Research on Student Learning and the Development of Improved Physics Instruction

1
Research on Student Learning and the Development
of Improved Physics Instruction

• David E. Meltzer
• Department of Physics and Astronomy
• Iowa State University
• Ames, Iowa

2
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (Western Iowa TCC) Ngoc-Loan
Nguyen Larry Engelhardt Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
3
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (Western Iowa TCC) Ngoc-Loan
Nguyen Larry Engelhardt Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
4
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (Western Iowa TCC) Ngoc-Loan
Nguyen Larry Engelhardt Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
5
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (M.S. 2001 now at
UMSL) Larry Engelhardt Ngoc-Loan Nguyen Warren
Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
6
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (M.S. 2001 now at
UMSL) Larry Engelhardt Ngoc-Loan Nguyen (M.S.
2003) Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
7
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (M.S. 2001 now at
UMSL) Larry Engelhardt Ngoc-Loan Nguyen (M.S.
2003) Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
8
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (M.S. 2001 now at
UMSL) Larry Engelhardt Ngoc-Loan Nguyen (M.S.
2003) Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
9
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (M.S. 2001 now at
UMSL) Larry Engelhardt Ngoc-Loan Nguyen (M.S.
2003) Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
10
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (M.S. 2001 now at
UMSL) Larry Engelhardt Ngoc-Loan Nguyen (M.S.
2003) Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
11
Outline

• Overview of goals and methods of PER
• Investigation of Students Reasoning
• Students reasoning in thermodynamics
• Diverse representational modes in student
  learning
• Curriculum Development
• Instructional methods and curricular materials
  for large-enrollment physics classes
• Assessment of Instruction
• Measurement of learning gain
• Potential broader impact of PER on undergraduate
  education

12
Outline

• Overview of goals and methods of PER
• Investigation of Students Reasoning
• Students reasoning in thermodynamics
• Diverse representational modes in student
  learning
• Curriculum Development
• Instructional methods and curricular materials
  for large-enrollment physics classes
• Assessment of Instruction
• Measurement of learning gain
• Potential broader impact of PER on undergraduate
  education

13
Outline

• Overview of goals and methods of PER
• Investigation of Students Reasoning
• Students reasoning in thermodynamics
• Diverse representational modes in student
  learning
• Curriculum Development
• Instructional methods and curricular materials
  for large-enrollment physics classes
• Assessment of Instruction
• Measurement of learning gain
• Potential broader impact of PER on undergraduate
  education

14
Outline

• Overview of goals and methods of PER
• Investigation of Students Reasoning
• Students reasoning in thermodynamics
• Diverse representational modes in student
  learning
• Curriculum Development
• Instructional methods and curricular materials
  for large-enrollment physics classes
• Assessment of Instruction
• Measurement of learning gain
• Potential broader impact of PER on undergraduate
  education

15
Outline

• Overview of goals and methods of PER
• Investigation of Students Reasoning
• Students reasoning in thermodynamics
• Diverse representational modes in student
  learning
• Curriculum Development
• Instructional methods and curricular materials
  for large-enrollment physics classes
• Assessment of Instruction
• Measurement of learning gain
• Potential broader impact of PER on undergraduate
  education

16
Outline

• Overview of goals and methods of PER
• Investigation of Students Reasoning
• Students reasoning in thermodynamics
• Diverse representational modes in student
  learning
• Curriculum Development
• Instructional methods and curricular materials
  for large-enrollment physics classes
• Assessment of Instruction
• Measurement of learning gain
• Potential broader impact of PER on undergraduate
  education

17
Outline

• Overview of goals and methods of PER
• Investigation of Students Reasoning
• Students reasoning in thermodynamics
• Diverse representational modes in student
  learning
• Curriculum Development
• Instructional methods and curricular materials
  for large-enrollment physics classes
• Assessment of Instruction
• Measurement of learning gain
• Potential broader impact of PER on undergraduate
  education

18
Outline

• Overview of goals and methods of PER
• Investigation of Students Reasoning
• Students reasoning in thermodynamics
• Diverse representational modes in student
  learning
• Curriculum Development
• Instructional methods and curricular materials
  for large-enrollment physics classes
• Assessment of Instruction
• Measurement of learning gain
• Potential broader impact of PER on undergraduate
  education

19
Outline

• Overview of goals and methods of PER
• Investigation of Students Reasoning
• Students reasoning in thermodynamics
• Diverse representational modes in student
  learning
• Curriculum Development
• Instructional methods and curricular materials
  for large-enrollment physics classes
• Assessment of Instruction
• Measurement of learning gain
• Ongoing and Future Projectsl broader impact of
  PER on undergraduate education

