Pub Date : 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1119/perc.2020.pr.sirnoorkar
Amogh Sirnoorkar, C. A. Hass, Qing X. Ryan, Eleanor C. Sayre
As part of a larger study of exploring students’ problem solving in small groups, we investigated how the instructor influences students’ epistemic framing in an upper-division electromagnetism class. We use the CAMP (Conceptual, Algorithmic, Mathematics, Physics) framework to investigate the dynamics of students’ frames surrounding their interaction with the instructor, tracking frame triplets before, during and after the instructor’s intervention during tutorial sessions. We present a case study of one such triplet (AP, CP, AP) by qualitatively analyzing student interaction with the instructor. Careful examination indicates that disagreements during the interaction necessitated the instructor to initiate conceptual discussion thereby causing a frame shift from an algorithmic to a conceptual frame.
{"title":"Qualitative Analysis of Students' Epistemic Framing Surrounding Instructor's Interaction","authors":"Amogh Sirnoorkar, C. A. Hass, Qing X. Ryan, Eleanor C. Sayre","doi":"10.1119/perc.2020.pr.sirnoorkar","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2020.pr.sirnoorkar","url":null,"abstract":"As part of a larger study of exploring students’ problem solving in small groups, we investigated how the instructor influences students’ epistemic framing in an upper-division electromagnetism class. We use the CAMP (Conceptual, Algorithmic, Mathematics, Physics) framework to investigate the dynamics of students’ frames surrounding their interaction with the instructor, tracking frame triplets before, during and after the instructor’s intervention during tutorial sessions. We present a case study of one such triplet (AP, CP, AP) by qualitatively analyzing student interaction with the instructor. Careful examination indicates that disagreements during the interaction necessitated the instructor to initiate conceptual discussion thereby causing a frame shift from an algorithmic to a conceptual frame.","PeriodicalId":269466,"journal":{"name":"2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114940057","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 : 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1119/perc.2020.pr.barthelemy
Ramón S. Barthelemy, Mirna Mohamed, Alexis V. Knaub, C. Henderson
This article outlines survey results seeking to understand USA Physics Education Research (PER) Ph.D. programs. The survey explored research group composition, the number of graduates, courses taken and more. The survey was sent to a list of PER research group leaders created by crowdsourcing from the PER community. Of the 46 PER Ph.D. programs identified and invited to the survey, 25 usable responses were received. The majority of programs were in departments of physics with fewer in schools of education or institutes of science education. Most programs required graduate physics course work, with fewer requiring research methodology courses. Only five required a course in PER. The majority of graduates into academic careers. However, a robust minority pursued careers in the private sector. The survey results allow us to estimate the size of the PER community in research groups at PhD granting institutions to be n=487 people with n=156 P.h.D. students.
{"title":"Graduate programs in physics education research: A USA based survey","authors":"Ramón S. Barthelemy, Mirna Mohamed, Alexis V. Knaub, C. Henderson","doi":"10.1119/perc.2020.pr.barthelemy","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2020.pr.barthelemy","url":null,"abstract":"This article outlines survey results seeking to understand USA Physics Education Research (PER) Ph.D. programs. The survey explored research group composition, the number of graduates, courses taken and more. The survey was sent to a list of PER research group leaders created by crowdsourcing from the PER community. Of the 46 PER Ph.D. programs identified and invited to the survey, 25 usable responses were received. The majority of programs were in departments of physics with fewer in schools of education or institutes of science education. Most programs required graduate physics course work, with fewer requiring research methodology courses. Only five required a course in PER. The majority of graduates into academic careers. However, a robust minority pursued careers in the private sector. The survey results allow us to estimate the size of the PER community in research groups at PhD granting institutions to be n=487 people with n=156 P.h.D. students.","PeriodicalId":269466,"journal":{"name":"2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114904467","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 : 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1119/perc.2020.pr.scherr
Rachel E. Scherr, W. Hairston, S. McKagan
Research-based instructional strategies in physics promote active participation in collaborative activities as a primary means for students to construct understanding. This emphasis is in line with situated learning theory, in which learning is indicated by a student’s increasing centrality in a community. In both perspectives, to learn more is to engage more centrally: to start discussions, conduct experiments, write on the board, decide when a question has been answered, and so on. In a study of small-group collaborative learning activities in introductory physics classrooms at three different universities, we observe that as students engage with one another and with instructors, they are not only negotiating physics concepts, but also negotiating social positioning. Some students are centered (and their contributions are valued), while others are marginalized (and their contributions are neglected). The aim of this research is to become conscious of how centering and marginalization shape the way physics is taught and learned.
