|
|
August 10-11,
2005 |
|
|
August 10-11,
2005 |
8:00-10:00 PM, Wednesday, August
10
Union Ballroom
Contributed Poster Presenters: Please follow the instructions provided here.
CP-01
Problem solving skills and evidence of their
independence and transferability.
Wendy Adams
(wendy.adams@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Carl Wieman
(wieman@jila.colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Abstract: Research in problem solving often presents categories of
problem solving skills. The existing research describes many of these skills
as higher level skills that develop only after other problem solving skills
have been acquired. Building on prior work, we present a framework for
categorizing problem solving skills, which emerge from interviews of
individuals using the Colorado Problem Solving Survey. This new survey is
designed to require a minimal amount of content knowledge in physics so as to
address a broad range of problem solving skills. Analysis of results from 16
interviews and 8 written responses reveal that people can have expert-like
skills in almost any area while their skills in all other problem solving
categories remain quite novice. We also find that a person s problem solving
skills can be carried not only across discipline but into the workplace as
well.
Supported in part by funding from National Science Foundation DTS.
CP-02
Elementary education students' conecpts of force
and motion
Rhett Allain
(rallain@selu.edu),
Southeastern
Louisiana University
Abstract: The goal of this project is to examine the conceptual
understanding of force and motion for pre-service elementary teachers. In
particular, the study will explore the occurrence of the idea that the motion
of an object is proportional to the force acting on that object. This
investigation will use the Force Concept Inventory as well as responses to
open ended questions to compare the understanding of pre-service elementary
teachers to that of introductory algebra-based physics students.
CP-03
A comparison of student understanding of seasons
using inquiry and didactic teaching methods
Paul Ashcraft
(pashcraft@clarion.edu),
Pennsylvania State University
Abstract: Student performance on open-ended questions concerning
seasons in a university physical science content course was examined to note
differences between classes that experienced inquiry using a 5-E lesson
planning model and those that experienced the same content with a traditional,
didactic lesson. The class examined is a required content course for
elementary education majors and understanding the seasons is part of the
university s state s elementary science standards. The two self-selected
groups of students showed no statistically significant differences in pre-test
scores, while there were statistically significant differences between the
groups post-test scores with those who participated in inquiry-based
activities scoring higher. There were no statistically significant
differences between the pre-test and the post-test for the students who
experienced didactic teaching, while there were statistically significant
improvements for the students who experienced the 5-E lesson.
CP-04
Student Perceptions of Physics by Inquiry at
Ohio State
Gordon Aubrecht, II
(aubrecht@mps.ohio-state.edu),
The Ohio State University
Yuhfen Lin
(yflin@mps.ohio-state.edu),
The Ohio State University
Dedra Demaree (ddemar1@mps.ohio-state.edu),
The Ohio State University
Xueli Zou (xzou@csuchico.edu),
California State University, Chico
Abstract: Students intending to become teachers may take Physics by
Inquiry courses at Ohio State (the
course is open to other non-science majors as well). We assess student
perceptions of the Physics by Inquiry course using the Q-sort assessment. The
assessment forces students to categorize the extent to which they think
twenty-five descriptive statements characterize their laboratory class
experience. They sort the statements from most to least characteristic of the
course into bins of successive size 2, 6, 9, 6, 2 (forcing a 'normal'
distribution). We construct a matrix from the five categories and the
twenty-five statements and examine the differences from the 'average' values.
We find differences among different classes and between students and
instructors. This poster will detail some of our most salient findings.
CP-05
Searching for Common and Optimum Knowledge
Acquisition Paths in learning Lunar Phases
Joseph Beuckman
(joe@beigerecords.com),
Southern Illinois University Edwardsville
Rebecca
Lindell (rlindel@siue.edu),
Southern Illinois University Edwardsville
Andrew Heckler (heckler@MPS.OHIO-STATE.EDU),
The Ohio State
University
Abstract: Preliminary qualitative work in determining a concept
hierarchy among dimensions of the Lunar Phases Concept Inventory1 looks
promising. The hierarchy proposed by Lindell, Hines and Heckler (AAPT WM04)
was based on prerequisite mastery of each dimension. Here, we implement
Ordering Theory2 to verify that such a hierarchy exists and attempt to build a
concept hierarchy among individual correct and incorrect schema within and
across the dimensions of the LPCI. This is quantitative work using pre- and
post-instructional data from the national field test of the LPCI.
[1] Diognon, J. and Falmagne, J. 'Knowledge Spaces'
[2] Lindell, R. and Olsen, J., 'Development of Lunar Phases Concept
Inventory'
[3] Airasian, P. and Bart, W. 'Ordering Theory'
CP-06
What is working in our introductory labs?
Jennifer Blue
(bluejm@muohio.edu),
Miami
University
Abstract: A survey was conducted in the introductory physics laboratory
class during the summer of 2005. Students were asked about their comfort with
lab, their roles in their lab group, and their understanding of lab. Results
will be reported, as will ideas for further research.
CP-07
Do our words really matter?: Case studies from
Quantum Mechanics
David Brookes
(dbrookes@physics.rutgers.edu),
Rutgers
University
Eugenia
Etkina (etkina@rci.rutgers.edu),
Rutgers
University
Abstract: To understand the role of language in learning physics, we
will treat language as one possible representation of a physical model of the
world. We will then present a theoretical framework that (a) enables us to
identify physical models encoded in language, (b) enables us to describe the
components of a linguistic representation of the model. The data shows that
physicists use linguistic representations to reason productively about
physical systems and problems. We will then present two case studies and
supporting evidence to argue that these linguistic representations are being
used and applied by physics students when they reason. Sometimes linguistic
representations are being misapplied and overextended. This in turn, allows
us to understand and account for many student ``misconceptions''. We will use
the case studies to argue that students struggles with language is part of the
process of learning physics.