20
Outline

• Overview of goals and methods of PER
• Investigation of Students Reasoning
• Students reasoning in thermodynamics
• Diverse representational modes in student
  learning
• Curriculum Development
• Instructional methods and curricular materials
  for large-enrollment physics classes
• Assessment of Instruction
• Measurement of learning gain
• Ongoing and Future Projectsl broader impact of
  PER on undergraduate education

21
Outline

• Overview of goals and methods of PER
• Investigation of Students Reasoning
• Students reasoning in thermodynamics
• Diverse representational modes in student
  learning
• Curriculum Development
• Instructional methods and curricular materials
  for large-enrollment physics classes
• Assessment of Instruction
• Measurement of learning gain
• Ongoing and Future Projects of PER on
  undergraduate education

22
Goals of PER

• Improve effectiveness and efficiency of physics
  instruction
• measure and assess learning of physics (not
  merely achievement)
• Develop instructional methods and materials that
  address obstacles which impede learning
• Critically assess and refine instructional
  innovations

23
Goals of PER

• Improve effectiveness and efficiency of physics
  instruction
• measure and assess learning of physics (not
  merely achievement)
• Develop instructional methods and materials that
  address obstacles which impede learning
• Critically assess and refine instructional
  innovations

24
Goals of PER

• Improve effectiveness and efficiency of physics
  instruction
• measure and assess learning of physics (not
  merely achievement)
• Develop instructional methods and materials that
  address obstacles which impede learning
• Critically assess and refine instructional
  innovations

25
Goals of PER

• Improve effectiveness and efficiency of physics
  instruction
• measure and assess learning of physics (not
  merely achievement)
• Develop instructional methods and materials that
  address obstacles which impede learning
• Critically assess and refine instructional
  innovations

26
Methods of PER

• Develop and test diagnostic instruments that
  assess student understanding
• Probe students thinking through analysis of
  written and verbal explanations of their
  reasoning, supplemented by multiple-choice
  diagnostics
• Assess learning through measures derived from
  pre- and post-instruction testing

27
Methods of PER

• Develop and test diagnostic instruments that
  assess student understanding
• Probe students thinking through analysis of
  written and verbal explanations of their
  reasoning, supplemented by multiple-choice
  diagnostics
• Assess learning through measures derived from
  pre- and post-instruction testing

28
Methods of PER

• Develop and test diagnostic instruments that
  assess student understanding
• Probe students thinking through analysis of
  written and verbal explanations of their
  reasoning, supplemented by multiple-choice
  diagnostics
• Assess learning through measures derived from
  pre- and post-instruction testing

29
Methods of PER

• Develop and test diagnostic instruments that
  assess student understanding
• Probe students thinking through analysis of
  written and verbal explanations of their
  reasoning, supplemented by multiple-choice
  diagnostics
• Assess learning through measures derived from
  pre- and post-instruction testing

30
Astronomy Education Research

• Diagnostic Exams
• Astronomy Diagnostic Test M. Zeilik et al.
• Lunar Phases Concept Inventory R. Lindell
• Active-Engagement Curricular Materials
• Lecture-Tutorials for Introductory Astronomy J.
  Adams, E. Prather, T. Slater
• Peer Instruction in Astronomy P. J. Green
• On-line Journal Astronomy Education Review
  www.aer.noao.edu

31
Astronomy Education Research

• Diagnostic Exams
• Astronomy Diagnostic Test M. Zeilik et al.
• Lunar Phases Concept Inventory R. Lindell
• Active-Engagement Curricular Materials
• Lecture-Tutorials for Introductory Astronomy J.
  Adams, E. Prather, T. Slater
• Peer Instruction in Astronomy P. J. Green
• On-line Journal Astronomy Education Review
  www.aer.noao.edu

32
Astronomy Education Research

• Diagnostic Exams
• Astronomy Diagnostic Test M. Zeilik et al.
• Lunar Phases Concept Inventory R. Lindell
• Active-Engagement Curricular Materials
• Lecture-Tutorials for Introductory Astronomy J.
  Adams, E. Prather, T. Slater
• Peer Instruction in Astronomy P. J. Green
• On-line Journal Astronomy Education Review
  www.aer.noao.edu

