A Synthesis of Discipline-Based Education Research in Physics Jennifer L

A Synthesis of Discipline-Based Education Research in Physics Jennifer L. Docktor & José P. Mestre University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Introduction................................................................................................................................2 Conceptual Change.....................................................................................................................4 Misconceptions.....................................................................................................................11 Knowledge in Pieces or Resources........................................................................................12 Ontological Categories..........................................................................................................12 Problem Solving.......................................................................................................................19 Expert-Novice Studies..........................................................................................................25 Worked Examples.................................................................................................................26 Representations.....................................................................................................................28 Mathematics in Physics.........................................................................................................29 Instructional Strategies..........................................................................................................31 Curriculum & Instruction in Physics.........................................................................................44 Lecture-based Methods.........................................................................................................49 Recitation or Discussion Methods.........................................................................................52 Laboratory Methods..............................................................................................................53 Structural Changes to the Classroom Environment................................................................56 General Instructional Strategies and Materials.......................................................................59 Assessment...............................................................................................................................78 Development and Validation of Concept Inventories.............................................................82 Comparing Scores Across Multiple Measures.......................................................................86 Comparing Scores Across Multiple Populations....................................................................87 Course Exams and Homework..............................................................................................89 Rubrics for Process Assessment............................................................................................91 Complex Models of Student Learning...................................................................................92 Cognition................................................................................................................................103 Knowledge and Memory.....................................................................................................109 Attention.............................................................................................................................110 Reasoning and Problem Solving..........................................................................................112 Learning..............................................................................................................................113 Attitudes and Beliefs about Learning and Teaching.................................................................122 Student Attitudes and Beliefs about Learning Physics.........................................................126 Faculty Beliefs and Values about Teaching and Learning....................................................132 Instructor Implementations of Reformed Curricula..............................................................134 Teaching Assistants.............................................................................................................136 Summary & Conclusions........................................................................................................141 Summary of Research in Physics Education from a Historical Perspective..........................141 What Distinguishes PER from Other DBER Fields?............................................................143 Future Directions in Physics Education Research................................................................144 Physics Education Research - 1 Introduction This paper synthesizes physics education research (PER) at the undergraduate level, and was commissioned by the National Research Council to inform a study on the Status, Contributions, and Future Directions of Discipline Based Education Research (DBER)—a comprehensive examination of the research on learning and teaching in physics and astronomy, the biological sciences, chemistry, engineering, and the geosciences at the undergraduate level. PER is a relatively new field that is about 40 years old, yet it is relatively more mature than its sister fields in biology, chemistry, engineering, astronomy, and geosciences education research. Although much is known about physics teaching and learning, much remains to be learned. This paper discusses some of what the PER field has come to understand about learners, learning, and instruction in six general topical areas described below. Topical Areas Covered and Organization Given the breadth and scope of PER to date, we organize our synthesis around six topical areas that capture most of the past research in physics education: conceptual change, problem solving, curriculum and instruction, assessment, cognition, and attitudes and beliefs about learning and teaching. To ensure consistency in the presentation and to aid the DBER Committee in its charge, each of the six topical areas was organized under the following sections: research questions; theoretical framework; methodology, data collection/sources and data analysis; findings; strengths and limitations; areas for future studies; references. Unlike traditional scholarly papers where all references are included at the end, we included references at the end of each of the six sections for convenience. The topical areas and organization were arrived at through consensus discussions between the two authors and in consultation with the DBER study director and Committee chair. Although we did not place any restrictions on the dates of the research studies covered, the great majority of the studies cited are within the last 20 years, and the great majority of studies cited were done in the US. In addition to the six topical areas, we provide a Summary & Conclusions section at the very end. Equally important to stating what this paper is covering is stating what has been left out, not by our choice but rather because of the Committee’s focus and needs. We did not include the following: pre-college physics education research, research related to physics teacher preparation Physics Education Research - 2 or physics teacher curriculum, or “how to” articles describing research analysis (e.g., ways of analyzing video interviews of students). The coverage herein is meant to be representative, not exhaustive. We apologize if we have left out a particular researcher’s favorite work—if we did, it was not intentional. Possible Uses of this Synthesis We envision multiple uses of this synthesis. First, it is meant to help the DBER Committee in its charge and deliberations. Second, it serves as a historical account of the field, taking stock in where PER has been and where it currently is. In addition, it provides a perspective of the status of other discipline-based education research relative to physics. Finally, the synthesis is an excellent resource for graduate students in PER, for graduate students or physics instructors in traditional physics areas who are interested in an overview of the PER field, and indeed to practicing PER faculty who may want to use it as a reference guide or as a resource in teaching graduate seminar on PER. Physics Education Research - 3 Conceptual Change Conceptual development and conceptual change are among the most widely studied areas in physics education research. Starting in the 1970s, as researchers and instructors became increasingly aware of the difficulties students had in grasping fairly fundamental concepts (e.g., that contact forces do not exert forces at a distance; that interacting bodies exert equal and opposite forces on each other), investigations into the cause of those difficulties became common. Over time these conceptual difficulties have been given several labels, including misconceptions, naïve conceptions, and alternative conceptions. In this review we have chosen to use the term misconceptions but acknowledge that some researchers may have a preference for other terms. Some would argue that misconceptions research marked the beginning of modern day physics education research. Early work consisted of identifying and cataloguing student misconceptions (Clement, 1982; McDermott, 1984), and there were entire conferences devoted to student

Load more