125
July 13–17, 2013
Wednesday afternoon
tained an initial problem, six isomorphic training problems, and a transfer
problem. Answers and explanations were given verbally. Students in the
cued conditions saw visual cues on the training problems, and those in the
feedback conditions were told if their responses were correct or incorrect.
We discuss the influence of both cueing and feedback on students’ answers
and attention.
*
This work is supported by the National Science Foundation under grant 1138697 as
well as the KSU NSF GK-12 Program under grant NSF DGE-0841414.
GA02:
2:50-3 p.m. Tracking Eye Movements While Viewing
Motion Graphs
Contributed – Jennifer L. Docktor, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse,
Department of Physics, 1725 State St., La Crosse, WI 54601;
Jose Mestre, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Elizabeth Gire, University of Memphis
N. Sanjay Rebello, Adrian Madsen, Kansas State University
Multiple representations are important for learning physics concepts and
solving problems (e.g. interpreting text, equations, pictures, diagrams, and/
or graphs), yet students often struggle to make sense of these representa-
tions. This study investigates how introductory students and graduate stu-
dents view and interpret motion graphs. Participants viewed several graphs
of position, velocity, or acceleration on a computer screen and were asked
to match a region of the graph with a description of the object’s motion. We
compare performance on the questions with audio-recorded explanations
and eye movements recorded using an eye tracker.
GA03:
3-3:10 p.m. A Meta-analysis of Brain-Behavior
Correlations in Problem Solving
Contributed – Jessica E. Bartley, Florida International University, 11200 SW
8th St., CP 204, Miami, FL 33199;
Angela R. Laird, Eric Brewe, Florida International University
Human brain mapping methods offer the opportunity to provide biological
evidence of student engagement in physics conceptual reasoning and prob-
lem solving tasks. We identified brain networks associated with physics
problem solving via a quantitative meta-analysis of component cognitive
processes such as deductive reasoning, spatial skills, and mathematical
calculations. This study assembled functional magnetic resonance imaging
(fMRI) data from the BrainMap database
1
and used computational data
mining techniques to identify the neural correlates associated with these
cognitive processes. The present results were designed to provide ground-
work for larger fMRI work in the domain of PER. Ultimately, we aim to
use this work as the first phase of a study seeking to identify biological evi-
dence to operationalize engagement, embodied experience, and conceptual
metaphor in physics problem solving.
1.A.R. Laird ,J.L. Lancaster, P.T. Fox, “BrainMap: The social evolution of a human
brain mapping database,”
Neuroinformatics
2005, 3:65-78
GA04:
3:10-3:20 p.m. Emphasis on ‘Basic’ Skills in Problem
Solving Sessions
Contributed – Brianne N. Gutmann, University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign,
307 W Elm St., #2, Urbana, IL 61801;
Gary Gladding, University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign
In a supplementary class that aims to help struggling students with
problem solving, I have replaced some of the problem practice with basic
skill practice, instead. Most of the students are potentially high risk to fail
our introductory mechanics class, as flagged by a diagnostic test given
to incoming freshmen. They have completed a preparatory class prior to
this course, and take this extra class concurrently with mechanics. It is
usually focused on problem-solving strategies and lots of practice solving
problems. This time, I am treating half of the sections traditionally, while
the other half spend some of their time working “easier” problems: old
exam problems that most students did really well on, but failing students
did poorly on. This work includes a short quiz and a packet of related prob-
lems. I will discuss how this affected their performance in their mechanics
course.
GA05:
3:20-3:30 p.m. The Role of Participation in
Experimental Design and Problem Solving
Contributed – Binod Nainabasti, Florida International University, 11200 SW 8
St., VH 173, Miami, FL 33199;
David T. Brookes, Florida International University
The context of this study is a calculus-based introductory college physics
course that is a studio-format course implementing the Investigative Sci-
ence Learning Environment (ISLE). Our study analyzes students’ interac-
tions as they work together in groups, engaging in experimental design and
how their interactions are related to their problem-solving performance
in exams. Students are first given an experimental design problem. They
must solve the design problem and learn new physics by working together
in groups of three and collaborating together as a whole class. A day later
they take an individual exam in which one of the problems is related to the
experimental design problem they encountered previously. Using video
data, we identify different ways in which students participate in group dis-
cussions when they engage in the experimental design problem. We then
see if there are patterns in their participation that are connected to their
performance on the related exam question.
GA06:
3:30-3:40 p.m. Team-based and Project-based Learning
in a Flipped Introductory Physics Class
Contributed – Carolann Koleci, Harvard University, 29 Oxford St., Cambridge,
MA 02138;
Eric Mazur, Kelly Miller, Harvard University
Yoo Junehee, Seoul National University/Harvard University
Have you ever considered doing away with lectures and traditional exams?
Imagine a class in which there are no formal lectures and no exams. Envi-
sion students coming prepared for class. Instead of memorizing strands
of equations or regurgitating concepts, students take ownership of their
learning. They become passionate about learning physics because month-
long projects provide the motivation for the learning. What if conceptual
learning gains in such a class were more than double that of a traditional
class? Welcome to Applied Physics 50, our introductory applied physics
course that is team-based and project-based.
GA07:
3:40-3:50 p.m. Lens to Learning: Class-wide Video
Analysis of Peer Instruction Dscussions
Contributed – Laura Tucker, Harvard University, 29 Oxford St., Pierce Hall
293, Cambridge, MA 02138;
Rachel Scherr, Seattle Pacific University
Eric Mazur, Harvard University
Numerous studies show courses taught using Peer Instruction have higher
learning gains than traditional courses on standardized assessments. Yet
we have very few measurements of what actually happens during the peer
discussion component of this pedagogy. To address this need, we recorded
every student discussion in nearly every lecture of an introductory physics
course at a major research university. We will present results from analysis
of these student conversations, providing insight on discussion behavior
over different questions. In addition, we will illustrate the interesting case
of “discovery conversations,” in which all students in a group answer incor-
rectly in the initial poll and discuss only among their group, but one or
more group members answer correctly after discussion.
GA08:
3:50-4 p.m. Investigating the Construction and
Effectiveness of Student Notecards
Contributed – Timothy L. McCaskey, Columbia College, Chicago, Depart-
ment of Science and Mathematics, 600 S. Michigan Ave., Chicago, IL 60605;
In a previous study, I allowed introductory physics students to create a
notecard for their midterm and final exams in an attempt to remove equa-
tion memorizing as a focus of the course. I hoped to use the study of these
cards as an epistemological lens that would uncover their perceptions and
attitudes about the course. Without follow-up questions, though, episte-
