UMD Physics Education Research

Goertzen, Scherr, Elby, PRST-PER, (2009)

2009-11-04T14:47:00.004-05:00

Accounting for tutorial teaching assistants' buy-in to reform instruction

Download a copy here.

Renee Michelle Goertzen, Rachel E. Scherr, and Andrew Elby

Accepted to the Physical Review Special Topics: Physics Education Research.

Abstract. Successful implementation of tutorials includes establishing norms for learning in the tutorial classroom. The teaching assistants (TAs) who lead each tutorial section are important arbiters of these norms. TAs who value (buy into) tutorials are more likely to convey their respect for the material and the tutorial process to the students, as well as learning more themselves. We present a case study of a TA who does not buy into certain aspects of the tutorials he teaches and demonstrate how his lack of buy-in affects specific classroom interactions. We would hope to design professional development programs to help TAs appreciate the power of tutorial instruction. However, our research suggests that the typical professional development activities offered to tutorial TAs are not likely to be effective. Instead, it appears that what we call the “social and environmental context” of the tutorials – including classroom, departmental, and institutional levels of implementation – has the potential to strongly affect TA buy-in to tutorials, and probably outweighs the influence of any particular activity that we might prepare for them.

Redish & Gupta, GIREP Conference Presentation (2009)

2009-08-23T12:59:00.004-04:00

Making Meaning with Math in Physics

Edward F. Redish and Ayush Gupta

Contributed paper presented at GIREP2009, Leicester, UK, August 20, 2009.

Physics makes powerful use of mathematics, yet how this happens is often poorly understood. Professionals closely integrate their mathematical symbology with physical meaning, resulting in a powerful and productive knowledge structures. But because of the way the cognitive system builds expertise, instructors who are expert physicists may have difficulty in unpacking their well-integrated knowledge in order to understand the difficulties novice students have in learning their subject. Despite the fact that students may have previously been exposed to ideas in math classes, the addition of physical contexts can produce severe barriers to learning and sense-making. In order to better understand student difficulties and to unpack expert knowledge, we adopt and adapt ideas and methods from cognitive semantics, a sub-branch of linguistics devoted to understanding how meaning is associated with language. We illustrate this with examples spanning the physics curriculum.

Redish & Bing, GIREP Conference Poster (2009)

2009-08-23T12:51:00.004-04:00

Using Math in Physics: Warrants and Epistemological Frames

Edward F. Redish and Thomas J. Bing

Prepared in conjunction with Symposium, “Mathematization in Physics Lessons: Problems and Perspectives”, R. Karam and G. Pospiech, organizers. GIREP meeting, Leicester, UK, 18. August, 2009.

Abstract: Mathematics is an essential component of university level science, but it is more complex than a straightforward application of rules and calculation. Using math in science critically involves the blending of ancillary information with the math in a way that both changes the way that equations are interpreted and provides metacognitive support for recovery from errors. We have made ethnographic observations of groups of students solving physics problems in classes ranging from introductory algebra based physics to graduate quantum mechanics. These lead us to conjecture that expert problem solving in physics requires the development of the complex skill of mixing different classes of warrants – the ability to blend physical, mathematical, and computational reasons for constructing and believing a result. In order to analyze student behavior along this dimension, we have created analytical tools including epistemic frames and games. These should provide a useful lens on the development of problem solving skills and permit an instructor to recognize the development of sophisticated problem solving behavior even when the student makes mathematical errors.

(List of references)

Redish, Cooke, Dobbins, & Hall, GIREP Conference Poster (2009)

2009-08-23T12:43:00.005-04:00

Transforming the Physics Education of Undergraduate Biology Students in Introductory Physics and Biology Courses

Edward F. Redish, Todd J. Cooke, Heather D. Dobbins, and Kristi L. Hall

Poster presented at GIREP2009, Leicester, UK, August 2009.

Abstract: In 2003, the US National Academy of Sciences issued the BIO 2010 report that called for the increased incorporation of mathematics, physics, and chemistry into undergraduate biology curriculum, and for a corresponding increase in the biological relevance of introductory science courses for biologists. This initiative has led to widespread interdisciplinary efforts that are transforming the way mathematics and chemistry is taught to US biology students, but it has not prompted comparable reform in physics. There appear to be a number of reasons for this lag. Many Physics faculty are hesitant about pruning and reorganizing traditional content and may not be familiar with the content that biologists feel is relevant and useful, while many Biology faculty are hesitant about including physics in their biology classes explicitly. At the University of Maryland, a group of physicists and biologists have started working together to better understand the roadblocks to implementing a coordinated revision of our introductory biology and physics courses for biology students. The challenges facing this effort occur at a variety of levels. 1) Introductory physics for biologists is often a “cut-down” version of introductory physics for engineers. As such, it inherits some inappropriate approaches. For example, it introduces the second law of Thermodynamics via heat engines and ignores chemical energy. This approach is inappropriate because organisms cannot convert temperature gradients into useful metabolic energy, whereas other forms of physical and chemical energy are continually being transformed in biological systems. 2) Introductory biology classes typically are “fact-based”, relying on extensive reading and focusing on concept mastery, including introducing the student to many different terms, processes, and relationships, while physics courses are structured to emphasize complex reasoning from a small set of fundamental laws and principles. 3) Physics classes rely heavily on problem-solving and are over the past decade have developed extensive active-engagement learning pedagogy, whereas biology courses still tend to rely heavily on direct lecture and protocol-based laboratories. 4) Biology classes tend to use mathematics to represent qualitative dependences, while physics classes treat math as a fundamental reasoning tool. Our poster presents examples and suggestions for bridging these gaps. Our goal is to initiate a widespread discussion among physicists and biologists regarding the physics challenge in the BIO 2010 initiative.

Redish & Sayre, GIREP Conference Poster (2009)

2009-08-23T12:31:00.006-04:00

Resources: A Theoretical Framework for Physics Education

Edward F. Redish and Eleanor C. Sayre

Poster presented at GIREP2009, Leicester, UK, August 2009

Abstract: The Resources Framework (RF) is a structure for creating phenomenological models of high-level thinking. It is based on a combination of core stable results selected from educational research phenomenology, cognitive neuroscience, and behavioral science. As a framework (as opposed to a theory), it provides ontologies -- classes of structural elements and their behaviors -- rather than providing specific structures. These ontologies permit the creation of models that bridge existing models of knowledge and learning, such as the alternative conceptions theory and the knowledge in pieces approach, or cognitive modeling and the socio-cultural approach. Structurally, the RF is an associative network model with control structure and dynamic binding. As a phenomenological and descriptive framework, it does not (yet) create mathematical models from low-level elements. This poster outlines the RF and shows how it gives new ways of looking at traditional issues such as transfer, concepts, ontologies, and epistemology.

(List of references.)

Lippmann-Kung, Am J Phys (2005)

2009-01-27T12:00:00.002-05:00

Teaching the Concepts of Measurement: One example of a concept-based laboratory course

R. Lippmann-Kung, American Journal of Physics, 73, p 771-777 (2005).

Abstract: For students to successfully complete an experiment, they must have an understanding of measurement and its related uncertainty.We argue for teaching the concepts of measurement and not only the calculations. An example of a concepts-based laboratory course is given, outlining the concepts presented, the design of the laboratory time, and the laboratory tasks. The concepts are briefly described and two often-overlooked concepts, predictive versus descriptive questions and internal versus external variation, are explained. Our survey results show that the fraction of students using range and not just average when comparing two data sets approximately doubled after instruction.

Lippmann-Kung, AREA Meeting (2002)

2009-01-27T11:57:00.002-05:00

Analyzing Students' Use of Metacognition During Laboratory Activities

R. Lippmann-Kung, AREA Meeting, New Orleans, LA (2002).

Abstract: In this paper we use a discourse analysis tool to investigate student behavior in different types of laboratories, from more traditional to free inquiry labs. We also correlate students’ behavior with their explicit metacognitive statements, which allows us to differentiate between productive and unproductive metacognition.

Tuminaro & Redish, PER Conference Proceedings (2003)

2009-01-27T11:43:00.003-05:00

Understanding Students' Poor Performance on Mathematical Problem Solving in Physics

J. Tuminaro & E. F. Redish, Proceedings of the Physics Education Research Conference, Madison, WI (Aug 6-7, 2003).

Redish, Wittmann, Bao & Steinberg, NARST Annual Meeting (1999)

2009-01-27T11:23:00.003-05:00

The Influence of Student Understanding of Classical Physics when Learning Quantum Physics

E. F. Redish, M. C. Wittmann, L. Bao & R. N. Steinberg, Research on the Teaching and Learning of Quantum Sciences, NARST Annual Meeting, Boston, MA (1999).

Abstract: Understanding quantum mechanics is of growing importance, not just to future physicists, but to future engineers, chemists, and biologists. Fields in which understanding quantum mechanics is important include photonics, mesoscopic engineering, and medical diagnostics. It is therefore not surprising that quantum is being taught more often to more students starting as early as high school. However, quantum mechanics is difficult and abstract. Furthermore, understanding many classical concepts is prerequisite to a meaningful understanding of quantum systems.

In this paper, we describe research results of two examples of the influence of student understanding of classical concepts when learning quantum mechanics. for each example, we describe difficulties students have in the classical regime and how these difficulties seem to impair student learning of quantum concepts. We briefly discuss how these difficulties can be addressed.

Obviously the examples described in this paper are not intended to be exhaustive. Instead, we have two objectives. The first is to highlight the importance of having a strong conceptual base when learning more advanced topics in physics. The second is to illustrate the importance of continuously and systematically probing student learning by using the tools of physics education research.

Wittmann, Steinberg & Redish, Int J Sci Ed (2003)

2009-01-27T11:11:00.004-05:00

Understanding and Affecting Student Reasoning about Sound Waves

M. C. Wittmann, R. N. Steinberg & E. F. Redish, International Journal of Science Education, 25(8), p 991-1013 (2003).

Abstract:Student learning of sound waves can be helped through the creation of group-learning classroom materials whose development and design rely on explicit investigations into student understanding. We describe reasoning in terms of sets of resources, i.e. grouped building blocks of thinking that are commonly used in many different settings. Students in our university physics classes often used sets of resources that were different from the ones we wish them to use. By designing curriculum materials that ask students to think about the physics from a different view, we bring about improvement in student understanding of sound waves. Our curriculum modifications are specific to our own classes, but our description of student learning is more generally useful for teachers. We describe how students can use multiple sets of resources in their thinking, and raise questions that should be considered by both instructors and researchers.

Wittmann, International J of Science Ed (2002)

2009-01-21T18:10:00.005-05:00

The Object Coordination Class Applied to Wavepulses: Analysing Student Reasoning in Wave Physics

M. C. Wittmann, International Journal of Science Education, 24(1), p 97-118 (2002). (link to journal article)

Abstract: Detailed investigations of student reasoning show that students approach the topic of wave physics using both event-like and object-like descriptions of wavepulses, but primarily focus on object properties in their reasoning. Student responses to interview and written questions are analysed using diSessa and Sherin's coordination class model which suggests that student use of specific reasoning resources is guided by possibly unconscious cues. Here, the term reasoning resources is used in a general fashion to describe any of the smaller grain size models of reasoning (p-prims, facets of knowledge, intuitive rules, etc) rather than theoretically ambiguous (mis)conceptions. Student applications of reasoning resources, including one previously undocumented, are described. Though the coordination class model is extremely helpful in organising the research data, problematic aspects of the model are also discussed.

Abbott, Saul, Parker & Beichner, Am J Phys PER Suppl (2000)

2009-01-15T14:43:00.004-05:00

Can one lab make a difference?

J. M. Saul, D. S. Abbott, G. W. Parker & R. J. Beichner, American Journal of Physics, Physics Education Research Supplement, 68(S1), S60-S61 (2000). (link to journal article)

Sabella & Steinberg, Physics Teacher (1997)

2009-01-15T14:38:00.003-05:00

Performance on multiple-choice diagnostics and complementary exam problems

M. S. Sabella & R. N. Steinberg, The Physics Teacher, 35(3), p 150-155 (1997). (link to journal article)

Abstract: Multiple-choice diagnostic tests are becoming increasingly popular at many levels in the physics education community. They are regularly used to assess curriculum and to measure student understanding of basic concepts. Their multiple-choice format makes them easy to implement and analyze. This has led to the great benefit of an increased awareness of students’ conceptual difficulties.

