopic-level items were categorized to provide insight into the consistency of the students' ideas; if students relied on the same idea at both levels, they ended up in the same category at both levels, and their use of the second law was consistent. The most essential finding is that a majority of students, 52%-69% depending on the physical system under evaluation, used the second law of thermodynamics consistently at macroscopic and microscopic levels; approximately 40% of the students used it correctly in terms of physics while others relied on erroneous ideas, such as the idea of conserving entropy. The most common inconsistency harbored by 10%-15% of the students (depending on the physical system under evaluation) was students' tendency to consider the number of accessible microstates to remain constant even if the entropy was stated to increase in a similar process; other inconsistencies were only seen in the answers of a few students. In order to address the observed inconsistencies, we would suggest that lecturers should utilize tasks that challenge students to evaluate phenomena at macroscopic and microscopic levels concurrently and tasks that would guide students in their search for contradictions in their thinking.

This study analyzes the types of peer discussion that occur during lecture-based tutorial sessions. It focuses in particular on whether discussions of this kind have certain characteristics that might indicate success in the post-testing phase. The data were collected during an introductory physics course. The main data set was gathered with the aid of audio recordings. Data-driven content analysis was applied in the analysis to facilitate the placement of students' discussions in particular categories related to different types of discussions. Four major discussion types were found: discussions related to the content knowledge, metalevel discussions including metaconceptual and metacognitive elements, discussions related to practical issues, and creating a base for discussion, seen here in the order of their prevalence. These categories were found to possess individual substructures that involved, for example, asking and answering questions, participating in a dialogue, or disagreeing with a peer. Analyzing the substructures of the categories revealed that there were evident differences between the groups, some of them related to the group size. With regard to the characteristics of discussions considered to be connected to a better learning outcome, it was observed that a great number of lines uttered related to the physics content or metalevel discussions seemed to have a direct bearing on success in the post test at the group level. For individual students, answering content-related questions posed by their peers might also indicate success in the post test. We would encourage researchers to continue this type of research in order to discover the essential characteristics of students' discussions that facilitate learning.