An Investigation of Students' Conceptual Understanding in Related Sophomore to Graduate‐Level Engineering and Mechanics Courses

Abstract

Interviews were conducted with students from a sophomore‐level mechanics of materials class, a sophomore/junior‐level structures class, a senior‐level steel design class and a graduate‐level advanced steel design class to investigate students' conceptual understanding of bending and normal stress. The graduate students generally demonstrated higher computational skill and confidence but they were not significantly different from the sophomores in terms of conceptual understanding. Interestingly, the seniors showed markedly lower confidence in their ability to solve the problems posed in the interviews. Common difficulties include a conceptual definition of stress and reasoning involving the normal stresses developed under bending.

Refinement of a Concept Inventory to Assess Conceptual Understanding in Civil Engineering Fluid Mechanics

“…Acquiring conceptual knowledge has been described as more than just memorizing facts, but indicates that the learner knows something. For instance, Montfort et al 2 describes that conceptual knowledge is "internal" and relates knowledge with intuition, stating that "you don't remember something you understand conceptually, it is just true" (pg. 111).…”

“…For instance Montfort et al 2 presents that conceptual understanding requires that students grasp the underlying significance of their computations, rather than simple demonstration of their abilities to complete steps. Educational practices common in engineering, such as problem-based lectures, homework, and exams, have been shown to improve students' abilities to complete calculations, while true conceptual understanding is often more difficult to achieve 2,22 .…”

“…Piaget 24 proposed that knowledge is organized into different categories (or schema), and that when students encounter new concepts during learning, they must either assign them to existing categories or reconfigure categories to accommodate the new concepts. One viewpoint is that reclassifying a concept among categories is what defines conceptual change 2,25 . Misconceptions, which are deeply-held, prior conflicting beliefs, can make conceptual change particularly difficult 10 .…”

“…As a result, civil engineers may need to deviate from well-established design templates and heuristics to develop truly innovative designs. To accomplish this feat, engineers must possess a deep conceptual understanding of engineering fundamentals so that they are able to critically analyze new scenarios and create tailored solutions 2 . Indeed, Streveler and colleagues 3 , summarizing the work of Sheppard et al 4 , state that the practice of engineering involves three components: (1) problem solving, which includes processes used to define and solve problems, (2) specialized knowledge that facilitates problem solving, and (3) integration of Page 26.1322.2 problem-solving processes and knowledge.…”

“…Research has shown that despite passing grades, many engineering students lack a true understanding of subject material in a variety of courses 2 . Given that literature in educational psychology suggests that students construct knowledge as a result of experiences and interactions with others [6][7][8][9] , engineering educators are turning to more engaging teaching and learning practices to improve students' knowledge networks, as well as identify and correct misconceptions 10 .…”