CP-08
Physics Education Reseach: Making Inroads with an
Entrenched Physics Teacher at
Vacaville High School
Austin Calder
(amcalder@ucdavis.edu),
University
of California, Davis
Abstract: In this paper I present an overview of a one-year teacher
research orientated collaboration between graduate fellows at the
University of California at Davis and high
school science teachers in Vacaville High Schools. One goal of the
collaboration was the presence of expertise in the classroom, in the form of
an advanced graduate student. Along with this, there was the expectation of
an information exchange and general teaching dialogue between graduate fellow
and high school teacher. In this case, the teacher involved proved quite
adamant in his traditional teaching views and often antagonistic toward the
graduate fellow. Specifically, I detail the nature of the interactions and
communications between the graduate fellow, whose focus is Physics Education,
and a physics teacher with nine years of traditional teaching experience.
Also given is an abridgment of the actual Teacher Research project along with
its sponsoring program.
CP-09
To Extract or Not To Extract? That Is The
Question.
Alice D. Churukian
(churukia@cord.edu),
Concordia
College, Moorhead, Minnesota
Paula V.
Engelhardt (Engelhar@tntech.edu),
Tennessee Tech. University
Abstract: As a multitude of diagnostic instruments have been and are
being developed to assess student understanding of various topics in physics,
instructors are faced, more and more, with the dilemma of cost versus
benefit. How many diagnostic instruments can effectively be administered in a
single semester? Which instruments will give the most benefit? Why isn't
there one instrument to assess the entire semester and still provide
appropriate feedback? The Survey of Electricity, Magnetism, (DC) Circuits,
and Optics (SEMCO) was initially created to assess the effectiveness of New
Studio physics at Kansas State
University. SEMCO is a conglomerate survey of questions selected from the CSE,
the CSM, DIRECT, the LOCE, and the Optics ConcepTest. Do students taking
SEMCO respond in a similar manner to students taking the full version of any
one of the diagnostic instruments from which it was created? Other research
suggests that changing the order of the questions can matter in terms of
drawing students to different distracters. This poster will examine the
effect of student performance between SEMCO and DIRECT for both calculus-based
introductory students and algebra-based introductory students.
CP-10
Scaffolding Students' Microscopic Modeling of
Friction in Teaching Interviews: A Case Study with Two Students
Edgar Corpuz
(eddy@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
N. Sanjay
Rebello (srebello@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
Abstract:
Our
previous research [1] showed that students’ mental models of microscopic friction
are significantly influenced by their macroscopic ideas and experiences. We
conducted teaching interviews to facilitate students’ construction of a
scientifically accepted model of microscopic friction and make them aware of
the disparity between macroscopic and microscopic friction. We present the
different scaffoldings provided to students during the teaching interviews and
describe how these experiences influenced the model construction processes of
two typical students.
[1]
Corpuz, E.G. and N.S. Rebello (2005). Introductory College Physics Students
Mental Models of Friction and Related Phenomena at the Microscopic Level.
Supported in part by NSF grant REC-0133621.
CP-11
College Students'
Transfer from Calculus to Physics
Lili Cui
(lili@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
N. Sanjay
Rebello (srebello@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
Andrew G. Bennett (bennett@math.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
Abstract:
This research investigated students’ transfer of learning from calculus
courses to an introductory physics course. We used semi-structured think
aloud interviews to assess the extent to which students transfer their
calculus knowledge when solving problems in a physics course. Results
indicate that students do transfer their knowledge from calculus class to
physics class. However, during the transfer process, they needed specific
scaffolding to connect the calculus knowledge with the physics problem.
Supported in part by the NSF Grant DUE-0206943.
CP-12
Understanding change in physics education:
Identifying old barriers and new directions.
Melissa Dancy
(mhdancy@uncc.edu),
University
of North Carolina, Charlotte
Charles
Henderson (charles.henderson@wmich.edu),
Western Michigan University
Abstract: While there are many calls for educational change, these
calls often assume a common set of goals and pathways to change. Careful
consideration of change in physics education indicates that the process is
complex and often fraught with contradictory goals. In this poster, we will
discuss our development of a set of dimensions to categorize practices and
beliefs related to physics teaching and learning. We will then identify
practices that have been advocated by educational reformers in other
disciplines, but are not generally found in PER-based curricula. Finally we
will offer an analysis which connects our results with theories of change
proposed by others.
CP-13
Gender in the student laboratory: An exploration
of students experiences of doing laboratory work in physics
Anna Danielsson
(anna.danielsson@fysik.uu.se),
Uppsala
University
Abstract: Laboratory work is generally seen as an important part of any
science education, since it is here the students are given the chance to do
science . This gives a unique opportunity to talk to the students about how
they experience learning the doing of science and also to highlight (some) of
the cultural norms of the physics student-community. In this spirit, I am
conducting semi-structured interviews with physics majors, exploring how they
experience learning in the student laboratory, taking into account the
gendered norms of physics education. My main interest is how the students in
the context of laboratory work create a physicist identity in relation to the
cultural norms of the physics student-community.
CP-14
Is instructional emphasis on the use of
non-mathematical representations worth the effort?
Charles De Leone
(cdeleone@csusm.edu),
California
State University, San Marcos
Elizabeth
Gire (egire@physics.ucsd.edu),
University of California, San Diego
Abstract: A hallmark of physics is its rich use of representations. The
most common representations used by physicists are mathematical
representations such as equations, but many problems are rendered more
tractable through the use of other representations such as diagrams or
graphs. Examples of representations include force diagrams in mechanics,
state diagrams in thermodynamics, and motion graphs in kinematics. Most
introductory physics courses teach students to use these representations as
they apply physical models to problems. But does student representation use
correlate with problem solving success? In this poster we address this
question as we report on student representation usage during the first
semester of an introductory physics course for biologists taught in an
active-learning setting.
