Students' Ideas About Entropy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics* Warren Christensen and David E. Meltzer Iowa State University PERG *Supported in part.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Ideal Gas Law – Macroscopic Perspective. Ideal Gas Law: Macroscopic Perspective Outline/Introduction Quick Pre-Test – Start to get you thinking about.
Advertisements

Student Concepts of Gravity in Introductory Astronomy and Physics Courses Jack Dostal* and David Meltzer Iowa State University Department of Physics and.
Department of Mechanical Engineering ME 322 – Mechanical Engineering Thermodynamics Lecture 18 Introduction to 2 nd Law and Entropy.
Students’ Ideas About the State-Function Property of Entropy* Warren M. Christensen, David E. Meltzer, Thomas A. Stroman Iowa State University *Supported.
Phy 212: General Physics II
1. 2
Phy 202: General Physics II Ch 15: Thermodynamics.
2nd Law of Thermodynamics 1st Law: energy is conserved But is that enough ? –Object drops converting KE to heat but never see the opposite –H 2 and O 2.
P340 Lecture 5 (Second Law) THE FUNDAMENTAL POSTULATE (OF THERMAL PHYSICS) Any isolated system in thermodynamic equilibrium is equally likely to be in.
Student difficulties with graphical representation of vector products: crossing and dotting beyond t’s and i’s* Warren M. Christensen, Ngoc-Loan Nguyen,
Student Learning of Calorimetry Concepts Ngoc-Loan P. Nguyen and David E. Meltzer Iowa State University Supported by NSF DUE-# Project Description:
Thermodynamics Chapter 15. Expectations After this chapter, students will:  Recognize and apply the four laws of thermodynamics  Understand what is.
THERMODYNAMICS CH 15.
Teaching Thermodynamics: How do Mismatches between Chemistry and Physics Affect Student Learning? David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy.
Addressing Learning Difficulties with Circuits: An “Aufbau*” Approach David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy Iowa State University * “Aufbau”
Student Conceptions of Entropy in an Introductory Physics Course Warren Christensen Iowa State University April 12, 2007.
Development of Active-Learning Curricular Materials in Thermodynamics for Physics and Chemistry David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy And.
Identifying and Addressing Student Learning Difficulties in Calorimetry and Thermodynamics Ngoc-Loan Nguyen and David E. Meltzer Department of Physics.
Investigating and Improving Student Learning through Physics Education Research David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy Iowa State University.
Recurrent Areas of Confusion in Student Learning of Thermodynamics David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy and Thomas J. Greenbowe Department.
Peer-led instruction for a qualifying exam preparatory course or: How I learned to stop worrying and love the Ph.D. qualifying exam Warren Christensen.
Student understanding of entropy and the second law of thermodynamics Warren Christensen Iowa State University Supported in part by NSF grants #DUE
Chapter 21ENTROPY AND THE SECOND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS 21.1 Some One-Way Processes Consider the following examples: Example 1: If you drop a stone, it.
Thermodynamics The First Law of Thermodynamics Thermal Processes that Utilize an Ideal Gas The Second Law of Thermodynamics Heat Engines Carnot’s Principle.
Evolution of Students’ Ideas About Entropy David E. Meltzer Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College Arizona State University Warren M. Christensen Physics Department.
Intuitive and Rule-based Reasoning in the Context of Calorimetry Warren M. Christensen, Ngoc-Loan P. Nguyen, and David E. Meltzer Department of Physics.
Investigation of Diverse Representational Modes in the Learning of Physics and Chemistry David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy Iowa State.
Physics 101: Lecture 28, Pg 1 Physics 101: Lecture 28 Thermodynamics II l Today’s lecture will cover Textbook Chapter Final Check Final Exam.
Research on Student Learning in Thermal Physics David E. Meltzer College of Teacher Education and Leadership Arizona State University Mesa, Arizona, USA.
Research on Student Learning of Thermal Physics David E. Meltzer Arizona State University in collaboration with: Warren M. Christensen North Dakota State.
Learning Streams: A Case Study in Curriculum Integration Mani Mina, Arun Somani, Akhilesh Tyagi, Diane Rover, Matthew Feldmann, and Mack Shelley Iowa State.
Philip W. Young Dept. of Chemistry & Engineering Physics, University of Wisconsin-Platteville, Platteville, WI Correlation between FCI Gains and.
Students’ Conceptual Difficulties in Thermodynamics for Physics and Chemistry: Focus on Free Energies David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy.
Developing Improved Curricula and Instructional Methods based on Physics Education Research David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy Iowa State.
Investigations of Learning Difficulties in Thermodynamics for Physics and Chemistry David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy And Thomas J.
Detecting and Addressing Students’ Reasoning Difficulties in Thermal Physics David E. Meltzer Department of Physics University of Washington Seattle, Washington,
Improving Instruction in Thermal Physics through Research on Students’ Thinking David E. Meltzer College of Teacher Education and Leadership Arizona State.
Chapter21 Entropy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
Diagnostic Testing David E. Meltzer University of Washington.
Time-dependent Interpretation of Correct Responses to Multiple-Choice Questions David E. Meltzer Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College Arizona State University.
Applying Physics Education Research to Teaching Thermodynamics David E. Meltzer Department of Physics University of Washington
The Value and the Challenge of Interdisciplinary Research in STEM Education David E. Meltzer Mary Lou Fulton Teachers College Arizona State University.
Early Identification of Introductory Major's Biology Students for Inclusion in an Academic Support Program BETHANY V. BOWLING and E. DAVID THOMPSON Department.
What’s Entropy? Student Understanding of Thermodynamics in an Introductory Physics Course* Warren Christensen Iowa State University PERG David Meltzer.
Solution to Questions 1 and 2: Students' Use of Rule-based Reasoning in the Context of Calorimetry and Thermal Phenomena* Ngoc-Loan P. Nguyen, Warren M.
Overview: Research on Student Learning of Thermal Physics David E. Meltzer Arizona State University Warren M. Christensen North Dakota State University.
Thermodynamics I Inter - Bayamon Lecture 7 Thermodynamics I MECN 4201 Professor: Dr. Omar E. Meza Castillo
Research on Student Learning and the Development of Effective Curriculum Warren Christensen Iowa State University February 8, 2007.
Addressing Students’ Reasoning Difficulties in Thermal Physics David E. Meltzer Department of Physics University of Washington Supported in part by NSF.
Student understanding of entropy and the second law of thermodynamics in an introductory physics course * Warren Christensen and David E. Meltzer Iowa.
Students’ Reasoning Regarding Fundamental Concepts in Thermodynamics: Implications for Instruction David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy.
Students’ Reasoning Regarding Electric Field Concepts Pre- and Post-Instruction David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy Iowa State University.
Students’ Reasoning About Entropy in Chemical and Physical Contexts David E. Meltzer Supported in part by U.S. National Science Foundation Grant Nos. DUE.
Physics 101: Lecture 28, Pg 1 Physics 101: Lecture 28 Thermodynamics II l Today’s lecture will cover Textbook Chapter Final Check Final Exam.
Investigating and Addressing Learning Difficulties in Thermodynamics David E. Meltzer Department of Physics University of Washington Seattle, Washington.
Physics 101: Lecture 28, Pg 1 Physics 101: Lecture 28 Thermodynamics II l Today’s lecture will cover Textbook Chapter
Physics 101 Lecture 11. Thermal Physics Thermodynamics.
Thermodynamics Part 2 The Second Law. The 2 nd law of thermodynamics All cyclical processes must expel heat to function. Thus no engines are 100% efficient.
Active-Learning Curricula for Thermodynamics in Physics and Chemistry David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy And Thomas J. Greenbowe Department.
David E. Meltzer and Matthew I. Jones Arizona State University
Probing Students' Mathematical Difficulties in Introductory Physics
Exploration of Physics Students' Mathematical Difficulties
University of Washington
The Laws of Thermodynamics
Chapter 10-3 The Second Law of Thermodynamics
Entropy (S) a measure of disorder
Review for Exam 2.
Laws of Thermodynamics
Complete chart for 18 minutes
Thermodynamics Part 2 The Second Law.
Presentation transcript:

