A means by which things happen

One of the activities this morning in UE1 was a pre-course assessment, in which they were asked to describe what is happening with the energy while a bowling ball is being lowered at constant speed. Lane didn't want to have the class try to work out the answer to this question (he said, "We're not quite ready for that" and I couldn't agree more). He did invite the teachers to share what questions the task raised for them. My question about this scenario is: Where does the gravitational energy of the ball go as you lower it? (I know the answer to that question, but I still consider that "the question.") The questions they asked were nowhere near that. Some of their questions were, approximately:

• "Is gravity energy?"
• "Does the joint act as mechanical energy?"
• "What is meant by the term potential energy?"
• "Is resistance of motion an energy?"
• "When we talk about transfers and transformations I don't even know where to begin. I don't even know what my questions are."

These questions suggest to me that the teachers are not using a substance metaphor for energy. These questions don't have a background premise that energy is a kind of a thing, a thing whose essential act is to go from one place to another. I'm not saying they should (yet); I'm observing that they aren't. It seems like the gravity, joint, and resistance questions pose energy as possibly being a means by which things happen, or are prevented from happening. This seems totally reasonable. 

Here is what Lane wrote of their questions: