Denoting and Comparing Leadership Attributes and Behaviors in Group Work

Projects and Practices in Physics (P$^3$) is an introductory physics class at Michigan State University that replaces lectures with a problem based learning environment. To promote the development of group based practices, students all receive group and individual feedback at the end of each week. The groups are comprised of four students, one of which often takes on the role of being the group's "leader." Developing leadership based skills is a specific learning goal of the P$^3$ learning environment and the goal of this research is to examine what leadership-specific actions/traits students in P$^3$ demonstrate while working in their group. The initial phase of this study examined multiple pieces of literature to identify possible characteristics and behaviors that may present themselves in potential leaders -- creating a codebook. This phase of the study applies the codebook to in-class data to compare two tutor-labeled leaders and their leadership styles.Comment: 4 pages, 1 figur

Examining Students\u27 Representation Choices in University Modeling Instruction

Representations (such as pictures, diagrams, word descriptions, equations, etc.) are critical tools for learning, problem solving, and communicating in science, particularly in physics where multiple representations often serve as intermediate steps, a means to evaluate a solution, and highlight different aspects a physical phenomenon. This dissertation explores the representation choices made by students in the University Modeling Instruction (MI) courses on problems from across introductory physics content. Modeling Instruction is a two-semester introductory, calculus-based physics sequence that was designed to guide students through the process of building, testing, applying, and refining models. As a part of this modeling cycle, students have explicit instruction and practice in building, evaluating, and coordinating representations in introductory physics. Since I am particularly interested in representations across all of introductory physics, this work was situated in the second semester of MI. To address students\u27 representation choices, the Problem Solving and Representation Use Survey (PSRUS) was developed as modified card sort survey, which asked students to simply list the representations that they would use on 25 physics questions from across introductory physics. Using non-parametric statistical tests (Mann-Whitney-Wilcox, Wilcoxon-Ranked Sign, and Cliff\u27s Delta), I compare the number and variety of representations that students choose. Initially, students who took the first semester of MI use significantly more representations in their problem solving when compared to those who did not; however, there are significant gains in the number of representations that these students choose over the semester across the introductory physics content. After significant changes to the second semester MI curriculum, the difference between these two groups disappears, with both groups increasing their representation choices when compared to the previous semester. Using network analysis to compare students\u27 concurrent representation choices, I also show that students use a consistent set of representations on mechanics problems; whereas, they choose a wider variety on electricity and magnetism (EM) problems. In both mechanics and EM, pictures serve as an important connecting representation between the others. I use these results to make suggestions for instructors, curriculum developers, and physics education researchers

Impact of the second semester University Modeling Instruction course on students’ representation choices

Representation use is a critical skill for learning, problem solving, and communicating in science, especially in physics where multiple representations often scaffold the understanding of a phenomenon. University Modeling Instruction, which is an active-learning, research-based introductory physics curriculum centered on students’ use of scientific models, has made representation use a primary learning goal with explicit class time devoted to introducing and coordinating representations as part of the model building process. However, because of the semester break, the second semester course, Modeling Instruction-Electricity and Magnetism (MI-EM), contains a mixture of students who are returning from the Modeling Instruction-mechanics course (to whom we refer to as “returning students”) and students who are new to Modeling Instruction with the MI-EM course (to whom we refer to as “new students”). In this study, we analyze the impact of MI-EM on students’ representation choices across the introductory physics content for these different groups of students by examining both what individual representations students choose and their average number of representations on a modified card-sort survey with a variety of mechanics and EM questions. Using Wilcoxon-signed-rank tests, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests, Cliff’s delta effect sizes, and box plots, we compare students’ representation choices from pre- to postsemester, from new and returning students, and from mechanics and EM content. We find that there is a significant difference between returning and new students’ representation choices, which serves as a baseline comparison between Modeling Instruction and traditional lecture-based physics classes. We also find that returning students maintain a high representation use across the MI-EM semester, while new students see significant growth in their representation use regardless of content

Multiple Representations and Epistemic Games in Introductory Physics Exam Solutions

Previous analysis of common exam questions in introductory physics at Florida International University has revealed differences in the number and type of epistemic games played by students in their solutions. Separated by course format (lecture/lab, lecture/lab/recitation, or inquiry-based), student work also shows varying use of multiple representational tools. Here we examine representation use in more detail to establish a descriptive picture of representation use across multiple instructors and course formats. We then compare these profiles with the epistemic games played by students, asking whether the same epistemic game shows the same pattern of representational tools across course types. We find that patterns of representation use vary by course format, but there are generally not clear representational signatures to uniquely identify epistemic games

Multiple Representations and Epistemic Games in Introductory Physics Exam Solutions

Previous analysis of common exam questions in introductory physics at Florida International University has revealed differences in the number and type of epistemic games played by students in their solutions. Separated by course format (lecture/lab, lecture/lab/recitation, or inquiry-based), student work also shows varying use of multiple representational tools. Here we examine representation use in more detail to establish a descriptive picture of representation use across multiple instructors and course formats. We then compare these profiles with the epistemic games played by students, asking whether the same epistemic game shows the same pattern of representational tools across course types. We find that patterns of representation use vary by course format, but there are generally not clear representational signatures to uniquely identify epistemic games

Multiple Representations and Epistemic Games in Introductory Physics Exam Solutions

Previous analysis of common exam questions in introductory physics at Florida International University has revealed differences in the number and type of epistemic games played by students in their solutions. Separated by course format (lecture/lab, lecture/lab/recitation, or inquiry-based), student work also shows varying use of multiple representational tools. Here we examine representation use in more detail to establish a descriptive picture of representation use across multiple instructors and course formats. We then compare these profiles with the epistemic games played by students, asking whether the same epistemic game shows the same pattern of representational tools across course types. We find that patterns of representation use vary by course format, but there are generally not clear representational signatures to uniquely identify epistemic games

Students’ perspectives on computational challenges in physics class

High school science classrooms across the United States are answering calls to make computation a part of science learning. The problem is that there is little known about the barriers to learning that computation might bring to a science classroom or about how to help students overcome these challenges. This case study explores these challenges from the perspectives of students in a high school physics classroom with a newly revamped, computation-integrated curriculum. Focusing mainly on interviews to center the perspectives of students, we found that computation is a double-edged sword: It can make science learning more authentic for students who are familiar with it, but it can also generate frustration and an aversion towards physics for students who are not

Planning for participants’ varying needs and abilities in qualitative research

[This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Qualitative Methods in PER: A Critical Examination.] All people vary in their needs and abilities; however, typical research practices do not consider these variations, which likely impacts who participates in research studies. Additionally, few PER studies have investigated aspects of disability or reported disability identity. Combined, this means that PER researchers typically do not seek out the experiences of disabled people and disabled people might not have access to participate in research studies. In this paper, we demonstrate how a research team can use principles from Universal Design for Learning and the Variation Planning Tool to anticipate expectations of ability and create flexible options in a qualitative research study. We then demonstrate how different interview structures can impact disabled participants through a case study with three participants, all of whom self-identified as students with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder. Finally, we conclude with implications and suggestions for researchers in planning their study designs. It is critical that, as physics education researchers, we anticipate, welcome, and support disabled participants in our research, particularly as interviews are a prevalent method in the field. Through the example presented in this paper, we hope to encourage researchers to examine their own methods through the lens of accessibility and to offer alternative formats in their research design as a means to combat ableism and to provide access to all research participants