A framework for the natures of negativity in introductory physics

Mathematical reasoning skills are a desired outcome of many introductory physics courses, particularly calculus-based physics courses. Positive and negative quantities are ubiquitous in physics, and the sign carries important and varied meanings. Novices can struggle to understand the many roles signed numbers play in physics contexts, and recent evidence shows that unresolved struggle can carry over to subsequent physics courses. The mathematics education research literature documents the cognitive challenge of conceptualizing negative numbers as mathematical objects--both for experts, historically, and for novices as they learn. We contribute to the small but growing body of research in physics contexts that examines student reasoning about signed quantities and reasoning about the use and interpretation of signs in mathematical models. In this paper we present a framework for categorizing various meanings and interpretations of the negative sign in physics contexts, inspired by established work in algebra contexts from the mathematics education research community. Such a framework can support innovation that can catalyze deeper mathematical conceptualizations of signed quantities in the introductory courses and beyond

Framework for the natures of negativity in introductory physics

Mathematical reasoning skills are a desired outcome of many introductory physics courses, particularly calculus-based physics courses. Novices can struggle to understand the many roles signed numbers play in physics contexts, and recent evidence shows that unresolved struggle can carry over to subsequent physics courses. Positive and negative quantities are ubiquitous in physics, and the sign carries important and varied meanings. The mathematics education research literature documents the cognitive challenge of conceptualizing negative numbers as mathematical objects—both for experts, historically, and for novices as they learn. We contribute to the small but growing body of research in physics contexts that examines student reasoning about signed quantities and reasoning about the use and interpretation of signs in mathematical models. In this paper we present a framework for categorizing various meanings and interpretations of the negative sign in physics contexts, inspired by established work in algebraic contexts from the mathematics education research community. Such a framework can support innovation that can catalyze deeper mathematical conceptualizations of signed quantities in the introductory courses and beyond

Online administration of a reasoning inventory in development

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.Comment: PERC 202

Online test administration results in students selecting more responses to multiple-choice-multiple-response items

We developed the Physics Inventory of Quantitative Literacy (PIQL) to assess students\u27 quantitative reasoning in introductory physics contexts. The PIQL includes several multiple-choice-multiple-response (MCMR) items (i.e., multiple-choice questions for which more than one response may be selected) as well as traditional single-response multiple-choice items. In this paper, we discuss differences in performance on MCMR items that seems to result from differences in administration method (paper versus online). In particular, we find a tendency for clickiness in online administration: students choose more responses to MCMR items when taking the electronic version of the assessment. Student performance on single-response multiple-choice items was not affected by administration method. These results suggest that MCMR items may provide a unique opportunity to probe differences in online and on-paper administration of low-stakes assessments. © 2023 authors. Published by the American Physical Society. Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article\u27s title, journal citation, and DOI

Exploring student facility with "goes like'' reasoning in introductory physics

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.Comment: under review for Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings 202

Toward a valid instrument for measuring physics quantitative literacy

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.Comment: accepted for publication: 2020 Physics Education Research Conferenc