Traffic Signal System Misconceptions across three Cohorts

Abstract

Both research evidence and theories of situated knowledge suggest that students are not prepared for the engineering workforce upon graduation from engineering programs. Concept inventory results from diverse fields also suggest that students do not understand fundamental concepts of engineering, mathematics, and science. These concerns may result from different knowledge deficiencies: one from a lack of conceptual understanding and the other from a lack of applied knowledge. In an attempt to explain the patterns in misconceptions across three cohorts, the research goals of this paper are to identify misconceptions (knowledge about phenomena that are persistent and incorrect) related to traffic signal operations and design across the cohorts of novice engineering students, expert engineering students, and practicing engineers. Results indicate three misconception patterns (decreasing, increasing, and no change) across the three cohorts. The pattern of decreasing misconception can be explained by a traditional model of learning that suggests improved understanding with additional instruction and student time on task. The pattern of increasing misconception appeared for concepts that are particularly complex and confounding; practicing engineers produce much more complex answers that are mostly correct but include leaps and speculations not yet proven in the literature. Misconception frequencies that stay the same tend to include topics that do not have required national standards or that are buried in automated processes. The process of identifying and documenting misconceptions that exist across these cohorts is a necessary step in the development of a data-driven curriculum. An example of a conceptual exercise developed from four misconceptions identified in this study is also demonstrated.