Energy is an important crosscutting concept in all science disciplines, and energy conservation is widely regarded as one of the most important principles in physics. Over the years, numerous graphical representations have been proposed that allow learners of physics to visualize energy states and dynamics in a particular situation. Each diagram highlights different aspects of energy and therefore may represent different conceptualizations of energy. Bar charts, or example, foreground the idea of multiple categories of energy to account for the distribution of energy in a system across those energy types. Similarly, pie charts highlight relative distribution of energy among different energy types. While bar charts are able to represent negative energy, pie charts emphasize that there is a certain, total amount of energy available that is distributed over different types. Various energy tracking diagrams (e.g., PET energy source-receiver diagrams, Energy Tracking Diagrams) foreground the localization of energy along a chain of energy transfer processes and within the involved objects.

1.
B. W.
Harrer
, “
On the origin of energy: Metaphors and manifestations as resources for conceptualizing and measuring the invisible, imponderable
,”
Am. J. Phys.
85
,
454
460
(
June
2017
).
2.
J. W.
Jewett
, “
Energy and the confused student IV: A global approach to energy
,”
Phys. Teach.
46
,
210
(
April
2008
).
3.
R. E.
Scherr
,
B. W.
Harrer
,
H. G.
Close
,
A. R.
Daane
,
L. S.
DeWater
,
A. D.
Robertson
,
L.
Seeley
, and
S.
Vokos
, “
Energy Tracking Diagrams
,”
Phys. Teach.
54
,
96
102
(
Feb.
2016
).
4.
A.
Hobson
, “
Energy flow diagrams for teaching physics concepts
,”
Phys. Teach.
42
,
113
117
(
Feb.
2004
).
5.
E.
Brewe
, “
Energy as a substance-like quantity that flows: Theoretical considerations and pedagogical consequences
,”
Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.
7
,
020106
(
2011
).
6.
B.
Brazzle
and
A.
Tapp
, “
Using a ternary diagram to display a system’s evolving energy distribution
,”
Phys. Teach.
54
,
216
219
(
April
2016
).
7.
K. E.
Gray
and
R. E.
Scherr
, “
Drawing Energy: Evidence of Next Generation Science Standards for Energy in diagrams
,” in
2016 PERC Proceedings
, edited by
D. L.
Jones
,
L.
Ding
, and
A.
Traxler
(
AAPT
,
College Park, MD
), pp.
128
131
.
8.
A.
Van Heuvelen
and
X.
Zou
, “
Multiple representations of work-energy processes
,”
Am. J. Phys.
69
,
184
194
(
Feb.
2001
).
9.
F.
Goldberg
,
S.
Robinson
, and
V. K.
Otero
,
Physics Everyday Thinking
(
It’s About Time
,
Armonk, NY
,
2008
).
10.
Like some of these other representations, the Energy-Interaction Diagram largely aligns with the model for energy expressed in and underlying the Next Generation Science Standards.14 Our characterization of this alignment using a list of categories developed by Gray and Scherr (see Ref. 7) can be found in an online appendix at TPT Online http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.5126824 under the Supplemental tab.
11.
W.
Potter
,
D.
Webb
,
C.
Paul
,
E.
West
,
M.
Bowen
,
B.
Weiss
,
L.
Coleman
, and
C.
De Leone
, “
Sixteen years of Collaborative Learning through Active Sense-making in Physics (CLASP) at UC Davis
,”
Am. J. Phys.
82
,
153
163
(
2014
).
12.
R. E.
Scherr
,
H. G.
Close
,
S. B.
McKagan
, and
S.
Vokos
, “
Representing energy. I. Representing a substance ontology for energy
,”
Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.
8
,
020114
(
2012
).
13.
See, for example, the treatment of potential energy forms as stored energy in
R. D.
Knight
,
B.
Jones
, and
S.
Field
,
College Physics: A Strategic Approach
(
Pearson Education, Inc.
,
San Francisco, CA
,
2006
); and
E.
Hecht
,
Physics: Algebra/Trig
(
Brooks/Cole Publishing Company
,
Pacific Grove, CA
,
1997
).
14.
NGSS Lead States
,
Next Generation Science Standards: For States, by States
(
National Academies Press
,
Washington, DC
,
2013
).

Supplementary Material

AAPT members receive access to The Physics Teacher and the American Journal of Physics as a member benefit. To learn more about this member benefit and becoming an AAPT member, visit the Joining AAPT page.