Computer Simulations vs.Physical Experiments: A Gender Comparison of Implementation Methods for Inquiry-Based Heat Transfer Activities

Fundamental concepts in chemical engineering such as rate versus the amount of heat transferred and thermal radiation, can be difficult for students to understand. While prior research has found that one way to facilitate conceptual understanding and alter misconceptions is with inquiry-based activities, there may be differing outcomes based on their method of implementation. This quasi-experimental study compared two implementation methods for inquiry-based activities to address misconceptions about thermal radiation and rate versus amount of heat transferred with undergraduate engineering majors. One group of participants used computer simulations while the other group primarily did physical experiments. Changes in conceptual understanding were assessed using the Heat and Energy Concept Inventory (HECI; [21], [22]) and two of its sub-tests: Rate versus Amount and Radiation. Both implementation groups sampled were predominantly composed of white males with self-reported GPAs of 3.0 and higher. Findings showed that participants who used physical experiments to learn the concepts had significantly higher mean post-test scores on the total HECI and their respective sub-tests than those who used computer simulations. This same pattern was seen with concept area and gender. Introduction and Background Heat and temperature concepts are found at all levels in the science curricula [9] and are well-known for creating conceptual difficulties for learners [28]. Carlton [1] found many students described temperature as “...a measure of how hot or cold something feels” (p. 102). Others found students believed there is no difference between heat and temperature or that heat is a form of energy [6], [7], [25], [29]. While it could be hypothesized that the more coursework taken, the greater the conceptual understanding, Jasen and Oberem [9] found that the number of courses/semesters of physical science taken had “minimal influence” (p. 892) on students’ abilities to correctly answer questions on thermal equilibrium and heat transfer. Conceptual issues are not limited to the pre-college grades. Engineering undergraduates have also been found to have difficulty understanding the concepts of heat and temperature [16], [20], [24]. For example, Prince and Vigeant [20] discovered that many engineering undergraduates considered heat and temperature equal entities. Self and others [24] found that almost 30% of chemical and mechanical engineering seniors could not, “...logically distinguish between temperature and energy in simple engineering systems and processes” (p. S2G-1). This can be due to preconceived beliefs built on what have been labeled misconceptions [26]. Misconceptions about circumstances affecting the rate and amount of heat transferred have been observed in engineering undergraduates [18], [19]. Misconceptions about thermal radiation have also been documented [8], [18], [19]. Typical methods of teaching generally fail to alter misconceptions [11], [24]. “It is very difficult to repair many of these robust misconceptions through simple lecturing...” [24, p. S2G6]. Previous research has found that inquiry-based physical experiments can increase students’ understanding of difficult engineering concepts [31]. Despite the positive outcomes from handson inquiry-based activities, there may be obstacles to their implementation. Some engineering programs are unable to implement inquiry-based experiments due to time or financial constraints [12]. Wright and Sundal [32] found multiple barriers to the use of more innovative pedagogies in their survey of faculty from math, science, and technology faculty at 30 institutions. Among those were the lack of curriculum modification to encourage innovative methodologies and lack of money to support training and assessment of new methods. More recently, data collected by the AIChE Concept Warehouse [10] on five versions of inquiry-based activities to teach radiation and rate versus amount concepts, found that faculty preferred the simulations over physical experiments by a ratio of two to one. While prior research has found that one way to alter these misconceptions is with inquirybased activities, there may be differing outcomes based on their method of implementation. For example, some research has indicated computer simulations may be able to more clearly demonstrate a concept than a physical experiment [4] because simulations highlight important evidence and delete confusing information [30]. Other research has found no significant differences in the conceptual understanding of undergraduate preservice teachers learning about temperature or changes in temperature with either physical or virtual manipulatives [33]. Both computer simulations and physical experiments have been shown to be effective when used in science courses [3]. Additionally, when physical and virtual labs were used together to learn about heat and temperature, students outperformed those doing just a physical lab [34]. Other factors may influence the effectiveness of instructional methods, including lab group composition and gender. Even with effective implementation methods, there can also be differences in learning based on the composition of lab groups. For example, Ding, Bosker, and Harskamp [5] found that females in single-gender dyads significantly outperformed females in mixed-gender dyads. For males, this pattern was not evident. One factor that could impact females’ performances in lab groups is self-efficacy. MacPhee, Farro, and Canetto [13] discovered that when starting college, females tended to regard themselves as academically weaker than males. However, by graduation their self-efficacy increased and was comparable to that of males. Another factor that could influence females’ performance is their prior knowledge, specifically differences in the foundational science courses they have taken prior to college [17]. Purpose of the Study Students have difficulty understanding concepts related to heat, temperature, and thermal radiation. Inquiry-based pedagogies that can foster the learning of these difficult concepts are needed. Physical experiments and computer simulations are two alternatives with the potential to increase students’ conceptual understanding. While physical experiments develop authentic laboratory skills and highlight the challenges involved in scientific research, computer simulations can emphasize key information, control outside variables, and reduce distracting aspects [3]. But, are both equally effective in promoting undergraduate engineering students’ conceptual learning? Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of computer simulations with primarily physical experiments on undergraduate engineering students’ understanding of rate versus amount and thermal radiation concepts. While some previous research has found that students using computer simulations outperformed those doing physical experiments (e.g., [4]), other research has discovered no significant differences in the conceptual understanding of students using the two different pedagogies [33]. Given these findings, more research is warranted. A secondary purpose of this study was to determine whether computer simulations and physical experiments would be equally effective with different heat transfer concepts and by gender. Is there a difference in the students’ level of understanding of rate versus amount of heat transferred and thermal radiation by method of instruction? Does one pedagogy work better for one concept? Does the effectiveness of the modes of instruction vary by gender?