FFPER 2013 Working Group Report: Diversity Concerns in Physics

Cid, X., Samuels, N., Hinko, K, Lunk, B., Gupta, A. (2013) FFPER 2013 Working Group Report: Diversity Concerns in Physics.  APS Forum on Education Newsletter (Ed: Beth Lindsey), Fall 2013 Issue. (Full Text)

From Fear To Fun In Thermodynamics

D. J. Roundy, A. Gupta, J. F. Wagner, T. Dray, M. B. Kustusch, and C. A. Manogue, From Fear To Fun In Thermodynamics, 2013 PERC Proceedings [Portland, OR, July 17-18, 2013], edited by P. V. Engelhardt, A. D. Churukian, and D. L. Jones. (Full Text)

Integrating emotions into fine-grained accounts of students' reasoning

A. Gupta, Integrating emotions into fine-grained accounts of students' reasoning, 2013 PERC Proceedings [Portland, OR, July 17-18, 2013], edited by P. V. Engelhardt, A. D. Churukian, and D. L. Jones. (Full Text) 

Teaching cross-platform design and testing methods for embedded systems using DICE

Bhattacharyya, S. S., Plishker, W., Gupta, A., & Shen, C.-C. (2011). Teaching cross-platform design and testing methods for embedded systems using DICE. Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Embedded Systems Education, WESE  ’11 (pp. 38–45). New York, NY, USA: ACM. doi:10.1145/2077370.2077376

Incorporating Affect in Engineering Students’ Epistemological Dynamics

Danielak, B., Gupta, A., & Elby, A. (2010). Incorporating Affect in Engineering Students’ Epistemological Dynamics. In Gomez, K., Lyons, L., & Radinsky, J. (Eds.) Learning in the Disciplines: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS2010) - Volume 2, Short Papers, Symposia, and Selected Abstracts. (pp. 411-412). International Society of the Learning Sciences: Chicago IL.

The Case for Dynamic Models of Learners' Ontologies in Physics

Gupta, A., Hammer, D., & Redish, E. F. (2010).  The Case for Dynamic Models of Learners' Ontologies in Physics. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19:3, pp. 285-321. [Link to Article on the Journal Page]

The Marginalized Identities of Sense-makers: Reframing Engineering Student Retention

Danielak, B. A., Gupta, A., & Elby, A. (2010). The Marginalized Identities of Sense-makers: Reframing Engineering Student Retention. Proceedings of the 2010 Frontiers in Education Conference (ASEE/IEEE).

Understanding Students' Difficulties in Terms of Coupled Epistemological and Affective Dynamics

Gupta, A., Danielak, B. A., & Elby, A. (2010). Understanding Students' Difficulties in Terms of Coupled Epistemological and Affective Dynamics.  Proceedings of the 2010 Frontiers in Education Conference (ASEE/IEEE).

Inquiry Based Professional Development for a Diverse Population

Elby, A., Gupta, A., Conlin, L. D., Richards, J., (2013) Inquiry Based Professional Development for a Diverse Population. APS Forum on Education Newsletter (Ed: Beth Lindsey), Summer 2013 Issue (Teacher Preparation Section). (Full Text) 

Problem-solving rubrics revisited: Attending to the blending of informal conceptual and formal mathematical reasoning

Hull, M., Kuo, E., Gupta, A., & Elby, A. (2013). Problem-solving rubrics revisited: Attending to the blending of informal conceptual and formal mathematical reasoning. Phys. Rev. ST Physics Ed. Research 9, 010105 (2013)  Link to Journal Version 

On static and dynamic ontologies

1. Hammer, D., Gupta, A, & Redish, E. F. (2011). On static and dynamic ontologies. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20 (1), 163-168.

Beyond Epistemological Deficits: Dynamic Explanations of Engineering Students' Difficulties with Mathematical Sense-making

1. Gupta, A. & Elby, A. (2011). Beyond Epistemological Deficits: Dynamic Explanations of Engineering Students' Difficulties with Mathematical Sense-making. International Journal of Science Education, 33(18), pp. 2463-2488.

How students blend conceptual and formal mathematical reasoning in solving physics problems

Kuo, E., Hull, M., Gupta, A., & Elby, A. (2013). How students blend conceptual and formal mathematical reasoning in solving physics problems. Sci. Ed., 97: 32–57  doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.21043

Redish & Gupta, GIREP Conference Presentation (2009)

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.

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

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)

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)

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

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)

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.