Pub Date : 2022-09-22DOI: 10.1119/perc.2022.pr.patterson
Zac Patterson, Lin Ding
With the second quantum revolution and the growing need of a competent workforce in Quantum Information Science, formal instruction on contemporary physics topics such as quantum mechanics (QM) is a particularly important component of modern secondary science education. Additionally, a formal introduction to physics is incomplete without an exploration of the quantum realm and the findings of the first quantum revolution. Exposure to QM can radically alter an individual’s view of the physical universe and can broadly engage secondary students. Exposure to QM in secondary schools has increased substantially in recent years yet is still an understudied area with a limited body of research on this topic. The aim of this paper is to analyze this body of research by bibliometric analysis, examining yearly output, citation index, author nationality, publishing venue, and keywords of relevant publications. The academic search engines SCOPUS and Web of Science were used to collect publications emphasizing the teaching and learning of QM at the secondary level. First, we present a quantitative analysis of the bibliometrics, followed by an assessment of publication trends in teaching and learning. Lastly, an analysis of research gaps and opportunities for further investigation is discussed.
随着第二次量子革命和量子信息科学领域对合格劳动力的需求日益增长，关于量子力学(QM)等当代物理主题的正式教学是现代中等科学教育中特别重要的组成部分。此外，没有对量子领域的探索和第一次量子革命的发现，对物理学的正式介绍是不完整的。接触量子力学可以从根本上改变个人对物质世界的看法，并能广泛地吸引中学生。近年来，中学对质量管理的接触大大增加，但这仍然是一个研究不足的领域，关于这一主题的研究有限。本文的目的是通过文献计量分析，考察相关出版物的年产量、被引索引、作者国籍、出版地点和关键词，对这一研究主体进行分析。使用学术搜索引擎SCOPUS和Web of Science收集强调二级质量管理教与学的出版物。首先，我们对文献计量学进行了定量分析，然后对教学和学习中的出版趋势进行了评估。最后，对研究差距和进一步研究的机会进行了分析。
{"title":"A bibliometric analysis of PER on quantum mechanics in secondary schools","authors":"Zac Patterson, Lin Ding","doi":"10.1119/perc.2022.pr.patterson","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2022.pr.patterson","url":null,"abstract":"With the second quantum revolution and the growing need of a competent workforce in Quantum Information Science, formal instruction on contemporary physics topics such as quantum mechanics (QM) is a particularly important component of modern secondary science education. Additionally, a formal introduction to physics is incomplete without an exploration of the quantum realm and the findings of the first quantum revolution. Exposure to QM can radically alter an individual’s view of the physical universe and can broadly engage secondary students. Exposure to QM in secondary schools has increased substantially in recent years yet is still an understudied area with a limited body of research on this topic. The aim of this paper is to analyze this body of research by bibliometric analysis, examining yearly output, citation index, author nationality, publishing venue, and keywords of relevant publications. The academic search engines SCOPUS and Web of Science were used to collect publications emphasizing the teaching and learning of QM at the secondary level. First, we present a quantitative analysis of the bibliometrics, followed by an assessment of publication trends in teaching and learning. Lastly, an analysis of research gaps and opportunities for further investigation is discussed.","PeriodicalId":253382,"journal":{"name":"2022 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128458125","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-22DOI: 10.1119/perc.2022.pr.changstrom
J. Changstrom, Mary Bridget Kustusch, Eleanor C. Sayre
We use a communities of practice framework to explore how departments value different constituent groups, focusing on faculty, undergraduate
我们使用实践框架社区来探索部门如何重视不同的组成群体，重点是教师，本科生
{"title":"Using communities of practice to explore departmental values","authors":"J. Changstrom, Mary Bridget Kustusch, Eleanor C. Sayre","doi":"10.1119/perc.2022.pr.changstrom","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2022.pr.changstrom","url":null,"abstract":"We use a communities of practice framework to explore how departments value different constituent groups, focusing on faculty, undergraduate","PeriodicalId":253382,"journal":{"name":"2022 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121584373","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-22DOI: 10.1119/perc.2022.pr.wilcox
Bethany R. Wilcox, Katherine Rainey, M. Vignal
Recent years have seen a movement within the research-based assessment development community towards item formats that go beyond simple multiple-choice formats. Some have moved towards free-response questions, particularly at the upper-division level; however, free-response items have the constraint that they must be scored by hand. To avoid this limitation, some assessment developers have moved toward formats that maintain the closed-response format, while still providing more nuanced insight into student reasoning. One such format is known as coupled, multiple response (CMR). This format pairs multiple-choice and multiple-response formats to allow students to both commit to an answer in addition to selecting options that correspond with their reasoning. In addition to being machine-scorable, this format allows for more nuanced scoring than simple right or wrong. However, such nuanced scoring presents a potential challenge with respect to utilizing certain testing theories to construct validity arguments for the assessment. In particular, Item Response Theory (IRT) models often assume dichotomously scored items. While polytomous IRT models do exist, each brings with it certain constraints and limitations. Here, we will explore multiple IRT models and scoring schema using data from an existing CMR test, with the goal of providing guidance and insight for possible methods for simultaneously leveraging the affordances of both the CMR format and IRT models in the context of constructing validity arguments for research-based assessments.
