Social positioning correlates with consensus building in two contentious large-group meetings

Brookes, David T.; Hinrichs, Brant E.; Nass, Jacob L.

doi:10.1119/perc.2019.pr.brookes

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In that year, the other faculty member taught the course, while the interviews were conducted by Hinrichs. The instructional strategies applied in that E&M class were primarily traditional lectures, but the students had had at least one semester of experience with modeling, whiteboard work, coordinating multiple representations, and consensus building [14,15,16] in introductory physics with Hinrichs.…”

Section: A Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing students’ collaboratively solving spherical unit vector problems in upper-level E&M through a lens of shared resources

Cao¹,

Hinrichs²

2021

2021 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We are interested in better understanding ways that students collaborate to solve conceptual physics problems in the context of spherical unit vectors in upper-level E&M, especially problems that have been shown to be difficult for students to solve individually on their own, but which groups of students have been more successful at. Using think-aloud interviews with students in small groups, we ask them to solve together on a large whiteboard conceptual problems from this E&M context. The interviews were video and audio recorded, and qualitatively analyzed using an emergent coding method and the resources framework [4]. Through this analysis, we observed one common mechanism in all three group-interviews whereby students collaborated effectively: first one student activated a conceptual resource and expressed it, then another student took up that idea, and finally the whole group together used that idea to move forward with the problem. This mechanism exemplifies a newer framework: shared resources [12]. We further analyzed students' collaboration through the lens of shared resources and identified multiple instances. We propose that the shared resources construct could be a potential tool to help understand how students collaborate in solving conceptual physics problems. In this paper, we report our methodology and the results from one group interview to illustrate one shared resource we identified and the role it played in helping students collaboratively solve the conceptual problem in this context. Future work and implications for instruction are suggested.

show abstract

Section: A Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analyzing students’ collaboratively solving spherical unit vector problems in upper-level E&M through a lens of shared resources

Cao¹,

Hinrichs²

2021

2021 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In MDM, students work in small groups to create a solution to the same problem on a 2'x 3' whiteboard. They then sit in a large circle with their whiteboards held facing in and conduct a student-led whole-class discussion ("board" meeting) to reach consensus [19,20]. Each…”

Section: A Classroom Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Changing the notation that represents a force changes how students say it

Hinrichs¹,

Swanson²

2020

2019 Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To facilitate both learning about forces and coordinating forces with the system schema, force symbols in University Modeling Instruction carefully represent forces as detailed descriptions of interactions. For example, ! F E→B g represents the gravitational force by Earth on a ball, where "g" represents gravitational (i.e. the type of interaction), "E" represents Earth, → represents "by" and "on", and "B" represents ball. Although students are taught to say ! F E→B g as "gravitational force", audio data from student-led whole-class discussions shows that more than 40% percent of the time ! F E→B g was referred to as "force gravity" instead. Symbols for contact force, such as ! F H →B c , were also similarly referred to as "force contact" rather than "contact force" more than 40% of the time. Because language plays such a crucial role in learning physics, several years ago, as an experiment, the notation was changed from ! F E→B g to g ! F E→B to make it more closely match how it is to be read. After this experimental notation switch, student use of "force gravity" dropped to less than 2%, while use of "force contact" completely disappeared. While we make no claims that helping students read symbols more effectively also facilitates their learning about forces, it is clear that the simple change in notation was extremely effective at solving the reading problem.

show abstract

Social positioning correlates with consensus building in two contentious large-group meetings

Cited by 2 publications

References 15 publications

Analyzing students’ collaboratively solving spherical unit vector problems in upper-level E&M through a lens of shared resources

Analyzing students’ collaboratively solving spherical unit vector problems in upper-level E&M through a lens of shared resources

Changing the notation that represents a force changes how students say it

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About