Students' Ideas About Entropy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics* Warren Christensen and David E. Meltzer Iowa State University PERG *Supported in part by NSF grants #DUE and #PHY

Objectives: (a) To investigate students’ qualitative understanding of entropy, the second law of thermodynamics, and related topics in a second- semester calculus-based physics course*; (b) To develop research-based curricular materials In collaboration with John Thompson at the University of Maine on investigations in an upper- level undergraduate thermal physics course Thermodynamics Project *Previous work on related topics: M. Cochran (2002)

Fall 2004 Course Design Primarily traditional physics instruction –some use of a personal response system Thermodynamics was the last topic covered in the course Concepts concerning the 2 nd Law were discussed in the context of heat engines during one lecture, and in a separate 30 minute lecture on the entropy of a system

Pretest A series of four questions was administered to nearly all recitations during the first week of class to assess students’ understanding of concepts in calorimetry and thermodynamics. –Question 3: Change in entropy during a spontaneous process

3. For each of the following questions consider a system undergoing a naturally occurring (“spontaneous”) process. The system can exchange energy with its surroundings. A.During this process, does the entropy of the system [S system ] increase, decrease, or remain the same, or is this not determinable with the given information? Explain your answer. B.During this process, does the entropy of the surroundings [S surroundings ] increase, decrease, or remain the same, or is this not determinable with the given information? Explain your answer. C.During this process, does the entropy of the system plus the entropy of the surroundings [S system + S surroundings ] increase, decrease, or remain the same, or is this not determinable with the given information? Explain your answer. Spontaneous Process Question

