Spreadsheet physics: Examples in meteorology and planetary science

Herman, R. B.

doi:10.1119/1.3230033

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1979 wurde VisiCalc für den Apple II entwickelt (Baker & Sugden, 2003), was dann bereits 1984 für den Unterricht genutzt wurde (Arganbright, 1984). Auch aktuell wird Excel häufig im Physikunterricht eingesetzt, da das Programm den meisten Lehrkräften geläufig ist und für verschiedene Dinge genutzt werden kann (Herman, 2009). Die Ausgabe bleibt bei Tabellenkalkulationsprogrammen auf Diagramme beschränkt.…”

Section: Tabellenkalkulationsprogrammeunclassified

Mathematische Modellbildung und Videoanalyse zum Lernen der Newtonschen Dynamik im Vergleich

Weber¹

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Newtons laws of motion are known to be difficult to understand for students. Many persistent preconceptions exist, that are incompatible to the physical theory. Those preconceptions hinder the progress in conceptual understanding of Newtons laws. One reason for the persistence of those conceptions is the focus on idealized situation is physics class. Students have difficulties with those situations and a gap between physics class and the real world can arise. Complex motions from everyday life are too mathematically difficult for physics lessons in school. The computer as a tool can help to bridge that gap. This pre-post-design study with = 274 students from 11 th grade of German (Hessian) schools investigates two different ways of using the computer to discuss complex motions with friction regarding their efficacy in improving the conceptual understanding of Newtons first two laws after the school lessons. For that, two equivalent interventions were designed that only differ in the way the computer is used. In each intervention, four different experiments are discussed. The students always work in groups of two after the respective experiment is shown in the plenum. The test, which was used to measure conceptual understanding and other variables, is partly based on known tests. Other parts of the test were created and piloted for this study. Additionally, screen recordings in combination with the conversations of = 45 students were used to investigate, among other things, the way students use the software.A significant difference with large effect size between conceptual understanding in the pre-test and post-test was found in both cohorts. A comparison showed no difference between computational modelling and video motion analysis in the overall conceptual understanding. However, a significant difference in items regarding Newtons first law was found. The computational modelling cohort improved significantly more. It was also found that the common preconception, that a force in the direction of motion is necessary, was reduced further in the computational modelling cohort. An analysis of the screen recordings reveals that this preconception is expressed more often in that group as well. This leads to the conclusion that modelling forces students to activate the preconception which is then disproved by the comparison of the model and the data in the software. This cognitive conflict leads to a bigger reduction of the preconception which in turn leads to a larger improvement in the items regarding Newtons first law. The computational modelling cohort also improves in model understanding. More differences (e.g. cognitive load and different affective variables) were found and are being discussed.

show abstract

Section: Tabellenkalkulationsprogrammeunclassified

Mathematische Modellbildung und Videoanalyse zum Lernen der Newtonschen Dynamik im Vergleich

Weber¹

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, downward infrared radiation from the atmosphere to the surface is in reality much greater than what arises out of this model (εσT 4 a ≃ 220 W m −2 vs. 342 W m −2 observed). At least one textbook and one published paper include a reflection coefficient for outgoing LWR from the surface [2,11], together with an emissivity close to unity (implied in the diagram for the radiation by the atmospheric layer), but this also leads to the physical inconsistency that absorptivity is not equal to emissivity. Furthermore, reflection of infrared radiation by the atmospheric layer must correspond physically to scattering processes.…”

Section: Parametermentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Barker and Ross [9] construct a 'toy model' of global warming using a single atmospheric layer together with the earth's surface, and include non-radiative processes, and use a spreadsheet model to find solutions for various parameter choices (as do Shallcross and Harrison [10] and Herman [11], in a paper to be mentioned later). A somewhat odd feature of their model is that the convective energy transfer depends not on the temperature difference between the surface and the atmosphere, but only on the surface temperature itself.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How much is not enough? One-, two- and three-atmospheric-layer models for earth’s energy balance

Brecha¹

2021

Phys. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple energy balance models of planetary systems are of fundamental importance to understanding equilibrium temperatures. Most textbooks that discuss energy balance take a further step and include the effects of an atmosphere on the surface temperature. It is noticeable, however, that in such discussions of planetary surface energy balance some fundamental physical characteristics of energy balance are incorrectly portrayed, but rarely commented upon. Here it is shown that zero-dimensional energy balance models with either one or two atmospheric layers will necessarily lead to results that lack correct physical content, although they may or may not give temperature results that are numerically approximately correct. Ignoring the role of convective heat transfer and having even rough magnitudes of both upward- and downward-welling long-wavelength radiation wrong means that fundamental physical processes are missing. Adding a third atmospheric layer to a simple model that also includes a stylised representation of convection can restore both reasonable numerical accuracy and the correct physical properties, while at the same time being simple enough for easy physical interpretation.

show abstract

“…Also, the result of the simulation is a table full of numbers with no overview of the calculations, which makes both finding errors and modifying the calculation difficult [29]. Nonetheless, spreadsheet processing has been a popular way of implementing computational modelling in physics teaching in various contexts [30].…”

Section: Spreadsheet Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

The benefit of computational modelling in physics teaching: a historical overview

Weber

Wilhelm

2020

Eur. J. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computational modelling is not only an important element in scientific research, it also has a rich history in physics education and its application in the classroom has changed greatly over the last few decades. To explain why computational modelling is used in physics education, we discuss its use in teaching and the benefits to the teaching and learning process. Secondly, historical developments are highlighted, and different methods of computational modelling are discussed in more detail, developing the desired features of modern software for classroom computational modelling. A review of the research in this field was conducted, showing what is known about the effects of computational modelling on students’ conceptual understanding, systemic thinking, views about nature of science and interest in physics, among others variables. Derived from the research results, recommendations are given about the use of computational modelling in physics education and research recommendations are presented with the goal to better understand the interaction between the student and computational modelling process.

show abstract

Spreadsheet physics: Examples in meteorology and planetary science

Cited by 7 publications

References 11 publications

Mathematische Modellbildung und Videoanalyse zum Lernen der Newtonschen Dynamik im Vergleich

Mathematische Modellbildung und Videoanalyse zum Lernen der Newtonschen Dynamik im Vergleich

How much is not enough? One-, two- and three-atmospheric-layer models for earth’s energy balance

The benefit of computational modelling in physics teaching: a historical overview

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About