87
July 13–17, 2013
Tuesday morning
DG03:
11 a.m.-12:30 p.m. Attitudinal Assessment of
Curriculum on the Physics of Medical Instruments
Poster – James K. Johnson,* Portland State University, Portland, OR 97201;
Warren Christensen, North Dakota State University
Ralf Widenhorn, Grace Van Ness, Elizabeth Anderson, Portland State
University
Over the past several years, a curriculum targeting pre-health students
and focused on the physics behind biomedical instruments has been in
development at Portland State University. Recently, an effort to assess the
curriculum’s impact on students has begun. Given the hands-on focus of
the course and positive feedback from students, we hypothesized that it
would positively impact their attitudes toward physics and physics learn-
ing. We administered the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science
Survey (CLASS) in order to cast light on students’ attitudes. The survey
was administered to the summer course and to introductory algebra-based
physics courses at the same university. The summer course “Physics in
Biomedicine” produced a small, nonsignificant shift in student attitudes.
This is a promising result, when contrasted with the significant negative
shift that is the norm among introductory courses and occurred in our
introductory algebra-based physics course.
*Sponsored by Ralf Widenhorn
DG04:
11 a.m.-12:30 p.m. Physics for Biologists: A Laboratory
Curriculum Project
Poster – Kimberly A. Moore, University of Maryland, College Park (PERG),
College Park, MD 20741;
John Giannini, Ben Geller, Wolfgang Losert, University of Maryland
It can be a challenge to create a laboratory curriculum for an introduc-
tory physics class with a strong focus on biology/chemistry connections,
while maintaining an emphasis on real scientific practices. We have created
“open-ended”/”non-cookbook” labs addressing relevant physical issues at
biological scales using a variety of tools, including microscopy, image and
video analysis, electrophoresis, and spectroscopy. In doing so, we have
learned some important lessons for creating IPLS labs: 1) the connections
of physics concepts to biology/chemistry must be explicit; 2) students need
help adapting lab strategies from the protocol-rich, data-rare labs found
in their majors to these protocol-rare, data-rich labs; 3) to construct an
open-ended experience with minimal teacher guidance requires frequent
iterations of equipment assessment and curriculum creation; and 4) the
writing of a “minimal guidance” curriculum is best approached in an
unusual order—supporting documents first! (Part of UMd-PERG NEXUS/
Physics; Supported by funding from HHMI and NSF.)
DG05:
11 a.m.-12:30 p.m. Hands-on Activities Integrated with
Online Resources in a Life Science Physics Course*
Poster – Nancy Beverly, Mercy College, 555 Broadway, Dobbs Ferry, NY
10522;
Hands-on activities can be integrated with online animations and inter-
active simulations to help the life science student explore the physical
mechanisms which underlie living processes and human functioning.
Multiple examples throughout the introductory physics curriculum will be
presented.
DG06:
11 a.m.-12:30 p.m. Impact of Targeted Scientific
Reasoning in the Introductory Physics Lab*
Poster – Carol Fabby, University of Cincinnati, 400 Geology/Physics Bldg.,
PO Box 210011, Cincinnati, OH 45221-0011;
Kathy Koenig, Zach Huard, University of Cincinnati
Recent research indicates that students entering college with formal
reasoning abilities are more proficient learners. However, typical college
courses do not significantly impact these abilities because they do not in-
clude targeted instruction in scientific reasoning. These courses do not pro-
vide the foundation for typical students to develop the necessary scientific
reasoning skills to be successful. In an effort to better target our students’
development of scientific reasoning, we have revised the structure and
topics of the activities in our introductory physics lab courses. Students
are more involved in the actual design of the experiments with more
emphasis placed on student use of evidence-based reasoning in lab
report writing. Online homework and quizzes between lab sessions
provide further targeted support. This poster provides details on how
the new lab curriculum and practice of skills impacts initial develop-
ment of scientific reasoning abilities through gains on a midterm and
pre- and post-test assessments.
*Partially supported by the National Institutes of Health 1RC1RR028402-01
DG07:
11 a.m.-12:30 p.m. Physiology, Physique, and
Physics: Integration of Physics, Anatomy, and
Physiology
Poster – Bijaya Aryal, University of Minnesota-Rochester, 300 University
Square, 111 S Broadway, Rochester, MN 55904; baryal@umn.edu
Robert Dunbar, University of Minnesota-Rochester
We designed and implemented an activity to explore learning gains
associated with integration of physics content into an anatomy and
physiology classroom. This activity is a modified case study used
in three semesters over the last three years when we systematically
altered the activity to explore the impact of specific variables. The
changes allowed us to explore the degree to which students success-
fully incorporate understanding of physics concepts when the learning
activity is connected to a student designed electromyography (EMG)
lab compared to gains when the activity is only associated with a
hands-on activity. Other changes allowed us to explore how using dif-
ferent scenarios effects student understanding of physics concepts. We
studied the impact of the level of abstractness in a test question that is
expected to test students’ quantitative skill related to physics concepts
covered. Student performance across multiple semesters was evaluated
at the individual and small group level.
DG08:
11 a.m.-12:30 p.m. Connecting the Dots: Links
Between Kinetic Theory and Bernoulli’s Principle*
Poster – Katherine Misaiko, University of New England, Biddeford, ME
04005;
du
James Vesenka, University of New England
Kinetic theory and Bernoulli’s principle are fundamental concepts life
science students can use to explain a variety of important biologi-
cal phenomena. We are using a series of simple experiments to help
pinpoint student learning gaps in fluid dynamics based on paired
student interviews. Students were asked to use multiple representations
(diagrams, graphs, math and written descriptions) to explain the fol-
lowing: 1. An “empty” sealed balloon expanding inside a glass jar being
evacuated. 2. A dented Ping-Pong ball expanding upon heating when
in contact with boiling water. 3. A manometer liquid level changing
due to air flowing away from an open end. The interviews suggest that
understanding Bernoulli’s principle requires a solid conceptual under-
standing of kinetic theory, in particular equating pressure with particle
collisions. A “modeling centered” ideal gas law lab has been developed
using semi-quantitative diagrammatic tools that we propose will help
to improve student understanding of Bernoulli’s principle.
*Supported by DUE 1044154, Sponsored by James Vesenka
DG09:
11 a.m.-12:30 p.m. Apparent Paradox Between
Bernoulli’s and Hagen-Poiseuille’s Principles*
Poster – Elizabeth Whitmore, University of New England, Biddeford, ME
04005;
.edu
James Vesenka, University of New England
The research objective is to reconcile the counterintuitive result
students have when applying the Bernoulli principle to a constricted
blood vessel. Students find the pressure decrease with increasing fluid
speed to be at odds with their understanding of the resulting pressure
increase of a blocked artery. In order to evaluate the apparent paradox
generated by Bernoulli’s principle and Hagen-Poiseuille’s principle, stu-