33
Astronomy Education Research

• Diagnostic Exams
• Astronomy Diagnostic Test M. Zeilik et al.
• Lunar Phases Concept Inventory R. Lindell
• Active-Engagement Curricular Materials
• Lecture-Tutorials for Introductory Astronomy J.
  Adams, E. Prather, T. Slater
• Peer Instruction in Astronomy P. J. Green
• On-line Journal Astronomy Education Review
  www.aer.noao.edu

34
What PER Can NOT Do

• Determine philosophical approach toward
  undergraduate education
• target primarily future science professionals?
• focus on maximizing achievement of best-prepared
  students?
• achieve significant learning gains for majority
  of enrolled students?
• try to do it all?
• Specify the goals of instruction in particular
  learning environments
• physics concept knowledge
• quantitative problem-solving ability
• laboratory skills
• understanding nature of scientific investigation

35
What PER Can NOT Do

• Determine philosophical approach toward
  undergraduate education
• focus on majority of students, or on subgroup?
• Specify the goals of instruction in particular
  learning environments
• proper balance among concepts, problem-solving,
  etc.
• physics concept knowledge
• quantitative problem-solving ability
• laboratory skills
• understanding nature of scientific investigation

36
What PER Can NOT Do

• Determine philosophical approach toward
  undergraduate education
• focus on majority of students, or on subgroup?
• Specify the goals of instruction in particular
  learning environments
• proper balance among concepts, problem-solving,
  etc.
• physics concept knowledge
• quantitative problem-solving ability
• laboratory skills
• understanding nature of scientific investigation

37
Active PER Groups in Ph.D.-granting Physics
Departments
gt 10 yrs old 6-10 yrs old lt 6 yrs old
U. Washington U. Maine Oregon State U.
Kansas State U. Montana State U. Iowa State U.
Ohio State U. U. Arkansas City Col. N.Y.
North Carolina State U. U. Virginia Texas Tech U.
U. Maryland U. Minnesota San Diego State U. joint with U.C.S.D. Arizona State U. U. Mass., Amherst Mississippi State U. U. Oregon U. California, Davis U. Central Florida U. Colorado U. Illinois U. Pittsburgh Rutgers U. Western Michigan U. Worcester Poly. Inst. U. Arizona New Mexico State U.
leading producers of Ph.D.s
38
www.physics.iastate.edu/per/
39
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project

• Investigate student learning with standard
  instruction
• Develop new materials based on research
• Test and modify materials
• Iterate as needed

40
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project

• Investigate student learning with standard
  instruction probe learning difficulties
• Develop new materials based on research
• Test and modify materials
• Iterate as needed

41
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project

• Investigate student learning with standard
  instruction probe learning difficulties
• Develop new materials based on research
• Test and modify materials
• Iterate as needed

42
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project

• Investigate student learning with standard
  instruction probe learning difficulties
• Develop new materials based on research
• Test and modify materials
• Iterate as needed

43
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project

• Investigate student learning with standard
  instruction probe learning difficulties
• Develop new materials based on research
• Test and modify materials
• Iterate as needed

44
Addressing Learning Difficulties A Model
ProblemStudent Concepts of GravitationJack
Dostal and DEM

• 10-item free-response diagnostic administered to
  over 2000 ISU students during 1999-2000.
• Newtons third law in context of gravity
  direction and superposition of gravitational
  forces inverse-square law.
• Worksheets developed to address learning
  difficulties tested in Physics 111 and 221, Fall
  1999

45
Addressing Learning Difficulties A Model
ProblemStudent Concepts of GravitationJack
Dostal and DEM

• 10-item free-response diagnostic administered to
  over 2000 ISU students during 1999-2000.
• Newtons third law in context of gravity
  direction and superposition of gravitational
  forces inverse-square law.
• Worksheets developed to address learning
  difficulties tested in Physics 111 and 221, Fall
  1999

46
Addressing Learning Difficulties A Model
ProblemStudent Concepts of GravitationJack
Dostal and DEM

• 10-item free-response diagnostic administered to
  over 2000 ISU students during 1999-2000.
• Newtons third law in context of gravity
  direction and superposition of gravitational
  forces inverse-square law.
• Worksheets developed to address learning
  difficulties tested in calculus-based physics
  course Fall 1999

47
Example Newtons Third Law in the Context of
Gravity

• Is the magnitude of the force exerted by the
  asteroid on the Earth larger than, smaller than,
  or the same as the magnitude of the force exerted
  by the Earth on the asteroid? Explain the
  reasoning for your choice.
• Presented during first week of class to all
  students taking calculus-based introductory
  physics (PHYS 221-222) at ISU during Fall 1999.
• First-semester Physics (N 546) 15 correct
  responses
• Second-semester Physics (N 414) 38 correct
  responses
• Most students claim that Earth exerts greater
  force because it is larger

