Session 3248

Testing for Prerequisites in Thermodynamics as an Assessment Tool

Maurice Bluestein
Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis

Abstract

At Indiana University - Purdue University, Indianapolis (IUPUI), bachelor degree

students in mechanical engineering technology are required to take two thermodynamics courses.
The second, usually taken in the upper level years, has prerequisites of calculus and the first
thermodynamics course. We have found it necessary in all thermodynamics II courses taught
over the past ten years to review calculus and thermodynamics I extensively. Thus we have set
out to quantify how much of the prerequisites are remembered by giving a brief, in-class, closed
book test on the first day of class in thermodynamics II. The test consists of multiple choice
questions on simple differentiation and integration (six questions) plus thermodynamics (four
questions). The tests are taken anonymously to relieve anxiety and to insure a true measure of
what the students know as a group. The results of these tests will be reported in this paper with a
commentary on any differences seen between fall and spring semesters. The overall results are
not encouraging: no class has scored above 50 percent, with a three semester average of 46.1
percent.

I. Introduction

The current emphasis on outcomes-based assessment processes in engineering technology

programs has been spearheaded by the TAC/ABET accreditation agency1. Most engineering
technology schools recognize the need to develop an assessment program if they are to maintain
accreditation. An important criterion in any such program is the demonstration of appropriate
mastery of the knowledge, techniques, skills and modern tools of the students’ disciplines. Most
programs attempt to demonstrate this within the learning objectives of a particular course. Rarely is
an attempt made to verify such mastery of the prerequisite(s) for that particular course. At IUPUI,
we have been doing this for the past three semesters, going on a fourth, in our Thermodynamics II
course.

The assessment of prior knowledge and understanding is an accepted element of classroom

assessment techniques. In particular, a Background Knowledge Probe has been recognized as an
effective tool to establish the appropriate level at which to begin instruction2. Students enrolled in
Thermodynamics II are given a 10 question multiple-choice test on the first day of classes. The test
covers material from Thermodynamics I and Calculus I, the two prerequisites for Thermodynamics
II. This test has been utilized to develop the appropriate content of Thermodynamics II following
Page 6.976.1

Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Engineering Education
accepted classroom assessment techniques3.

This paper describes the test and the results thereof. This is an ongoing process, and the material to
be presented at the 2001 Annual Meeting of the ASEE will include the results of a fourth semester
of testing.

II. Methodology

The syllabus for our first thermodynamics course is structured around the first and second laws,
continuity, processes involving steam and ideal gases, the basics of heat power cycles, refrigeration
and heat transfer. The second course emphasizes analysis of the heat power cycles, efficiency,
components of thermodynamic systems and psychrometrics. In addition, calculus is utilized in
Thermodynamics II to evaluate the work done in complex thermodynamic processes. Much more
could be covered in Thermodynamics II if the students had better retention of the material of
Thermodynamics I.

To gauge retention, a questionnaire was prepared and has been given to the Thermodynamics II
students on the first day of class of the semester, beginning in the fall, 1999. The format is multiple
choice and students are asked to complete it anonymously in five minutes. This ten-question test
includes six questions on basic differential and integral calculus and four on basic thermodynam-
ics. The test is shown in Figure 1. According to the literature2, the test should include one question
most students are certain to answer correctly and at least one other that is judged to be more
difficult. This we have endeavored to do, although we do not regard any of the questions as
particularly difficult.

The tests are collected and scored by the instructor. Correct answers are given immediately after
collection of the papers. On the next day of class, the score results are given to the students. They
are thereby encouraged to review the material. The textbook used for Thermodynamics II contains
the answers to the four problems posed in the test.

III. Results and Discussion

Because of the deadline for submittal of this paper, we are only able to provide results through the
fall, 2000, semester. For the presentation of this paper at the Annual ASEE meeting in June, 2000,
the results from the spring, 2000, semester will be included. At that time, the results of the two fall
and two spring semesters will be compared.

Forty-one students have taken the test through the fall, 2000, semester. Test results are shown in
Table 1. The results indicate that students could answer less than half of the questions correctly.
They seemed to do better with differential than integral calculus, and better with calculus than with
thermodynamics. Table 2 shows the breakdown of results by prerequisite subject and semester.
One can conclude that the students tend to remember basic calculus better than basic
thermodynamics. It may also be concluded that time has not improved the results; rather, it would
Page 6.976.2

Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Engineering Education
appear that test results are going down with time. We have felt that the word would get around for
the students to expect this test and would brush up on the subject matter, resulting in an
improvement in the scores. Since the test is not graded, there may be little incentive, however, to
do well on it.

It was also expected that spring semester scores would be better than fall semester scores since
some spring students would have just completed a prerequisite course just weeks before. Since our
department offers its thermodynamics courses on an alternating time basis (Thermodynamics I
during the day in the spring, in the evening in the fall; Thermodynamics II during the day in the
fall, in the evening in the spring), many students are able to take the two courses in consecutive
semesters. Because both courses in thermodynamics are felt to be among the most challenging in
the curriculum, some students prefer to take them in succession in an effort to retain the material
better. While the spring, 2000, semester shows the best scores of the three tests, these are not
significantly different than those of the other two semesters.