Partially supported by NSF Grant #DUE-0410991
CP-15
Assessing ISLE labs as an enhancement to
traditional large-lecture courses at the
Ohio State University
Dedra Demaree
(demaree.2@osu.edu),
The Ohio State University
Yuhfen Lin
(yflin@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu),
The Ohio State University
Gordon Aubrecht (aubrecht.1@osu.edu),
The Ohio State University
Lei Bao (lbao@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu),
The Ohio State University
Abstract: At the Ohio State University (OSU), some existing laboratory
sections were replaced with Investigative Science Learning Environment (ISLE)
labs during the 3-quarter calculus-based introductory physics sequence this
past academic year. The ISLE labs have been developed by the PAER Group at
Rutgers University and implemented
at Rutgers and at California State University, Chico. A direct comparison is
made of OSU students participating in the ISLE labs with students in the
existing labs under the same large-lecture instruction. Assessment included
diagnostic tests, attitude surveys, and feedback obtained from a Q-type
instrument. The ISLE environment focuses on scientific abilities which are
not directly tested in our large-lecture course or diagnostic tests.
Therefore, we also solicited volunteers to participate in a lab 'practical
exam' aimed at looking for differences in scientific abilities. The results
of these assessments will be discussed.
CP-16
Designing an Assessment Tool for Matter &
Interactions Mechanics Course*
Lin Ding
(lding@ncsu.edu),
North Carolina
State University
Ruth Chabay
(rwchabay@unity.ncsu.edu),
North Carolina
State University
Bruce Sherwood (Bruce_Sherwood@ncsu.edu),
North Carolina
State University
Abstract: Matter & Interactions [1] is a modern curriculum for
calculus-based introductory physics. In the M&I mechanics course, the first
semester of a two-semester sequence, a major goal is that students learn to
use a small number of fundamental principles, in particular the momentum
principle and the energy principle, to explain a broad range of phenomena [2].
There is no published assessment tool that directly measures whether the M&I
curriculum meets this goal. We designed an energy test for the M&I mechanics
course, and administered a beta version to a class of 77 students. Some
preliminary results will be reported.
This study is partially supported by NSF grant 5-33494.
[1] Matter & Interactions I: Modern Mechanics and Matter & Interactions II:
Electric and Magnetic Interactions. Ruth Chabay & Bruce Sherwood, Wiley 2002,
http//www4.ncsu.edu/~rwchabay/mi.
[2] Ruth Chabay & Bruce Sherwood,
"Modern mechanics," Am. J. Phys. Vol. 72, 439, 2004.
CP-17
A Preliminary Study of the Effectiveness of
Different Recitation Teaching Methods
Robert Endorf
(robert.endorf@uc.edu),
University
of Cincinnati
Kathleen
Koenig (kkoenig@fuse.net)
Greg Braun (braung@xavier.edu),
Xavier University
Abstract: We present preliminary results from a comparative study of
student understanding for students who attended recitation classes which used
different teaching methods. Student volunteers from our introductory
calculus-based physics course attended a special recitation class that was
taught using one of four different teaching methods. A total of 272 students
were divided into approximately equal groups for each method. Students in each
class were taught the same topic, Changes in Energy and Momentum , from
Tutorials in Introductory Physics1. The different teaching methods varied in
the amount of student and teacher engagement. Student understanding was
evaluated through pretests and posttests given at the recitation class, and a
posttest question on the final exam. Our results demonstrate the importance of
the instructor s role in teaching the recitation. This poster addresses the
conference theme by presenting evidence for which teaching methods should be
emphasized in training future teachers and faculty members.
Supported by NSF grant DUE-0126919 1. L.C. McDermott, P.S. Shaffer and the
Physics Education Group at the
University of Washington, Tutorials in Introductory Physics, First Ed.
(Prentice Hall, 2002).
CP-18
Design labs: Student s expectations and reality
Eugenia Etkina
(etkina@rci.rutgers.edu),
Rutgers
University
Sahana Murthy
(sahana@physics.rutgers.edu),
Rutgers
University
Abstract: In a study reported in the 2004 PERC proceedings the authors
described how introductory physics labs in which students design their own
experiments help them develop scientific abilities such as an ability to
design an experiment to solve a problem, an ability to collect and analyze
data, and an ability to communicate the details of the experimental procedure.
The goals of the present study are to investigate the social aspect of student
learning in these labs: whether students expectations are consistent with the
goals of the labs, whether student assessment of their learning in the labs
matches the goals, and whether they perceive them as helping to learn useful
skills. As all future science teachers enroll in introductory physics labs,
restructuring the labs and changing students expectations about them is
closely related to the improvement of teacher preparation.
CP-19
A Methodological Framework for Researcher and
Teacher Professional Development
Peter R. Fletcher
(fletcher@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
N. Sanjay
Rebello (srebello@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
Abstract: Whether you are training a junior researcher or working with
a seasoned teacher, an appropriate methodological framework offers an ideal
environment in which to conduct a program of professional development
activities. The framework described here provides a forum and research
setting allowing junior through experienced teachers and researchers to act in
a variety of project management roles and perform a range of research
activities. This presentation shows how a scaleable robust and flexible
research framework is constructed by combining elements from Grounded Theory,
Phenomenology and Action Research. In addition for larger projects an
administrative framework based upon the three-level teaching experiment of
Lesh and Kelly [1] is integrated to form a responsive, manageable research and
professional development environment. We conclude the presentation with a
discussion on a selection of professional development opportunities and
activities possible within the framework.