Since its publication in this journal, the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) has become extremely popular with much attention given to student scores. The FCI therefore plays a major role in the development of curriculum and instructional strategies. Despite such importance, there are only a few studies published on how student performance on the FCI correlates with their understanding of the subject matter.

In order to help physics educators interpret the results of the FCI, as well as other multiple-choice diagnostics, it is clear that further research is needed. The Physics Education Research Group at the University of Maryland has written open-ended examination problems that correspond to several FCI questions. The FCI was administered during the last week of the semester and the exam problems were included the following week on final exams of first semester introductory calculus-based physics classes at the University of Maryland. In this article, we describe the correlation between student performance on the FCI and the corresponding exam problems.

Layman & Krajcik, Innovations in Science and Tech Ed (1992)

2009-01-15T14:26:00.002-05:00

The microcomputer and practical work in science laboratories

J. Layman & J. Krajcik, In D. Layton (Ed.) Innovations in Science and Technology Education, IV, UNESCO, p. 171 (1992). (html version)

Abstract: The microcomputer can now be used as a tool in the laboratory by students of all ages. The ability to connect a device (a probe) to the computer that can measure things in the real world (such as temperature, position, sound intensity, pH, light intensity and force) now allows students and teachers to acquire information about the world in a way that is new and exciting and can make a major contribution to the science conceptual development of the user. The ability of the microcomputer to transform these data into a real-time graph as the experiment progresses is a second critical contribution to conceptual development. This personally-observed information from the real world can play a major role in honoring the constructivist view of learning that suggests that each person constructs his or her personal world view. A major factor in this process is the quality of each individual's interaction with physical systems and the personal effort expended to create explanations and understandings of a variety of science concepts rendered visible by the system. When the computer plays a role in this manner, it will be identified as a Microcomputer-Based Laboratory (MBL). The combination of the equipment and the computer programs required to enable the computer to serve as a laboratory device will be called probeware. This present description contrasts sharply with the limited description of the micro-computer as a laboratory instrument in New Trends in Physics Teaching (Layman, 1984).

Teachers in today's classrooms and students currently enrolled in our colleges and universities still have limited opportunities to develop fully their own set of science concepts and rarely have an opportunity to use the microcomputer in the laboratory in support of this. An MBL based program will be described that was designed for practicing middle school teachers and recommendations will be offered for the type of commitment that has to be made in the sciences and in science education by teachers involved in training and professional development activities.

Layman & Shama, Conference in Collegiate Mathematics Ed (1997)

2009-01-15T14:23:00.003-05:00

The Role of Representations in Learning an Interdisciplinary Mathematics and Physics University Course

J. Layman & G. Shama, Presented at the Research Conference in Collegiate Mathematics Education, Central Michigan University (Sept 1997). (html version)

Abstract: The University of Maryland offers a physics course as part of the Maryland collaborative for teachers' preparation [MCTP] project. One of the course aims is to promote the learning of the concept of a function through the learning of physics. The students learn in small groups, through problem solving and with the aid of microcomputer based laboratories. Students are asked to examine and find connections between experiments, stories, graphs and algebraic representations. Analysis of observations of students' group work in the course revealed that experiments differed from stories in many characteristics as graphs differed from algebraic expressions. Similarities were found among the translation process from an experiment or a graph to a story or an algebraic representation. Similarities were also found between the opposing direction translations. These translations differed in many characteristics from translations between graphs to experiments and from translations between algebraic equations to stories. According to the above analysis the four situations -- experiment, story, graphical and algebraic representations -- can be presented has vertexes of a parallelogram. Each edge and diagonal of the parallelogram represents a bi-directional arrow of possible translations. Between parallel edges there are many similarities.

Jolly, Zollman, Rebello & Dimitrova, Am J Phys (1998)

2009-01-15T14:18:00.003-05:00

Visualizing motion in potential wells

P. Jolly, D. Zollman, N. Rebello & A. Dimitrova, American Journal of Physics, 66(1), p 57-63 (19998). (link to journal article)

Abstract: The concept of potential-energy diagrams is of fundamental importance in the study of quantum physics. Yet, students are rarely exposed to this powerful alternative description in introductory classes and thus have difficulty comprehending its significance when they encounter it in beginning-level quantum courses. We describe a learning unit that incorporates a sequence of computer-interfaced experiments using dynamics or air-track systems. This unit is designed to make the learning of potential-energy diagrams less abstract. Students begin by constructing the harmonic or square-well potential diagrams using either the velocity data and assuming conservation of energy or the force-displacement graph for the elastic interaction of an object constrained by springs or bouncing off springy blocks. Then, they investigate the motion of a rider magnet interacting with a configuration of field magnets and plot directly the potential-energy diagrams using a magnetic field sensor. The ease of measurement allows exploring the motion in a large variety of potential shapes in a short duration class.

Bao, Hogg & Zollman, Am J Phys (2002)

2009-01-15T14:10:00.002-05:00

Model analysis of fine structures of student models: An Example with Newton's Third Law

L. Bao, K. Hogg & D. Zollman, American Journal of Physics, 70(7), p 766 778 (July 2002). (link to journal article)

Abstract: In problem-solving situations, the contextual features of the problems affect student reasoning. Using Newton's third law as an example, we study the role of context in students' uses of alternative conceptual models. We have identified four contextual features that are frequently used by students in their reasoning. Using these results, a multiple-choice survey was developed to probe the effects of the specific contextual features on student reasoning. Measurements with this instrument show that different contextual features can affect students' conceptual learning in different ways. We compare student data from different populations and instructions and discuss the implications.

Conlin, Gupta, Scherr & Hammer, AIP Conf Proceedings (2007)

2009-01-15T13:59:00.004-05:00

The Dynamics of Students' Behaviors and Reasoning During Collaborative Physics Tutorial Sessions

L. Conlin, A. Gupta, R. Scherr & D. Hammer, AIP Conference Proceedings 951, Physics Education Research Conference, p 69-72 (2007). (html version)

Abstract: We investigate the dynamics of student behaviors (posture, gesture, vocal register, visual focus) and the substance of their reasoning during collaborative work on inquiry-based physics tutorials. Scherr has characterized student activity during tutorials as observable clusters of behaviors separated by sharp transitions, and has argued that these behavioral modes reflect students' epistemological framing of what they are doing, i.e., their sense of what is taking place with respect to knowledge. We analyze students' verbal reasoning during several tutorial sessions using the framework of Russ, and find a strong correlation between certain behavioral modes and the scientific quality of students' explanations. We suggest that this is due to a dynamic coupling of how students behave, how they frame an activity, and how they reason during that activity. This analysis supports the earlier claims of a dynamic between behavior and epistemology. We discuss implications for research and instruction.

Gupta, Hammer & Redish, Proceedings for the International Conf for the Learning Sciences (2008)

2009-01-15T13:53:00.003-05:00

Towards a Dynamic Model of Learners' Ontologies in Physics

A. Gupta, D. Hammer & E. F. Redish, Proceedings of the International Conference for the Learning Sciences, Issue 8 [ISSN: 1814-9316]. (2008)

Redish, Talk: AAPT National Meeting (2001)

2009-01-15T13:45:00.002-05:00

What can astronomy education learn from physics education research?

E. F. Redish, Invited talk presented at AAPT National Meeting, San Diego (January 2001). (frame html version)

Redish, Talk: Ganiel Symposium (2001)

2009-01-15T13:41:00.002-05:00

Metacognition and instructional design: Theory-driven goals and methods in a large university physics class

E. F. Redish, talk given at Ganiel Symposium, Rehovoth, Israel (September 14, 2001). (frame html version)

Redish, Talk: Conf on Integrating Math and Science Ed Research (2002)

2009-01-15T13:38:00.002-05:00

Our Model of how a Student "Works": Does it matter for teaching science?

E. F. Redish, talk given at the Conference on Integrating Science and Math Education Research, Orono, Maine (June 23, 2002).

Redish, Talk: Physics Colloquium (2003)

2009-01-15T13:34:00.002-05:00

Rethinking College Physics: What do we have to offer biology students?

E. F. Redish, talk given as the UMD Physics Department Colloquium, College Park, MD (February 11, 2003). (frame html version)

Redish, Talk: APS-AAPT Joint Regional Meeting (2003)

2009-01-15T13:30:00.004-05:00

The Future of Physics Education: Building an Applied Science?

E. F. Redish, Talk given at the APS-AAPT Joint Regional Meeting, Berkeley, CA (November 15, 2003). (frame html version)

Hodari & Hufnagel, Am J Phys Letter (1999)

2009-01-15T12:41:00.002-05:00

Diamonds, emeralds, rubies, and sapphires

A. Hodari & B. Hufnagel, Letter to the editor, American Journal of Physics, 67(9), p 753 (September 1999). (html version)

Saul, PhD Dissertation (1998)

2009-01-15T07:14:00.003-05:00

Beyond problem solving: Evaluating introductory physics courses through the hidden curriculum

J. M. Saul, Ph.D. Dissertation, E. F. Redish (advisor), (1998). (html TOC and abstract)

pdfs: Intro, Ch 1, Ch 2, Ch 3, Ch 4, Ch 5, Ch 6, Ch 7, Ch 8, Ch 9, Ch 10, Ch 11

Abstract: A large number of innovative approaches have been developed based on Physics Education Research (PER) to address student difficulties introductory physics instruction. Yet, there are currently few widely accepted assessment methods for determining the effectiveness of these methods. This dissertation compares the effectiveness of traditional calculus-based instruction with University of Washington's Tutorials, University of Minnesota's Group Problem Solving & Problem Solving Labs, and Dickinson College's Workshop Physics. Implementation of these curricula were studied at ten undergraduate institutions. The research methods used include the Force Concept Inventory (FCI), the Maryland Physics Expectation (MPEX) survey, specially designed exam problems, and interviews with student volunteers. The MPEX survey is a new diagnostic instrument developed specifically for this study.

Instructors often have learning goals for their students that go beyond having them demonstrate mastery of physics through typical end-of-chapter problems on exams and homeworks. Because these goals are often not stated explicitly nor adequatelyreinforced through grading and testing, we refer to this kind of learning goal as part of the course's ìhidden curriculum.î In this study, we evaluate two aspects of student learning from this hidden curriculum in the introductory physics sequence: conceptual understanding and expectations (cognitive beliefs that affect how students think about and learn physics).

We find two main results. First, the exam problems and the pre/post FCI results on students conceptual understanding showed that the three research-based curricula were more effective than traditional instruction for helping students learn velocity graphs, Newtonian concepts of force and motion, harmonic oscillator motion, and interference. Second, although the distribution of students' expectations vary for different student populations, the overall distributions differ considerably from what expert physics instructors would like them to have and differ even more by the end of the first year. Only students from two of the research-based sequences showed any improvement in their expectations.

Wittmann, PhD Dissertation (1998)

2009-01-14T16:15:00.000-05:00

Making sense of how students come to an understanding of physics: An example from mechanical waves

M. C. Wittmann, Ph.D. Dissertation, E. F. Redish (advisor), (1998). (html TOC and abstract)

pdfs: Intro, Ch 1, Ch 2, Ch 3, Ch 4, Ch 5, Ch 6, Ch 7, Ch 8

Abstract: While physics education research (PER) has traditionally focused on introductory physics, little work has been done to organize and develop a model of how students come to make sense of the material they learn. By understanding how students build their knowledge of a specific topic, we can develop effective instructional materials. In this dissertation, I describe an investigation of student understanding of mechanical and sound waves, how we organize our findings, and how our results lead to the development of curriculum materials used in the classroom.

The physics of mechanical and sound waves at the introductory level (using small-amplitude approximation in the dispersionless system) involves fundamental concepts that are difficult for many students. These include: distinguishing between medium properties and boundary conditions, recognizing local phenomena (e.g. superposition) in extended systems, using mathematical functions of two variables, and interpreting and applying the mathematics of waves in a variety of settings. Student understanding of these topics is described in the context of wave propagation, superposition, use of mathematics, and other topics. Investigations were carried out using the common tools of PER, including free response, multiple choice, multiple-response, and semi-guided individual interview questions.

Student reasoning is described in terms of primitives generally used to simplify reasoning about complicated topics. I introduce a previously undocumented primitive, the object as point primitive. We organize student descriptions of wave physics around the the idea of patterns of associations that use common primitive elements of reasoning. We can describe students as if they make an analogy toward Newtonian particle physics. The analogy guides students toward describing a wave as if it were a point particle described by certain unique parts of the wave. A diagnostic test has been developed to probe the dynamics of student reasoning during the course of instruction.