3. For each of the following questions consider a system undergoing a naturally occurring (“spontaneous”) process. The system can exchange energy with its surroundings. A.During this process, does the entropy of the system [S system ] increase, decrease, or remain the same, or is this not determinable with the given information? Explain your answer. B.During this process, does the entropy of the surroundings [S surroundings ] increase, decrease, or remain the same, or is this not determinable with the given information? Explain your answer. C.During this process, does the entropy of the system plus the entropy of the surroundings [S system + S surroundings ] increase, decrease, or remain the same, or is this not determinable with the given information? Explain your answer. Spontaneous Process Question

Responses to Entropy Question 2004 Introductory Physics Pretest Results (N=179) IncreaseDecrease Remain the same Not determinable S system 30%20%9%38% S surroundings 26%18%9%40% S total 15%1%72%8% Blank responses omitted from the sample

Pretest Results [N = 179] 72% of students indicated that the total entropy (system + surroundings) would remain the same 34% of student responses were consistent with some sort of “conservation” principle –e.g., A. Increases, B. Decreases, and so C. Stays the same

15% of students indicated that the total entropy (system + surroundings) would increase BUT… Only 4% gave a correct response for all three parts Pretest Results [N = 179]

Final Exam Question [N = 539] A question similar to the pretest was administered on the final exam.

Final Exam Question [N = 539] A. 54% B. 5% C. 7% D. 4% E. 30%

Pre- and Post-Instruction Comparison The results of the final-exam question are most directly comparable to the responses on part C of the pretest: C.During this process, does the entropy of the system plus the entropy of the surroundings [S system + S surroundings ] increase, decrease, or remain the same, or is this not determinable with the given information? Explain your answer. S TOT stays the same PretestFinal Exam 72%54% S TOT increases PretestFinal Exam 15%30% Correct answer

Interview Data [N = 8] We conducted hour-long interviews with student volunteers after the completion of the entire course. Students were asked to respond to a series of questions focusing on the properties of entropy in irreversible processes, the concept of entropy as a state function, and the second-law constraint on maximum efficiency of a heat engine.

Final Exam Question

S TOT stays the same PretestFinal Exam 72%54% S TOT increases PretestFinal Exam 15%30% 5 out of 8 students (63%) gave the correct answer (S TOT increases) on the final exam question during interviews 3 students specifically stated that I, II, and IV were all possible answers, but chose “II and IV only” since they felt it was the best option offered Full-class response

General Observations Students associated entropy with common textbook nomenclature, such as disorder (N = 3) and randomness (N = 3). 6 out of 8 students made a connection between heat transfer and entropy at some point during the interview. Previously reported 1 st Law misconceptions* were observed and did, in some instances, contribute to incorrect responses concerning entropy. *Loverude, Kautz, and Heron (2002); Meltzer (2004)

Comparison between Introductory and Upper-level Students A nearly identical pretest was administered in an upper-level thermal physics course

3. For each of the following questions consider a system undergoing a naturally occurring (“spontaneous”) process. The system can exchange energy with its surroundings. A.During this process, does the entropy of the system [S system ] increase, decrease, or remain the same, or is this not determinable with the given information? Explain your answer. B.During this process, does the entropy of the surroundings [S surroundings ] increase, decrease, or remain the same, or is this not determinable with the given information? Explain your answer. C.During this process, does the entropy of the system plus the entropy of the surroundings [S system + S surroundings ] increase, decrease, or remain the same, or is this not determinable with the given information? Explain your answer. Spontaneous Process Question [Introductory-Course Version]

Responses to Entropy Question [Correct Responses] 2004 Introductory Physics (Pretest) (N=179) 2004 Thermal Physics (Pretest) (N=12) 2004 Thermal Physics (Post-Instruction Interviews) (N=17) correct with correct explanation S system 38%50%76%47% S surroundings 40%50%88%76% S total 15%92%100%

Responses to Entropy Question [Correct Responses] 2004 Introductory Physics (Pretest) (N=179) 2004 Thermal Physics (Pretest) (N=12) 2004 Thermal Physics (Post-Instruction Interviews) (N=17) correct with correct explanation S system 38%50%76%47% S surroundings 40%50%88%76% S total 15%92%100%

Responses to Entropy Question [Correct Responses] 2004 Introductory Physics (Pretest) (N=179) 2004 Thermal Physics (Pretest) (N=12) 2004 Thermal Physics (Post-Instruction Interviews) (N=17) correct with correct explanation S system 38%50%76%47% S surroundings 40%50%88%76% S total 15%92%100%

Responses to Entropy Question [Correct Responses] 2004 Introductory Physics (Pretest) (N=179) 2004 Thermal Physics (Pretest) (N=12) 2004 Thermal Physics (Post-Instruction Interviews) (N=17) correct with correct explanation S system 38%50%76%47% S surroundings 40%50%88%76% S total 15%92%100%

Conclusions Students appear to have an idea that the total entropy during a natural process remains unchanged (“conserved”?) Student confusion concerning the relationships among S system, S surroundings, and S total during a naturally occuring process seems very resistant to instruction