[1] Lesh, R. and A.E. Kelly, Multitiered Teaching Experiments, in Handbook of
Research Design in Mathematics and Science Education, R. Lesh and A.E. Kelly,
Editors. 2000, Lawrence Earlbaum
Associates: Mahwah, NJ. Supported in part by NSF grant REC-01336
CP-20
Science Teacher Self-Efficacy Beliefs and their
Impact on Effective Teaching
Eric. A Hagedorn
(ehagedorn@utep.edu),
University
of Texas at El Paso
Abstract: A beginning science teacher may possess the knowledge and
skills required to teach science, but if she does not believe that she can
effectively do so, she is unlikely to do so. Similarly, if a teacher does not
believe that her students can effectively learn science, this will also
adversely affect her teaching. The first belief, which at first glance seems
related to self-confidence, has been carefully defined and empirically
validated as a “self-efficacy belief.” The second belief relating to
perceived student abilities has been carefully defined and empirically
validated as an “outcome expectancy belief.” The Science Teacher Efficacy
Beliefs Instrument (STEBI) has been effectively used to measure teachers’
self-efficacy and outcome expectancy beliefs for the past 15 years. This
paper will review the literature on science teacher self-efficacy beliefs and
provide an overview of the STEBI – including the interpretation of actual data
taken before and after pre-service teachers participate in the second course
of a physics course based on AAPT’s Powerful Ideas in Physical Science [PIPS]
curriculum.
CP-21
Making words work: The simultaneous construction
of concepts and discourse
Danielle Harlow
(Danielle.Harlow@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Valerie Otero
(Valerie.Otero@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Abstract: Many words are used in physics differently than they are used
in everyday speech. Thus, physics learners must develop conceptual
understandings of physical phenomena while learning to use words in new ways.
This simultaneous construction of physics concepts and discourse requires that
students talk about partially understood concepts using partially acquired
vocabulary. In this paper, we present an analysis of physics students as they
use terms such as momentum and energy to explain unexpected observations
involving acceleration. Our analysis shows that students use science terms
that they do not fully understand to temporarily resolve conceptual conflict.
Even when terms are used in ways inconsistent with accepted scientific
definitions, this practice contributes both to the development of students'
conceptual understanding of physics and to their acquisition of science
discourse.
This project is supported by the National Science Foundation Grant 0096856.
CP-22
Physics Faculty and Educational Researchers:
Divergent Expectations as Barriers to the Diffusion of Innovations
Charles Henderson
(Charles.Henderson@WMICH.edu),
Western
Michigan University
Melissa Dancy
(mhdancy@email.uncc.edu),
University of North Carolina, Charlotte
Abstract: Physics Education Research (PER) practitioners have engaged
in substantial curriculum development and dissemination work in recent years.
Yet, it appears that this work has not had a significant influence on the
basic teaching practices of typical physics faculty. We conducted interviews
with five likely users of educational research to identify barriers to
dissemination. One significant barrier appears to be that faculty and
educational researchers have different expectations about how they should work
together to improve student learning. This discrepancy was expressed directly
(and often emotionally) by all of the instructors we interviewed. Although
different instructors described different aspects of this discrepancy, we
believe that they are all related to a single underlying issue: PER expects to
disseminate curricular innovations and have faculty adopt them with minimal
changes while faculty expect PER to work with them to adapt PER knowledge and
materials for their unique instructional situations. We will explore this
claim and the evidence found in the interview transcripts. We will also
discuss implications for the PER community.
CP-23
Developing an inquiry-based physical science
course for preservice elementary teachers
Zdeslav Hrepic
(zhrepic@fhsu.edu),
Fort
Hays State University
Paul Adams
(padams@fhsu.edu),
Fort
Hays State University
Jason Zeller (zeller@hometelco.net)
Nancy Talbott (ntalbott@media-net.net)
Germaine Taggart (gtaggart@fhsu.edu),
Fort
Hays State University
Lanee Young (lyoung@fhsu.edu),
Fort
Hays State University
Abstract: Pre-service elementary teachers should experience science
through inquiry in order to be effective in teaching science. In addition,
inquiry as a mode of teaching is mandated by
Kansas and National Science Education
Standards. As a result of the No Child Left Behind Act, teachers also need to
be prepared to include basic skills in reading and mathematics in all
instruction. To address these issues Fort Hays State University (FHSU) is
adapting and extending the NSF-developed teacher enhancement materials
Operation Primary Physical Science (OPPS) for use in a physical science course
for pre-service elementary teachers. We will present main features of OPPS,
demonstrate its effectiveness as shown through workshops with in-service
teachers and discuss results that we have collected with students enrolled in
the adapted course since the beginning of the Fall 2004 semester.
Supported in part by NSF grants DUE-0311042 and DUE-0088818.
CP-24
Investigating students ideas about X-rays and
development of teaching materials for a medical physics course
Spartak Kalita
(kalita@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
Dean Zollman
(dzollman@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
Abstract: Contemporary medicine both diagnostic and treatment
involve sophisticated applications of fundamental principles of physics. By
the time pre-med students reach a general physics course they have often
already heard of or undergone procedures such as X-ray screening. Yet, the
pre-med physics course curricula mention them in passing. This is lamentable
because while pre-med students often complain that physics lacks relevance -
we are missing a great opportunity to show them how useful it will be in their
future profession. The Modern Miracle Medical Machine project is proposed to
fill this deficiency. The X-ray teaching-learning module is going to be one of
the central parts of it. We have conducted some preliminary research on the
topic, including more then a dozen semi-structured clinical interviews with
KSU Physics students with various backgrounds. Further investigation of
students mental models, teaching interviews and the development of
instructional materials utilizing appropriate assessment and evaluation tools
is being planned and will follow soon
This research is supported by the National Science Foundation under grant DUE
0427645.
