2025 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition
Using Learning Maps and Bloom’s Taxonomy to Develop a New Instrument to Assess Knowledge Transfer from Physics to Statics Courses.
Presented at Mechanics Division (MECHS) Technical Session 6
This paper presents the design and analysis of a pilot problem set deployed to engineering students to assess their retention of physics knowledge at the start of a statics course. The problem set was developed using the NSF-IUSE (grant #2315492) Learning Map project (LMap) and piloted in the spring and fall of 2024. The LMap process is rooted in the Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation (ADDIE) model [1] and Backward Design [2,3], extending these principles to course sequences to align learning outcomes, assessments, and instructional practices. The primary motivation for this problem set (Statics Knowledge Inventory, SKI) was to evaluate students' understanding and retention of physics concepts at the beginning of a statics course. The SKI includes a combination of multiple-choice questions (MCQ) and procedural problems, filling a gap in widely-used concept inventories for physics and statics, such as the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) and Statics Concept Inventory (SCI), which evaluate learning gains within a course, rather than knowledge retention across courses. Using the LMap analysis and instructor consultations, we identified overlapping concepts and topics between Physics and Statics courses, referred to here as “interdependent learning outcomes” (ILOs). The problem set includes 15 questions—eight MCQs and seven procedural problems. Unlike most concept inventories, procedural problems were added to provide insight into students’ problem-solving approach and conceptual understanding. These problems require students to perform calculations, demonstrate their work, and assess their conceptual understanding of key topics, and allow the instructors to assess essential prerequisite skills like drawing free-body diagrams (FBDs), computing forces and moments, and performing basic vector calculation and unit conversions. Problems were selected and adapted from physics and statics textbooks, supplemented by instructor-designed questions to ensure full coverage of the ILOs. We used the revised 2D Bloom’s Taxonomy [4] and a 3D representation of it [5] to classify each problem within a 6x4 matrix (six cognitive processes x four knowledge dimensions). This classification provided instructors and students with a clear understanding of the cognitive level required for each problem. Additionally, we measured students’ perceived confidence and difficulty in each problem using two questions on a 3-point Likert scale. The first iteration of the problem set was administered to 19 students in the spring 2024 statics course. After analyzing their performance, we identified areas for improvement and revised the problem set, removing repetitive MCQs and restructuring the procedural problems into scaffolded, multi-part questions with associated rubrics for evaluation. The revised version, consisting of five MCQs and six procedural problems, was deployed to 136 students in the fall 2024 statics course. A randomly selected subset of student answers from the second iteration was graded and analyzed to compare with the first. This analysis will inform future efforts to evaluate knowledge retention and transfer in key skills across sequential courses. In collaboration with research teams developing concept inventories for mechanics courses, we aim to integrate these procedural problems into future inventories.
-
Dr. Priyantha Wijesinghe University of Vermont [biography]
-
Varuni A. Seneviratne University of Vermont [biography]
-
Larry R Medsker The George Washington University [biography]
-
Marlee Ottati University of Vermont [biography]
The full paper will be available to logged in and registered conference attendees once the conference starts on June 22, 2025, and to all visitors after the conference ends on June 25, 2025