Title: Physics Education Research In Perspective
1Physics Education Research In Perspective
- David E. Meltzer
- Department of Physics and Astronomy
- Iowa State University
- Ames, Iowa
2Collaborators 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
3Collaborators 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
4Collaborators 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
5Collaborators 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
6Collaborators 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
7Collaborators 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
8Collaborators 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
9Collaborators 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
10Collaborators 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
11Outline
- Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
- Investigation of Students Reasoning
- Students reasoning in calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Diverse representational modes in student
learning - Curriculum Development
- Curricular materials for calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Instructional methods and curricular materials
for large-enrollment physics classes - Assessment of Instruction
- Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
Education majors - Measurement of learning gain
12Outline
- Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
- Investigation of Students Reasoning
- Students reasoning in calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Diverse representational modes in student
learning - Curriculum Development
- Curricular materials for calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Instructional methods and curricular materials
for large-enrollment physics classes - Assessment of Instruction
- Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
Education majors - Measurement of learning gain
13Outline
- Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
- Investigation of Students Reasoning
- Students reasoning in calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Diverse representational modes in student
learning - Curriculum Development
- Curricular materials for calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Instructional methods and curricular materials
for large-enrollment physics classes - Assessment of Instruction
- Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
Education majors - Measurement of learning gain
14Outline
- Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
- Investigation of Students Reasoning
- Students reasoning in calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Diverse representational modes in student
learning - Curriculum Development
- Curricular materials for calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Instructional methods and curricular materials
for large-enrollment physics classes - Assessment of Instruction
- Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
Education majors - Measurement of learning gain
15Outline
- Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
- Investigation of Students Reasoning
- Students reasoning in calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Diverse representational modes in student
learning - Curriculum Development
- Curricular materials for calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Instructional methods and curricular materials
for large-enrollment physics classes - Assessment of Instruction
- Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
Education majors - Measurement of learning gain
16Preface Goals and Methods
- Goals of Physics Education Research
- Methods of Physics Education Research
- What PER can NOT do
17Goals 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
18Goals 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
19Goals 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
20Goals 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
21Methods 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
22Methods 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
23Methods 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
24What 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
25What 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
26What 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
27Outline
- Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
- Investigation of Students Reasoning
- Students reasoning in calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Diverse representational modes in student
learning - Curriculum Development
- Curricular materials for calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Instructional methods and curricular materials
for large-enrollment physics classes - Assessment of Instruction
- Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
Education majors - Measurement of learning gain
28Outline
- Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
- Investigation of Students Reasoning
- Students reasoning in calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Diverse representational modes in student
learning - Curriculum Development
- Curricular materials for calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Instructional methods and curricular materials
for large-enrollment physics classes - Assessment of Instruction
- Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
Education majors - Measurement of learning gain
29Active 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
30Outlook for Physics Education Research
- Experience suggests that PER is an attractive
field for prospective graduate students - Recent employment prospects for PER graduates
have been extremely favorable - Small numbers of personnel can have
disproportionately large national impact
31Outlook for Physics Education Research
- Experience suggests that PER is an attractive
field for prospective graduate students - Recent employment prospects for PER graduates
have been extremely favorable - Small numbers of personnel can have
disproportionately large national impact
32Outlook for Physics Education Research
- Experience suggests that PER is an attractive
field for prospective graduate students - Recent employment prospects for PER graduates
have been extremely favorable - Small numbers of personnel can have
disproportionately large national impact
33Outlook for Physics Education Research
- Experience suggests that PER is an attractive
field for prospective graduate students - Recent employment prospects for PER graduates
have been extremely favorable - Small numbers of personnel can have
disproportionately large national impact
34Primary Trends in PER
- Research into Student Understanding
- Research-based Curriculum Development
- Assessment of Instructional Methods
- Preparation of K-12 Physics and Science Teachers
35Primary Trends in PER
- Research into Student Understanding
- Research-based Curriculum Development
- Assessment of Instructional Methods
- Preparation of K-12 Physics and Science Teachers
36Primary Trends in PER
- Research into Student Understanding
- Research-based Curriculum Development
- Assessment of Instructional Methods
- Preparation of K-12 Physics and Science Teachers
37Primary Trends in PER
- Research into Student Understanding
- Research-based Curriculum Development
- Assessment of Instructional Methods
- Preparation of K-12 Physics and Science Teachers
38Primary Trends in PER
- Research into Student Understanding
- Research-based Curriculum Development
- Assessment of Instructional Methods
- Preparation of K-12 Physics and Science Teachers
39Major Curriculum Development Projects
- U.S. Air Force Academy
- Just-in-Time Teaching large classes
- U. Arizona Montana State
- Lecture Tutorials for Introductory Astronomy
- Arizona State U.