CP-25
Tricky calorimetry: making sense of the real world
Anna Karelina
(anna.karelina@gmail.com),
Rutgers University
Eugenia
Etkina (etkina@rci.rutgers.edu),
Rutgers University
Sahana Murthy (sahana@physics.rutgers.edu),
Rutgers University
Maria Rosario
Ruibal Villasenor
Abstract: The Rutgers PAER group developed and implemented introductory
physics laboratory tasks where students design and perform experiments to
solve practical problems and the rubrics that allow students to self-assess
their work. Researchers use the rubrics to score lab reports. Our research
indicates that the most common students difficulties are evaluating the
effects of the assumptions that they make building a model of a situation and
evaluating measurement uncertainties. Consequently students have trouble
assessing whether their solution of a particular problem makes sense. In this
study we investigate the work of 70 students solving two experimental problems
in calorimetry and correlate the trends in student work with the goals of
instructors, found through interviews. Our findings indicate that although
students have the same lab write-ups and used the same rubrics for assessment,
their work depends on the unspoken goals of the instructor. This is an
important finding for teacher preparation.
Supported by grant DUE-0241078
CP-26
Assessing the effectiveness of a computer
simulation in conjunction with Tutorials in Introductory Physics in
undergraduate physics recitations
Christopher Keller
(christopher.keller@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Noah
Finkelstein (finkelsn@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Katherine Perkins (katherine.perkins@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Steven Pollock (steven.pollock@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Abstract: We present two studies documenting the effectiveness of the
use of a computer simulation with Tutorials in Introductory Physics [1] in a
transformed college physics course [2]. An interactive computer simulation,
entitled the Circuit Construction Kit (CCK) [3], was introduced to investigate
its possible impact on students conceptual understanding. The first study
compared students using either CCK or real laboratory equipment to complete
two Tutorials on DC circuits. The second study investigated the impact of the
simulation s explicit conceptual model for current flow by removing this
feature for a subset of students. In the first study, the use of CCK with
Tutorials yielded slightly better improvements in conceptual understanding
compared to real equipment, as measured by exam performance soon after the
intervention. In the second study, students using CCK with and without the
explicit current model performed similarly to their real-equipment
counterparts. We discuss the implications of adding (or removing) such
explicit models within computer simulations.
[1] McDermott, Schaffer. Tutorials in Introductory Physics. Prentice Hall,
New Jersey. 2002.
[2] Colorado PhysTEC
[3] Physics Education Technology Project (PhET),
phet.colorado.edu
CP-27
Students cognitive conflict and conceptual change
in a PBI class
Yeounsoo Kim
(kim.1902@osu.edu),
The Ohio State University
Lei Bao
(lbao@mps.ohio-state.edu),
The Ohio State University
Omer Acar (acar.4@osu.edu),
The Ohio State University
Abstract: With proper context settings, instructors need to guide
students to explicitly recognize cognitive conflicts among students existing
understandings and the new knowledge being taught. To study this issue, we
have developed an easy-to-use instrument, the in-class Conflict and Anxiety
Recognition Evaluation (iCARE), for monitoring the status of students
cognitive conflicts and anxiety in the context of Physics by Inquiry (PBI)
classes. Using iCARE, we investigate what types of cognitive conflict is
constructive or destructive in conceptual change when college students are
confronted with anomalous situations in a PBI class. In this research, we will
present our results about the relationship between students types of
cognitive conflicts and their conceptual changes and show among students with
different levels of motivational beliefs the relationship between the
characteristics of students prior knowledge and cognitive conflicts. We will
also discuss the implications for the more effective cognitive conflict
strategy in real school setting.
This work was supported by NSF grants REC-0087788 and REC-0126070.
CP-28
The effect of educational environment on
representational competence in introductory physics
Patrick Kohl
(kohlp@ucsu.colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Noah
Finkelstein (noah.finkelstein@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Abstract: In a previous study of a traditional, large-lecture
algebra-based physics course, we demonstrated that giving students a choice of
representational format when they solve quiz problems could have either
significantly positive or negative performance effects, depending on the topic
and representation used. Further, we see that students are not necessarily
aware of the representation at which they are most competent .[1] Here, we
extend these results by considering two courses taught by a reform-style
instructor. These performance data are substantially different in character,
with the students from the reform courses showing much smaller performance
variations when given a choice of representation. From these data, we infer
that students in the reform courses may be learning a broader set of
representational skills than students in the traditional course. We therefore
examine major components of the courses (exams, homeworks, lectures) to
characterize the use of different representations. We find that the reform
courses make use of richer selections of representations, and make more
frequent use of multiple representations, suggesting a mechanism by which
these students learned improved skills.
[1] P. B. Kohl and N. D. Finkelstein. Representational Format, Student
Choice, and Problem Solving in Physics. Proceedings of the 2004 Physics
Education Research Conference (in press)
CP-29
How students form conclusions in the student
laboratory
Rebecca Kung
(rebecca.kung@fysik.uu.se),
Uppsala
University
Abstract: A large component of most laboratory courses is using results
from measurements to make conclusions. Many of these decisions involve
comparing data to theory or data to data to see whether they agree or
disagree. Frequently students are given a prescriptive cutoff (such as 10%
difference or 2 standard deviations) to determine agreement. To understand the
different ways students form conclusions without such a rule, their arguments
have been analyzed in terms of the information used, the comparisons made, and
the argument's complexity. I have found this analysis useful as a researcher
and an instructor, to make sense of how students are thinking and to determine
what intervention might be needed. As part of the discussion, students'
arguments from several introductory university physics laboratory courses will
be presented.
