Miners' Misconceptions of Circuits as a Factor Influencing Underground Mining Accidents

Cognitive representations and misconceptions of flow through circuits is an area which has received little attention from science educators, cognitive psychologists, or accident investigators. Misconceptions are also called Aristotelian thinking. They involve a person using primitive unscientific ways of reasoning to make decisions about events (Piaget, 1929; Nussbaum & Novick, 1982; McCloskey, 1983). The use of such primitive concepts leads to errors in reasoning about scientific and technical problems. The existence of misconceptions is well documented among children, adolescents, and adults involved in learning science concepts (Piaget, 1929; Cole & Raven, 1969; Clement, 1982; Mistrell, 1982; McDermott, 1984; Richardson, 1987). Concepts of flow through circuits are important because miners' conceptual errors about these aspects may be, in part, responsible for two fatal mine disasters. On at least two separate occasions, methane gas explosions occurred in underground mines when separate ventilation systems were connected (Elam, Fuller, Carter, Cavanaugh, Fesak & Painter, 1983; Fesak & Cavanaugh, 1984). A review of these disasters indicates that conceptual errors made by miners may have resulted in the accidents (Cole, Wala, Haley, & Vaught, 1987). In this study, co-author Andrzej Wala, stated that his research had "identified conceptual errors that may have caused the miners in these disasters to make fatal mistakes" (Cole et al. 1987), p. 167. Further exploration of these conceptual errors by Wala has led to the hypothesis that misconceptions of basic aspects of flow distribution changes in mine ventilation circuits, are at least, in part, responsible for some mine disasters caused by errors in ventilation systems (Wala & Cole, 1987). Why should these conceptual errors occur? Ausubel (1963) suggested that students come to a new area of study with their own conceptions or preconceptions about how a process operates. Furthermore, these preconceptions may be in conflict with the empirical data from the discipline. In such cases, learning becomes a process in which new concepts must displace or be re-molded from stable concepts that the student has constructed over many years (Clement, 1982). Given the existing research with misconceptions and the work of Wala and Cole (1987), it was hypothesized that experienced miners; either working miners, students of mining engineering, or professional mining engineers, harbored misconceptions about the formal or conceptual aspects of mine ventilation circuits. The misconceptions hypothesized to exist involved flow distribution changes in complex mine ventilation circuits; specifically, how does flow distribution change when a ventilation circuit pathway is altered? Given this information, the following research questions were proposed. Research Questions 1. Do experienced miners and mining engineers harbor misconceptions about mine ventilation systems? This question was addressed by: A. The administration of the Cutthrough Ventilation Arrangements (CVA) exercise that measures subjects' performance level when making decisions about major ventilation changes when connecting two mine sections;