- Modeling Instruction primarily high-school
teachers - Davidson College
- Physlets
- Harvard
- ConcepTests Peer Instruction
- Indiana University
- Socratic-Dialogue Inducing Labs
- Iowa State U.
- Workbook for Introductory Physics
- Kansas State U.
- Visual Quantum Mechanics
- U. Massachusetts, Amherst
- Minds-On Physics high school
40Major Curriculum Development Projects contd
- U. Maryland U. Maine CCNY
- New Model Course in Quantum Physics
Activity-based Physics Tutorials - U. Minnesota
- Cooperative Group Problem Solving
- U. Nebraska Texas Tech U.
- Physics with Human Applications
- North Carolina State U. Central Florida
- SCALE-UP large classes Matter and Interactions
- Oregon State U.
- Paradigms in Physics upper-level
- Rutgers Ohio State U.
- Investigative Science Learning Environment
- San Diego State U.
- Constructing Physics Understanding
- Tufts U. Oregon Dickinson College
- Real-time Physics Workshop Physics MBL
- U. Wash
- Physics by Inquiry Tutorials in Introductory
Physics
41Types of Curriculum Development(lots of overlaps)
- Lab-based
- Large-class (interactive lectures)
- Small-class (group learning)
- High-School
- Technology-based
- Upper-level
- Teacher Preparation
42Types of Curriculum Development(lots of overlaps)
- Lab-based
- Large-class (interactive lectures)
- Small-class (group learning)
- High-School
- Technology-based
- Upper-level
- Teacher Preparation
ISU PER projects
43Major PER Research Trends
- Students conceptual understanding
- Development and analysis of diagnostic and
assessment instruments and methods - Students attitudes toward and beliefs about
learning physics - Analysis of students knowledge structure
(context-dependence of students knowledge) - Assessment of students problem-solving skills
- Faculty beliefs about teaching problem solving
- Investigation of group-learning dynamics
44Major PER Research Trends
- Students conceptual understanding
- Development and analysis of diagnostic and
assessment instruments and methods - Students attitudes toward and beliefs about
learning physics - Analysis of students knowledge structure
(context-dependence of students knowledge) - Assessment of students problem-solving skills
- Faculty beliefs about teaching problem solving
- Investigation of group-learning dynamics
ISU PER projects
45Major PER Research Trends
- Students conceptual understanding
- Development and analysis of diagnostic and
assessment instruments and methods - Students attitudes toward and beliefs about
learning physics - Analysis of students knowledge structure
(context-dependence of students knowledge) - Assessment of students problem-solving skills
- Faculty beliefs about teaching problem solving
- Investigation of group-learning dynamics
ISU PER projects
46www.physics.iastate.edu/per/
47Outline
- Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
- Investigation of Students Reasoning
- Students reasoning in calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Diverse representational modes in student
learning - Curriculum Development
- Curricular materials for calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Instructional methods and curricular materials
for large-enrollment physics classes - Assessment of Instruction
- Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
Education majors - Measurement of learning gain
48Outline
- Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
- Investigation of Students Reasoning
- Students reasoning in calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Diverse representational modes in student
learning - Curriculum Development
- Curricular materials for calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Instructional methods and curricular materials
for large-enrollment physics classes - Assessment of Instruction
- Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
Education majors - Measurement of learning gain
49Teacher Preparation(1998-1999)
- Development of Elementary Physics Course Based
on Guided Inquiry - Supported by NSF Course and Curriculum
Development Program - Multiple Goals
- Improve students content knowledge through
guided discovery - Develop students teaching ability and
understanding of scientific process - Mixed Outcomes
- Measurable, but limited, learning gains
- Student attitudes dependent on previous
background
50Teacher Preparation(1998-1999)
- Development of Elementary Physics Course Based
on Guided Inquiry - Supported by NSF Course and Curriculum
Development Program - Multiple Goals
- Improve students content knowledge through
guided discovery - Develop students teaching ability and
understanding of scientific process - Mixed Outcomes
- Measurable, but limited, learning gains
- Student attitudes dependent on previous
background
51Teacher Preparation(1998-1999)
- Development of Elementary Physics Course Based
on Guided Inquiry - Supported by NSF Course and Curriculum
Development Program - Multiple Goals
- Improve students content knowledge through
guided discovery - Develop students teaching ability and
understanding of scientific process - Mixed Outcomes
- Measurable, but limited, learning gains
- Student attitudes dependent on previous
background
52Teacher Preparation(1998-1999)
- Development of Elementary Physics Course Based
on Guided Inquiry - Supported by NSF Course and Curriculum
Development Program - Multiple Goals
- Improve students content knowledge through
guided discovery - Develop students teaching ability and
understanding of scientific process - Mixed Outcomes
- Measurable, but limited, learning gains
- Student attitudes dependent on previous
background
53Outline
- Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