CP-30
Student assessment of laboratory in introductory
physics courses
Yuhfen Lin
(yflin@mps.ohio-state.edu),
The Ohio State University
Dedra Demaree
(ddemar1@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu),
The Ohio State University
Xueli Zou (XZou@csuchico.edu),
California State University, Chico
Gordon
Aubrecht (aubrecht@mps.ohio-state.edu),
The Ohio State University
Abstract: In inquiry labs we try to help students learn to make
scientific decisions. How successful are we? Are the instructor and the lab
material getting the message across to the students? A modified version of the
Laboratory Program Variables Inventory (LPVI), a Q-type instrument has been
used to study students perceptions of the lab. We identified statements
related to student dependence on instructors, separating the statements into
categories of student directed , intermediate , and instructor directed .
We analyzed different labs from different universities and found that
students perceptions of how much control they had over the lab varied with
lab type. We also found a dependence of student perceptions on lab instructor
within each type of lab. The variation between different types of lab was
greater than the variation between instructors within the lab type. This is a
promising tool for assessing the lab material and instruction.
CP-31
Student Learning and Dynamic Transfer while
Interacting with 'Constructing Physics Understanding' (CPU) Curriculum: A Case
Study
Charles Mamolo
(cbmamolo@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
Peter R.
Fletcher (fletcher@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
N. Sanjay Rebello (srebello@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
Abstract: This research investigated the extent of the effectives of
the Constructing Physics Understanding (CPU) curriculum on mechanical wave
properties in effecting student learning. The research was conducted at
University of San Carols,
Philippines. Six (6) students were the participants of the study. We used
the phenomenographic approach coupled with the constructivism philosophy as
the underlying; further on, we used the Dynamic Transfer Model developed at
Kansas State University - Physics Education Group in plotting out the
students’ intellectual development so as to gauge the extent of the
effectiveness of the CPU.
Supported in part by NSF grant REC-0133621.
CP-32
Strengthening the Connection between Coursework
and Real-World Phenomena
Jeff Marx
(jmarx@mcdaniel.edu),
McDaniel
College
Bill Knouse
Abstract: Positively influencing students’ attitudes and beliefs about
the nature of science and scientific inquiry should be a critical goal of a
well-intentioned curriculum. Unfortunately, several researchers have revealed
that it can be difficult to improve such attitudes and beliefs. In an attempt
to overcome some of these difficulties we looked to improve a narrow range of
students’ attitudes, instead of the broad spectrum of attitudes addressed in
previous works. Specifically, we designed curricular materials for first-year
general science students intended to help them make connections between the
material they cover in class and real-world phenomena. To help us characterize
changes in student’s attitudes we administered the EBAPs at the beginning and
end of the semester. Although the overall improvement in scores from pre-test
to post-test was not significant, upon finer inspection of responses we did
see some trends toward more sophisticated attitudes and beliefs.
CP-33
A Quantum Mechanics Conceptual Survey
Sarah McKagan
(mckagan@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Carl Wieman
(cwieman@jila.colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Abstract: We have developed a survey of conceptual understanding of
quantum mechanics. The survey is based on interviews of faculty members about
what they think are the most important concepts in quantum mechanics and on
known student misconceptions about this topic. We have tested the survey
through student interviews and have given it to two modern physics courses.
We are in the process of surveying physics faculty and graduate students as
well. Student interviews, which were designed to test the validity of survey
questions, have revealed many interesting results about student ideas about
quantum mechanics. We have seen many of the same student conceptions
discussed in other studies, as well as some that have not previously been
reported.
CP-34
Investigations of Student Reasoning in
Thermochemistry
David E. Meltzer
(dem@iastate.edu),
Iowa
State University
Thomas J.
Greenbowe (tgreenbo@iastate.edu),
Iowa
State University
Abstract: Students in both chemistry and general science classes often
have their first encounter with concepts of heat and temperature in the
context of calorimetry. In particular, it is a topic often addressed in
courses directed at pre-service elementary- and middle-school teachers.
However, understanding the origins of energy flows resulting from chemical
reactions presents a substantial conceptual challenge for introductory
students. We have carried out an investigation of the ways in which students
in an introductory university chemistry course attempt to solve basic problems
in solution calorimetry. We will report on several specific conceptual
difficulties that were encountered by these students. Among these difficulties
are a misunderstanding of the meaning of the mass 'm' in the equation Q=mcDT,
and a failure to understand that heats of reaction originate from the breaking
and forming of chemical bonds between atoms.
Supported in part by NSF DUE-9981140 and PHY-0406724.
CP-35
A more complete way to follow development of
student ideas in mechanics.
Maximiliano
Montenegro
(montenegro.3@osu.edu),
The Ohio State University
Gordon
Aubrecht (aubrecht@mps.ohio-state.edu),
The Ohio State University
Lei Bao (lbao@mps.ohio-state.edu),
The Ohio State University
Abstract: Although different kinds of misconceptions can give rise to
the same scores, in general total scores are used to define teaching
strategies. A more complete strategy would be analyze students' pattern of
answers for identifying present misconceptions and generate specific
strategies to address them. In this work, we use cluster analysis to classify
students in base of their misconceptions in mechanics, to identify those
students with the same nature of misconceptions. Moreover, this analysis
allows us to keep track of their misconceptions along a standard lecture and
to show how they can stay unchanged without a specific strategy.
CP-36
Examining the Evolution of Student Ideas About
Quantum Tunneling
Jeffrey Morgan
(jeffrey.morgan@umit.maine.edu),
University
of Maine
Michael
Wittmann (michael.wittmann@umit.maine.edu),
University
of Maine
Abstract: We have been investigating student understanding of quantum
tunneling for the past three years. Our data include interviews with, and
surveys and exam questions from sophomores who have completed a modern physics
course and seniors who have completed a quantum physics course. Consequently,
we have acquired multiple data points for a small set of students who have
taken both courses that allow for longitudinal study. Our analysis yields a
few promising results, including abandonment of the energy loss
misconception [1] however, many difficulties remain. We focus on one student
to illustrate the persistent lack of coherence between pieces of knowledge
surrounding the example of quantum tunneling through a one-dimensional
potential energy barrier even after completion of two courses in quantum
physics.