We have replaced traditional recitation instruction with curriculum materials designed to help students come to a more complete and appropriate understanding of wave physics. We find that the research-based instructional materials are more effective than the traditional lecture setting in helping students apply appropriate reasoning elements to the physics of waves.

Bao, PhD Dissertation (1999)

2009-01-14T16:10:00.001-05:00

Using the Context of Physics Problem Solving to Evaluate the Coherence of Student Knowledge

L. Bao, Ph.D. Dissertation, E. F. Redish (advisor), (1999). (html TOC and abstract)

pdfs: Ch 1, Ch 2, Ch 3, Ch 4, Ch 5, Ch 6, Ch 7, Ch 8, Ch 9

Abstract: A good understanding of how students understand physics is of great importance for developing and delivering effective instructions. This research is an attempt to develop a coherent theoretical and mathematical framework to model the student learning of physics. The theoretical foundation is based on useful ideas from theories in cognitive science, education, and physics education. The emphasis of this research is made on the development of a mathematical representation to model the important mental elements and the dynamics of these elements, and on numerical algorithms that allow quantitative evaluations of conceptual learning in physics.

In part I, a model-based theoretical framework is proposed. Based on the theory, a mathematical representation and a set of data analysis algorithms are developed. This new method is called Model Analysis, which can be used to obtain quantitative evaluations on student models with data from multiple-choice questions. Two specific algorithms are discussed in great detail. The first algorithm is the concentration factor. It measures how student responses on multiple-choice questions are distributed. A significant concentration on certain choices of the questions often implies the existence of common student models that are associated to those choices. The second algorithm is model evaluation which analyzes student responses to form student model vectors and student model density matrix. By studying the density matrix, we can obtain quantitative evaluations of specific models used by students. Application examples with data from FCI, FMCE, and Wave Test are discussed. A number of additional algorithms are introduced to deal with unique aspects of different tests and to make quantitative assessment of various features of the tests. Implications on test design techniques are also discussed with the results from the examples.

Based n the theory and algorithms developed in part I, research is conducted to investigate student understandings of quantum mechanics. Common student models on classical prerequisites and important quantum concepts are identified. For exampled, many students interpret the quantum wavefunction as the representation of the energy of a particle. Based on the research results, multiple-choice instruments are developed to probe student models analysis algorithms. A set of quantum tutorials are also developed and implemented instruction. Results from exams and student interviews indicate that the quantum tutorials are effective.

Sabella, PhD Dissertation (1999)

2009-01-14T15:59:00.000-05:00

Using the context of physics problem solving to evaluate the coherence of student knowledge

M. S. Sabella, Ph.D. Dissertation, E. F. Redish (advisor), (1999). (html TOC and abstract)

pdfs: Intro, Ch 1, Ch 2, Ch 3, Ch 4, Ch 5, Ch 6, Ch 7, Ch 8, Ch 9

Abstract: We use the context of problem solving to show that students exhibit a local coherence but not global coherence in their physics knowledge. When presented with a problem-solving task, students often activate a coherent set of knowledge called a schema to solve the problem. This schema of strongly related knowledge and procedures. Although the schemas students develop in the physics course are usually sufficient in the class, they are often insufficient for solving complex problems. Complex problems require that students have a deep understanding where they have integrated their qualitative knowledge with their quantitative knowledge and have integrated related physics topics. We show that our students activate schemas consisting of small amounts of knowledge and these schemas are often isolated from other schemas.

Physics Education Research (PER) has shown that students in introductory physics lack a deep understanding of physics principles and concepts. Through research-based curricula, conceptual understanding can be improved. In addition PER has shown that these students can be taught problem solving skills through a modified curriculum. Despite these improvements, students still have difficulty developing a coherent knowledge of physics. In particular, students often have difficulty connecting related physics concepts. In addition, they view quantitative problems and qualitative questions as distinct types of tasks, possessing different types of knowledge and different sets of rules for responding.

We discuss some possible methods that physics instructors and physics education researchers can use to examine coherence in student knowledge. Using these methods, we provide evidence for the local coherence in student physics knowledge by identifying distinct schemas for qualitative and quantitative knowledge. After identifying some of these difficulties in student understanding, we look at how students are connecting their qualitative knowledge to quantitative knowledge after going through concept-based curriculum. The research benefits as well as shortcomings in the concept-based curriculum and talk about possible modifications that may foster coherence. In addition, we compare performance on quantitative questions between a physics class using the traditional problem-solving recitation and a class using Tutorials in Introductory Physics on quantitative problems.

Lippmann, PhD Dissertation (2003)

2009-01-14T15:55:00.001-05:00

Students' understanding of measurement and uncertainty in the physics laboratory: Social construction, underlying concepts, and quantitative analysis

R. F. Lippmann, Ph.D. Dissertation, E. F. Redish (advisor), (2003). (html TOC and abstract)(appendices)

Abstract: In the physical sciences and other fields, conclusions are made from experimental data. To succeed in such fields, people must know how to gather, analyze, and draw conclusions from data: not just following steps, but understanding the concepts of measurement and uncertainty. We design the Scientific Community Laboratory (SCL) to teach students to utilize their everyday skills of argument and decision-making for data gathering and analysis. We then develop research tools for studying students’ understanding of measurement and uncertainty and use these tools to investigate students in the traditional laboratory and in the SCL.

For students to apply their everyday skills of argument and decision-making, they must be in a state of mind (a frame) where they consider these skills productive. The laboratory design should create an environment which encourages such a frame. We determine student’s frames through information reported by students in interviews and surveys and through analyzing students’ behavior. We find that the time students spend sense-making in the SCL is five times more than in traditional labs. Students in both labs frequently evaluate their level of understanding but only in the SCL does that evaluation cause a change to more productive behavior.

We analyze lab videotapes to determine underlying concepts commonly used by students when gathering and analyzing data. Our final goal is for students to use these concepts to analyze data in an appropriate manner. We develop a multiple-choice survey which asks students to analyze data from a hypothetical lab context. With this survey we find more students using range to compare data sets after the SCL (from 12% before to 43% after).

For students to understand measurement and uncertainty, we argue that the laboratory must be designed to encourage students to be in a frame where they view resources used to argue and evaluate as appropriate, engage in productive behavior and monitor their behavior, use productive resources to build an understanding of the underlying concepts, and use those concepts to analyze data. We make use of interviews, surveys, and video data to study each of these requirements and to evaluate the SCL curriculum.

Tuminaro, PhD Dissertation (2004)

2009-01-14T13:47:00.000-05:00

A cognitive framework for analyzing and describing introductory students' use and understanding of mathematics in physics

J. Tuminaro, Ph.D. Dissertation, E. F. Redish (advisor), (2004). (html TOC and abstract)

Abstract: Many introductory, algebra-based physics students perform poorly on mathematical problem solving tasks in physics. There are at least two possible, distinct reasons for this poor performance: (1) students simply lack the mathematical skills needed to solve problems in physics, or (2) students do not know how to apply the mathematical skills they have to particular problem situations in physics. While many students do lack the requisite mathematical skills, a major finding from this work is that the majority of students possess the requisite mathematical skills, yet fail to use or interpret them in the context of physics.

In this thesis I propose a theoretical framework to analyze and describe studentsí mathematical thinking in physics. In particular, I attempt to answer two questions. What are the cognitive tools involved in formal mathematical thinking in physics? And, why do students make the kinds of mistakes they do when using mathematics in physics? According to the proposed theoretical framework there are three major theoretical constructs: mathematical resources, which are the knowledge elements that are activated in mathematical thinking and problem solving; epistemic games, which are patterns of activities that use particular kinds of knowledge to create new knowledge or solve a problem; and frames, which are structures of expectations that determine how individuals interpret situations or events.

The empirical basis for this study comes from videotaped sessions of college students solving homework problems. The students are enrolled in an algebra-based introductory physics course. The videotapes were transcribed and analyzed using the aforementioned theoretical framework.

Two important results from this work are: (1) the construction of a theoretical framework that offers researchers a vocabulary (ontological classification of cognitive structures) and grammar (relationship between the cognitive structures) for understanding the nature and origin of mathematical use in the context physics, and (2) a detailed understanding, in terms of the proposed theoretical framework, of the errors that students make when using mathematics in the context of physics.

Atkins, PhD Dissertation (2004)

2009-01-14T13:42:00.000-05:00

Analogies as categorization phenomena: Studies from scientific discourse

L. J. Atkins, Ph.D. Dissertation, D. Hammer (advisor), (2004). (html TOC and abstract) (pdf links: Chapter 1, Chapter 2, Chapter 3, Chapter 4, Chapter 5, Chapter 6, Chapter 7, Chapter 8)

Abstract: Studies on the role of analogies in science classrooms have tended to focus on analogies that come from the teacher or curriculum, and not the analogies that students generate. Such studies are derivative of an educational system that values content knowledge over scientific creativity, and derivative of a model of teaching in which the teacher's role is to convey content knowledge. This dissertation begins with the contention that science classrooms should encourage scientific thinking and one role of the teacher is to model that behavior and identify and encourage it in her students. One element of scientific thinking is analogy. This dissertation focuses on student-generated analogies in science, and offers a model for understanding these. I provide evidence that generated analogies are assertions of categorization, and the base of an analogy is the constructed prototype of an ad hoc category. Drawing from research on categorization, I argue that generated analogies are based in schemas and cognitive models. This model allows for a clear distinction between analogy and literal similarity; prior to this research analogy has been considered to exist on a spectrum of similarity, differing from literal similarity to the degree that structural relations hold but features do not. I argue for a definition in which generated analogies are an assertion of an unexpected categorization: that is, they are asserted as contradictions to an expected schema.

Gresser, PhD Dissertation (2006)

2009-01-14T13:38:00.002-05:00

A Study of Social Interaction and Teamwork in Reformed Physics Laboratories

P. Gresser, Ph.D. Dissertation, E. F. Redish (advisor), (2006). (html TOC and abstract)

Abstract: It is widely accepted that, for many students, learning can be accomplished most effectively through social interaction with peers, and there have been many successes in using the group environment to improve learning in a variety of classroom settings. What is not well understood, however, are the dynamics of student groups, specifically how the students collectively apprehend the subject matter and share the mental workload.

This research examines recent developments of theoretical tools for describing the cognitive states of individual students: associational patterns such as epistemic games and cultural structures such as epistemological framing. Observing small group interaction in authentic classroom situations (labs, tutorials, problem solving) suggests that these tools could be effective in describing these interactions.

Though conventional wisdom tells us that groups may succeed where individuals fail, there are many reasons why group work may also run into difficulties, such as a lack or imbalance of knowledge, an inappropriate mix of learning styles, or a destructive power arrangement. This research explores whether or not inconsistent epistemological framing among group members can also be a cause of group failure. Case studies of group interaction in the laboratory reveal evidence of successful groups employing common framing, and unsuccessful groups failing from lack of a shared frame.

This study was conducted in a large introductory algebra-based physics course at the University of Maryland, College Park, in a laboratory designed specifically to foster increased student interaction and cooperation. Videotape studies of this environment reveal that productive lab groups coordinate their efforts through a number of locally coherent knowledge-building activities, which are described through the framework of epistemic games. The existence of these epistemic games makes it possible for many students to participate in cognitive activities without a complete shared understanding of the specific activity's goal. Also examined is the role that social interaction plays in initiating, negotiating, and carrying out these epistemic games. This behavior is illustrated through the model of distributed cognition.
An attempt is made to analyze this group activity using Tuckman's stage model, which is a prominent description of group development within educational psychology. However, the shortcomings of this model in dealing with specific cognitive tasks lead us to seek another explanation. The model used in this research seeks to expand existing cognitive tools into the realm of social interaction. In doing so, we can see that successful groups approach tasks in the lab by negotiating a shared frame of understanding. Using the findings from these case studies, recommendations are made concerning the teaching of introductory physics laboratory courses.

Russ, PhD Dissertation (2006)

2009-01-14T13:35:00.003-05:00

A Framework for Recognizing Mechanistic Reasoning in Student Scientific Inquiry

R. S. Ross, Ph.D. Dissertation, D. Hammer (advisor), (2006). (html TOC and abstract)

Abstract: A central ambition of science education reform is to help students develop abilities for scientific inquiry. Education research is thus rightly focused on defining what constitutes "inquiry" and developing tools for assessing it. There has been progress with respect to particular aspects of inquiry, namely student abilities for controlled experimentation and scientific argumentation. However, we suggest that in addition to these frameworks for assessing the structure of inquiry we need frameworks for analyzing the substance of that inquiry.

