Students' conceptions of the second law of thermodynamics—an interpretive study

Abstract

Thirty-four clinical interviews were conducted with Grade 10 students (15-16 years old) who had received four years of physics instruction. The interview's focus was to understand students' responses from their point of view and not solely from the physicist's angle. The results of the study confirm and deepen, on the one hand, findings from other studies concerning students' severe difficulties in leaming the energy concept, the particle model, and the distinction between heat and temperature. On the other hand, students' qualitative conceptions in a new area-the second law of thermodynamics-are revealed. For instance, in the case of irreversibility (i.e., the idea that all processes take place by themselves only in one direction), most students came to conclusions similar to those of modem physicists. But their explanations of irreversibility are based on significantly different conceptual frameworks. The results of the study suggest that a mere enlargement of the traditional physics curriculum by the addition of ideas of the second law is not sufficient to familiarize students with these ideas. A totally new teaching approach to heat, temperature, and energy is necessary. In this approach, basic qualitative ideas of the second law should be a central and integral part from the beginning of instruction.

An Examination of Cross Sectional Change in Student’s Metaphorical Perceptions Towards Heat, Temperature and Energy Concepts

“…Thus, students holding misconceptions may resist any attempt to change them. Kesidou & Duit (1993) report that the difficulties experienced in differentiating the concepts of energy, heat and temperature from each other continue to be experienced by college students. Though the science concepts are taught scientifically in formal education institutions and explained correctly in textbooks, students may prefer to keep the alternative concepts that are the products of their socio-cultural environments and may show resistance to any conceptual change (Karamustafaoğlu, Özmen & Ayvacı, 2004).…”

“…These metaphors were classified considering their frequencies in Table 3. In relation to the concept of temperature, the metaphors developed are associated with thermometer, Celsius and degree as well as heat, sources of heat and affective color of heat and these connotations prove that there are some misconceptions held by the students related to the concepts of heat and temperature (Aydoğan, Güneş & Gülçiçek, 2003;Ericson & Tiberghien, 1985;Gönen & Akgün, 2005;Kesidou & Duit, 1993;McDermott, 2003). For instance, there are some misconceptions in relation to ideas that heat can be measured with a thermometer and temperature can be transferred from one place to another like a form of energy.…”

Understanding Energy Conservation: Intersection Between Biological and Everyday Life Contexts

“…Goldring & Osborne, 1994;Pinto et al, 2005), and the application of energy conservation in biological systems (e.g. Barak et al, 1997;Eisten & Stavy, 1988;Fetherston, 1999;Gayford, 1986;Goldring & Osborne, 1994;Kesidou et al, 1993;Kruger et al, 1992;Linjse, 1990;Mann, 2003;Solomon, 1982;Trumper, 1997). opposite of energy degradation.…”

“…However, as shown in Table 1, previous research shows that many students do not realise that energy is conserved in biological processes and systems. Kesidou et al (1993) explain that students often reject the idea of energy conservation because it seems to contradict everyday experiences and language usage where energy is often viewed as being produced and consumed, but not conserved. As such it is important to point out here that some students who seem to have erroneous ideas about energy conservation may be influenced by a language problem, and not a conceptual one.…”

Teaching Energy Conservation as a Unifying Principle in Physics

“…Firstly, students' difficulties were analysed. Research results show that students identify work and effort (Driver and Warrington 1985), energy and power (Goldring and Osborne 1994), consider only one of the factors that form part of work and forget the other, identify work and energy (Duit 1984;Driver and Warrington 1985), assign a material character to energy (Duit 1987;Solomon 1985), associate it with movement, activity (Solomon 1983) or processes (Duit 1984;Viglietta 1990), consider that energy can be used up (Kesidou and Duit 1993) or stored (Solomon 1985) since everyday language is impregnated with expressions such as ''consumption of energy'' or ''energy crisis'', attribute gravitational potential energy to a body but not to the interaction between two bodies (Solbes and Tarín 1998), ignore internal energy changes (van Huls and van den Berg 1993), think about heat in terms of a substance (Albert 1978;Erickson 1979Erickson , 1980, and confuse heat and temperature (Arnold 1994;Labur and Niaz 2002). More specifically we identified the following aspects:…”