(213d) Improving Conceptual Knowledge and Retention in Introduction to Engineering Thermodynamics

By the end of our sophomore level Introduction to Engineering Thermodynamics course (CBEN 210), students should be able to demonstrate both procedural and conceptual knowledge. Procedural knowledge is the ability to solve domain problems and usually yields a final numerical answer.[1] Conceptual knowledge is understanding of the principles governing a domain.[2] Data collected over the course of two years in CBEN 210 showed that students consistently performed better on procedural problems than conceptual problems. Conceptual knowledge can be more challenging because it requires organizing key principles, like content experts, and it is frequently coupled with misconceptions, which are hard to undo.[3] In this study, we identified three conceptual topics that students performed poorly on and initiated three in-class interventions to address the deficiency. The three topic areas were isenthalpic flow through a valve, isentropic work, and entropy generation. The interventions were all interactive activities that tied the thermodynamic concept to a real-word application. For example, isenthalpic flow through a valve was examined by the students as a technique to measure steam quality in a process line. The impact of these interventions will be measured with a concept inventory exam administered 8 -12 months following enrollment in CBEN 210. Since our chemical engineering students take a second course in thermodynamics, their ability to retain knowledge beyond the end of the sophomore level class is important. The test group contains approximately 70 students and will be compared to a control group from the previous year that did not receive the interventions. Correlations between thermodynamic knowledge retention and CBEN 210 performance, class timing (8 or 12 months), and other factors such as GPA will be examined.

[1] R. Taraban et al, J. Eng. Ed., 96, 57, 2007.

[2] R. A. Streveler et al, J. Eng. Ed., 97, 279, 2008

[3] P. N. Van Meter et al, J Eng. Ed., 105, 245, 2016.