Another factor may be the usage of the textbook. In previous studies4,5, it was found that textbooks
are underutilized by our typical technology student. It should also be interesting to determine what
percentage of students keep their textbooks after completion of the Thermodynamics I course.
Only 71 percent of students surveyed in the studies cited above for all courses responded that they
keep their textbook "always’’ or ’’usually".

While admittedly these results may be considered anecdotal because of the number of students
taking the test, they are still cause for concern. These prerequisite courses are important to the
material in the advanced thermodynamics course. Also, ABET, the accrediting body for
engineering technology, requires calculus usage in advanced courses like Thermodynamics II.
Even though all students who participated in this test passed the prerequisite courses, they did not
exhibit sufficient retention of the material.

IV. Conclusions

Our initial results indicate that students in an advanced thermodynamics course are not sufficiently
competent in the prerequisites for this course. This calls into question the validity of relying on
students passing the prerequisite courses for admission into the advanced course. Considerable
time must then be spent on review of more basic concepts. Would this be the same result if such a
test were administered in other advanced courses?

We intend to continue such testing in Thermodynamics II and to report our results in the future. It
is suggested that testing of prerequisite material be done at other institutions to see if there is a
relationship to the type of student at those schools. We are also interested in understanding the
reason for the problem of retention of prerequisite material. By comparing the results of testing in
the fall versus spring semesters we may be able to assess the time factor in retention since many
students take Thermodynamics II in the spring immediately following their taking
Thermodynamics I in the fall.
Page 6.976.3

Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Engineering Education
Bibliography
1. Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology. Proposed Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Technology
Programs, Baltimore, MD, 1999.
2. Angelo, T.A. and Cross, K.P. Classroom Assessment Techniques, 2nd ed. Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1993.
3. Angelo, T.A (Ed.)., Classroom Research: Early Lessons from Success. In New Directions for Teaching and
Learning, no. 46. San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass, 1991.
4. Bluestein, M. & Borden, V.M.H. Textbook Usage by Engineering Technology Students. In Proc. of Illinois-
Indiana Section Conf., ASEE, 8-20, 1997.
5. Bluestein, M. & Borden, V.M.H. The Pitfalls of Relying on Textbooks in Technology Courses. In Proc. of 8th
Annual Meeting, Technology-Based Engineering Education Consortium, Long Beach, CA, 1996.

MAURICE BLUESTEIN
Maurice Bluestein is Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering Technology at Indiana University-Purdue
University Indianapolis. He received a Ph.D. in biomedical engineering from Northwestern University in 1967. He
spent 25 years in industry in a variety of executive positions before he turned to teaching full-time in 1989. He is the
author of over 30 papers, has received numerous grants, and has authored a revision to a textbook on thermodynamics.

Page 6.976.4

Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Engineering Education
 REVIEW TEST OF BASIC CALCULUS AND THERMODYNAMICS

Circle the correct answer of those following each question.

1. The integral of x dx is:

1 2x x2 x2/2
2. The integral of (1/x) dx is:
x 2x ln x x2
3. The integral of 6x2 dx is:
2x3 6x3 6x 3x2
2
4. The derivative of 2x is:
2x dx 4x dx 4x3 dx x3 dx
5. The derivative of 2 ln x is:
2x dx (2/x) dx (1/x) dx 2 ln x dx
2
6. The integral of x dx from x=1 to x=3 is:
26/3 -26/3 26 none of these
7. Which of the following is a statement of the first law of thermodynamics?
Q = mc(∆T) W = ∫ p dV Q - W = ∆U all of these
8. Which of the following is a definition of enthalpy?
Q/T Q–W mcp 7 U + pV
9. The typical electric power plant relies on which energy conversion cycle?
Brayton Otto Rankine Diesel
10. Which of the following expresses the second law of thermodynamics?:
(a) Work cannot be completely converted into heat.
(b) Heat cannot be completely converted into work.
(c) Energy can be neither created nor destroyed in a system.
(d) The rate of mass flowing into a system equals the mass flow rate leaving.

Figure 1. Retention Questionnaire Used in Thermodynamics II.

Page 6.976.5

Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Engineering Education
 TEST RESULTS FROM 41 STUDENTS

Question Correct Answer No. Correct Pct. Correct

1 x2/2 16 39.0

2 ln x 27 65.9

3 2x3 21 51.2

4 4x dx 30 73.2

5 (2/x) dx 20 48.8

6 26/3 9 22.0

7 Q - W = ∆U 22 53.7

8 U + pV 16 39.0

9 Rankine 22 53.7

10 (b) 6 14.6

Average Number of Correct Answers: 18.9

Average Percent Correct Answers: 46.1

Table 1. Test Results by Question.

Page 6.976.6

Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Engineering Education
 TEST RESULTS BY SEMESTER AND SUBJECT

% correct % correct % correct

Semester No. Students Calculus Ques. Thermo. Ques. All Questions

Fall 1999 15 50.0 41.7 46.7

Spring 2000 10 56.7 40.0 50.0

Fall 2000 16 45.8 39.1 43.1

__________________________________________________________________

Totals 41 50.0 40.2 46.1

Table 2. Test Results by Semester and Subject.

Page 6.976.7

Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Engineering Education