48
Example Newtons Third Law in the Context of
Gravity

• Is the magnitude of the force exerted by the
  asteroid on the Earth larger than, smaller than,
  or the same as the magnitude of the force exerted
  by the Earth on the asteroid? Explain the
  reasoning for your choice.
• Presented during first week of class to all
  students taking calculus-based introductory
  physics at ISU during Fall 1999.
• First-semester Physics (N 546) 15 correct
  responses
• Second-semester Physics (N 414) 38 correct
  responses
• Most students claim that Earth exerts greater
  force because it is larger

49
Example Newtons Third Law in the Context of
Gravity

• Is the magnitude of the force exerted by the
  asteroid on the Earth larger than, smaller than,
  or the same as the magnitude of the force exerted
  by the Earth on the asteroid? Explain the
  reasoning for your choice.
• Presented during first week of class to all
  students taking calculus-based introductory
  physics at ISU during Fall 1999.
• First-semester Physics (N 546) 15 correct
  responses
• Second-semester Physics (N 414) 38 correct
  responses
• Most students claim that Earth exerts greater
  force because it is larger

50
Example Newtons Third Law in the Context of
Gravity

• Is the magnitude of the force exerted by the
  asteroid on the Earth larger than, smaller than,
  or the same as the magnitude of the force exerted
  by the Earth on the asteroid? Explain the
  reasoning for your choice.
• Presented during first week of class to all
  students taking calculus-based introductory
  physics at ISU during Fall 1999.
• First-semester Physics (N 546) 15 correct
  responses
• Second-semester Physics (N 414) 38 correct
  responses
• Most students claim that Earth exerts greater
  force because it is larger

51
Example Newtons Third Law in the Context of
Gravity

• Is the magnitude of the force exerted by the
  asteroid on the Earth larger than, smaller than,
  or the same as the magnitude of the force exerted
  by the Earth on the asteroid? Explain the
  reasoning for your choice.
• Presented during first week of class to all
  students taking calculus-based introductory
  physics at ISU during Fall 1999.
• First-semester Physics (N 546) 15 correct
  responses
• Second-semester Physics (N 414) 38 correct
  responses
• Most students claim that Earth exerts greater
  force because it is larger

52
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)

• Guide students through reasoning process in which
  they tend to encounter targeted conceptual
  difficulty
• Allow students to commit themselves to a response
  that reflects conceptual difficulty
• Guide students along alternative reasoning track
  that bears on same concept
• Direct students to compare responses and resolve
  any discrepancies

53
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)

• Guide students through reasoning process in which
  they tend to encounter targeted conceptual
  difficulty
• Allow students to commit themselves to a response
  that reflects conceptual difficulty
• Guide students along alternative reasoning track
  that bears on same concept
• Direct students to compare responses and resolve
  any discrepancies

54
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)

• Guide students through reasoning process in which
  they tend to encounter targeted conceptual
  difficulty
• Allow students to commit themselves to a response
  that reflects conceptual difficulty
• Guide students along alternative reasoning track
  that bears on same concept
• Direct students to compare responses and resolve
  any discrepancies

55
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)

• Guide students through reasoning process in which
  they tend to encounter targeted conceptual
  difficulty
• Allow students to commit themselves to a response
  that reflects conceptual difficulty
• Guide students along alternative reasoning track
  that bears on same concept
• Direct students to compare responses and resolve
  any discrepancies

56
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)

• Guide students through reasoning process in which
  they tend to encounter targeted conceptual
  difficulty
• Allow students to commit themselves to a response
  that reflects conceptual difficulty
• Guide students along alternative reasoning track
  that bears on same concept
• Direct students to compare responses and resolve
  any discrepancies

57
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)

• One of the central tasks in curriculum reform is
  development of Guided Inquiry worksheets
• Worksheets consist of sequences of closely linked
  problems and questions
• focus on conceptual difficulties identified
  through research
• emphasis on qualitative reasoning
• Worksheets designed for use by students working
  together in small groups (3-4 students each)
• Instructors provide guidance through Socratic
  questioning

58
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)

• One of the central tasks in curriculum reform is
  development of Guided Inquiry worksheets
• Worksheets consist of sequences of closely linked
  problems and questions
• focus on conceptual difficulties identified
  through research
• emphasis on qualitative reasoning
• Worksheets designed for use by students working
  together in small groups (3-4 students each)
• Instructors provide guidance through Socratic
  questioning