[1] J.T. Morgan, M.C. Wittmann, and J.R. Thompson in 2003 Physics Education
Research Conference, J. Marx, K. Cummings,
S. Franklin, Eds., AIP Conference
Proceedings 720, 97-100 (2004).
CP-37
A replication study of the use of concentration
analysis to characterize student response patterns on a multiple-choice
concept test in mechanics
Jennifer J. Neakrase
(jennifer.neakrase@asu.edu),
Arizona State University
Luanna G.
Ortiz (luanna.ortiz@asu.edu),
Arizona State University
Abstract: The current study investigated conceptions of the concepts of
force and motion at pre- and post-instruction of 261 students enrolled in the
calculus-based introductory physics course at
Arizona State University in the spring 2005
semester. The experimental design and analysis procedure were based on an
empirical study by Bao & Redish [1], in which they proposed the concentration
analysis methodology. Concentration analysis is a quantitative method intended
to measure the evolution of common reasoning patterns given by students
between a pre- and post-test on a multiple-choice assessment. Overall, the
study found similar characteristic reasoning patterns reported earlier.
[1] Bao, L., & Redish, E.F. (2001). Concentration analysis: A quantitative
assessment of student states, Phys. Educ. Res., Amer. J. Phys. Supplement, 69,
S45-S53.
CP-38
Investigating the reliability of the MPEX survey
Christopher Omasits
(cjo120@yahoo.com),
Grove City
College
DJ Wagner
(djwagner@gcc.edu),
Grove City
College
Abstract: The Maryland Physics Expectations Test (MPEX) is a
Likert-scale survey used to measure students' attitudes both before and after
taking a physics course. Student responses are categorized as either
favorable or unfavorable as determined by the prevalent responses given by an
expert control group [1]. We investigated the possibility of false negative
or positive responses on the student surveys by asking students to elaborate
on their responses to some of the statements. While the majority (usually
90-100%) of explanations were consistent with the corresponding Likert choice,
a few questions generated multiple student responses that deserved further
review. These interesting student responses were compiled and sent to
physics faculty to gauge the favorability of the students entire response.
Here we present our analysis of the questions that generated the highest
number of inconsistent responses.
[1] E. Redish, J. Saul, R. Steinberg. Student Expectations in Introductory
Physics. American Journal of Physics (March 1998) 212-224.
CP-39
Research-based laboratories for introductory
physics courses*
Luanna Ortiz
(luanna.ortiz@asu.edu),
Arizona State University
Michael
Loverude (mloverude@fullerton.edu),
California State University, Fullerton
Stephen Kanim (skanim@nmsu.edu),
New Mexico State University
Brian Frank (bwfrank@asu.edu),
Arizona State University
Abstract: In the introductory courses at many universities, the lab is
the only venue for research-based curricula. We are in the process of
developing a modified laboratory sequence for introductory mechanics that
builds upon proven curricular materials including Tutorials in Introductory
Physics [1]. Some labs are closely related to existing Tutorials. For other
topics we are conducting basic research into student understanding and
applying what we learn to the development of new labs. Our poster will
provide an overview of the curriculum development project and give specific
examples of laboratory exercises and the underlying research.
[1] McDermott, Shaffer, and the U.
Wash. P.E.G., 2002. Supported by NSF grants DUE-0341289, DUE-0341350, and
DUE-0341333.
CP-40
Towards characterizing the relationship between
students self-reported interest in and their surveyed beliefs about physics
Katherine Perkins
(Katherine.Perkins@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Mindy Gratny
(mindyk@ksu.edu),
Kansas State University
Wendy Adams (wendy.adams@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Noah Finkelstein (finkelsn@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Carl Wieman
(wieman@jila.colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Abstract: Repeated measurements of students beliefs about physics and
learning physics have shown that students beliefs typically degrade -- that is
become more novice-like -- over the course of most introductory physics
classes. In this paper, we begin to examine the relationship between students
beliefs and their self-reported interest in physics as well as the
relationship between their respective changes over the term. We report results
from survey data collected in a large calculus-based introductory mechanics
courses (N=391). We used the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey
(CLASS v3) to characterize students beliefs and asked students to rate their
interest in physics, how it has changed, and why. We find positive
correlations (R=0.65) between students Overall belief and their self-rated
interest at the end of the term. An analysis of students reasons for why
their interest changed showed that a sizable fraction of students cited
reasons tied to beliefs about physics or learning physics probed by the CLASS
survey with the leading reason for increased interest being the connection
between physics and the real world.
CP-41
Analogical Scaffolding: A Research Based Model of
Learning Abstract Ideas in Physics
Noah Podolefsky
(noah.podolefsky@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Noah D.
Finkelstein (noah.finkelstein@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Abstract: Analogies are ubiquitous in physics. An analogy is often
considered to be a mapping from a familiar domain to an unfamiliar domain
(e.g. water system to electric circuits). Drawing on the work of Lakoff, Roth,
and Fauconnier, we seek to develop a model for student learning of abstracted
electromagnetic (E-M) waves. Applying this model we posit that students can
productively learn about E-M waves via a series of linked analogies of
increasing abstraction, what we refer to as analogical scaffolding . We
employ this model to interpret the results of a two part experiment. College
students in introductory physics were divided into two groups: in one group,
sound waves were used as an analogy for E-M waves; the other group used waves
on a string as an analogy for E-M waves. In part one of the experiment,
students were asked to choose a representation that best characterized their
understanding of sound or string waves and answered a question on these.