{"title":"Centering and marginalization in introductory university physics courses","authors":"Rachel E. Scherr, W. Hairston, S. McKagan","doi":"10.1119/perc.2020.pr.scherr","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2020.pr.scherr","url":null,"abstract":"Research-based instructional strategies in physics promote active participation in collaborative activities as a primary means for students to construct understanding. This emphasis is in line with situated learning theory, in which learning is indicated by a student’s increasing centrality in a community. In both perspectives, to learn more is to engage more centrally: to start discussions, conduct experiments, write on the board, decide when a question has been answered, and so on. In a study of small-group collaborative learning activities in introductory physics classrooms at three different universities, we observe that as students engage with one another and with instructors, they are not only negotiating physics concepts, but also negotiating social positioning. Some students are centered (and their contributions are valued), while others are marginalized (and their contributions are neglected). The aim of this research is to become conscious of how centering and marginalization shape the way physics is taught and learned.","PeriodicalId":269466,"journal":{"name":"2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115779114","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 : 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1119/perc.2020.pr.stewart
D. Hewagallage, J. Stewart
The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation is commonly used to measure the conceptual understanding of Newtonian mechanics. Several studies have reported a substantial difference in pretest scores between men and women. This study examines the contribution of several prior preparation factors to explain the variance in pretest score and whether these factors explain gender differences in the pretest score. The study examined a large sample ( N = 1060 ) of students taking introductory calculus-based mechanics at the university level. Women outperformed men on most prior preparation and college achievement measures. No significant differences between men and women were found in high school physics taking patterns. Linear regression analysis showed only 23% of the variance in FMCE pretest score could be explained using a linear combination of prior preparation variables. Controlling for these variables failed to explain the gender difference in pretest scores; conversely, the gender difference increased controlling for prior preparation.
{"title":"What does the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation pretest measure?","authors":"D. Hewagallage, J. Stewart","doi":"10.1119/perc.2020.pr.stewart","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2020.pr.stewart","url":null,"abstract":"The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation is commonly used to measure the conceptual understanding of Newtonian mechanics. Several studies have reported a substantial difference in pretest scores between men and women. This study examines the contribution of several prior preparation factors to explain the variance in pretest score and whether these factors explain gender differences in the pretest score. The study examined a large sample ( N = 1060 ) of students taking introductory calculus-based mechanics at the university level. Women outperformed men on most prior preparation and college achievement measures. No significant differences between men and women were found in high school physics taking patterns. Linear regression analysis showed only 23% of the variance in FMCE pretest score could be explained using a linear combination of prior preparation variables. Controlling for these variables failed to explain the gender difference in pretest scores; conversely, the gender difference increased controlling for prior preparation.","PeriodicalId":269466,"journal":{"name":"2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131552690","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 : 2020-09-01DOI: 10.1119/perc.2020.pr.boudreaux
A. Boudreaux, S. Kanim, Alexis Olsho, S. Brahmia, Charlotte Zimmerman, Trevor I. Smith
We present a set of modes of reasoning about ratio and proportion as a means of operationalizing expert practice in physics. These modes, or natures of proportional reasoning, stem from consideration of how physicists reason in context and are informed by prior work in physics and mathematics education. We frame the natures as the core of an emerging framework for proportional reasoning in introductory physics, that will categorize the uses of proportional reasoning in introductory physics contexts, and provide guidance for the development of reliable assessments. We share results from preliminary assessment items indicating that university physics students have difficulty interpreting and applying ratios in context.
{"title":"Toward a framework for the natures of proportional reasoning in introductory physics","authors":"A. Boudreaux, S. Kanim, Alexis Olsho, S. Brahmia, Charlotte Zimmerman, Trevor I. Smith","doi":"10.1119/perc.2020.pr.boudreaux","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2020.pr.boudreaux","url":null,"abstract":"We present a set of modes of reasoning about ratio and proportion as a means of operationalizing expert practice in physics. These modes, or natures of proportional reasoning, stem from consideration of how physicists reason in context and are informed by prior work in physics and mathematics education. We frame the natures as the core of an emerging framework for proportional reasoning in introductory physics, that will categorize the uses of proportional reasoning in introductory physics contexts, and provide guidance for the development of reliable assessments. We share results from preliminary assessment items indicating that university physics students have difficulty interpreting and applying ratios in context.","PeriodicalId":269466,"journal":{"name":"2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123171269","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 : 2020-08-25DOI: 10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Dounas-Frazer
D. Dounas-Frazer, K. S. Johnson, Soojin Park, Jacob T. Stanley, H. Lewandowski
We report results from a study designed to identify links between undergraduate students' views about experimental physics and their engagement in multiweek projects in lab courses. Using surveys and interviews, we explored whether students perceived particular classroom activities to be features of experimental physics practice. We focused on 18 activities, including maintaining lab notebooks, fabricating parts, and asking others for help. Interviewees identified activities related to project execution as intrinsic to experimental physics practice based on high prevalence of those activities in interviewees' own projects. Fabrication-oriented activities were identified as conditional features of experimentation based on differences between projects, which interviewees attributed to variations in project resources. Interpersonal activities were also viewed as conditional features of experimentation, dependent upon one's status as novice or expert. Our findings suggest that students' views about experimental physics are shaped by firsthand experiences of their own projects and secondhand experiences of those of others.