59
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)

• One of the central tasks in curriculum reform is
  development of Guided Inquiry worksheets
• Worksheets consist of sequences of closely linked
  problems and questions
• focus on conceptual difficulties identified
  through research
• emphasis on qualitative reasoning
• Worksheets designed for use by students working
  together in small groups (3-4 students each)
• Instructors provide guidance through Socratic
  questioning

60
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)

• One of the central tasks in curriculum reform is
  development of Guided Inquiry worksheets
• Worksheets consist of sequences of closely linked
  problems and questions
• focus on conceptual difficulties identified
  through research
• emphasis on qualitative reasoning
• Worksheets designed for use by students working
  together in small groups (3-4 students each)
• Instructors provide guidance through Socratic
  questioning

61
Example Gravitation Worksheet (Jack Dostal and
DEM)

• Design based on research (interviews written
  diagnostic tests), as well as instructional
  experience
• Targeted at difficulties with Newtons third law,
  and with use of proportional reasoning in
  inverse-square force law

62
Example Gravitation Worksheet (Jack Dostal and
DEM)

• Design based on research (interviews written
  diagnostic tests), as well as instructional
  experience
• Targeted at difficulties with Newtons third law,
  and with use of proportional reasoning in
  inverse-square force law

63
Example Gravitation Worksheet (Jack Dostal and
DEM)

• Design based on research (interviews written
  diagnostic tests), as well as instructional
  experience
• Targeted at difficulties with Newtons third law,
  and with use of proportional reasoning in
  inverse-square force law

64
Protocol for Testing Worksheets(Fall 1999)

• 30 of recitation sections yielded half of one
  period for students to do worksheets
• Students work in small groups, instructors
  circulate
• Remainder of period devoted to normal activities
• No net additional instructional time on
  gravitation
• Conceptual questions added to final exam with
  instructors approval

65
Protocol for Testing Worksheets(Fall 1999)

• 30 of recitation sections yielded half of one
  period for students to do worksheets
• Students work in small groups, instructors
  circulate
• Remainder of period devoted to normal activities
• No net additional instructional time on
  gravitation
• Conceptual questions added to final exam with
  instructors approval

66
Protocol for Testing Worksheets(Fall 1999)

• 30 of recitation sections yielded half of one
  period for students to do worksheets
• Students work in small groups, instructors
  circulate
• Remainder of period devoted to normal activities
• No net additional instructional time on
  gravitation
• Conceptual questions added to final exam with
  instructors approval

67
Protocol for Testing Worksheets(Fall 1999)

• 30 of recitation sections yielded half of one
  period for students to do worksheets
• Students work in small groups, instructors
  circulate
• Remainder of period devoted to normal activities
• No net additional instructional time on
  gravitation
• Conceptual questions added to final exam with
  instructors approval

68
Protocol for Testing Worksheets(Fall 1999)

• 30 of recitation sections yielded half of one
  period for students to do worksheets
• Students work in small groups, instructors
  circulate
• Remainder of period devoted to normal activities
• No net additional instructional time on
  gravitation
• Conceptual questions added to final exam with
  instructors approval

69
Protocol for Testing Worksheets(Fall 1999)

• 30 of recitation sections yielded half of one
  period for students to do worksheets
• Students work in small groups, instructors
  circulate
• Remainder of period devoted to normal activities
• No net additional instructional time on
  gravitation
• Conceptual questions added to final exam with
  instructors approval

