Examining and contrasting the cognitive activities engaged in undergraduate research experiences and lab courses

While the positive outcomes of undergraduate research experiences (UREs) have been extensively categorized, the mechanisms for those outcomes are less understood. Through lightly structured focus group interviews, we have extracted the cognitive tasks that students identify as engaging in during their UREs. We also use their many comparative statements about their coursework, especially lab courses, to evaluate their experimental physics-related cognitive tasks in those environments. We find there are a number of cognitive tasks consistently encountered in physics UREs that are present in most experimental research. These are seldom encountered in lab or lecture courses, with some notable exceptions. Having time to reflect and fix or revise, and having a sense of autonomy, were both repeatedly cited as key enablers of the benefits of UREs. We also identify tasks encountered in actual experimental research that are not encountered in UREs. We use these findings to identify opportunities for better integration of the cognitive tasks in UREs and lab courses, as well as discussing the barriers that exist. This work responds to extensive calls for science education to better develop students' scientific skills and practices, as well as calls to expose more students to scientific research.Comment: 11 pages, 3 figure

Transforming a 4th year Modern Optics Course Using a Deliberate Practice Framework

We present a study of active learning pedagogies in an upper division physics course. This work was guided by the principle of deliberate practice for the development of expertise, and this principle was used in the design of the materials and the orchestration of the classroom activities of the students. We present our process for efficiently converting a traditional lecture course based on instructor notes into activities for such a course with active learning methods. Ninety percent of the same material was covered and scores on common exam problems showed a 15 % improvement with an effect size greater than 1 after the transformation. We observe that the improvement and the associated effect size is sustained after handing off the materials to a second instructor. Because the improvement on exam questions was independent of specific problem topics and because the material tested was so mathematically advanced and broad (including linear algebra, Fourier Transforms, partial differential equations, vector calculus), we expect the transformation process could be applied to most upper division physics courses having a similar mathematical base.Comment: 31 page

Oersted Medal Lecture 2007: Interactive simulations for teaching physics: What works, what doesn't, and why

We give an overview of the Physics Educational Technology (PhET) project to research and develop web-based interactive simulations for teaching and learning physics. The design philosophy, simulation development and testing process, and range of available simulations are described. The highlights of PhET research on simulation design and effectiveness in a variety of educational settings are provided. This work has shown that a well-designed interactive simulation can be an engaging and effective tool for learning physics

Seeking instructional specificity: an example from analogical instruction

Broad instructional methods like interactive engagement have been shown to be effective, but such general characterization provides little guidance on the details of how to structure the instructional materials. In this study, we seek instructional specificity by comparing two ways of using an analogy to learn a target physical principle: (i) applying the analogy to the target physical domain on a Case-by-Case basis and (ii) using the analogy to create a General Rule in the target physical domain. In the discussion sections of a large, introductory physics course (N = 231), students who sought a General Rule were better able to discover and apply a correct physics principle than students who analyzed the examples Case-by-Case. The difference persisted at a reduced level after subsequent direct instruction. We argue that students who performed Case-by-Case analyses are more likely to focus on idiosyncratic problem-specific features rather than the deep structural features. This study provides an example of investigating how the specific structure of instructional materials can be consequential for what is learned

Value added or misattributed? A multi-institution study on the educational benefit of labs for reinforcing physics content

Instructional labs are widely seen as a unique, albeit expensive, way to teach scientific content. We measured the effectiveness of introductory lab courses at achieving this educational goal across nine different lab courses at three very different institutions. These institutions and courses encompassed a broad range of student populations and instructional styles. The nine courses studied had two key things in common: the labs aimed to reinforce the content presented in lectures, and the labs were optional. By comparing the performance of students who did and did not take the labs (with careful normalization for selection effects), we found universally and precisely no added value to learning from taking the labs as measured by course exam performance. This work should motivate institutions and departments to reexamine the goals and conduct of their lab courses, given their resource-intensive nature. We show why these results make sense when looking at the comparative mental processes of students involved in research and instructional labs, and offer alternative goals and instructional approaches that would make lab courses more educationally valuable.Comment: Accepted to Phys Rev PE

Physics Exams that Promote Collaborative Learning

The two-stage exam is a relatively simple way to introduce collaborative learning and formative assessment into an exam. Their use is rapidly growing in the physics department at the University of British Columbia, as both students and faculty find them rewarding. In a two-stage exam students first complete and turn in the exam individually, and then, working in small groups, answer the exam questions again. During the second stage, the room is filled with spirited and effective debate with nearly every student participating. This provides students with immediate targeted feedback supplied by discussions with their peers. Furthermore, we see indications that the use of this exam format not only ensures consistency across interactive course components, but it also positively impacts how students approach the other collaborative course components. This is accomplished without losing the summative assessment of individual performance that is the expectation of exams for most instructors. In this paper we describe how to implement two- stage exams and provide arguments why they should be part of physics courses that use interactive engagement and social/collaborative learning methods