Thinking Outside the Box: Understanding Students Thinking on Statics in Mechanics

Katherine E. Welsh; Lorena S. Grundy; Brian P. Self

Download Paper | Permalink

Conference: 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Location: Portland, Oregon
Publication Date: June 23, 2024
Start Date: June 23, 2024
End Date: July 12, 2024
Conference Session: Assessing Conceptual Thinking about Engineering Mechanics
Tagged Division: Mechanics Division (MECHS)
Permanent URL: https://peer.asee.org/48155

Request a correction

Paper Authors

biography

Katherine E. Welsh United States Air Force Academy

visit author page

Captain Katherine E. Welsh is an instructor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the United States Air Force Academy (USAFA). She has instructed the Fundamentals of Mechanics course, a unique course that teaches mechanics concepts to all students, including those who are not pursuing engineering degrees. Katie received her Active Duty commission from the Air Force Reserve Officer Training Corps detachment 150 at the University of Florida in Gainesville, Florida. She graduated cum laude from the University of Florida with a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering. Captain Welsh earned her M.S. in Systems Engineering from the Air Force Institute of Technology at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio. Her research interests include concept based learning and design of autonomous systems.

visit author page

biography

Lorena S. Grundy Tufts University orcid.org/0000-0001-7706-2216

visit author page

Lorena Grundy is an ASEE eFellows postdoctoral fellow at Tufts University, where she works with Milo Koretsky to study chemical engineering education. She received her BSE from Princeton in 2017 and PhD from UC Berkeley in 2022, both in chemical engineering.

visit author page

biography

Brian P. Self California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo

visit author page

Brian Self obtained his B.S. and M.S. degrees in Engineering Mechanics from Virginia Tech, and his Ph.D. in Bioengineering from the University of Utah. He worked in the Air Force Research Laboratories before teaching at the U.S. Air Force Academy for for seven years. Brian has taught in the Mechanical Engineering Department at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo since 2006. Dr Self’s engineering education interests include collaborating on the Dynamics Concept Inventory, developing model-eliciting activities in mechanical engineering courses, inquiry-based learning in mechanics, and design projects to help promote adapted physical activities. Other professional interests include aviation physiology and biomechanics. He is a Fellow of the American Society for Engineering Education and the Aerospace Medical Association.

visit author page

Download Paper | Permalink

Abstract

Student-centered pedagogy requires that instructors engage deeply with student thinking, as opposed to didactically prescribing one correct problem-solving algorithm. In this work, we explore student understanding of friction forces in the context of static equilibrium in a mechanics class, a course with which students often struggle. To improve the learning experience of these students, we first had a large set of students (~200) explain their answers to a statics concept question. We then will use a think aloud protocol to study how students address a problem with multiple solution paths, and how they assess their own thinking. Specifically, we ask: 1. What patterns emerge in student approaches to the problem? 2. How do different student approaches interact with their assessment of their thinking? Study participants are students in a combined statics and deformable bodies course that elect to participate and are currently taking or have completed introductory physics. They will be asked a question about friction and equilibrium affectionally referred to as “the box problem,” which asks what happens to friction force when a person holding a box at rest applies additional force to the sides of the box. The interview begins with a different mechanics practice problem to get the student comfortable with the interview process, followed by the question of interest. Students explain their line of thinking using a think aloud protocol, select their answer, and provide their confidence level in that answer. The interviewer asks follow-up questions based off their responses to better understand their thinking, and asks if their confidence level or answer has changed after follow-up questions. Responses will be recorded on an iPad using audio and screen capture recording and analyzed for common themes. This experiment expands upon previous work using the same “box problem” by introducing a think aloud protocol to better understand the thinking of students in the answers they provide. Previous work found that students who attempt to solve the problem using common friction equations are more likely to answer incorrectly but are also more confident in their answers. The analysis of think aloud data identifies themes in other student problem-solving approaches, leading to recommendations for instructors to better engage with student thinking and prompt diverse solution paths.

Citation
Format

Welsh, K. E., & Grundy, L. S., & Self, B. P. (2024, June), Thinking Outside the Box: Understanding Students Thinking on Statics in Mechanics Paper presented at 2024 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Portland, Oregon. https://peer.asee.org/48155

TY - CPAPER
AB - Student-centered pedagogy requires that instructors engage deeply with student thinking, as opposed to didactically prescribing one correct problem-solving algorithm. In this work, we explore student understanding of friction forces in the context of static equilibrium in a mechanics class, a course with which students often struggle. To improve the learning experience of these students, we first had a large set of students (~200) explain their answers to a statics concept question. We then will use a think aloud protocol to study how students address a problem with multiple solution paths, and how they assess their own thinking. Specifically, we ask:
1. What patterns emerge in student approaches to the problem?
2. How do different student approaches interact with their assessment of their thinking?
Study participants are students in a combined statics and deformable bodies course that elect to participate and are currently taking or have completed introductory physics. They will be asked a question about friction and equilibrium affectionally referred to as “the box problem,” which asks what happens to friction force when a person holding a box at rest applies additional force to the sides of the box. The interview begins with a different mechanics practice problem to get the student comfortable with the interview process, followed by the question of interest. Students explain their line of thinking using a think aloud protocol, select their answer, and provide their confidence level in that answer. The interviewer asks follow-up questions based off their responses to better understand their thinking, and asks if their confidence level or answer has changed after follow-up questions. Responses will be recorded on an iPad using audio and screen capture recording and analyzed for common themes.
This experiment expands upon previous work using the same “box problem” by introducing a think aloud protocol to better understand the thinking of students in the answers they provide. Previous work found that students who attempt to solve the problem using common friction equations are more likely to answer incorrectly but are also more confident in their answers. The analysis of think aloud data identifies themes in other student problem-solving approaches, leading to recommendations for instructors to better engage with student thinking and prompt diverse solution paths.

AU - Katherine E. Welsh
AU - Lorena S. Grundy
AU - Brian P. Self
CY - Portland, Oregon
DA - 2024/06/23
PB - ASEE Conferences
TI - Thinking Outside the Box: Understanding Students Thinking on Statics in Mechanics
UR - https://peer.asee.org/48155
ER -