{"title":"Methods for utilizing Item response theory with Coupled, Multiple-Response assessments","authors":"Bethany R. Wilcox, Katherine Rainey, M. Vignal","doi":"10.1119/perc.2022.pr.wilcox","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2022.pr.wilcox","url":null,"abstract":"Recent years have seen a movement within the research-based assessment development community towards item formats that go beyond simple multiple-choice formats. Some have moved towards free-response questions, particularly at the upper-division level; however, free-response items have the constraint that they must be scored by hand. To avoid this limitation, some assessment developers have moved toward formats that maintain the closed-response format, while still providing more nuanced insight into student reasoning. One such format is known as coupled, multiple response (CMR). This format pairs multiple-choice and multiple-response formats to allow students to both commit to an answer in addition to selecting options that correspond with their reasoning. In addition to being machine-scorable, this format allows for more nuanced scoring than simple right or wrong. However, such nuanced scoring presents a potential challenge with respect to utilizing certain testing theories to construct validity arguments for the assessment. In particular, Item Response Theory (IRT) models often assume dichotomously scored items. While polytomous IRT models do exist, each brings with it certain constraints and limitations. Here, we will explore multiple IRT models and scoring schema using data from an existing CMR test, with the goal of providing guidance and insight for possible methods for simultaneously leveraging the affordances of both the CMR format and IRT models in the context of constructing validity arguments for research-based assessments.","PeriodicalId":253382,"journal":{"name":"2022 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":"53 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114342019","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-22DOI: 10.1119/perc.2022.pr.werth
Alexandra Werth, Kristin A. Oliver, Colin G. West, H. Lewandowski
, Google Colaboratory, or “Colab" for short, is a multiuser, collaborative environment that allows anyone with access to Google and the internet to write and execute arbitrary python code through their browser. With recent calls to increase use of computation in physics education, Colab has the potential to be a valuable tool to allow students to collaboratively code together—particularly in an online environment. Through this work, we examine how student teams navigated collaboration challenges related to using Colab in an online environment to conduct data analysis for a course-based undergraduate research experience in physics. We analyze students’ final written assignment of the course, a “memo to future researchers," through the framework of socially-shared regulation of learning, to understand the challenges, regulations, and perceived goal attainment students discussed relating to their experience programming in teams online with Colab. We found that students struggled with version control issues when simultaneously writing, editing, and saving their work. This led to the need to use socially-shared regulatory strategies, including assigning and rotating roles from week to week and having clear, regular communication. Highlighting these students’ experiences and their advice to future researchers can help inform instructional guidance on how to best promote productive teamwork in collaborative coding environments both online and in person.
{"title":"Engagement in collaboration and teamwork using Google Colaboratory","authors":"Alexandra Werth, Kristin A. Oliver, Colin G. West, H. Lewandowski","doi":"10.1119/perc.2022.pr.werth","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2022.pr.werth","url":null,"abstract":", Google Colaboratory, or “Colab\" for short, is a multiuser, collaborative environment that allows anyone with access to Google and the internet to write and execute arbitrary python code through their browser. With recent calls to increase use of computation in physics education, Colab has the potential to be a valuable tool to allow students to collaboratively code together—particularly in an online environment. Through this work, we examine how student teams navigated collaboration challenges related to using Colab in an online environment to conduct data analysis for a course-based undergraduate research experience in physics. We analyze students’ final written assignment of the course, a “memo to future researchers,\" through the framework of socially-shared regulation of learning, to understand the challenges, regulations, and perceived goal attainment students discussed relating to their experience programming in teams online with Colab. We found that students struggled with version control issues when simultaneously writing, editing, and saving their work. This led to the need to use socially-shared regulatory strategies, including assigning and rotating roles from week to week and having clear, regular communication. Highlighting these students’ experiences and their advice to future researchers can help inform instructional guidance on how to best promote productive teamwork in collaborative coding environments both online and in person.","PeriodicalId":253382,"journal":{"name":"2022 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122287947","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-22DOI: 10.1119/perc.2022.pr.flores
Mark Flores, Rebecca Verchimak, Dina Zohrabi Alaee, B. Zwickl
Students’ use of support from peers and instructors is an important aspect of success in college. This preliminary phenomenographic study examines a variety of help seeking behaviors of undergraduate majors in physics and life sciences and factors that lead to those behaviors. Seven students described their experiences using semi-structured interviews during the summer of 2021. The analysis was structured around identifying characteristics of peers and instructors, as well as personal help-seeking attitudes, that either promoted help seeking or help avoidance. Peers were generally the first source of help, and were prioritized based on ability and the closeness of the relationship. Instructors fostered help seeking through availability and a non-judgemental demeanor. A feeling of vulnerability and fear of judgement was cited as the most common reason for avoiding help. The findings provide insights for faculty and departments seeking to encourage student success.
