130
Wednesday morning
while they learn physics from two consecutive semesters of a calculus-
based introductory college physics course that implements the Investi-
gative Science Learning Environment (ISLE) curriculum. We consider
students’ interaction patterns from two different viewpoints. The first is
based on their positioning, in terms of equity, during peer interactions.
The second is based on the structure of cognitive processes as described
in the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy. Using comparative analysis we examine
the relationship between students’ interactions in these two viewpoints and
their learning as measured by performance in class exams and conceptual
understanding. Additionally, we will attempt to identify the key character-
istics and behaviors of “successful students,” namely those who are able to
fully exploit the affordances of a highly student-centered learning environ-
ment that places an emphasis on self-directed learning.
FF03:
8:50-9 a.m. Quantifying Patterns of Interaction in a
Studio-based ISLE Physics Class
Contributed – David T. Brookes, Florida International University, Miami, FL
33199;
Binod Nainabasti, Florida International University
Yuehai Yang, California State University, Chico
We are interested to examine patterns of behavior and interactions
amongst physics students as they learn in a highly interactive and student-
centered learning environment. This environment is an introductory level
studio-based ISLE physics class taught at Florida International University.
We use a descriptive statistical approach and network analysis to identify
productive or unproductive behavioral factors and try to quantify how
these factors affect students’ learning. We will report on interesting features
and patterns that we discovered. In particular we consider the relative
importance of factors such as how students participate in peer discussions
while working on class activities, how much they take advantage of infor-
mal learning groups outside of class time, how they participate in whole-
class discussions, and even whether students arrive on time to class or not.
FF04:
9-9:10 a.m. Describing Video Viewing Behavior in a
Flipped Introductory Mechanics Course
Contributed – John M. Aiken, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA
30332;
Shih-Yin Lin, Scott S. Douglas, Edwin F. Greco, Michael F. Schatz, Brian D.
Thoms, Georgia Institute of Technology
Marcos D. Caballero, Michigan State University
In fall 2013, Georgia Tech began offering a “flipped” introductory calculus-
based mechanics class as an alternative to the traditional large-enrollment
lecture class. This class “flips” instruction by introducing new material
outside of the classroom through pre-recorded, lecture videos that feature
in-video “clicker” questions. Classroom time is spent working in small
groups solving problems, practicing scientific communication, and peer
evaluation. Video lectures constitute students’ initial introduction to course
material. We analyze how students engage with online lecture videos via
“clickstream” data. Clickstream data consists of time-stamped interactions
with the online video player. Plays, pauses, seeks, and other events are
recorded when the student interacts with the video player. Patterns in this
behavior can emerge and be used to highlight areas of interest in the video
and improve the overall video delivery for future iterations of this course.
FF05:
9:10-9:20 a.m. Explanatory Coherence in an Introduc-
tory Physics for Life Scientists Course
Contributed – Benjamin D. Geller, University of Maryland, College Park,
Department of Physics, College Park, MD 20742;
Benjamin W. Dreyfus, Julia S. Gouvea, Vashti Sawtelle, Chandra Turpen,
University of Maryland, College Park
Life science students crave coherence among the science courses that they
are required to take, and are frustrated when these courses fail to talk to
each other in meaningful ways. In an effort to bridge disciplinary divides,
we have iteratively designed and implemented an Introductory Physics for
Life Scientists (IPLS) course that aims to unpack the physical mechanisms
underlying a number of authentic biological phenomena. We draw on
case-study data to examine what it looks like for students in our course to
make connections between fundamental physical principles and mean-
ingful biological questions. In particular, we explore the multiple ways in
which an explanation can be “mechanistic” in the context of interdisci-
plinary sense making, and the affective markers that indicate satisfactory
explanation. We argue that achieving explanatory coherence in an IPLS
course demands that we take up authentic biological phenomena for
which highly detailed accounts are not practical.
FF06:
9:20-9:30 a.m. Heuristics for Designing Interdisciplin-
ary Learning Environments
Contributed – Chandra Anne Turpen, University of Maryland, College
Park, Department of Physics, College Park, MD 20742;; chandra.turpen@
colorado.edu
Vashti Sawtelle, Benjamin Dreyfus, Benjamin, Geller University of Mary-
land, College Park
Julia Svoboda Gouvea, University of Maryland, College Park & University
of California, Davis
Our research team has been engaged in the iterative redesign of an intro-
ductory physics course for life science (IPLS) majors to explicitly bridge
biology and physics in ways that are authentic to the disciplines. In our
efforts to transform the IPLS course, we draw on the work of others who
have argued that high-quality science instruction recognizes, leverages,
and cultivates the productive beginnings of scientific inquiry in students’
science reasoning by engaging students in making sense of phenomena,
building and refining models, and generating satisfying explanations.
It is unclear however what this learning process should look like at the
college level as students also build from and refine more formal disciplin-
ary knowledge that they have developed across their academic careers.
Reflecting on our successes and failures in developing this course, we
will present our best articulation of what educators should attend to in
designing such interdisciplinary courses.
FF07:
9:30-9:40 a.m. Uncovering Long-term Trends in
Students’ Engagement with Online Homework
Contributed – Craig C. Wiegert, University of Georgia, Department of Phys-
ics and Astronomy, Athens, GA 30602-2451;
Shahab Razavi, University of Georgia
A decade ago, web-based online homework was still somewhat of a nov-
elty for many instructors; today it’s a standard fixture in the introductory
physics course. As online homework usage has grown, the ways in which
students interact with this resource have changed. We present the analy-
sis of seven years’ worth of student usage data from one institution using
the open-source LON-CAPA system. What implications do the evolving
patterns of student activity have for instructors who want to maximize
the pedagogical effectiveness of online homework?
FF08:
9:40-9:50 a.m. Physics Identity and Defining
Interdisciplinary Affinity: Moving Beyond Performance
Contributed – Tyler Scott, Clemson University, Department of Engineering
and Science Education, Clemson, SC 29634;
Zahra Hazari, Geoff Potvin, Florida International University
Gerhard Sonnert, Philip Sadler, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophys-
ics
While interdisciplinarity is often considered a worthy goal of educa-
tion and a tool for better teaching, definitions of interdisciplinarity vary
among education researchers and practitioners. In addition, researchers
and practitioners usually focus on student performance on coursework
that is considered to be interdisciplinary. What this perspective lacks
is a consideration of the affective domain, namely student beliefs and
attitudes about interdisciplinarity. Building on hypothesized dimensions
of interdisciplinarity, we draw from a large-scale national survey to build
a useful measure of interdisciplinary affinity. We also investigate how
interdisciplinary affinity is related to students’ physics and general STEM
identities.