- Investigation of Students Reasoning
- Students reasoning in calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Diverse representational modes in student
learning - Curriculum Development
- Curricular materials for calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Instructional methods and curricular materials
for large-enrollment physics classes - Assessment of Instruction
- Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
Education majors - Measurement of learning gain
54Outline
- Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
- Investigation of Students Reasoning
- Students reasoning in calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Diverse representational modes in student
learning - Curriculum Development
- Curricular materials for calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Instructional methods and curricular materials
for large-enrollment physics classes - Assessment of Instruction
- Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
Education majors - Measurement of learning gain
55Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
- Investigate student learning with standard
instruction - Explore areas of conceptual difficulty
- Develop new materials based on research
- Test and modify materials
- Iterate as needed
56Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
- Investigate student learning with standard
instruction - Explore areas of conceptual difficulty
- Develop new materials based on research
- Test and modify materials
- Iterate as needed
57Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
- Investigate student learning with standard
instruction - Explore areas of conceptual difficulty
- Develop new materials based on research
- Test and modify materials
- Iterate as needed
58Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
- Investigate student learning with standard
instruction - Explore areas of conceptual difficulty
- Develop new materials based on research
- Test and modify materials
- Iterate as needed
59Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
- Investigate student learning with standard
instruction - Explore areas of conceptual difficulty
- Develop new materials based on research
- Test and modify materials
- Iterate as needed
60Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
- Investigate student learning with standard
instruction - Explore areas of conceptual difficulty
- Develop new materials based on research
- Test and modify materials
- Iterate as needed
61Addressing 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 -
62Addressing 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 -
63Addressing 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 -
64Example 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
65Example 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
66Example 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
67Example 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
68Example 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
69Implementation 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
70Implementation 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
71Implementation 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
72Implementation 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
73Implementation 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
74Implementation 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
75Implementation 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
76Implementation 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
77Implementation 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
78Example 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
79Example 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
80Example 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
81Protocol 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
82Protocol 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
83Protocol 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
84Protocol 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
85Protocol 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
86Protocol 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
87(No Transcript)
88(No Transcript)
89b
90common student response
c
b
91e) 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).
92e) 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).
93e) 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).
94e) 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).
952) In the following diagrams, draw arrows
representing force vectors, such that the length
of the arrow is proportional to the magnitude of
the force it represents. Diagram (i) In this
figure, two equal spherical masses (mass M)
are shown. Draw the vectors representing the
gravitational forces the masses exert on each
other. Draw your shortest vector to have a
length equal to one of the grid squares.
Diagram (ii) Now, one of the spheres is
replaced with a sphere of mass 2M. Draw a new
set of vectors representing the mutual
gravitational forces in this case. Diagra
m (iii) In this case, the spheres have masses
2M and 3M. Again, draw the vectors representing
the mutual gravitational forces.
962) In the following diagrams, draw arrows
representing force vectors, such that the length
of the arrow is proportional to the magnitude of
the force it represents. Diagram (i) In this
figure, two equal spherical masses (mass M)
are shown. Draw the vectors representing the
gravitational forces the masses exert on each
other. Draw your shortest vector to have a
length equal to one of the grid squares.