In this work we draw attention to and evaluate the substance of student mechanistic reasoning. Both within the history and philosophy of science and within science education research, scientific inquiry is characterized in part as understanding the causal mechanisms that underlie natural phenomena. The challenge for science education, however, is that there has not been the same progress with respect to making explicit what constitutes mechanistic reasoning as there has been in making explicit other aspects of inquiry.

This dissertation attempts to address this challenge. We adapt an account of mechanism in professional research science to develop a framework for reliably recognizing mechanistic reasoning in student discourse. The coding scheme articulates seven specific aspects of mechanistic reasoning and can be used to systematically analyze narrative data for patterns in student thinking. It provides a tool for detecting quality reasoning that may be overlooked by more traditional assessments.

We apply the mechanism coding scheme to video and written data from a range of student inquiries, from large group discussions among first grade students to the individual problem solving of graduate students. While the primary result of this work is the coding scheme itself and the finding that it provides a reliable means of analyzing transcript data for evidence of mechanistic thinking, the rich descriptions we develop in each case study help us recognize continuity between graduate level learning and elementary school science: part of what students are able to do in elementary school finds its way to graduate school. Thus this work makes it possible for researchers, curriculum developers, and teachers to systematically pursue mechanistic reasoning as an objective for inquiry.

Bing, PhD Dissertation (2008)

2009-01-14T13:29:00.005-05:00

An Epistemic Framing Analysis of Upper-Level Physics Students' Use of Mathematics

T. J. Bing, Ph.D. Dissertation, E. F. Redish (advisor), (2008). (html TOC and abstract)

Abstract: Mathematics is central to a professional physicist's work and, by extension, to a physics student's studies. It provides a language for abstraction, definition, computation, and connection to physical reality. This power of mathematics in physics is also the source of many of the difficulties it presents students. Simply put, many different activities could all be described as "using math in physics". Expertise entails a complicated coordination of these various activities. This work examines the many different kinds of thinking that are all facets of the use of mathematics in physics. It uses an epistemological lens, one that looks at the type of explanation a student presently sees as appropriate, to analyze the mathematical thinking of upper level physics undergraduates. Sometimes a student will turn to a detailed calculation to produce or justify an answer. Other times a physical argument is explicitly connected to the mathematics at hand. Still other times quoting a definition is seen as sufficient, and so on. Local coherencies evolve in students' thought around these various types of mathematical justifications. We use the cognitive process of framing to model students' navigation of these various facets of math use in physics.

We first demonstrate several common framings observed in our students' mathematical thought and give several examples of each. Armed with this analysis tool, we then give several examples of how this framing analysis can be used to address a research question. We consider what effects, if any, a powerful symbolic calculator has on students' thinking. We also consider how to characterize growing expertise among physics students. Framing offers a lens for analysis that is a natural fit for these sample research questions. To active physics education researchers, the framing analysis presented in this dissertation can provide a useful tool for addressing other research questions. To physics teachers, we present this analysis so that it may make them more explicitly aware of the various types of reasoning, and the dynamics among them, that students employ in our physics classes. This awareness will help us better hear students' arguments and respond appropriately.

Scherr & Hammer, Cognition and Instruction (2009)

2009-01-14T12:58:00.000-05:00

Student behavior and epistemological framing: Examples from collaborative active-learning activities in physics

R. E. Scherr & D. Hammer, Cognition and Instruction, to be published (April 2009)

Abstract: Questions of participant understanding of the nature of an activity have been addressed in anthropology and sociolinguistics with the concepts of frames and framing. For example, a student may frame a learning activity as an opportunity for sensemaking or as an assignment to fill out a worksheet. The student’s understanding of the nature of the activity affects what she notices, what knowledge she accesses, and how she thinks to act. Previous analyses have found evidence of framing primarily in linguistic markers associated with speech acts. In this paper, we show that there is useful evidence of framing in easily observed features of students’ behavior. We apply this observational methodology to explore dynamics among behavior, framing, and the conceptual substance of student reasoning in the context of collaborative active-learning activities in an introductory university physics course.

Goertzen, Scherr & Elby, AIP Conf Proceedings (2008)

2009-01-14T12:39:00.000-05:00

Indicators of understanding: What TAs listen for in student responses

R. M. Goertzen, R. E. Scherr & A. Elby, in AIP Conference Proceedings 1064, 2008 Physics Education Research Conference, C. Henderson, M. Sabella & L. Hsu (Eds.), p 119-122 (2008). (link to journal article)

Abstract: Before we can develop effective, research-based professional development programs for graduate student physics TAs, we must first identify their current classroom practices and why they engage in these practices. Framing, a theoretical framework developed in sociology and linguistics, provides an analytical toolbox for examining the expectations that guide the actions and attention of individuals while teaching. We use framing to develop fine-grained analyses of two episodes of TAs teaching tutorials. Despite the differences in their behaviors, the two TAs are in a sense both doing the same thing; they organize their interactions with students around ``searching for indicators'' that the students understand the targeted ideas.

Scherr, Am J Phys (2007)

2009-01-14T12:36:00.000-05:00

Modeling student thinking: An example from special relativity

R. E. Scherr, American Journal of Physics, 70(3), p 272-280 (2007).

Abstract: Our understanding of the nature of student ideas informs our instructional and research agendas. In this paper, I characterize student ideas in terms of five observable properties determinacy, coherence, context-dependence, variability, and malleability and describe how those observable properties correspond to the “misconceptions” and “pieces” models of student reasoning. I then analyze instructional materials and student thinking in a particular topic area special relativity in terms of each of those two models. I show that specific instructional strategies reflect specific theoretical orientations, and explore the extent to which observed student behavior corresponds to predictions made by the theoretical models. The analysis suggests that while both the misconceptions and pieces models are flexible enough to accommodate all of the data, some aspects of student thinking seem best described in terms of pieces, and others seem better characterized as misconceptions. The purpose of the analysis is to illustrate the effect of theoretical orientation on instruction, instructional research, and curriculum development.

Scherr & Elby, AIP Conference Proceedings (2006)

2009-01-14T12:30:00.000-05:00

Enabling informed adaptation: Open-source physics worksheets integrated with implementation resources

R. E. Scherr & A. Elby, in AIP Conference Proceedings 883, Physics Education Research Conference, P. R. Heron, L. McCullough & J. Marx (Eds.), p 46-49 (2006).

Abstract: Instructors inevitably need to adapt even the best reform materials to suit their local circumstances. We offer a package of research-based, open-source, epistemologically-focused mechanics tutorials, along with the detailed information instructors need to make effective modifications and offer professional development to teaching assistants. In particular, our tutorials are hyperlinked to instructor's guides that include the rationale behind the various questions, advice from experienced instructors, and video clips of students working on the materials. Our materials thus facilitate their own implementation and develop instructor expertise with PER-based instructional materials.

Scherr, Russ, Bing & Hodges, Phys Rev Special Topics: PER (2006)

2009-01-14T12:25:00.000-05:00

Initiation of student-TA interactions in tutorials

R. E. Scherr, R. S. Russ, T. J. Bing & R. A. Hodges, Phys. Rev. - Special Topics: Physics Education Research 2, 020108-020116 (2006). (html link to journal article)

Abstract: At the University of Maryland we videotaped several semesters of tutorials as part of a large research project. A particular research task required us to locate examples of students calling the teaching assistants TAs over for assistance with a physics question. To our surprise, examples of this kind of interaction were difficult to find. We undertook a systematic study of TA-student interactions in tutorial: In particular, how are the interactions initiated? Do the students call the TA over for help with a particular issue, does the TA stop by spontaneously, or does the worksheet require a discussion with the TA at that point? The initiation of the interaction is of particular interest because it provides evidence of the motivation for and purpose of the interaction. This paper presents the results of that systematic investigation. We discovered that the majority of student-TA interactions in tutorial are initiated by teaching assistants, confirmed our initial observation that relatively few interactions are initiated by students, and found, further, that even fewer interactions are worksheet initiated. Perhaps most importantly, we found that our sense of who initiates tutorial interactions—based on extensive but informal observations—is not necessarily accurate. We need systematic investigations to uncover the reality of our classroom experiences.

Wittmann, Heron & Scherr, APS Forum on Education Newsletter (2005)

2009-01-14T12:19:00.000-05:00

Overview of the Foundations and Frontiers in Physics Education Research Conference

M. C. Wittmann, P. R. L. Heron & R. E. Scherr, APS Forum on Education Newsletter (Fall 2005). (pdf of APS Newsletter)

Scherr, The Physics Teacher (2003)

2009-01-14T12:15:00.000-05:00

An implementation of Physics by Inquiry in a large-enrollment class

R. E. Scherr, The Physics Teacher, 41(2), p 113-118 (2003).

Abstract: As physics instructors, we enjoy access to a variety of powerful instructional materials. Among them are classroom-tested inquiry-based laboratory curricula such as Physics by Inquiry [1] and Workshop Physics.[2] Unfortunately, such materials are often tested in conditions unattainable in introductory physics courses. In particular, the recommended instructor-student ratio tends to be larger than we can afford. This article describes a implementation of Physics by Inquiry in a liberal-arts physics class with 70 students and one instructor. I discuss the choices I made with the materials under these circumstances, describe the challenges that arose, and offer evidence that the course was fairly successful. Examples such as this one show that proven instructional materials can be put to good use even in circumstances that fall outside the tested conditions.

Scherr, AIP Conf Proceedings (2003)

2009-01-14T12:09:00.000-05:00

Gestures as evidence of student thinking in physics

R. E. Scherr, in AIP Conference Proceedings 720, 2003 Physics Education Research Conference, J. Marx, K. Cummings & S. Franklin (Eds.), p 61-64 (2003)

Abstract: Student gestures are part of how students articulate their ideas, and can be of use to us in diagnosing student thinking and forming effective pedagogical responses. This paper presents examples of gestures that occur in a conversation between students and a TA about a mechanics homework problem, and analyzes one gesture that was particularly significant to the conversation.

Scherr, Shaffer & Vokos, Am J Phys (2002)

2009-01-14T12:05:00.000-05:00

The challenge of changing deeply-held student beliefs about the relativity of simultaneity

R. E. Scherr, P. S. Shaffer & S. Vokos, American Journal of Physics, 70(12), p 1238-1248 (2002). (html version)

Abstract: Previous research indicates that after standard instruction students at all academic levels often construct a conceptual framework in which the ideas of absolute simultaneity and the relativity of simultaneity co-exist. This article describes the development and assessment of instructional materials intended to improve student understanding of the concept of time in special relativity, the relativity of simultaneity, and the role of observers in inertial reference frames. Results from pretests and post-tests are presented to demonstrate the effect of the curriculum in helping students deepen their understanding of these topics. Excerpts from taped interviews and classroom interactions help illustrate the intense cognitive conflict that students encounter as they are led to confront the incompatibility of their deeply-held beliefs about simultaneity with the results of special relativity.

Scherr & Wittmann, PER Conference Proceedings (2002)

2009-01-14T12:00:00.000-05:00

The challenge of listening: The effect of researcher agenda on data collection and interpretation

R. E. Scherr & M. C. Wittmann, in Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings, S. Franklin, K. Cummings & J. Marx (Eds.), (2002). (frame html version)

Abstract: A researcher's interests dictate which student statements in a clinical interview are considered to constitute data. To the extent that our research agendas are unexamined, they may control our attention inappropriately, limiting the effectiveness of both data collection and data interpretation. We describe an interview in which the interviewer paid nearly exclusive attention to the student's conceptual understanding of charge flow, thereby missing information about her epistemological stance that might have made the interview itself more productive. We also present our initial collaborative analysis of the same interview, in which we judged a particular interview excerpt to contain relatively little information, and show that our judgment reveals more about our implicit research agenda than about the quality of the interview data itself. The data presented in this talk is analyzed from two other perspectives in the other two talks in this session.

Wittmann & Scherr, PER Conference Proceedings (2002)

2009-01-14T11:55:00.001-05:00

Student epistemological stance constraining researcher access to student thinking: An example from an interview on charge flow

M. C. Wittmann & R. E. Scherr, in Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings, S. Franklin, K. Cummings & J. Marx (Eds.), (2002).