{"title":"Student perceptions of laboratory classroom activities and experimental physics practice","authors":"D. Dounas-Frazer, K. S. Johnson, Soojin Park, Jacob T. Stanley, H. Lewandowski","doi":"10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Dounas-Frazer","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Dounas-Frazer","url":null,"abstract":"We report results from a study designed to identify links between undergraduate students' views about experimental physics and their engagement in multiweek projects in lab courses. Using surveys and interviews, we explored whether students perceived particular classroom activities to be features of experimental physics practice. We focused on 18 activities, including maintaining lab notebooks, fabricating parts, and asking others for help. Interviewees identified activities related to project execution as intrinsic to experimental physics practice based on high prevalence of those activities in interviewees' own projects. Fabrication-oriented activities were identified as conditional features of experimentation based on differences between projects, which interviewees attributed to variations in project resources. Interpersonal activities were also viewed as conditional features of experimentation, dependent upon one's status as novice or expert. Our findings suggest that students' views about experimental physics are shaped by firsthand experiences of their own projects and secondhand experiences of those of others.","PeriodicalId":269466,"journal":{"name":"2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114276416","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 : 2020-08-05DOI: 10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Cwik
Sonja Cwik, Kyle M. Whitcomb, C. Singh
Societal stereotypes and biases pertaining to who belongs in physics and who can excel in physics can impact motivational beliefs, e.g., of women and racial and ethnic minority students in physics courses. This study investigates how the learning environment predicts male and female students' motivational beliefs including physics self-efficacy, interest, and identity at the end of year long (spanning two-semester) algebra-based introductory physics courses. These were courses at a large university in the US taken primarily by biological science majors many of whom are interested in health professions. Although women are not underrepresented in these physics courses, societal stereotypes and biases internalized by female students over their lifetime can still impact their motivational beliefs about physics. Our findings show gender gap in motivational beliefs favoring men. These findings can be useful to provide support and create an equitable and inclusive learning environment to help all students excel in these courses.
{"title":"How the learning environment predicts male and female students’ motivational beliefs in algebra-based introductory physics","authors":"Sonja Cwik, Kyle M. Whitcomb, C. Singh","doi":"10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Cwik","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Cwik","url":null,"abstract":"Societal stereotypes and biases pertaining to who belongs in physics and who can excel in physics can impact motivational beliefs, e.g., of women and racial and ethnic minority students in physics courses. This study investigates how the learning environment predicts male and female students' motivational beliefs including physics self-efficacy, interest, and identity at the end of year long (spanning two-semester) algebra-based introductory physics courses. These were courses at a large university in the US taken primarily by biological science majors many of whom are interested in health professions. Although women are not underrepresented in these physics courses, societal stereotypes and biases internalized by female students over their lifetime can still impact their motivational beliefs about physics. Our findings show gender gap in motivational beliefs favoring men. These findings can be useful to provide support and create an equitable and inclusive learning environment to help all students excel in these courses.","PeriodicalId":269466,"journal":{"name":"2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117110621","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 : 2020-07-20DOI: 10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Zimmerman
Charlotte Zimmerman, Alexis Olsho, A. Boudreaux, Trevor I. Smith, Philip Eaton, S. Brahmia
Covariational reasoning -- reasoning about how changes in one quantity relate to changes in another quantity -- has been examined extensively in mathematics education research. Little research has been done, however, on covariational reasoning in introductory physics contexts. We explore one aspect of covariational reasoning: ``goes like'' reasoning. ``Goes like'' reasoning refers to ways physicists relate two quantities through a simplified function. For example, physicists often say that ``the electric field goes like one over r squared.'' While this reasoning mode is used regularly by physicists and physics instructors, how students make sense of and use it remains unclear. We present evidence from reasoning inventory items which indicate that many students are sense making with tools from prior math instruction, that could be developed into expert ``goes like'' thinking with direct instruction. Recommendations for further work in characterizing student sense making as a foundation for future development of instruction are made.
