Quantitative measures of equity in small groups

Archibeque, Benjamin; Genz, Florian; Franklin, Maxwell; Sayre, Eleanor C.

doi:10.1119/perc.2017.pr.006

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 13 publications

(23 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Prior research measured inchargeness in small-groups by counting various student statements such as questions asked and commands given [14]. Previous studies suggest that equal distribution of inchargeness is required for groups to be equitable [6,15]. In this work, however, we argue that equal inchargeness is not a necessary condition for equity.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…To test these two claims, we observed six groups of students in multiple sessions of an introductory, calculus-based mechanics lab course. We evaluated the equity of the group and students' levels of inchargeness by tracking their bids, and we detected qualitative markers for inchargeness [6,15]. We sought patterns between gender and inchargeness in equitable and inequitable groups to test our two claims.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our first claim was that students can use their inchargeness to make their groups more equitable, such as by acknowledging their peers, or less equitable, such as by ignoring the bids of their peers. Therefore, the concept of higher inchargeness does not necessarily refer to 'bossing around' or 'dictating ideas,' leading to inequity [6,15]. Rather, higher inchargeness can refer to having a higher number of interactions with group members to coordinate and conduct activities.…”

Section: Synthesizing Across Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How do gender and inchargeness interact to affect equity in lab group interactions?

Jeon¹,

Kalender²,

Sayre³

et al. 2020

2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In physics lab groups, students experience a wide range of equitable and inequitable interactions. After observing videos of students collaborating in an introductory physics lab, we defined that an equitable group is one in which every student's bids are heard by their peers. We developed a methodology to characterize different lab groups by tracking students' bid exchanges and assessing their levels of inchargeness. The analysis of equitable and inequitable groups showed that lab groups where one student is in charge can be equitable, as long as each group member's opinions are acknowledged. We also found that gender and inchargeness do not sufficiently predict the equity of student groups. Based on these results, we argue that students that are in charge use their inchargeness to make their groups either equitable or inequitable. Future work will explore whether additional variables interact with inchargeness to predict levels of equity in group work.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 76%

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Synthesizing Across Casesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How do gender and inchargeness interact to affect equity in lab group interactions?

Jeon¹,

Kalender²,

Sayre³

et al. 2020

2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Right: The dot product of a normalized vector with itself is 1. Archibeque et al (2018) measured the equity of conversations by members within each group by representing conversations with vectors and taking a dot product. We follow that example, and in our case, we are presented with a similar dilemma where there is a large amount of data (4 IRCs per item on the SLCI, 26 possible scores, 2 populations to compare) that we wish to boil down to a single number for each item on the SLCI (or for other common multiple-choice assessments) to allow easy comparisons of the IRCs of two populations.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Probing for Bias: Comparing Populations Using Item Response Curves

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We introduce an approach for making a quantitative comparison of the item response curves (IRCs) of any two populations on a multiple-choice test instrument. In this study, we employ simulated and actual data. We apply our approach to a dataset of 12,187 participants on the 25-item Science Literacy Concept Inventory (SLCI), which includes ample demographic data of the participants. Prior comparisons of the IRCs of different populations addressed only two populations and were made by visual inspection. Our approach allows for quickly comparing the IRCs for many pairs of populations to identify those items where substantial differences exist. For each item, we compute the IRC dot product, a number between 0 and 1 for which a value of 1 occurs when the IRCs of the two populations are identical. We then determine whether the value of the IRC dot product is indicative of significant differences in populations of real students. Through this process, we can quickly discover bias across demographic groups. As a case example, we apply our metric to illuminate four SLCI items that exhibit gender bias. We further found that gender bias was present for non-science majors on those items but not for science majors.

show abstract

“…Agency in a lab is also influenced by the learning environment and social-classroom dynamics and hierarchies [21], with such dynamics and hierarchies being imported from the wider cultural context in sciences [22]. If one student takes charge in a group, other students might not perceive the agency afforded to them [23,24]. In particular, members of marginalized groups might perceive themselves as having less agency to participate in tasks or group discourses because of their peers.…”

Section: Literature Review and Research Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sense of agency, gender, and students’ perception in open-ended physics labs

Kalender¹,

Stein²,

Holmes³

2020

2020 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Instructional physics labs are critical junctures for many STEM majors to develop an understanding of experimentation in the sciences. Students can acquire useful experimental skills and grow their identities as scientists. However, many traditionally-instructed labs do not necessarily involve authentic physics experimentation features in their curricula. Recent research calls for a reformation in undergraduate labs to incorporate more student agency and choice in the learning processes. In our institution, we have adopted open-ended lab teaching in the introductory physics courses. By using reformed curricula that provide higher student agency, we analyzed approximately 100 students in the introductory-level lab courses to examine their views towards the open-ended physics labs. Between the start and the end of the semester, we found a statistically significant shift in students' perceptions about the agency afforded in lab activities. We also examined students' responses to "Which lab unit was your favorite and why?". The analysis showed that majority of the students preferred Project Lab, which had the highest student agency and coding analysis showed that "freedom" was the most frequent response for students' reason for picking Project Lab. Finally, we also examined student views across gender and found no significant gender effect on students' sense of agency.

show abstract

Quantitative measures of equity in small groups

Cited by 5 publications

References 13 publications

How do gender and inchargeness interact to affect equity in lab group interactions?

How do gender and inchargeness interact to affect equity in lab group interactions?

Probing for Bias: Comparing Populations Using Item Response Curves

Sense of agency, gender, and students’ perception in open-ended physics labs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About