Diagram (ii) Now, one of the spheres is
replaced with a sphere of mass 2M. Draw a new
set of vectors representing the mutual
gravitational forces in this case. Diagra
m (iii) In this case, the spheres have masses
2M and 3M. Again, draw the vectors representing
the mutual gravitational forces.
972) In the following diagrams, draw arrows
representing force vectors, such that the length
of the arrow is proportional to the magnitude of
the force it represents. Diagram (i) In this
figure, two equal spherical masses (mass M)
are shown. Draw the vectors representing the
gravitational forces the masses exert on each
other. Draw your shortest vector to have a
length equal to one of the grid squares.
Diagram (ii) Now, one of the spheres is
replaced with a sphere of mass 2M. Draw a new
set of vectors representing the mutual
gravitational forces in this case. Diagra
m (iii) In this case, the spheres have masses
2M and 3M. Again, draw the vectors representing
the mutual gravitational forces.
982) In the following diagrams, draw arrows
representing force vectors, such that the length
of the arrow is proportional to the magnitude of
the force it represents. Diagram (i) In this
figure, two equal spherical masses (mass M)
are shown. Draw the vectors representing the
gravitational forces the masses exert on each
other. Draw your shortest vector to have a
length equal to one of the grid squares.
Diagram (ii) Now, one of the spheres is
replaced with a sphere of mass 2M. Draw a new
set of vectors representing the mutual
gravitational forces in this case. Diagra
m (iii) In this case, the spheres have masses
2M and 3M. Again, draw the vectors representing
the mutual gravitational forces.
99Post-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.
100Results on Newtons Third Law Question(All
students)
N Post-test Correct
Non-Worksheet 384 61
Worksheet 116 87
(Physics 221 Fall 1999 calculus-based course,
first semester)
101Results on Newtons Third Law Question(Students
who gave incorrect answer on pretest question)
N Post-test Correct
Non-Worksheet 289 58
Worksheet 82 84
(Physics 221 Fall 1999 calculus-based course,
first semester)
102Outline
- Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
- Investigation of Students Reasoning
- Students reasoning in calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Diverse representational modes in student
learning - Curriculum Development
- Curricular materials for calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Instructional methods and curricular materials
for large-enrollment physics classes - Assessment of Instruction
- Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
Education majors - Measurement of learning gain
103Outline
- Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
- Investigation of Students Reasoning
- Students reasoning in calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Diverse representational modes in student
learning - Curriculum Development
- Curricular materials for calorimetry and
thermodynamics - Instructional methods and curricular materials
for large-enrollment physics classes - Assessment of Instruction
- Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
Education majors - Measurement of learning gain
104Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
- Joint project with Tom Greenbowe, ISU Chemistry
Department - Initial support from ISU Center for Teaching
Excellence - Additional support from NSF, Course, Curriculum,
and Laboratory Improvement Educational
Materials Development program
105Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
- Joint project with Tom Greenbowe, ISU Chemistry
Department - Initial support from ISU Center for Teaching
Excellence - Additional support from NSF, Course, Curriculum,
and Laboratory Improvement Educational
Materials Development program
106(No Transcript)
107Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
- Joint project with Tom Greenbowe, ISU Chemistry
Department - Initial support from ISU Center for Teaching
Excellence - Additional support from NSF, Course, Curriculum,
and Laboratory Improvement Educational
Materials Development program
108Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
- Joint project with Tom Greenbowe, ISU Chemistry
Department - Initial support from ISU Center for Teaching
Excellence - Additional support from NSF, Course, Curriculum,
and Laboratory Improvement Educational
Materials Development program
109Investigation of Physics Students Reasoning in
ThermodynamicsDEM, Proc. of PER Conference
(2002)
DEM, submitted to PER Section, Am. J. Phys.
(2003)
- 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).
110This 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?
111This 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?
112Students 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.
- Students major conceptual difficulties stemmed
from overgeneralization of state-function
concept.
113This 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?
114This 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?
115This 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?
116Explanations 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 of work. - For work done take state A minus state B the
process to get there doesnt matter. - Many students come to associate work with
properties (and descriptive phrases) only used by
instructors in connection with state functions.
117This 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?
118This 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?
119This 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
Algebraic Method ?U1 ?U2 Q1 W1 Q2
W2 W1 W2 Q1 Q2
W1 gt W2 ? Q1 gt Q2
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