70
(No Transcript)
71
(No Transcript)
72
b
73
b
74
common student response
c
b
75
e)     Consider the magnitude of the
gravitational force in (b). Write down an
algebraic expression for the strength of the
force. (Refer to Newtons Universal Law of
Gravitation at the top of the previous page.)
Use Me for the mass of the Earth and Mm for the
mass of the Moon.         f)      Consider the
magnitude of the gravitational force in (c).
Write down an algebraic expression for the
strength of the force. (Again, refer to Newtons
Universal Law of Gravitation at the top of the
previous page.) Use Me for the mass of the Earth
and Mm for the mass of the Moon.         g)    
Look at your answers for (e) and (f). Are they
the same?   h)     Check your answers to (b) and
(c) to see if they are consistent with (e) and
(f). If necessary, make changes to the arrows in
(b) and (c).
76
e)     Consider the magnitude of the
gravitational force in (b). Write down an
algebraic expression for the strength of the
force. (Refer to Newtons Universal Law of
Gravitation at the top of the previous page.)
Use Me for the mass of the Earth and Mm for the
mass of the Moon.         f)      Consider the
magnitude of the gravitational force in (c).
Write down an algebraic expression for the
strength of the force. (Again, refer to Newtons
Universal Law of Gravitation at the top of the
previous page.) Use Me for the mass of the Earth
and Mm for the mass of the Moon.         g)    
Look at your answers for (e) and (f). Are they
the same?   h)     Check your answers to (b) and
(c) to see if they are consistent with (e) and
(f). If necessary, make changes to the arrows in
(b) and (c).
77
e)     Consider the magnitude of the
gravitational force in (b). Write down an
algebraic expression for the strength of the
force. (Refer to Newtons Universal Law of
Gravitation at the top of the previous page.)
Use Me for the mass of the Earth and Mm for the
mass of the Moon.         f)      Consider the
magnitude of the gravitational force in (c).
Write down an algebraic expression for the
strength of the force. (Again, refer to Newtons
Universal Law of Gravitation at the top of the
previous page.) Use Me for the mass of the Earth
and Mm for the mass of the Moon.         g)    
Look at your answers for (e) and (f). Are they
the same?   h)     Check your answers to (b) and
(c) to see if they are consistent with (e) and
(f). If necessary, make changes to the arrows in
(b) and (c).
78
e)     Consider the magnitude of the
gravitational force in (b). Write down an
algebraic expression for the strength of the
force. (Refer to Newtons Universal Law of
Gravitation at the top of the previous page.)
Use Me for the mass of the Earth and Mm for the
mass of the Moon.         f)      Consider the
magnitude of the gravitational force in (c).
Write down an algebraic expression for the
strength of the force. (Again, refer to Newtons
Universal Law of Gravitation at the top of the
previous page.) Use Me for the mass of the Earth
and Mm for the mass of the Moon.         g)    
Look at your answers for (e) and (f). Are they
the same?   h)     Check your answers to (b) and
(c) to see if they are consistent with (e) and
(f). If necessary, make changes to the arrows in
(b) and (c).
79
common student response
c
b
80
corrected student response
c
b
81
Post-test Question (Newtons third law)

• The rings of the planet Saturn are composed of
  millions of chunks of icy debris. Consider a
  chunk of ice in one of Saturn's rings. Which of
  the following statements is true?
• The gravitational force exerted by the chunk of
  ice on Saturn is greater than the gravitational
  force exerted by Saturn on the chunk of ice.
• The gravitational force exerted by the chunk of
  ice on Saturn is the same magnitude as the
  gravitational force exerted by Saturn on the
  chunk of ice.
• The gravitational force exerted by the chunk of
  ice on Saturn is nonzero, and less than the
  gravitational force exerted by Saturn on the
  chunk of ice.
• The gravitational force exerted by the chunk of
  ice on Saturn is zero.
• Not enough information is given to answer this
  question.

82
Results on Newtons Third Law Question(All
students)
N Post-test Correct
Non-Worksheet 384 61
Worksheet 116 87
(Fall 1999 calculus-based course, first semester)
83
Outline

• Overview of goals and methods of PER
• Investigation of Students Reasoning
• Students reasoning in thermodynamics
• Diverse representational modes in student
  learning
• Curriculum Development
• Instructional methods and curricular materials
  for large-enrollment physics classes
• Assessment of Instruction
• Measurement of learning gain
• Ongoing and Future Projectsl broader impact of
  PER on undergraduate education

84
Outline

• Overview of goals and methods of PER
• Investigation of Students Reasoning
• Students reasoning in thermodynamics
• Diverse representational modes in student
  learning
• Curriculum Development
• Instructional methods and curricular materials
  for large-enrollment physics classes
• Assessment of Instruction
• Measurement of learning gain
• Ongoing and Future Projectsl broader impact of
  PER on undergraduate education

85
Research Basis for Curriculum Development (NSF
CCLI Project with T. Greenbowe)

• Investigation of second-semester calculus-based
  physics course (mostly engineering students).
• Written diagnostic questions administered last
  week of class in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (Ntotal
  653).
• Detailed interviews (avg. duration ? one hour)
  carried out with 32 volunteers during 2002 (total
  class enrollment 424).
• interviews carried out after all thermodynamics
  instruction completed

two course instructors, ? 20 recitation
instructors
86
Research Basis for Curriculum Development (NSF
CCLI Project with T. Greenbowe)