{"title":"Factors influencing help seeking and help avoidant behaviors among physics and life science majors","authors":"Mark Flores, Rebecca Verchimak, Dina Zohrabi Alaee, B. Zwickl","doi":"10.1119/perc.2022.pr.flores","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2022.pr.flores","url":null,"abstract":"Students’ use of support from peers and instructors is an important aspect of success in college. This preliminary phenomenographic study examines a variety of help seeking behaviors of undergraduate majors in physics and life sciences and factors that lead to those behaviors. Seven students described their experiences using semi-structured interviews during the summer of 2021. The analysis was structured around identifying characteristics of peers and instructors, as well as personal help-seeking attitudes, that either promoted help seeking or help avoidance. Peers were generally the first source of help, and were prioritized based on ability and the closeness of the relationship. Instructors fostered help seeking through availability and a non-judgemental demeanor. A feeling of vulnerability and fear of judgement was cited as the most common reason for avoiding help. The findings provide insights for faculty and departments seeking to encourage student success.","PeriodicalId":253382,"journal":{"name":"2022 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":"77 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126934499","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this study, we adapted a prior identity framework to investigate how students’ perception of the inclusiveness of the learning environment (including sense of belonging, peer interaction and perceived recognition) in an introductory physics course predicts their course grades and physics motivational beliefs (including self-efficacy, interest and identity) at the end of this course. We found signatures of inequitable and non-inclusive learning environment in that female students’ mean scores for sense of belonging, peer interaction and perceived recognition were all lower than male students’ in the course. In addition, we found that female students had lower average course grades than male students. Using structural equation modeling, we found that students’ perception of the inclusiveness of the learning environment predicts their self-efficacy, interest, identity and grades at the end of the course even after controlling for students’ gender, motivational beliefs and grades in a previous course as well as their high school GPA and SAT math scores. In particular, students’ perceived recognition, e.g., by instructors and teaching assistants, played a major role in predicting students’ physics identity, and students’ sense of belonging in physics played an important role in explaining the change in students’ physics self-efficacy. Our findings can be helpful for creating an inclusive and equitable learning environment in which all students can excel.
{"title":"How inclusiveness of learning environment predicts female and male students� physics grades and motivational beliefs in introductory physics courses","authors":"Yangqiuting Li, C. Singh","doi":"10.1119/perc.2022.pr.li","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2022.pr.li","url":null,"abstract":"In this study, we adapted a prior identity framework to investigate how students’ perception of the inclusiveness of the learning environment (including sense of belonging, peer interaction and perceived recognition) in an introductory physics course predicts their course grades and physics motivational beliefs (including self-efficacy, interest and identity) at the end of this course. We found signatures of inequitable and non-inclusive learning environment in that female students’ mean scores for sense of belonging, peer interaction and perceived recognition were all lower than male students’ in the course. In addition, we found that female students had lower average course grades than male students. Using structural equation modeling, we found that students’ perception of the inclusiveness of the learning environment predicts their self-efficacy, interest, identity and grades at the end of the course even after controlling for students’ gender, motivational beliefs and grades in a previous course as well as their high school GPA and SAT math scores. In particular, students’ perceived recognition, e.g., by instructors and teaching assistants, played a major role in predicting students’ physics identity, and students’ sense of belonging in physics played an important role in explaining the change in students’ physics self-efficacy. Our findings can be helpful for creating an inclusive and equitable learning environment in which all students can excel.","PeriodicalId":253382,"journal":{"name":"2022 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126505893","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-22DOI: 10.1119/perc.2022.pr.vignal
M. Vignal, Katherine Rainey, Bethany R. Wilcox, Marcos D. Caballero, H. Lewandowski
Research-based assessments have historically been developed based on teaching experience and/or course learning goals or objectives. However, using course learning goals for assessment development has limitations, including that the goals for a course are often broad and difficult or impossible to assess with an individualized, scalable assessment instrument. Thus, we propose articulating assessment objectives (AOs), which are concise and specific statements about concepts and practices that an assessment aims to measure, as a productive strategy for assessment development. While similar in many respects to learning goals, AOs are explicitly designed to aid in assessment development in numerous ways, including by helping researchers organize high-level assessment goals, providing an additional means for establishing content validity, operationalizing the goals of the assessment via targeted assessment items, and serving as a way to communicate the substance of an assessment to instructors and researchers interested in using the assessment in their course or research study. Here, we discuss these affordances of AOs in the development of two recent research-based assessments, and we present two detailed examples of AOs and how we progressed from initial assessment concep-tion to AO articulation to finalized assessment items. We conclude by arguing that the articulation of AOs is a valuable step in the development of research-based assessments.
