90
Tuesday morning
Portland
most students rarely derive assistance from textbooks for basic courses,
and (b) knowledge learned in basic courses is ‘fragile’ knowledge that
quickly dissipates. Students therefore gain little knowledge from introduc-
tory courses to prepare them for advanced courses. To overcome these
phenomena, a teaching method was designed to guide students to derive
regular assistance from textbooks. The method credits active reading in
the final course grade. The research population comprised from engineer-
ing students studying a physics course taught with the reading embedded
approach. Respondents’ attitudes were compared through an attitudes
questionnaire administered at the course’s end, with engineering students’
attitudes from a previous study. Results indicated that students from the
reading embedded course were helped by textbooks and thought they were
very significant.
DH07:
11:30-11:40 a.m. What Is Said Matters: Relating Voting
Question Prompts to Participation
Contributed – Dedra Demaree, Oregon State University, Physics, 301 Weni-
ger Hall, Corvallis, OR 97331;
Emily Smith, Kyle McLelland, Oregon State University
Jennifer Roth
Sissi Li, California State University, Fullerton
During four quarters of introductory physics at Oregon State Univer-
sity, participation and engagement in voting activities was measured in
200-person lecture settings. The measure was in part based on students
turning to or discussing with neighbors, or gesturing during in-lecture
activities. Episodes of high and low participation were selected and both
the questions and the instructional prompts were analyzed using emergent
coding. This presentation will focus specifically on the discourse analysis of
the instructional prompts, and outline what prompts correlated with high
participation and what prompts correlated with low participation. It was
found that even subtle statements that can impact the students’ affective
experience impacted their participation. This presentation expands on pre-
vious findings that included only a fraction of the full data set. The author
would like to acknowledge the entire research group that contributed to
this project; too many to name as co-authors of this presentation.
DH08:
11:40-11:50 a.m. Enculturation Using Contrastive Sets
and Framing
Contributed – Paul J. Camp, Spelman College, Physics Department, 350
Spelman Lane, Atlanta, GA 30314;
I describe an instructional technique used in lab to learn how to write
a scientific paper using contrastive sets to prepare for a discussion. This
activity was implemented twice, once as an in-class discussion and once as
out of class activities with an online discussion. I summarize the striking
differences in performance and engagement, which I hypothesize is due to
a framing effect, and is an extraordinarily striking example of how strongly
the students’ frame can alter their engagement and performance.
DH09:
11:50 a.m.-12 p.m. Introducing Students to Active
Learning: “Framing” Strategies*
Contributed – Stephanie V. Chasteen, University of Colorado, Boulder, 390
UBC, Boulder, CO 80309;
Andrew Boudreaux, Western Washington University
Jon D.H. Gaffney, Eastern Kentucky University
How can we introduce our students to active learning strategies? An inter-
active course can challenge or even conflict with student views of learning,
and of the roles of the instructor and students in the classroom. Instructors
are often concerned about lack of engagement and sometimes face active
push-back against interactive teaching strategies. How can we let students
know what is expected of them, to support productive engagement and
buy-in? How can we “frame” for them what the class is about? Through an
informal poll, we have gathered a wide variety of materials from instruc-
tors around the country in order to provide shared resources for instruc-
tors. We will report on common themes and approaches in how instructors
frame active learning classrooms for their students, and describe future
work in this area.
*Materials can be found at
/
DH10:
12-12:10 P.M. Lecture Supported Mini-studio Approach
to Algebra-based Physics: First Steps
Contributed – Jacquelyn J. Chini, University of Central Florida, 4000 Central
Florida Blvd., Orlando, FL 32816,
Talat S. Rahman, University of Central Florida
We will describe and present evidence about the efficacy of the lecture-
supported mini-studio we are designing to overcome some of the potential
barriers to implementing reformed teaching structures at large universities.
At our university, we offer up to 10 sections of studio-based introductory
physics, but these courses serve only half of our introductory students.
To improve learning in our lecture-format classes, we are redesigning our
three-hour lab into a “mini-studio” that combines recitation and labora-
tory activities. We have multiple goals for the design of the mini-studio.
To meet the barrier of disparity in instruction between students attending
mini-studio at the beginning and end of the week, the curriculum must be
flexible. The curriculum should build conceptual understanding as well as
mathematical and problem-solving skills. Additionally, teaching mini-stu-
dio should develop the studio-mode teaching skills of faculty and graduate
students. Our initial efforts have shown improvements in students? perfor-
mance on standard assessments.
DH11:
12:10-12:20 p.m. Examining the Use of Tutorials in a
Large Lecture Environment
Contributed – David P. Smith, University of North Carolina, Department of
Physics and Astronomy, Chapel Hill, NC 27599;
Andrew Boudreaux, Western Washington University
Mila Kryjevskaia, North Dakota State University
The implementation of
Tutorials in Introductory Physics
1
has been wide-
spread throughout the United States. Tutorials are typically implemented in
recitation-style sections of an introductory calculus-based physics course,
although their use has been extended to other modes of instruction. At
UNC at Chapel Hill, we are examining the use of tutorials in a large lecture
environment of an introductory algebra-based physics course. In each
lecture, tutorial instruction is integrated with traditional instruction, with
tutorial questions often serving as motivation for the introduction of new
concepts. The efficacy of the instruction is currently being investigated
through the comparison of online conceptual pretest results to those on
post-test questions administered on course exams. Preliminary findings
and relevant comparisons to data from other universities will be presented.
1. L.C. McDermott, P.R.L. Heron, P.S. Shaffer, and the Physics Education Group at the
University of Washington,
Tutorials in Introductory Physics,
Pearson Custom Publish-
ing, 2012.
DH12:
12:20-12:30 p.m. Comparing Problem-based Learning
and Video Analysis as Strategies in Learning Concepts of
Force and Motion
Contributed – Manuel T. Eusebio, Higher Colleges of Technology-Abu Dhabi
Men’s College, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates;
Two groups of 20 students each from the Bachelor Engineering Technology
Program of the Abu Dhabi Men’s College, Higher Colleges of Technology,
who are currently enrolled in Physics I in spring 2012-2013, will serve as
respondents in this study.The groups will alternately be exposed to prob-
lem-based learning and video analysis instruction strategies. A pre-test
and a post-test utilizing selected items from Forced Concept Inventory and
researcher-constructed items in force and motion together with a percep-
tions inventory related to the use of the two strategies will be administered
to the respondents. Mean achievement in each topic will be investigated
and students’ reactions regarding the use of the two strategies, specifically
students’ attitude, motivation, and enjoyment afforded by the two strategies
in understanding the lessons will be extracted from the data.