• Investigation of second-semester calculus-based
  physics course (mostly engineering students).
• Written diagnostic questions administered last
  week of class in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (Ntotal
  653).
• Detailed interviews (avg. duration ? one hour)
  carried out with 32 volunteers during 2002 (total
  class enrollment 424).
• interviews carried out after all thermodynamics
  instruction completed

two course instructors, ? 20 recitation
instructors
87
Research Basis for Curriculum Development (NSF
CCLI Project with T. Greenbowe)

• Investigation of second-semester calculus-based
  physics course (mostly engineering students).
• Written diagnostic questions administered last
  week of class in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (Ntotal
  653).
• Detailed interviews (avg. duration ? one hour)
  carried out with 32 volunteers during 2002 (total
  class enrollment 424).
• interviews carried out after all thermodynamics
  instruction completed

two course instructors, ? 20 recitation
instructors
88
Research Basis for Curriculum Development (NSF
CCLI Project with T. Greenbowe)

• Investigation of second-semester calculus-based
  physics course (mostly engineering students).
• Written diagnostic questions administered last
  week of class in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (Ntotal
  653).
• Detailed interviews (avg. duration ? one hour)
  carried out with 32 volunteers during 2002 (total
  class enrollment 424).
• interviews carried out after all thermodynamics
  instruction completed

two course instructors, ? 20 recitation
instructors
89
Research Basis for Curriculum Development (NSF
CCLI Project with T. Greenbowe)

• Investigation of second-semester calculus-based
  physics course (mostly engineering students).
• Written diagnostic questions administered last
  week of class in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (Ntotal
  653).
• Detailed interviews (avg. duration ? one hour)
  carried out with 32 volunteers during 2002 (total
  class enrollment 424).
• interviews carried out after all thermodynamics
  instruction completed

two course instructors, ? 20 recitation
instructors
90
Research Basis for Curriculum Development (NSF
CCLI Project with T. Greenbowe)

• Investigation of second-semester calculus-based
  physics course (mostly engineering students).
• Written diagnostic questions administered last
  week of class in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (Ntotal
  653).
• Detailed interviews (avg. duration ? one hour)
  carried out with 32 volunteers during 2002 (total
  class enrollment 424).
• interviews carried out after all thermodynamics
  instruction completed
• final grades of interview sample far above class
  average

two course instructors, ? 20 recitation
instructors
91
Research Basis for Curriculum Development (NSF
CCLI Project with T. Greenbowe)

• Investigation of second-semester calculus-based
  physics course (mostly engineering students).
• Written diagnostic questions administered last
  week of class in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (Ntotal
  653).
• Detailed interviews (avg. duration ? one hour)
  carried out with 32 volunteers during 2002 (total
  class enrollment 424).
• interviews carried out after all thermodynamics
  instruction completed
• final grades of interview sample far above class
  average

two course instructors, ? 20 recitation
instructors
92
Grade Distributions Interview Sample vs. Full
Class
93
Grade Distributions Interview Sample vs. Full
Class
Interview Sample 34 above 91st percentile 50
above 81st percentile
94
Predominant Themes of Students Reasoning

• .

95
Predominant Themes of Students Reasoning

1. Understanding of concept of state function in the
   context of energy.
2. Belief that work is a state function.
3. Belief that heat is a state function.
4. Belief that net work done and net heat
   transferred during a cyclic process are zero.
5. Inability to apply the first law of
   thermodynamics.

96
Predominant Themes of Students Reasoning

1. Understanding of concept of state function in the
   context of energy.
2. Belief that work is a state function.
3. Belief that heat is a state function.
4. Belief that net work done and net heat
   transferred during a cyclic process are zero.
5. Inability to apply the first law of
   thermodynamics.

97
Predominant Themes of Students Reasoning

1. Understanding of concept of state function in the
   context of energy.
2. Belief that work is a state function.
3. Belief that heat is a state function.
4. Belief that net work done and net heat
   transferred during a cyclic process are zero.
5. Inability to apply the first law of
   thermodynamics.

98
Predominant Themes of Students Reasoning

1. Understanding of concept of state function in the
   context of energy.
2. Belief that work is a state function.
3. Belief that heat is a state function.
4. Belief that net work done and net heat absorbed
   by a system undergoing a cyclic process are zero.
5. Inability to apply the first law of
   thermodynamics.

99
Predominant Themes of Students Reasoning

1. Understanding of concept of state function in the
   context of energy.
2. Belief that work is a state function.
3. Belief that heat is a state function.
4. Belief that net work done and net heat absorbed
   by a system undergoing a cyclic process are zero.
5. Inability to apply the first law of
   thermodynamics.

