Download - Building on a Base:
![Page 1: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Building on a Base: tools, practices, and implications from
physics education research (PER)
S.J. PollockN.D. FinkelsteinPhysics Department
Thanks for support from: Pew/Carnegie CASTL,NSF CCLINSF STEM-TPAPS: PhysTEC
![Page 2: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Overview• Physics Education Research (PER) Rapid growth, subfield of physics• A Physicist’s History: Research on student concepts (Arons, McDermott, ...)
Concept Inventories (Halloun, Hestenes , Hake, ...)
Curriculum (Washington, Maryland, Mazur, many...) Theoretical Frames (Redish, diSessa, many...)
![Page 3: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Theoretical frames
Student concepts and engagement
Curricular reforms
Data
Classroom practice
Building on a base
![Page 4: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
structurePieces Coherence
By Authority Independent(experiment)
learning
COGNITION AND INSTRUCTION (physics), David Hammer
Novice Expert
Formulas & “plug ‘n chug”
Concepts & Problem Solving
content
think about science like a scientist
What’s our goal?
![Page 5: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
APS
In recent years, physics education research has emerged as a topic of
research within physics departments. ... The APS applauds
and supports the acceptance in physics departments of research in
physics education.
-The American Physical Society
Statement 99.2 Research in Physics Education (May 1999)
![Page 6: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Professional recognition
• Journals (AJP, and Physical Review) • NSF funding • >50 institutions with PER groups
![Page 7: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Data on student conceptions
Interviews/open questions (e.g. Arons, McDermott,
...)
• Prior knowledge• Basis for surveys and curriculum reform
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 8: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
A possible “tilting” development
• Force Concept Inventory (Hestenes, Wells, Swackhamer, Physics Teacher 20, (92) 141, Halloun and Hestenes)
• Multiple choice survey, (pre/post)• Experts (especially skeptics!) => necessary (not sufficient) indicator of
conceptual understanding.
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 9: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Sample question
![Page 10: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Force Concept Inventory (FCI)
R. Hake, ”…A six-thousand-student survey…” AJP 66, 64-74 (‘98).
<g> = post-pre 100-pre
traditional lecture
FCI I CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 11: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Trad’l Model of EducationInstruction viatransmissionIndividual Content (E/M)transmissionist
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 12: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Where does this come from?
• Our classes
![Page 13: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Force Concept Inventory (FCI)
R. Hake, ”…A six-thousand-student survey…” AJP 66, 64-74 (‘98).
<g> = post-pre 100-pre
red = trad, blue = interactive engagement
FCI II
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 14: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
PER Theoretic Background
Instructionvia transmissionIndividual Content (E/M)transmissionist
Individual
Prior knowledge
Content (E/M)Constructionconstructivistbasic constructivist
J. Piaget - Swiss psychologist (1896-1980)Students: are active in the educational process
construct understanding based on prior knowledgelearn through individual development
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 15: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Value of FCI
• Based on research• Refocus on concepts• Quantitative basis for comparing curricula• Wake up call
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 16: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Force Concept Inventory (FCI)
R. Hake, ”…A six-thousand-student survey…” AJP 66, 64-74 (‘98).
<g> = post-pre 100-pre
Fa03/Sp04Fa98
red = trad, blue = interactive engagement
FCI at CU
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 17: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Next steps
Conceptual survey development www.flaguide.org
Attitudes/student epistemology
Research on student understanding -> guide to curricular reforms -> incorporate cognitive theories
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 18: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Attitudes and Beliefs
VASS, MPEX, CLASS, ... (e.g. Saul, Redish, PER@C,...)