Abstract: A student's guiding epistemological mode (be it knowledge as memorized information, knowledge from authority, or knowledge as fabricated stuff) may constrain that student from reasoning in productive ways while also shaping the inferences a researcher can make about how that student reasons about a particular phenomenon. We discuss both cases in the context of an individual student interview on charge flow in wires. In the first part of the interview, her focus on memorized knowledge prevents the researcher from learning about her detailed reasoning about current. In the second part of the interview, her focus on constructed knowledge provides the researcher with a picture of her reasoning about the physical mechanisms of charge flow.

Scherr, Shaffer & Vokos, Am J Phys PER Suppl (2001)

2009-01-14T11:36:00.000-05:00

Student understanding of time in special relativity: Simultaneity and reference frames

R. E. Scherr, P. S. Shaffer & S. Vokos, American Journal of Physics, Physics Education Research Supplement, 69, S24-S35 (2001). (link to journal article)

Abstract: This article reports on an investigation of student understanding of the concept of time in special relativity. A series of research tasks are discussed that illustrate, step-by-step, how student reasoning of fundamental concepts of relativity was probed. The results indicate that after standard instruction students at all academic levels have serious difficulties with the relativity of simultaneity and with the role of observers in inertial reference frames. Evidence is presented that suggests many students construct a conceptual framework in which the ideas of absolute simultaneity and the relativity of simultaneity harmoniously co-exist.

Scherr & Elby, Proceedings of 2006 PER Conference (2007)

2009-01-13T21:11:00.000-05:00

Enabling informed adaptation: Open-source physics worksheets integrated with implementation resources

R. E. Scherr & A. Elby, in Proceedings of the 2006 Physics Education Research Conference, P. R. Heron, L. McCollough & J. Marx (Eds.), Melville, NY: American Institute of Physics (2007).

Lising & Elby, Am J Phys (2005)

2009-01-13T21:07:00.002-05:00

The impact of epistemology on learning: A case study from introductory physics

L. Lising & A. Elby, American Journal of Physics, 73(4), p 372-382 (2005). (html version)

Abstract: We discuss a case study of the influence of epistemology on learning for a student in an introductory college physics course. An analysis of videotaped class work, written work, and interviews indicates that many of the student's difficulties were epistemological in nature. Our primary goal is to show instructors and curriculum developers that a student's epistemological stance - her ideas about knowledge and learning - can have a direct, causal influence on her learning of physics. This influence exists even when research-based curriculum materials provide implicit epistemological support. For this reason, curriculum materials and teaching techniques could become more effective by explicitly attending to students' epistemologies.

McCaskey, Dancy & Elby, Proceedings of 2003 PER Conference (2004)

2009-01-13T21:00:00.002-05:00

Effects on assessment caused by splits between belief and understanding

T. L. McCaskey, M. H. Dancy & A. Elby, in Proceedings of the 2003 Physics Education Research Conference, S. Franklin, J. Marx & K. Cummings (Eds.), 720, p 37-40, Melville, NY: American Institute of Physics (2004).

Abstract: We performed a new kind of FCI study to get at the differences between what students believe and what they think scientists believe. Students took the FCI in the standard way, and then made a second pass indicating “the answer they really believe” and “the answer they think a scientist would give.” Students split on a large number of the questions, with women splitting more often than men.

Elby, Am J Phys PER Suppl (2001)

2009-01-13T20:56:00.002-05:00

Helping students learn how to learn

A. Elby, American Journal of Physics, Physics Education Research Supplement, 69(7), S54-S64 (2001). (html version)

Abstract: Students' “epistemological” beliefs—their views about the nature of knowledge and learning—affect how they approach physics courses. For instance, a student who believes physics knowledge to consist primarily of disconnected facts and formulas will study differently from a student who views physics as an interconnected web of concepts. Unfortunately, previous studies show that physics courses, even ones that help students learn concepts particularly well, generally do not lead to significant changes in students' epistemological beliefs. This paper discusses instructional practices and curricular elements, suitable for both college and high school, that helped students develop substantially more sophisticated beliefs about knowledge and learning, as measured by the Maryland Physics Expectations Survey (MPEX) and by the Epistemological Beliefs Assessment for Physical Science.

Hammer & Elby, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (2000)

2009-01-13T20:53:00.001-05:00

Epistemological Resources

D. Hammer & A. Elby, in Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference of the Learning Sciences, B. Fishman & S. O'Connor-Divelbiss (Eds.), Mahwah, NJ, p 4-5 (2000).

Abstract: Research on epistemologies has presumed a unitary ontology of "beliefs"; we propose a manifold ontology of "resources" and discuss implications for instruction.

Elby, J of Mathematical Behavior (2000)

2009-01-13T20:49:00.003-05:00

What students' learning of representations tells us about constructivism

A. Elby, Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19, p 481-502 (1999). (html version)

Abstract: This paper pulls into the empirical realm a longstanding theoretical debate about the prior knowledge students bring to bear when learning scientific concepts and representations. Misconceptions constructivists view the prior knowledge as stable alternate conceptions that apply robustly across multiple contexts. By contrast, fine-grained constructivists believe that much of students' intuitive knowledge consists of unarticulated, loosely-connected knowledge elements, the activation of which depends sensitively on context. By focusing on students' intuitive knowledge about representations, and by fleshing out the two constructivist frameworks, I show that they lead to empirically different sets of predictions. Pilot studies demonstrate the feasibility of a full-fledged experimental program to decide which flavor of constructivist describes students more adequately.

Elby, Amer J of Physics (1999)

2009-01-13T20:45:00.000-05:00

Another reason that physics students learn by rote

A. Elby, American Journal of Physics, Physics Education Research Supplement, 67(7), S52-S57 (1999).

Abstract: Using written questionnaires, I surveyed introductory physics students about how they study and about how they would advise a hypothetical student to study if she were trying to learn physics deeply with no grade pressure. The survey teases apart students’ “epistemological” beliefs about learning and understanding physics from their more coursespecific beliefs about how to earn high grades. The results indicate that students perceive “trying to understand physics well” to be a significantly different activity from “trying to do well in the course.”

Russ, Coffey, Hammer & Hutchison, Science Education (2008)

2009-01-13T20:37:00.000-05:00

Making Classroom Assessment More Accountable to Scientific Reasoning: A Case for Attending to Mechanistic Thinking

R. S. Russ, J. E. Coffey, D. Hammer & P. Hutchison, Science Education (2008)

Russ, Scherr, Hammer & Mikeska, Science Education (2008)

2009-01-13T20:33:00.000-05:00

Recognizing mechanistic reasoning in student scientific inquiry: A framework for discourse analysis developed from philosophy of science

R. S. Russ, R. E. Scherr, D. Hammer & J. Mikeska, Science Education, 92(3), p 499-525 (2008). (link to journal article)

Abstract: Science education reform has long focused on assessing student inquiry, and there has been progress in developing tools specifically with respect to experimentation and argumentation. We suggest the need for attention to another aspect of inquiry, namely mechanistic reasoning. Scientific inquiry focuses largely on understanding causal mechanisms that underlie natural phenomena. We have adapted an account of mechanism from philosophy of science studies in professional science [Machamer, P., Darden, D., & Craver, C. F., (2000). Thinking about mechanisms. Philosophy of Science, 67, 1-25] to develop a framework for discourse analysis that aids in identifying and analyzing students' mechanistic reasoning. We analyze a discussion among first-grade students about falling objects (1) to illustrate the generativity of the framework, (2) to demonstrate that mechanistic reasoning is abundantly present even in these young students, and (3) to show that mechanistic reasoning is episodic in their discourse.

Brown & Hammer, International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change (2008)

2009-01-13T20:30:00.000-05:00

Conceptual change in physics

D. E. Brown & D. Hammer, in International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change, S. Vosniadou (Ed.), p 127-154, New York: Routledge (2008).

Hammer, Russ, Mikeska & Scherr, Establishing a Consensus Agenda for K-12 Science Inquiry (2008)

2009-01-13T20:26:00.001-05:00

Identifying inquiry and conceptualizing students' abilities

D. Hammer, R. Russ, J. Mikeska & R. Scherr, in Establishing a Consensus Agenda for K-12 Science Inquiry, R. Duschl & R. Grandy (Eds.), Rotterdam, NL: Sense Publishers (2008).

Hammer & van Zee, Seeing the science in children's thinking (2006)

2009-01-13T20:21:00.000-05:00

Seeing the science in children's thinking: Case studies of student inquiry in physical science

D. Hammer & E. H. van Zee, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. (Book and DVD)

Description: Observing and listening to children while they inquire into the physical sciences is difficult. There’s lots to see and hear, but unless you know what to look and listen for, you might only see a noisy blur of activity. Seeing the Science in Children’s Thinking is a field guide to the science classroom with authentic examples presented in written and video form. It’s a great way for staff developers to train teachers’ eyes and ears to pick up the analysis and ideas of students as they occur in the wild of classroom conversations.

David Hammer and Emily Van Zee explain the scientific process, describe how research suggests students conceptualize inquiry, and offer ways to encourage scientific investigation in the elementary and middle grades. Then they offer six in-depth case studies of class discussion from grades 1 through 8, each keyed to clips of minimally edited in-the-classroom footage on the companion DVD-ROM. The case studies include not only a thorough description by each teacher, but also detailed facilitator’s notes for running effective staff-development workshops using the footage. The clips present up to thirty minutes of authentic, uninterrupted class discussions with optional subtitles. Additionally, full transcripts of the video clips are available as printable files on the DVD-ROM.

Evidence of children’s scientific thinking is all around the classroom, but it takes a skilled teacher to locate it. With Seeing the Science in Children’s Thinking your teachers can sharpen their senses, discover a wealth of information about how their students approach science, and create instruction that’s individualized and responsive.

May, Hammer & Roy, Science Education (2006)

2009-01-13T20:17:00.000-05:00

Children's analogical reasoning in a 3rd-grade science discussion

D. B. May, D. Hammer & P. Roy, Science Education, 90(2), p 316-330 (2006). (link to journal article)

Abstract: Expert scientific inquiry involves the generation and use of analogies. How and when students might develop this aspect of expertise has implications for understanding how and when instruction might facilitate that development. In a study of K-8 student inquiry in physical science, we are examining cases of spontaneous analogy generation. In the case we present here, a third-grader generates an analogy and modifies it to reconcile his classmates' counterarguments, allowing us to identify in these third-graders specific aspects of nascent expertise in analogy use. Promoting abilities and inclinations such as these children display requires that educators recognize and respond to them.

Rosenberg, Hammer & Phelan

2009-01-13T20:12:00.000-05:00

Multiple epistemological coherences in an eighth-grade discussion of the rock cycle

S. A. Rosenberg, D. Hammer & J. Phelan, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), p 261-292 (2006). (link to journal article)

Abstract: Research on personal epistemologies (Hofer & Pintrich, 2002) has mostly conceptualized them as stable beliefs or stages of development. On these views, researchers characterize individual students' epistemologies with single, coherent descriptions. Evidence of variability in student epistemologies, however, suggests the need for more complex models. Hammer and Elby (2002) proposed modeling personal epistemologies as comprised of manifold epistemological resources. This difference in ontology—the form research attributes to cognitive structure—accounts for variability: The activation of these epistemological resources depends on context. Our purpose in this article is to argue that it also accounts for coherences in student epistemologies, in particular for multiple local coherences. We advance this argument using a case study of a 15-min discussion by a group of eighth graders about the “rock cycle” (the cyclic transformations of rock among different forms). We begin with evidence of the students' working from a stable, coherent epistemological stance. Then, after a brief, purely epistemological intervention by the teacher, the evidence indicates they are working from a different but also coherent and stable epistemological stance.

van Zee, Hammer, Bell, Roy & Peter, Science Education (2005)

2009-01-13T20:05:00.001-05:00

Learning and teaching science as inquiry: A case study of elementary school teachers' investigations of light

E. H. van Zee, D. Hammer, M. Bell, P. Roy & J. Peter, Science Education, 89(6), p 1007-1042 (2005). (link to journal article)

Abstract: This case study documents an example of inquiry learning and teaching during a summer institute for elementary and middle school teachers. A small group constructed an explanatory model for an intriguing optical phenomenon that they were observing. Research questions included: What physics thinking did the learners express? What aspects of scientific inquiry were evident in what the learners said and did? What questions did the learners ask one another as they worked? How did these learners collaborate in constructing understanding? How did the instructor foster their learning? Data sources included video- and audio- tapes of instruction, copies of the participants' writings and drawings, field notes, interviews, and staff reflections. An interpretative narrative of what three group members said and did presents a detailed account of their learning process. Analyses of their utterances provide evidence of physics thinking, scientific inquiry, questioning, collaborative sense making, and insight into ways to foster inquiry learning.