100
Predominant Themes of Students Reasoning

1. Understanding of concept of state function in the
   context of energy.
2. Belief that work is a state function.
3. Belief that heat is a state function.
4. Belief that net work done and net heat absorbed
   by a system undergoing a cyclic process are zero.
5. Inability to apply the first law of
   thermodynamics.

101
Understanding of Concept of State Function in the
Context of Energy

• Diagnostic question two different processes
  connecting identical initial and final states.
• Do students realize that only initial and final
  states determine change in a state function?

102
Understanding of Concept of State Function in the
Context of Energy

• Diagnostic question two different processes
  connecting identical initial and final states.
• Do students realize that only initial and final
  states determine change in a state function?

103
Understanding of Concept of State Function in the
Context of Energy

• Diagnostic question two different processes
  connecting identical initial and final states.
• Do students realize that only initial and final
  states determine change in a state function?

104
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
105
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
106
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
107
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
108
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
?U1 ?U2
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
109
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
?U1 ?U2
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
110
Students seem to have adequate grasp of
state-function concept

• Consistently high percentage (70-90) of correct
  responses on relevant questions.
• Large proportion of correct explanations.
• Interview subjects displayed good understanding
  of state-function idea.
• Students major conceptual difficulties stemmed
  from overgeneralization of state-function
  concept.

111
Students seem to have adequate grasp of
state-function concept

• Consistently high percentage (70-90) of correct
  responses on relevant questions, with good
  explanations.
• Interview subjects displayed good understanding
  of state-function idea.
• Students major conceptual difficulties stemmed
  from overgeneralization of state-function
  concept.

112
Students seem to have adequate grasp of
state-function concept

• Consistently high percentage (70-90) of correct
  responses on relevant questions, with good
  explanations.
• Interview subjects displayed good understanding
  of state-function idea.
• Students major conceptual difficulties stemmed
  from overgeneralization of state-function
  concept.

113
Students seem to have adequate grasp of
state-function concept

• Consistently high percentage (70-90) of correct
  responses on relevant questions with good
  explanations.
• Interview subjects displayed good understanding
  of state-function idea.
• Students major conceptual difficulties stemmed
  from overgeneralization of state-function
  concept.

114
Students seem to have adequate grasp of
state-function concept

• Consistently high percentage (70-90) of correct
  responses on relevant questions, with good
  explanations.
• Interview subjects displayed good understanding
  of state-function idea.
• Students major conceptual difficulties stemmed
  from overgeneralization of state-function
  concept. Details to follow . . .

115
Predominant Themes of Students Reasoning

1. Understanding of concept of state function in the
   context of energy.
2. Belief that work is a state function.
3. Belief that heat is a state function.
4. Belief that net work done and net heat absorbed
   by a system undergoing a cyclic process are zero.
5. Inability to apply the first law of
   thermodynamics.

116
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
117
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
118
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
119
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
W1 gt W2
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
120
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
W1 gt W2
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
121
Responses to Diagnostic Question 1 (Work
question)
1999 (N186) 2000 (N188) 2001 (N279) 2002 Interview Sample (N32)
W1 gt W2
W1 W2
W1 lt W2
122
Responses to Diagnostic Question 1 (Work
question)
1999 (N186) 2000 (N188) 2001 (N279) 2002 Interview Sample (N32)
W1 gt W2
W1 W2
W1 lt W2
123
Responses to Diagnostic Question 1 (Work
question)
1999 (N186) 2000 (N188) 2001 (N279) 2002 Interview Sample (N32)
W1 W2 25 26 35


124
Responses to Diagnostic Question 1 (Work
question)
1999 (N186) 2000 (N188) 2001 (N279) 2002 Interview Sample (N32)
W1 W2 25 26 35
Because work is independent of path 14 23

explanations not required in 1999
125
Responses to Diagnostic Question 1 (Work
question)
1999 (N186) 2000 (N188) 2001 (N279) 2002 Interview Sample (N32)
W1 W2 25 26 35 22
Because work is independent of path 14 23 22

explanations not required in 1999
126
Responses to Diagnostic Question 1 (Work
question)
1999 (N186) 2000 (N188) 2001 (N279) 2002 Interview Sample (N32)
W1 W2 25 26 35 22
Because work is independent of path 14 23 22
Other reason, or none 12 13 0
explanations not required in 1999
127
Explanations Given by Interview Subjects to
Justify W1 W2

• Work is a state function.
• No matter what route you take to get to state B
  from A, its still the same amount