Students were then asked to choose a representation and answer a question for
E-M waves. Here, we apply our model to interpret how students draw on linked
representational formats in understanding these different phenomena. In part
two, students completed a tutorial on E-M waves after being prepared with
either sound, string, or no analogy. The effect of the different analogical
scaffolds for E/M waves was probed with a final exam question on E-M waves. We
find associations between which preparation students received (sound, string,
no prep) and how they answered questions on the characteristics of E-M waves.
CP-42
Transferring Transformations: Learning Gains,
Student Attitudes, and the Impacts of Multiple Instructors in Large Lecture
Courses.
Steven Pollock
(Steven.pollock@colorado.edu),
University
of Colorado
Abstract: We have implemented several research-based transformations in
our introductory calculus-based physics course at CU Boulder. These include
Peer Instruction with student response system in lecture[1], Tutorials[2] with
trained undergraduate learning assistants in recitations, and personalized
computer assignments[3]. In an effort to distinguish the effects of
instructor, TA training, and particular research-based activities, we present
extensive new measurements from six courses representing a spectrum of
reforms. This study includes data from mechanics courses with and without
Tutorials, and E&M courses with Tutorials. We present multiple quantitative
and qualitative measures of success, including validated pre/post content- and
attitude-surveys and common exam questions. We investigate the hand-off of
reforms between faculty implementing different suites of activities, and begin
to assess elements and requirements for success with these transformations. We
present evidence that combining research-based interactive engagement methods
in lecture, Tutorials, and homework plays a significant positive role in
conceptual and attitudinal development.
[1] Mazur (1997) Peer Instruction
[2] McDermott et al (1998). Tutorials in Introductory Physics
[3] lon-capa.org, masteringphysics.com Work supported by NSF and APS PhysTec
CP-43
Movie Physics: Transfer to the Real
World*
Carina M. Poltera
(cmp3377@ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
Peter R.
Fletcher (fletcher@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
N. Sanjay Rebello (srebello@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
Abstract: Physics is an integrated part of our lives. Yet students in
introductory physics can seldom transfer their learning from the classroom to
their life experiences. We used action clips from popular movies to examine
the extent to which students in introductory physics courses can transfer
their learning from the classroom and their personal experiences to the
situations shown in clips. A total of eight movie clips were shown to students
in a semi-structured interview format. We describe here the results for each
movie as well as general trends in students’ reasoning patterns.
This research is supported in part by NSF grant REC-0133621.
CP-44
Automated Instrument for Observing and Recording
Behaviors Over Time of Large Numbers of Students
Wendell Potter
(whpotter@ucdavis.edu),
University
of California, Davis
Abstract: All of us who have been involved in implementing
active-learning formats in settings that involve multiple numbers of
instructors face the difficulty of helping many of these instructors become
familiar and comfortable teaching in a new and strange learning environment.
We have found that one of the most valuable experiences for both graduate
student teaching assistants and faculty who are teaching in an active-learning
environment is to spend time critically observing what students actually do in
such an environment. However, these observational experiences are most
effective if they are systematic and well structured. We have implemented an
automated recording tool for lap tops that facilitates detailed observation
over time (typically one hour or more) of two or three students
simultaneously. The great advantage of this tool is that the detailed data is
immediately available for analysis. We will present examples and comparisons
of active-learning and traditional instruction in introductory physics.
CP-45
Teacher Researcher Professional Development: PER
Case study Kansas State University
N. Sanjay Rebello
(srebello@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
Peter
Fletcher (fletcher@phys.ksu.edu),
Kansas
State University
Abstract: In this presentation we report on a case study which provides
administrative and methodological professional development to undergraduate
and graduate research team members of the Kansas State University Physics
Education Research (KSU-PER) group. An integral component of a student s
professional development is the opportunity to participate in a range of
research activities and work in collaboration - both as a mentor and a junior
researcher. In order to coordinate and facilitate these opportunities KSU-PER
established an ongoing research project investigating students conceptions of
the physics underlying devices. The project utilized an integrated
methodological and administrative framework - combining elements from grounded
theory, phenomenology and action research. This framework provides a forum
and research setting allowing junior and experienced researchers to act in
various project management roles and perform a range of research activities.
We will conclude the presentation by reflecting upon our experiences.
Supported in part by NSF grant REC-0133621.
CP-46
Case Study: Students' Use of Multiple
Representations
David Rosengrant
(rosengra@eden.rutgers.edu),
Rutgers
University
Alan Van
Heuvelen
(alanvan@physics.rutgers.edu),
Rutgers
University
Eugenia
Etkina
(etkina@rci.rutgers.edu),
Rutgers
University
Abstract: Being able to represent physics concepts and problem
situations in multiple ways for qualitative reasoning and problem solving is a
scientific ability we want our students to develop. Physics education
literature indicates that using multiple representations is beneficial for
student understanding of physics ideas and for problem solving [1]. To find
out why and how students use multiple representations for problem solving, we
conducted a case study of six students during the second semester of a two
semester introductory physics course. These students varied both in their use
of representations and in their physics background. This case study gives us
an in-depth look at how students use of representations relates to their
ability to solve problems. This research helps us in teacher preparation
because it allows us to understand how students use multiple representations.
[1] J.I. Heller and F. Reif, 'Prescribing effective human problem solving
processes: Problem description in physics,' Cog. Inst. 1, 177-216 (1984)
Supported by NSF grants DUE 0241078, DUE 0336713.
CP-47
Enhancing High School Physics Instruction through
the Physics Van Inservice Institute
Mel Sabella
(msabella@csu.edu),
Chicago
State University
Gloria
Pritikin