Assessing the “hidden curriculum”
Examples:Examples: ““I study physics to learn knowledge that will be I study physics to learn knowledge that will be useful in life.”useful in life.”““TTo learn physics, I only need to memorize solutions to sample problems”
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 19: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
CLASS pre/post
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Unfavorable
Favorable
Overall PreIndep. PreCoher. PreConc. PreR. App. PreR. Care. PreMath PreEffort PreSkept. PreOverall PostIndep. PostCoher. PostConc. PostR. App. PostR. Care PostMath PostEffort PostSkept. Post
W. Adams 2003, replicating Redish, Steinberg, Saul AJP 66 p. 212 (‘98)
(Typical) attitude shifts
![Page 20: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
CLASS pre/post
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 20 40 60 80 100
Unfavorable
Favorable
Overall PreIndep. PreCoher. PreConc. PreR. App. PreR. Care. PreMath PreEffort PreSkept. PreOverall PostIndep. PostCoher. PostConc. PostR. App. PostR. Care PostMath PostEffort PostSkept. Post
Concepts
Reality
W. Adams 2003, replicating Redish, Steinberg, Saul AJP 66 p. 212 (‘98)
(Typical) attitude shifts
![Page 21: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Shift (%) (“reformed” class)
-6-8-12-11-10-7-17+5(All ±2%)
CLASS categories
• Real world connect...• Personal interest........• Sensemaking/effort...• Conceptual................• Math understanding...• Problem Solving........• Confidence................• Nature of science.......
Engineers: -12
Phys Male: +1Phys Female: -16
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 22: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
But it’s possible to do better
Conceptual Understanding
35
45
55
65
75
g<=.25 0.25<g<=0.5 0.5<g<=0.75 0.75<g<=0.9 0.9<g<=1
Learning GainsLow learning gain <---------> high learning gainBlue= preRed= post
Data from instructor attending (somewhat) to “hidden curriculum”)
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 23: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Expectations/Beliefs matter
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0-40 (N=24) 40-60 (N=74) 60-80(N=189)
80-100(N=44)
Pre-Overall Favorable Score
g<=0.3 0.3<g<=0.8 g>0.8
low <--------------------------------------> highpre CLASS (overall)
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 24: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Curriculum reformConcepTests (Mazur) (easy to implement) Tutorials (McDermott) (modest infrastructure)Workshop physics (Laws) (resource intensive)
And many more - can’t do justice! Interactive Lect Demos (Thornton, Sokoloff) Problem solving (Van Heuvelen, Heller,...)
Based on empirical researchNext generation: cognitive theory as well.
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 25: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Topic U. Wash. no tutorial
U. Wash.with tutorial
CUwith tutorial
Newton’s law & tension 25% 50% 55%
Newton & constraints 45% 70% 45%/75%
Force diagrams 30% 90% 95%
Newton’s III law 15% 70% 70%
Combine Newton’s laws 35% 80% 80%
ReproducibilityPrimary/secondary implementation of “Tutorials”
Rounding all results to nearest 5%
UW data from McDermott, Shaffer, Somers, Am. J. Phys. 62(1), 46-55 (94)
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 26: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Summary
• State of PER: beyond “reflective teaching”• Data driven• Published/publishable results• Reproducible across institutions• Changing culture of departments (?!)
CLASSCURRIC
STUDENTDATA
THEORY
![Page 27: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Discussion!
• Starting ideas...– What sorts of practices occur in engineering /
based on what sort of research/theoretical framing?– What assessment tools are there?– How well codified is the discipline / goals of
instruction?
![Page 28: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
The end
See: www.flaguide.orgper.colorado.eduwww2.physics.umd.edu/~redish/Book/
![Page 29: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Impact of peer instruction
![Page 30: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
FCI scoresPhys 1110 Fa '03
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 7 13 20 27 33 40 47 53 60 67 73 80 87 93 100Score (%)
# of students
FCI PreFCI Post
CU reformed course Fa 03
![Page 31: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Traditional vs. Interactive Engagement(From Hake, see earlier ref, AJP 66, 64-74 (‘98)
%gain vs %pretest
![Page 32: Building on a Base:](https://reader036.vdocuments.site/reader036/viewer/2022062810/56815cf5550346895dcaf7a0/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Correlating rest of course score to tut hw (Sp04: N=513, r=.65)
01020304050607080
0 20 40 60 80 100Tutorial HW score
Remaining grade (85 max)
g known (N=383, r=.58)g unknown (N=130, r=.65)
Impact of tutorials