Hammer & Coffey, NASA and Afterschool Programs (2005)

2009-01-13T20:01:00.000-05:00

What NASA has to offer

D. Hammer & J Coffey, in NASA and Afterschool Programs: Connecting to the Future, G. Walker, E. Wahl & L. Rivas (Eds.), p 76-83, Washington DC: NASA (2005).

Hammer, Enrico Fermi Summer School Proceedings (2004)

2009-01-13T19:52:00.002-05:00

The variability of student reasoning, lectures 1-3

D. Hammer, in Proceedings of the Enrico Fermi Summer School, Course CLVI, E. Redish & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Bologna: Italian Physical Society (2004).

Lecture 1: Case studies of children's inquiries, p 279-299.

Abstract: Classroom observations show variability in student reasoning, from young children through adults, even moment-to-moment for the same students in the same class. This varied phenomenology conflicts with views of naïve theories, entrenched conceptions and stages of development as stable attributes. Student knowledge and reasoning is better understood in terms of a manifold ontology of more fine-grained, context sensitive resources. Expectations of variability in student knowledge and reasoning suggest different approaches and objectives in instruction, especially in early science education.
This is the first lecture in a series of three. It introduces the overall agenda and then begins with a series of examples of children’s inquiries to reflect on the beginnings of scientific expertise.

Lecture 2: Transitions, p 301-319.

Abstract:This lecture continues the phenomenology of student reasoning from the first, beginning with brief examples of introductory physics students failing to apply basic logic and common sense. These contrast with the examples from the first lecture of children’s reasoning, but it would be a mistake to interpret the university students’ behavior as evidence that they are not capable of what we saw in elementary students. Rather, students at all ages are capable of reasoning in a variety of ways, and the bulk of this lecture focuses on examples of students shifting in their approaches and ideas over short time scales. Often these shifts follow epistemological prompts from an instructor, suggestions for how students should think about knowledge and learning.

Lecture 3: Manifold cognitive resources, p 321-340.

Abstract: The previous lectures focused on phenomenology: What sorts of occurrences do we see in students’ reasoning? This third and final lecture focuses on ontology: What sorts of things do we attribute to students’ minds? It has become conventional to speak and think in terms of conceptions, naïve theories, and stages of development. These are all attributions of stable properties, and they account well for patterns that can occur in student reasoning. They do not account well, however, for the variability and multiple patterns illustrated in the previous lectures. Research in cognitive science provides an alternative ontology of multiple, fine-grained cognitive resources that are contextsensitive in their activation. This lecture reviews some of that work and draws implications for elementary science education.

Louca, Elby, Hammer & Kagey, Educ Psychologist (2004)

2009-01-13T19:48:00.000-05:00

Epistemological resources: Applying a new epistemological framework to science instruction

L. Louca, A. Elby, D. Hammer & T. Kagey, Educational Psychologist, 39(1), p 57-68 (2004). (link to journal article)

Abstract: Most research on personal epistemologies has conceived them as made up of relatively large, coherent, and stable cognitive structures, either developmental stages or beliefs (perhaps organized into theories). Recent work has challenged these views, arguing that personal epistemologies are better understood as made up of finer grained cognitive resources whose activation depends sensitively on context. In this article, we compare these different frameworks, focusing on their instructional implications by using them to analyze a third-grade teacher's epistemologically motivated intervention and its effect on her students. We argue that the resources framework has more predictive and explanatory power than stage- and beliefs-based frameworks do.

Hammer & Elby, J of the Learning Sciences (2003)

2009-01-13T19:44:00.002-05:00

Tapping students' epistemological resources

D. Hammer & A. Elby, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), p 53-91 (2003).

Abstract: Research on personal epistemologies has begun to consider ontology: Do naive epistemologies take the form of stable, unitary beliefs or of fine-grained, context-sensitive resources? Debates such as this regarding subtleties of cognitive theory, however, may be difficult to connect to everyday instructional practice. Our purpose in this article is to make that connection. We first review reasons for supporting the latter account, of naive epistemologies as made up of fine-grained, context-sensitive resources; as part of this argument we note that familiar strategies and curricula tacitly ascribe epistemological resources to students. We then present several strategies designed more explicitly to help students tap those resources for learning introductory physics. Finally, we reflect on this work as an example of interplay between two modes of inquiry into student thinking, that of instruction and that of formal research on learning.

diSessa, Elby & Hammer, Intentional Conceptual Change (2002)

2009-01-13T19:38:00.000-05:00

J's epistemological stance and strategies

A. diSessa, A. Elby & D. Hammer, in Intentional Conceptual Change, G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), p 237-290, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum (2002).

Hammer & Elby, Personal Epistemology (2002)

2009-01-13T19:35:00.002-05:00

On the form of a personal epistemology

D. Hammer & A. Elby, in Personal Epistemology: The Psychology of Beliefs about Knowledge and Knowing, B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), p 169-190, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Hammer & Schifter, Cognition and Instruction (2001

2009-01-13T19:32:00.001-05:00

Practices of inquiry in teaching and research

D. Hammer, Cognition and Instruction, 19(4), p 441-478 (2001). (link to journal article)

Abstract: We have three central purposes in this paper. The first is to explore the nature of teacher inquiry, narrowing our focus to inquiry into student learning; the second is to explore what teachers’ inquiries and researchers’ inquiries offer one another; and the third is to consider the similarities and differences between teacher inquiry and research on learning. Although teacher inquiry has much in common with research on learning, and it is essential to recognize the overlap in practice and agenda, teacher inquiry differs from research in ways it would be counter-productive to ignore or to mask. We pursue these objectives by examining the teacher inquiry in two contexts: (1) a conversation among a group of physics teachers about a discussion that took place in one of their classes, and (2) essays by two elementary school teachers about their first- and second-grade students' early reasoning about triangles.

Elby & Hammer, Science Education (2001)

2009-01-13T19:28:00.002-05:00

On the substance of a sophisticated epistemology

A. Elby & D. Hammer, Science Education, 85(5), p 554-567 (2001).

Abstract: Among researchers who study students’ epistemologies, a consensus has emerged about what constitutes a sophisticated stance toward scientific knowledge. According to this community consensus, students should understand scientific knowledge as tentative and evolving, rather than certain and unchanging; subjectively tied to scientists' perspectives, rather than objectively inherent in nature; and individually or socially constructed rather than discovered. Surveys, interview protocols, and other methods used to probe students’ beliefs about scientific knowledge broadly reflect this outlook.

Our paper questions the community consensus about epistemological sophistication. We do not suggest that scientific knowledge is objective and fixed; if forced to choose whether knowledge is certain or tentative, with no opportunity to elaborate, we would choose “tentative.” Instead, our critique consists of two lines of argument. First, the literature fails to distinguish between the correctness and productivity of an epistemological belief. For instance, elementary school students who believe that science is about discovering objective truths to questions such as whether the earth is round or flat, or whether an asteroid led to the extinction of the dinosaurs, may be more likely to succeed in science than students who believe science is about telling stories that vary with one's perspective. Naive realism, although incorrect (according to a broad consensus of philosophers and social scientists), may nonetheless be productive for helping those students learn.

Second, according to the consensus view as reflected in commonly-used surveys, epistemological sophistication consists of believing certain blanket generalizations about the nature of knowledge and learning, generalizations that do not attend to context. These generalizations are neither correct nor productive. For example, it would be unsophisticated for students to view as tentative the idea that the Earth is round rather than flat. By contrast, they should take a more tentative stance towards theories of mass extinction. Nonetheless, many surveys and interview protocols tally students as sophisticated not for attending to these contextual nuances, but for subscribing broadly to the view that knowledge is tentative.

Hammer, CSCL2: Carrying Forward the Conversation (2001)

2009-01-13T19:23:00.000-05:00

Powerful technology and powerful instruction

D. Hammer, In CSCL 2: Carrying Forward the Conversation, T. Koschmann, R. Hall, & N. Miyake (Eds.), p 339-403, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum (2001).

Hammer, Amer J of Physics (2000)

2009-01-13T19:20:00.000-05:00

Student resources for learning introductory physics

D. Hammer, American Journal of Physics, Physics Education Research Supplement, 68(S1), S52-S59 (2000). (html version)

Abstract: With good reason, physics education research has focussed almost exclusively on student difficulties and misconceptions. This work has been productive for curriculum development as well as in motivating the physics teaching community to examine and reconsider methods and assumptions, but it is limited in what it can tell us about student knowledge and learning. This article suggests the study of student resources for learning, with an emphasis on the practical benefits to be gained for instruction.

Hammer, Inquiring into Inquiry Learning and Teaching in Science (2000)

2009-01-13T19:16:00.001-05:00

Teacher inquiry

D. Hammer, in Inquiring into Inquiry Learning and Teaching in Science, J. Minstrell & E. vanZee (Eds), Washington DC: American Association for the Advancement of Scieince, p 184-215 (2000) (Also 1999, In the Paper Series of the Center for the Development of Teaching at EDC, in Newton, MA) (html version)

Abstract: The progessive agendas of science education reform, in particular that of promoting student inquiry, place substantial intellectual demands on teachers. If these reforms are to succeed, the education community must do more to appreciate and address those demands. This paper presents three examples of high school physics teachers' conversations about "snippets" of each others' work with students. The purposes are (1) to hightlight the central role and intellectual demands of teacher inquiry, in particular teacher diagnosis of students' strengths and needs; (2) to suggest that teachers often experience and express their diagnoses in terms of instructional strategies, and (3) to suggest that the value of education research for instruction should be understood primarily with respect to what it may contribute to teacher inquiry.

Hammer, Science Education (1999)

2009-01-13T19:11:00.001-05:00

Physics for first-graders?

D. Hammer, Science Education, 83(6), p 797-799. (html preprint)

Abstract: Last year, browsing current journals, I came across an article in Kappan titled "Physics for First Graders" (Hagerott, 1997). I'm a big fan of the idea that young children can, do, and should learn physics, even children as young as the first grade. But this article was misguided, and it troubled me that Kappan, which bills itself as "The Professional Journal for Education," would publish it. I held off writing a response — I had plenty to do, and I assumed there would be a barrage of criticism. Still, I watched Kappan, and when several months went by without any sign of that criticism, I phoned the editors to learn that none had been submitted.

Was everyone expecting someone else to write? More worrisome was the possibility that the piece fit with Kappan readers' expectations of science education. I drafted a somewhat longer essay than I'd originally considered, backing up a little to explain my concerns about the scientific substance and pedagogy.

Kappan declined to publish my response. The editors felt I was "eminently unfair" to the author. Moreover, they noted, no one but me seemed to have any problem with the article: "As an enrichment activity that will give kids more exposure to some of the basic concepts of physics than they are likely to get otherwise — unless they have an exceptional first-grade teacher — we see nothing wrong with [the author's] approach." I don't think I was unfair, and the fact that the editors and readership might see nothing wrong with "Physics for First Graders" was, in the end, what motivated me to write. It is also what motivates me to publish my essay here, and I am grateful to Science Education for providing a venue.

What follows is the essay I submitted to Kappan. Readers of Science Education may make their own judgments, and I would be happy to hear them.

Hammer, Cognition and Instruction (1997)

2009-01-13T19:06:00.000-05:00

Discovery learning and discovery teaching

D. Hammer, Cognition and Instruction, 15(4), p 485-529 (1997).

Abstract: Teachers interested in promoting student inquiry often feel a tension between that agenda and the more traditional agenda of "covering the content." Efforts in education reform devote substantial time to addressing this tension, primarily through curriculum reform, paring the traditional content and adopting inquiry-oriented methods. "Discovery learning" approaches, in particular, are designed to engage students in inquiry through which, guided by the teacher and materials, they "discover" the intended content. Still, the tension remains, in moments, for example, when students make discoveries other than as intended.

How teachers experience and negotiate these moments depends largely on their expectations of curriculum and instruction. For some, successful instruction entails progress through a planned set of observations and ideas, and such moments of divergence may represent impediments. Others see the classroom as an arena not only for student exploration, but also for teacher exploration, of the students' understanding and reasoning, of the subject matter, of what constitutes progress toward expertise and how to facilitate that progress. For them, successful instruction depends on teachers' often unanticipated perceptions and insights. One might call this "discovery teaching."