{"title":"Affordances of Articulating Assessment Objectives in Research-based Assessment Development","authors":"M. Vignal, Katherine Rainey, Bethany R. Wilcox, Marcos D. Caballero, H. Lewandowski","doi":"10.1119/perc.2022.pr.vignal","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2022.pr.vignal","url":null,"abstract":"Research-based assessments have historically been developed based on teaching experience and/or course learning goals or objectives. However, using course learning goals for assessment development has limitations, including that the goals for a course are often broad and difficult or impossible to assess with an individualized, scalable assessment instrument. Thus, we propose articulating assessment objectives (AOs), which are concise and specific statements about concepts and practices that an assessment aims to measure, as a productive strategy for assessment development. While similar in many respects to learning goals, AOs are explicitly designed to aid in assessment development in numerous ways, including by helping researchers organize high-level assessment goals, providing an additional means for establishing content validity, operationalizing the goals of the assessment via targeted assessment items, and serving as a way to communicate the substance of an assessment to instructors and researchers interested in using the assessment in their course or research study. Here, we discuss these affordances of AOs in the development of two recent research-based assessments, and we present two detailed examples of AOs and how we progressed from initial assessment concep-tion to AO articulation to finalized assessment items. We conclude by arguing that the articulation of AOs is a valuable step in the development of research-based assessments.","PeriodicalId":253382,"journal":{"name":"2022 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125206618","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-22DOI: 10.1119/perc.2022.pr.pawl
A. Pawl
Introductory mechanics is classified as a general education laboratory science at many colleges and universities. General education outcomes often include the ability to reason from evidence or justify claims with evidence. These skills are also central components of the Next Generation Science Standards for K-12 education. In contrast to this mandate to focus on evidence-based reasoning, both the teaching and the assessing of the ability to reason from evidence are often implicit rather than explicit parts of the introductory mechanics laboratory curriculum. This article reports the first results of an ongoing attempt to scaffold the learning of reasoning from evidence and to make the assessment of this skill explicit by employing the “Claim, Evidence and Reasoning” framework in a college-level introductory mechanics laboratory.
{"title":"Claims, evidence and reasoning in the introductory mechanics Lab","authors":"A. Pawl","doi":"10.1119/perc.2022.pr.pawl","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2022.pr.pawl","url":null,"abstract":"Introductory mechanics is classified as a general education laboratory science at many colleges and universities. General education outcomes often include the ability to reason from evidence or justify claims with evidence. These skills are also central components of the Next Generation Science Standards for K-12 education. In contrast to this mandate to focus on evidence-based reasoning, both the teaching and the assessing of the ability to reason from evidence are often implicit rather than explicit parts of the introductory mechanics laboratory curriculum. This article reports the first results of an ongoing attempt to scaffold the learning of reasoning from evidence and to make the assessment of this skill explicit by employing the “Claim, Evidence and Reasoning” framework in a college-level introductory mechanics laboratory.","PeriodicalId":253382,"journal":{"name":"2022 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125755823","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-22DOI: 10.1119/perc.2022.pr.hutchison
Paul Hutchison
Participation in sensemaking discourse is widely seen as important to students’ learning in physics classes. Many physics curricula and pedagogical strategies use collaborative small group activities to create opportunities for students to engage in authentic collaborative sensemaking discourse, but we also know collaborative small groups sometimes function inequitably. Access to discourse in them is co-constructed by group members and impacted by both the histories of individual members and the cultural attitudes and expectations they bring. As a result, some students can be marginalized and excluded from fair access to valuable participation in discourse. This study focuses on one student in a previously studied small group known to frequently function inequitably. The focus student, “Jessica”, was an infrequent participant and arguably a low-influence member of the group. Because she was usually denied fair access to participation in the on-task sensemaking discourse, Jessica is a type of student our research community needs to focus on as we work to better understand the dynamics of collaborative small groups. By analyzing video data of this group, this study aimed to understand how Jessica negotiated her, albeit infrequent, episodes of participation in on-task discussion. Using positioning theory as the primary analytic framework, the analysis illustrates how Jessica negotiated on-task participation opportunities by establishing access to the conversational floor and/or positioning herself with authority in off-task discourse and leveraging that to negotiate access to the group’s on-task discourse. .
