1 / 31

Why should we change how we teach physics?

Why should we change how we teach physics?. Derek Muller & Manju Sharma Sydney University Physics Education Research (SUPER). Conceptual Inventories. Tests to evaluate conceptual physics understandings Force Concept Inventory Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation Mechanics Baseline

duran
Télécharger la présentation

Why should we change how we teach physics?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Why should we change how we teach physics? Derek Muller & Manju Sharma Sydney University Physics Education Research (SUPER)

  2. Conceptual Inventories • Tests to evaluate conceptual physics understandings • Force Concept Inventory • Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation • Mechanics Baseline • Developed based on interviews/surveys • Used before and after courses to assess effectiveness Derek Muller

  3. Force Concept Inventory • Do the questions ask about important conceptual topics? • Is the wording appropriate? • Is the test easier/more difficult than a standard mechanics test or the HSC? • Do you think a student could understand Newton’s laws well and score poorly? • Do you think a student without a good conceptual understanding could score well? Derek Muller

  4. How would your students do? • How would year 11’s fair on this test before instruction? • After instruction? • How would year 12’s go? • First year Uni? Fundamentals, Regular, Advanced? 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Derek Muller

  5. The facts • Before instruction, students average 20-30% • After traditional lecturing or instruction, most students gain 10-20% with a max of 30% Derek Muller

  6. Derek Muller

  7. Sydney University 2006 Derek Muller

  8. Confidence? Derek Muller

  9. Questions • Why do students do so poorly? • Why do they think that they’re going well? Derek Muller

  10. diSessa (1996) Early Interviews Derek Muller

  11. diSessa (1996) cont. Derek Muller

  12. diSessa (1996) Final interviews Derek Muller

  13. Derek Muller

  14. Misconceptions • Long history in physics education research (many documented) • Strategies devised for changing misconceptions • Tutorials • Studio physics • Peer Instruction • Interactive Lecture Demonstrations • Interactive Engagement Lectures Derek Muller

  15. What makes these methods more effective? • Students paying more attention? • Actual tangible contexts? • Discussion with other students? • Behavioral activity? • Misconceptions raised? • Slower pace? • Less math? • Teaching to the test? Derek Muller

  16. Research Questions • Do students learn more by watching other students discuss misconceptions? (no activity required) • Do students learn more by just hearing common misconceptions raised and refuted? • Are students confused when misconceptions are raised in instruction? • Will addressing misconceptions increase the effectiveness of a multimedia segment? • Does student prior knowledge matter? Derek Muller

  17. Experiment Design • Four treatments created to explain Newton’s First and Second Laws • Administered through a website (QuickTime videos) with pre-post testing • All first year students (~800) asked to participate for one assignment mark (fundamental, regular, advanced) Derek Muller

  18. Four Treatments Derek Muller

  19. Results • Create measure of gain (Gain = Post-test – Pre-test) Derek Muller

  20. To see the video treatments • The videos are available in QuickTime and Windows Media video formats through the following web links • Exposition • Extended Exposition • Refutation • Dialogue • Keep in mind these are research tools produced in a very short time frame Derek Muller

  21. Data analysis • Simple measure of improvement for each student Gain = Posttest – Pretest All values are actual numbers of questions correct out of 26 Derek Muller

  22. Gain for Fundamental Students Derek Muller

  23. Gain for Regular Students Derek Muller

  24. Gain for Advanced students Derek Muller

  25. Do the treatments have different effects? Derek Muller

  26. ANOVA Effect size (difference in mean)/(Standard Deviation) = .83, .79 for the Dialogue and Refutation respectively The K-S statistics indicate that the distributions are not significantly different from normal so the ANOVA comparison of variance is a reliable analysis tool in this case Derek Muller

  27. Does Gain Depend on Prior Knowledge? Derek Muller

  28. What about Confidence Gain? Derek Muller

  29. Future Investigation • Is there a difference between Dialogue and Refutation methods? • Interviews to gauge student perceptions of videos • Applications of ‘vicarious learning’ in classrooms • Comparison with other online methods, collaborative learning Derek Muller

  30. If you want to try the FCI • Use a different name (Mechanics Concepts etc.) • Make sure copies don’t get passed out among students • Find data and research papers on its use with thousands of students • Normalized gain Gain/(Max Gain) is usually ~.23 for typical courses and .48 for ‘reform method’ teaching practices Derek Muller

  31. Should we change how we teach physics? • Many researchers believe physics lectures/classes need to be significantly altered • Teaching physics at a slower pace with more hands-on activities and more discussion • Implemented in schools and universities internationally (Curtain University in Australia) • But is it sustainable? • At the very least, students seem to need explicit exposure to misconceptions Derek Muller

More Related