This article presents a detailed account of a week of learning and instruction from the author's high school physics course, to provide a context for discussion of the role and demands of teacher inquiry. On the view supported here, the coordination of student inquiry and traditional content is not simply a matter of reducing the latter and welcoming the former; it is a matter of discerning and responding to students' particular strengths and needs.

Hammer, Amer J of Physics (1996)

2009-01-13T19:00:00.000-05:00

More than misconceptions: Multiple perspectives on student knowledge and reasoning, and an appropriate role for education research

D. Hammer, American Journal of Physics, 64(10), p 1316-1325 (1996). (html version)

Abstract: This article analyzes an excerpt of a discussion from a high school physics class from several different perspectives on students' knowledge and reasoning, illustrating a range in what an instructor might perceive in students' work and take as tasks for instruction. It suggests a view of current education research as providing perspectives to expand, refine, and support instructors' perceptions and judgment, rather than as providing definitive principles or proven methods.

Hammer, J of the Learning Sciences (1996)

2009-01-13T18:55:00.000-05:00

Misconceptions or p-prims: How may alternative perspectives of cognitive structure influence perceptions and intentions?

D. Hammer, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(2), p 97-127 (1996). (Also 1995, EDC Center for the Development of Teaching Paper Series, Newton, MA.)

Abstract: The notion that students come to science courses with misconceptions has become quite widely accepted by those who follow or participate in education research. diSessa and his colleagues (diSessa, 1988, 1993; Smith, diSessa, & Roschelle, 1993) have challenged the theoretical and empirical validity of this perspective and offered an alternative account of cognitive structure in "phenomenological primitives," or "p-prims." The purpose of this article is to further clarify and contrast the two accounts, in particular to consider their utility and generativity as conceptual tools for teachers: How might each perspective influence instructional perceptions and intentions? The article recounts a discussion about forces and motion from a high school physics class; analyzes how a teacher might perceive students' participation in that discussion from either perspective; and considers what, based on those perceptions, the teacher might see as tasks for instruction.

Hammer & DiMauro, E Journal of Science Ed (1996)

2009-01-13T18:06:00.000-05:00

Student teachers on LabNet: Linking preservice teachers with a professional community

D. Hammer & V. DiMauro, Electronic Journal of Science Education, 1(2), (1996). (html version)

Abstract: This article describes our preliminary exploration of a use for telecommunications in preservice teacher education. During the 1993 to 1994 school year, eleven student teachers at Tufts University participated in LabNet, a project at TERC to develop a community of science and mathematics teachers who share an interest in "project enhanced learning" and who communicate with each other through bulletin boards and electronic mail (Spitzer & Wedding, 1995). This article reviews the student teachers' involvement in LabNet to suggest it benefited them in several ways. In particular, it provided them specific, practical ideas and advice, with respect to student projects and otherwise; a sympathetic and appreciative forum in which to discuss their own ideas and experiences; and the general support of a progressive, active group of teachers for experimenting with innovative methods. The student teachers' participation seemed to benefit the LabNet community as well, stimulating topics of conversation veteran teachers might not otherwise have explored. Finally, we suggest, this form of contact among intern and practicing teachers has further potential to provide continuity between preservice and inservice community and professional development.

Hammer, Science Education (1995)

2009-01-13T17:57:00.000-05:00

Epistemological considerations in teaching introductory physics

D. Hammer, Science Education, 79(4), p 393-413 (1995). (Also 1995, EDC Center for the Development of Teaching Paper Series, Newton, MA) (link to journal article)

Abstract: Epistemological beliefs are beliefs about knowledge and learning. In a physics class, for example, some students might believe learning consists of memorizing facts and formulas provided by the teacher, whereas others might believe it entails applying and modifying their conceptualizations of phenomena. This paper explores, in the context of a debate about velocity from the author's high school physics class, how a perspective of students as having epistemological beliefs might influence a teacher's perceptions of students and intentions for instruction.

Hammer, Cognition and Instruction (1995)

2009-01-13T17:53:00.000-05:00

Student inquiry in a physics class discussion

D. Hammer, Cognition and Instruction, 13(3), p 401-430 (1995). (link to journal article)

Abstract: There is a long, rich history of arguments for the importance of involving students in a process of inquiry. For many instructors, however, promoting student inquiry is a difficult agenda to pursue, for two reasons. First, there is often tension for instructors between concerns for this agenda and more traditional concerns for the correctness and completeness of students' understanding. Second, it is not easy to recognize when productive student inquiry is taking place. For a teacher in class, what is valuable about the students' participation at any given moment may not be as obvious as the flaws and ambiguities in their arguments.

This article analyzes a short excerpt from a physics class discussion to consider the value of the students' work as inquiry and to illustrate a teacher's negotiation of the tension between inquiry and traditional content-oriented concerns. The approach is to try to discover the beginnings of science in what the students say and do, rather than to apply criteria from a particular model of scientific reasoning. The article presents this exploration for students' knowledge and abilities both as an approach to research on student inquiry and as a mode of instructional practice to support that inquiry.

Hammer, International J of Science Ed (1994)

2009-01-13T17:45:00.000-05:00

Students' beliefs about conceptual knowledge in introductory physics

D. Hammer, International Journal of Science, 16(4), p 385-403 (1994). (link to journal)

Abstract: This paper describes a distinction between two ways in which students' may see the role of conceptual knowledge in introductory physics. Concepts is a belief that conceptual knowledge constitutes the core of physics understanding; Apparent Concepts is a belief that the associations between conceptual knowledge and physics are apparent but not essential. Excerpts from interviews of two subjects illustrate this distinction in a range of interviewing activities and show its relevance for understanding students' work in an introductory physics course.

Hammer, Cognition and Instruction (1994)

2009-01-13T17:32:00.002-05:00

Epistemological beliefs in introductory physics

D. Hammer, Cognition and Instruction, 12(2), p 151-183 (1994). (link to journal)

Abstract: Students' beliefs about knowledge and learning in a domain may have a significant effect on how they approach the material and what they learn. This paper describes a study of such "epistemological beliefs" in the context of an introductory physics course. I interviewed six students, meeting several times with each over one semester. The interviews involved a variety of conversations and tasks closely tied to the course.

Through the development and use of an analytic framework, it was possible to characterize subject's beliefs. The framework consisted of three dimensions:

1) beliefs about the structure of physics knowledge, as a collection of isolated pieces or as a single coherent system;

2) beliefs about the content of physics knowledge, as formulas or as concepts that underlie the formulas;

3) beliefs about learning physics, whether it means receiving information or involves an active process of reconstructing one's understanding.

The characterizations satisfied criteria of evident involvement in the subjects' work in the course and of consistency, across interviewing tasks as well as across physics content. That it was possible to construct such characterizations in individual case studies supports the validity of epistemological beliefs as a theoretical perspective by which to understand student reasoning.

Sherin, diSessa & Hammer, Interactive Learning Environments (1993)

2009-01-12T16:57:00.000-05:00

Dynaturtle revisited: Learning physics through collaborative design of a computer model

B. Sherin, A. diSessa & D. Hammer, Interactive Learning Environments, 3(2), p 91-118 (1993). (link to journal)

Abstract: We investigate two related issues. In what ways can we support student inquiry in the classroom? How can innovative representational systems support learning?In the first case, we advocate collaborative design as a form of activity particularly suited for supporting student inquiry in physics. Students can easily understand and engage in activities that are framed in terms of design, and the task of design also provides a context in which idealized worlds can be considered naturally. With respect to representations for learning, we explore the use of programming language to mediate design and inquiry in physics. Programming provides students with an alternative means of expression that is precise and compact. Because a computer language contains certain commands and structures, and not others, it both constrains and enables. In addition, programming can easily capture causal relations and time development, features central to physics. We make our points by displaying and analyzing a teacher-led class discussion in which a group of high school students, working together at a blackboard, designed a computer program that models frictionless Newtonian motion.

Metz & Hammer, Interactive Learning Environments (1993)

2009-01-12T16:52:00.000-05:00

Learning physics in a computer microworld: In what sense a world?

K. Metz & D. Hammer, Interactive Learning Environments, 3(1), p 55-76 (1993). (link to journal)

Abstract: The term microworld implies that there is some form of worldness in students' learning in this software genre. This article develops a conceptual framework to analyze the sense in which the world metaphor may or may not hold. It also applies the framework to data of students interacting with one computer microworld. We consider three possible senses of the metaphor. In the strongest sense, the artifact qua microworld defines the realm within which the students are reasoning. In a weaker sense, the student constructs a worldlike conceptual space. In the weakest sense of the metaphor, the software functions as a world only in the sense that it encourages the students' construction of inferences from one situation to another. We videotaped 12 physics-naive high school students interacting with Elmira, a computer microworld designed to foster students' reasoning about Relative Motion across a broad variety of combinations of motions (linear and/or circular). The finding that students were not constrained to the Relative Motion interpretation and the prevalence of alternative interpretations was inconsistent with the strongest sense of the metaphor. The weaker, constructed space sense of the microworld metaphor also appeared invalid here, in view of the students' flexible use of broad range of strategies based on fundamentally different representations and the weak connections between puzzle interpretation and problem-solving strategies. The low frequency of puzzles that the students related indicate a limited conceptualization of interconnectedness of the puzzles. This is not to say that the microworld was not successful, we believe it was: Learning did occur, and students came to interpret the microworld in accordance with the designer's intentions. We mean only to raise the question of whether it is appropriate to assume a worldlike quality to students' reasoning within a microworld.

diSessa, Hammer, Sherin & Kolpakowski, J of Mathematical Behavior (1991)

2009-01-12T16:46:00.000-05:00

Inventing graphing: Meta-representational expertise in children

A. diSessa, D. Hammer, B. Sherin & T. Kolpakowski, Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10, p 117-160 (1991).

Abstract: A cooperative activity involving eight sixth grade students over five days focused on inventing static representations of motion. In generating, critiquing and refining numerous representations, strong metarepresentational competence was found. An intricate blend of the children's conceptual and interactional skills, their interest in and sense of ownership over the inventions, and the teacher's organization of activities were found.

Hammer, The Physics Teacher (1989)

2009-01-12T16:42:00.001-05:00

Two approaches to learning physics

D. Hammer, The Physics Teacher, 27, p 664-671 (1989).

Bing & Redish, Conference Proceedings (2008)

2009-01-12T16:22:00.000-05:00

Using warrants as a window to epistemic framing

T. J. Bing & E. F. Redish, Proceedings of the Physics Education Research Conference, Edmonton, AB, July 2008, to be published.

Abstract: Mathematics can serve many functions in physics. It can provide a computational system, reflect a physical idea, conveniently encode a rule, and so forth. A physics student thus has many different options for using mathematics in his physics problem solving. We present a short example from the problem solving work of upper level physics students and use it to illustrate the epistemic framing process: “framing” because these students are focusing on a subset of their total math knowledge, “epistemic” because their choice of subset relates to what they see (at that particular time) as the nature of the math knowledge in play. We illustrate how looking for students’ warrants, the often unspoken reasons they think their evidence supports their mathematical claims, serves as a window to their epistemic framing. These warrants provide a powerful, concise piece of evidence of these students’ epistemic framing.

Redish & Hammer, Am J Phys (2008)

2009-01-12T16:18:00.000-05:00

Reinventing College Physics for Biologists: Explicating an Epistemological Curriculum

E. F. Redish & D. Hammer, accepted for publication in Am J Phys, (2008). [with supplementary appendix]

Abstract: The University of Maryland Physics Education Research Group (UMd-PERG) carried out a five-year research project to rethink, observe, and reform introductory algebra-based (college) physics. This class is one of the Maryland Physics Department’s large service courses, serving primarily life-science majors. After consultation with biologists, we re-focused the class on helping the students learn to think scientifically – to build coherence, think in terms of mechanism, and to follow the implications of assumptions. We designed the course to tap into students’ productive conceptual and epistemological resources, based on a theoretical framework from research on learning. The reformed class retains its traditional structure in terms of time and instructional personnel, but we modified existing best-practices curricular materials, including Peer Instruction, Interactive Lecture Demonstrations, and Tutorials. We provided class-controlled spaces for student collaboration, which allowed us to observe and record students learning directly. We also scanned all written homework and examinations, and we administered pre-post conceptual and epistemological surveys. The reformed class enhanced the strong gains on pre-post conceptual tests produced by the best-practices materials while obtaining unprecedented pre-post gains on epistemological surveys instead of the traditional losses.