{"title":"Equity and off-task discussion in a collaborative small group","authors":"Paul Hutchison","doi":"10.1119/perc.2022.pr.hutchison","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2022.pr.hutchison","url":null,"abstract":"Participation in sensemaking discourse is widely seen as important to students’ learning in physics classes. Many physics curricula and pedagogical strategies use collaborative small group activities to create opportunities for students to engage in authentic collaborative sensemaking discourse, but we also know collaborative small groups sometimes function inequitably. Access to discourse in them is co-constructed by group members and impacted by both the histories of individual members and the cultural attitudes and expectations they bring. As a result, some students can be marginalized and excluded from fair access to valuable participation in discourse. This study focuses on one student in a previously studied small group known to frequently function inequitably. The focus student, “Jessica”, was an infrequent participant and arguably a low-influence member of the group. Because she was usually denied fair access to participation in the on-task sensemaking discourse, Jessica is a type of student our research community needs to focus on as we work to better understand the dynamics of collaborative small groups. By analyzing video data of this group, this study aimed to understand how Jessica negotiated her, albeit infrequent, episodes of participation in on-task discussion. Using positioning theory as the primary analytic framework, the analysis illustrates how Jessica negotiated on-task participation opportunities by establishing access to the conversational floor and/or positioning herself with authority in off-task discourse and leveraging that to negotiate access to the group’s on-task discourse. .","PeriodicalId":253382,"journal":{"name":"2022 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":"57 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126681502","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-22DOI: 10.1119/perc.2022.pr.sammons
Amber Sammons, Rebecca Rosenblatt, R. Zich
Results from a multi-semester study of the effects of eight supplemental laboratory activities in a general education physics course will be presented. A total of two control and three treatment semesters were studied. The results allowed comparison between expert-like attitudes measured by the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey (CLASS) and scientific reasoning skills measured by Lawson’s Classroom Test of Science Reasoning. Correlation of the pre/posttest CLASS scores and posttest Lawson scores found no relationship between the scores. Both student attitudes and scientific reasoning skills showed improvement, relative to a control semester, for the first semester the intervention was applied. In subsequent semesters, improved scientific reasoning skills continued to be observed, but not improvement in students’ scientific attitudes. A detailed comparison of the CLASS and Lawson scores are presented along with a discussion of implications for instruction given this apparent decoupling of expert-like attitudes and reasoning skills.
{"title":"Comparison of expert-like attitudes and scientific reasoning skills","authors":"Amber Sammons, Rebecca Rosenblatt, R. Zich","doi":"10.1119/perc.2022.pr.sammons","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2022.pr.sammons","url":null,"abstract":"Results from a multi-semester study of the effects of eight supplemental laboratory activities in a general education physics course will be presented. A total of two control and three treatment semesters were studied. The results allowed comparison between expert-like attitudes measured by the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey (CLASS) and scientific reasoning skills measured by Lawson’s Classroom Test of Science Reasoning. Correlation of the pre/posttest CLASS scores and posttest Lawson scores found no relationship between the scores. Both student attitudes and scientific reasoning skills showed improvement, relative to a control semester, for the first semester the intervention was applied. In subsequent semesters, improved scientific reasoning skills continued to be observed, but not improvement in students’ scientific attitudes. A detailed comparison of the CLASS and Lawson scores are presented along with a discussion of implications for instruction given this apparent decoupling of expert-like attitudes and reasoning skills.","PeriodicalId":253382,"journal":{"name":"2022 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129817273","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：