{"title":"Exploring student facility with \"goes like'' reasoning in introductory physics","authors":"Charlotte Zimmerman, Alexis Olsho, A. Boudreaux, Trevor I. Smith, Philip Eaton, S. Brahmia","doi":"10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Zimmerman","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Zimmerman","url":null,"abstract":"Covariational reasoning -- reasoning about how changes in one quantity relate to changes in another quantity -- has been examined extensively in mathematics education research. Little research has been done, however, on covariational reasoning in introductory physics contexts. We explore one aspect of covariational reasoning: ``goes like'' reasoning. ``Goes like'' reasoning refers to ways physicists relate two quantities through a simplified function. For example, physicists often say that ``the electric field goes like one over r squared.'' While this reasoning mode is used regularly by physicists and physics instructors, how students make sense of and use it remains unclear. We present evidence from reasoning inventory items which indicate that many students are sense making with tools from prior math instruction, that could be developed into expert ``goes like'' thinking with direct instruction. Recommendations for further work in characterizing student sense making as a foundation for future development of instruction are made.","PeriodicalId":269466,"journal":{"name":"2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123384396","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 : 2020-07-16DOI: 10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Smith_T
Trevor I. Smith, Philip Eaton, S. Brahmia, Alexis Olsho, A. Boudreaux, Charlotte Zimmerman
We have developed the Physics Inventory of Quantitative Literacy (PIQL) as a tool to measure students' quantitative literacy in the context of introductory physics topics. We present the results from various quantitative analyses used to establish the validity of both the individual items and the PIQL as a whole. We show how examining the results from classical test theory analyses, factor analysis, and item response curves informed decisions regarding the inclusion, removal, or modification of items. We also discuss how the choice to include multiple-choice/multiple-response items has informed both our choices for analyses and the interpretations of their results. We are confident that the most recent version of the PIQL is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring students' physics quantitative literacy in calculus-based introductory physics courses at our primary research site. More data are needed to establish its validity for use at other institutions and in other courses.
{"title":"Toward a valid instrument for measuring physics quantitative literacy","authors":"Trevor I. Smith, Philip Eaton, S. Brahmia, Alexis Olsho, A. Boudreaux, Charlotte Zimmerman","doi":"10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Smith_T","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Smith_T","url":null,"abstract":"We have developed the Physics Inventory of Quantitative Literacy (PIQL) as a tool to measure students' quantitative literacy in the context of introductory physics topics. We present the results from various quantitative analyses used to establish the validity of both the individual items and the PIQL as a whole. We show how examining the results from classical test theory analyses, factor analysis, and item response curves informed decisions regarding the inclusion, removal, or modification of items. We also discuss how the choice to include multiple-choice/multiple-response items has informed both our choices for analyses and the interpretations of their results. We are confident that the most recent version of the PIQL is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring students' physics quantitative literacy in calculus-based introductory physics courses at our primary research site. More data are needed to establish its validity for use at other institutions and in other courses.","PeriodicalId":269466,"journal":{"name":"2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131045579","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 : 2020-07-16DOI: 10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Olsho
Alexis Olsho, S. Brahmia, Trevor I. Smith, Charlotte Zimmerman, A. Boudreaux, Philip Eaton
We are developing a new research based assessment (RBA) focused on quantitative reasoning -- rather than conceptual understanding -- in physics contexts. We rapidly moved administration of the RBA online in Spring 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We present our experiences with online, unproctored administration of an RBA in development to students enrolled in a large-enrollment, calculus-based, introductory physics course. We describe our attempts to adhere to best practices on a limited time frame, and present a preliminary analysis of the results, comparing results from the online administration to earlier results from in-person, proctored administration. We include discussion of online administration of multiple-choice/multiple-response (MCMR) items, which we use on the instrument as a way to probe multiple facets of student reasoning. Our initial comparison indicates little difference between online and paper administrations of the RBA, consistent with previous work by other researchers.
{"title":"Online administration of a reasoning inventory in development","authors":"Alexis Olsho, S. Brahmia, Trevor I. Smith, Charlotte Zimmerman, A. Boudreaux, Philip Eaton","doi":"10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Olsho","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Olsho","url":null,"abstract":"We are developing a new research based assessment (RBA) focused on quantitative reasoning -- rather than conceptual understanding -- in physics contexts. We rapidly moved administration of the RBA online in Spring 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We present our experiences with online, unproctored administration of an RBA in development to students enrolled in a large-enrollment, calculus-based, introductory physics course. We describe our attempts to adhere to best practices on a limited time frame, and present a preliminary analysis of the results, comparing results from the online administration to earlier results from in-person, proctored administration. We include discussion of online administration of multiple-choice/multiple-response (MCMR) items, which we use on the instrument as a way to probe multiple facets of student reasoning. Our initial comparison indicates little difference between online and paper administrations of the RBA, consistent with previous work by other researchers.","PeriodicalId":269466,"journal":{"name":"2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134449935","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：