Printer Friendly

Correcting student misconceptions about the cause and prevention of electric shock.

The physics of electric shock is a topic that is addressed in every general physics text. Invariably, the discussion begins with the effects in humans of externally induced internal electric currents of various magnitudes. The texts are fairly good at describing the physiological effects of these currents, i.e. interference with essential nerve processes that can produce convulsive muscle action, ventricular fibrillation, and respiratory arrest. It is made clear that these internal currents are quite small relative to the currents found in household electric appliances. Most texts then discuss strategies that are employed to reduce the danger of electric shock, i.e. polarized plugs, three-wire circuits with the grounding wire and plug, and ground fault circuit interrupters. However, general physics books under-emphasize two important things when discussing electrical safety. These two things are the magnitude of the voltage difference that will produce a lethal shock and how one can prevent the voltage difference from being applied across the human body. In an informal, admittedly unscientific, survey of well-educated acquaintances, it appears that student misconceptions about electrical safety carry over to adulthood. Comments such as "it's the current that kills, not the voltage," a half-truth demonstrating limited knowledge; "the voltage from a car battery is lethal," a false statement; and "you have to be grounded to get shocked," another untruth; coming from respected college graduates in technical fields, make one wonder if the practical aspects of electrical safety are accurately presented in the textbooks. In this presentation we will suggest some ways of correcting these misconceptions, beginning with a complete definition of electric shock followed by demonstrations illustrating electrical safety.

* Tansil, J.E. Department of Physics & Engineering Physics, Southeast Missouri State University.
COPYRIGHT 2005 Missouri Academy of Science
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2005, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Physics, Senior Division
Author:Manivannan, Kandiah
Publication:Transactions of the Missouri Academy of Science
Article Type:Abstract
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Jan 1, 2005
Words:281
Previous Article:Conceptual change of K-8 science teachers in Force and Motion.
Next Article:Jamaican medical clinic: pre-medical service learning experience.
Topics:


Related Articles
Physics and Engineering.
CalMaeth: An Interactive Learning System Focussing on the Diagnosis of Mathematical Misconceptions.
Constructivism in Computer Science Education [1].
LETTERS: THANKS FOR SEEING NEED FOR DEVICES.
BODY, CLUB MUST BE IN SYNC.
Exploring how students learn organic chemistry. (The scholarship of teaching and learning).
Revision of prerequisites: ICT tools.
Ability and critical thinking as predictors of change in students' psychological misconceptions.
Language and second teaching in physics learning.
They know the math, but the words get in the way.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2014 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters