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

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)

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)

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.

Wittmann, PhD Dissertation (1998)

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.

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

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 & Wittmann, PER Conference Proceedings (2002)

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)

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.

Redish & Wittmann, AIP Conf Proc (2005)

Twenty Questions for PER: How does it all fit together?

E. F. Redish & M. C. Wittmann, in Proceedings of the Physics Education Research Conference: Sacramento, CA, August 2004, AIP Conf. Proc, 790, p 11-14 (2005).

Abstract: In physics education research (PER), for many years now we have focused our attentions on finding ways to improve our instruction and have achieved some notable successes. In this paper, we suggest that the time has come to embed this activity in a more complete and scientific view of PER, one that builds a coherent understanding of the system of teaching and learning in addition to improving the practice of our instruction. We outline five broad topics of interest for PER and discuss questions that need to be addressed in each topic over the next few years. The topics are: the model of the participants, the model of the contexts, the model of the content, the engineering of instruction, and the overall epistemology of PER — How do we decide when we think we know something?

Redish, Steinberg & Wittmann, Am J Phys (2002)

Investigating student understanding of quantum physics: Spontaneous models of conductivity

E. F. Redish, R. N. Steinberg & M. C. Wittmann, Am J Phys, 70(3), p 218-226 (2002). (html version)

Abstract: Students are taught several models of conductivity, both at the introductory and the advanced level. From early macroscopic models of current flow in circuits, through the discussion of microscopic particle descriptions of electrons flowing in an atomic lattice, to the development of microscopic nonlocalized band diagram descriptions in advanced physics courses, they need to be able to distinguish between commonly used, though sometimes contradictory, physical models. In investigations of student reasoning about models of conduction, we find that students often are unable to account for the existence of free electrons in a conductor and create models that lead to incorrect predictions and responses contradictory to expert descriptions of the physics. We have used these findings as a guide to creating curriculum materials that we show can be effective helping students to apply the different conduction models more effectively.

Wittmann, Steinberg & Redish, Am J Phys (1999)

Making Sense of How Students Make Sense of Mechanical Waves

M. C. Wittmann, R. N. Steinberg & E. F. Redish, The Physics Teacher, 37, p 15-21 (Jan 1999).

Abstract: In our classroom experiences as teachers, we are
often baffled when students correctly answer questions in one setting and then can’t answer seemingly identical questions in another. Obviously, their understanding of the material is not as strong as we would like. But are we asking the relevant questions when we come to this conclusion? Do the students
fundamentally not know the material? Do they know it but not recognize appropriate circumstances in which to use it? And how should our instruction
and evaluation of their knowledge depend on the answers to these questions?

We have begun to address these questions at the University of Maryland using the methods and tools of physics education research.(1) Our approach combines the study of student difficulties with physics with the design of instructional materials and environments that help students improve their understanding. This approach can lead to educational environments
that help students overcome their difficulties. (2)

We report here on our study of student understanding of the physics of mechanical waves. Understanding wave physics is important for making sense of physical optics, quantum mechanics, and electromagnetic radiation. Previous research has shown that students have fundamental difficulties with some of the basic concepts of wave physics.

Steinberg, Wittmann & Redish, ICUPE AIP (1996)

Mathematical Tutorials in Introductory Physics

R. N. Steinberg, M. C. Wittmann & E. F. Redish, Sample class, presented at The International Conference on Undergraduate Physics Education (ICUPE), College Park, MD (July 31 - August 3, 1996) Proceedings to be published by the American Institute of Physics, E. Redish & J. Rigden (Eds.) (html version)

Abstract: Students in introductory calculus-based physics not only have difficulty understanding the fundamental physical concepts, they often have difficulty relating those concepts to the mathematics they have learned in math courses. This produces a barrier to their robust use of concepts in complex problem solving. As a part of the Activity-Based Physics project, we are carrying out research on these difficulties and are developing instructional materials in the tutorial framework developed at the University of Washington by Lillian C. McDermott and her collaborators. In this paper, we present a discussion of student difficulties and the development of a mathematical tutorial on the subject of pulses moving on strings.