Redish & Smith, J of Engineering Educ (2008)

2009-01-12T16:10:00.000-05:00

Looking Beyond Content: Skill development for engineers

E. F. Redish & K. A. Smith, Journal of Engineering Education, 97, p 295-307 (July 2008).

Abstract: Current concerns over reforming engineering education have focused attention on helping students develop skills and an adaptive expertise. Phenomenological guidelines for instruction along these lines can be understood as arising out of an emerging theory of thinking and learning built on results in the neural, cognitive, and behavioral sciences. We outline this framework and consider some of its implications for one example: developing a more detailed understanding of the specific skill of using mathematics in modeling physical situations. This approach provides theoretical underpinnings for some best-practice instructional methods designed to help students develop this skill and provides guidance for further research in the area.

Bing & Redish, Am J Phys (2008)

2009-01-12T16:02:00.001-05:00

Symbolic manipulators affect mathematical mindsets

T. J. Bing & E. F. Redish, Am J Phys, 76, p 418-424 (2008). (html version)

Abstract: The use of symbolic calculators such as MATHEMATICA is becoming more commonplace among upper level physics students. The presence of such powerful calculators can couple strongly to the type of mathematical reasoning students employ. These tools do not merely offer students a convenient way to perform the calculations they would have otherwise done by hand. We present examples from the work of upper level physics majors where MATHEMATICA plays an active role in focusing and sustaining their thoughts around calculation. These students still engage in powerful mathematical reasoning while they calculate, but struggle because of the narrowed breadth of their thinking. We model MATHEMATICA'S influence as an integral part of the constant feedback that occurs in how students frame, and hence focus, their work.

Gupta, Redish & Hammer, PER Conf Proceedings (2008)

2009-01-12T15:57:00.000-05:00

Coordination of Mathematical and Physics Resources by Physics Graduate Students

A. Gupta, E. F. Redish & D. Hammer, in Proceedings of the Physics Education Research Conference, Greensboro, NC, July 2007, AIP Conf. Proc, 951, p104-107 (2008). (html version)

Abstract: We investigate the dynamics of how graduate students coordinate their mathematics and physics knowledge within the context of solving a homework problem for a plasma physics survey course. Students were asked to obtain the complex dielectric function for a plasma with a specified distribution function and find the roots of that expression. While all the 16 participating students obtained the dielectric function correctly in one of two equivalent expressions, roughly half of them (7 of 16) failed to compute the roots correctly. All seven took the same initial step that led them to the incorrect answer. We note a perfect correlation between the specific expression of dielectric function obtained and the student's success in solving for the roots. We analyze student responses in terms of a resources framework and suggest routes for future research.

Gupta, Hammer & Redish, preprint (2008)

2009-01-12T15:52:00.000-05:00

The Case for a Dynamic Model of Expert and Novice Ontologies in Physics

A. Gupta, D. Hammer & E. F. Redish, University of Maryland, preprint (2008). (html version)

Abstract: In a series of well-known papers, Chi and Slotta (Chi, 1992; Chi & Slotta, 1993; Chi, Slotta & de Leeuw, 1994; Slotta, Chi & Joram, 1995; Chi, 2005; Slotta & Chi, 2006) have contended that a reason for students' difficulties in learning physics is that they think about concepts as things rather than as processes, and that there is a significant barrier between these two ontological categories. We contest this view, arguing that expert and novice reasoning often and productively traverses ontological categories. We cite examples from everyday, classroom, and professional contexts to illustrate this. We agree with Chi and Slotta that instruction should attend to learners' ontologies; but we find these ontologies are better understood as dynamic and context-dependent, rather than as static constraints. To promote one ontological description in physics instruction, as suggested by Slotta and Chi, could undermine novices' access to productive cognitive resources they bring to their studies and inhibit their transition to the dynamic ontological flexibility required of experts.

Bing & Redish, PER Conference Proceedings (2007)

2009-01-12T15:49:00.000-05:00

The Cognitive Blending of Mathematics and Physics Knowledge

T. J. Bing & E. F. Redish, in Proceedings of the Physics Education Research Conference, Syracuse, NY, August 2006, AIP Conf. Proc., 883, p 26-29 (2007).

Abstract: Numbers, variables, and equations are used differently in a physics class than in a pure mathematics class. In physics, these symbols not only obey formal mathematical rules but also carry physical ideas and relations. This paper focuses on modeling how this combination of physical and mathematical knowledge is constructed. The cognitive blending framework highlights both the different ways this combination can occur and the emergence of new insights and meaning that follows such a combination. After an introduction to the blending framework itself, several examples from undergraduate physics students’ work are analyzed.

Tuminaro & Redish, Phys Rev STPER (2007)

2009-01-12T15:45:00.001-05:00

Elements of a Cognitive Model of Physics Problem Solving: Epistemic Games

J. Tuminaro & E. F. Redish, Phys Rev ST PER, 3, 020101 (2007).

Abstract: Although much is known about the differences between expert and novice problem solvers, knowledge of those differences typically does not provide enough detail to help instructors understand why some students seem to learn physics while solving problems and others do not. A critical issue is how students access the knowledge they have in the context of solving a particular problem. In this paper, we discuss our observations of students solving physics problems in authentic situations in an algebra-based physics class at the University of Maryland. We find that when these students are working together and interacting effectively, they often use a limited set of locally coherent resources for blocks of time of a few minutes or more. This coherence appears to provide the student with guidance as to what knowledge and procedures to access and what to ignore. Often, this leads to the students failing to apply relevant knowledge they later show they possess. In this paper, we outline a theoretical phenomenology for describing these local coherences and identify six organizational structures that we refer to as epistemic games. The hypothesis that students tend to function within the narrow confines of a fairly limited set of games provides a good description of our observations. We demonstrate how students use these games in two case studies and discuss the implications for instruc-tion.

Sabella & Redish, Am J Phys (2007)

2009-01-12T15:15:00.001-05:00

Knowledge Organization and Activation in Physics Problem Solving

M. Sabella & E. F. Redish, Am J Phys, 75, p 1017-1029 (2007).

Abstract: Conceptual knowledge is only one aspect of a good knowledge structure: how and when knowledge is activated and used are also important. In this paper, we explore knowledge organization in the context of the resources model of student thinking through observations of student problem-solving behavior on a mechanics task that integrates the concepts of force, motion, and energy. We document in detail that both introductory and advanced students may have knowledge structures with local coherences that may inhibit their access to additional useful knowledge. These results suggest that instructors and researcher need to pay increased attention to how and when students use what they know as well as to what they know.

Redish, NSF Conf: Reconsidering the Textbook (2006)

2009-01-12T15:11:00.000-05:00

Whither/Wither the Physics Textbook in an Active/Inactive Era?

E. F. Redish, thinkpiece based on poster presented at the NSF conference, Reconsidering the Textbook: A Workshop, Washington, DC (May 24-26, 2006).

Abstract: The textbook still seems to be the core element in the large introductory university physics course, determining the content, pace, notation, and orientation taken by the instructor and students. Yet a number of trends seem to portend deep change in how the textbook is conceived and used. Few instructors are satisfied with the textbook: “It covers too many topics, it does them in the wrong order, it doesn’t do things in the way I like.” Few students actually read the textbook. Research has increasingly demonstrated that “active learning” is much more effective for students than the “transmissionist telling” that seems to be the model for most textbooks. And finally, an upcoming generation of students seems much more comfortable with obtaining their information on-line, often with active game-like components and video. In this paper, I explore some ways text can be adapted to the current university physics learning environment that is increasingly incorporating more active learning elements. I then consider the future and whether web documents with interactivity will lead to the textbook’s just “withering away” despite its apparent current vitality.

Redish, Conf Proc: World View on Physics Educ in 2005 (2005)

2009-01-12T15:08:00.000-05:00

Problem Solving and the Use of Math in Physics Courses

E. F. Redish, to be published in Proceedings of the Conference, World View on Physics Education in 2005: Focusing on Change, Delhi (Aug 21-26, 2005).

Abstract: Mathematics is an essential element of physics problem solving, but experts often fail to appreciate exactly how they use it. Math may be the language of science, but math-in-physics is a distinct dialect of that language. Physicists tend to blend conceptual physics with mathematical symbolism in a way that profoundly affects the way equations are used and interpreted. Research with university physics students in classes from algebra-based introductory physics indicates that the gap between what students think they are supposed to be doing and what their instructors expect them to do can cause severe problems.

Redish, Conf Proc: World View on Physics Educ in 2005 (2005)

2009-01-12T15:03:00.000-05:00

Changing Student Ways of Knowing: What should our students learn in physics class?

E. F. Redish, to be published in Proceedings of the Conference, World View on Physics Education in 2005: Focusing on Change, Delhi (Aug 21-26, 2005).

Abstract: Over the past twenty-five years, educational research on introductory university physics classes has demonstrated that student learning is often significantly less than we hope and expect. Specific conceptual difficulties have been identified in a wide variety of topics. Research-based curricula designed to improve student conceptual learning can yield substantial gains over traditional instruction. I review some of the results of this research and development and describe a project at the University of Maryland that explores the next step: understanding the deeper and less explicit elements of science learning that I refer to as “the hidden curriculum.” The results of this project indicate that it is possible to provide explicit instruction to change students’ ways of knowing even in a large lecture environment.

Redish, Scherr & Tuminaro, The Physics Teacher (2006)

2009-01-12T14:49:00.001-05:00

Reverse Engineering the Solution of a "Simple" Physics Problem: Why learning physics is harder than it looks

E. F. Redish, R. E. Scherr & J. Tuminaro, published in a slightly abbreviated version in The Physics Teacher, 44, p 293 (May 2006).

Abstract: Problem solving is the heart and soul of most college physics and many high school physics courses. The “big idea” is that physics tells you more about a physical situation than you thought you knew — and you can quantify it if you use fundamental physical principles expressed in mathematical form. Often, the results of your problem solving can lead you to understand and rethink your intuitions about the physical world in new and more productive ways. As a result, physics is a great place (some of us would claim the best place) to learn how to use mathematics effectively in science.

As physics teachers, we often stress the importance of problem solving in learning physics. Unfortunately, many of our students appear to find problem solving very difficult. Sometimes they generate ridiculous answers and seem satisfied with them. Sometimes they can do the calculations but not interpret the implications of the results. Sometimes, despite apparent success in problem solving, they seem to have a poor understanding of the physics that went into the problems.1 We give them explicit instructions on how to solve problems (“draw a picture,” “find the right equation,” …) but it doesn’t seem to help.

We might respond that they need to take more math prerequisite classes, but in the algebra-based physics class at the University of Maryland, almost all of the students have taken calculus and earned an A or a B. Many of them have been successful in classes such as organic chemistry, cellular biology, and genetics. Why do they have so much trouble with the math in an introductory physics class?

As part of a research project to study learning in algebra-based physics,2 the Physics Education Research Group at the University of Maryland videotaped students working together on physics problems. Analyzing these tapes gives us new insights into the problems they have in using math in the context of physics. One problem is that they have inappropriate expectations as to how to solve problems in physics (some of it learned, perhaps, in math classes). This is discussed elsewhere.3 A second problem seems to lie with the instructors. As instructors, we may have misconceptions about how people think and learn, and this has important implications about how we interpret what our students are doing.

In this paper, we want to consider one example of students working on a physics problem that showed us in a dramatic fashion that we had failed to understand the work the students needed to do in order to solve an apparently “simple” problem in electrostatics. Our critical misunderstanding was failing to realize the level of complexity that we had built into our own “obvious" knowledge about physics.

Scherr & Redish, The Physics Teacher (2005)

2009-01-12T14:46:00.000-05:00

Newton's zeroth law: Learning from listening to our students

R. E. Scherr & E. F. Redish, The Physics Teacher, 43, p 41-45 (2005).

Abstract: Introductory physics students have difficulty with free-body diagrams. A principle we call “Newton’s Zeroth Law” articulates important (but usually tacit) ideas underlying them. In this paper we explain our use of Newton’s Zeroth Law in the introductory algebra-based course at the University of Maryland. We also discuss how one student’s “misconception” led us to see that an alternative formulation of Newton’s laws is possible, one that we had not previously considered, even after many years of teaching the subject.