Students’ opinions on the educational value of physics laboratories: a cross-sectional survey

Leung, Anthony C. K.; Terrana, Alexandra; Jerzak, S.

doi:10.1139/cjp-2016-0358

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the past two decades, physics education research has identified the challenges that students encounter in learning physics at all levels of instruction [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]. Building on these investigations, researchers are developing, implementing, and evaluating evidencebased curricula and pedagogies to reduce these challenges to help students develop a coherent understanding of physics concepts and enhance their problem solving, reasoning, and meta-cognitive skills [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27].…”

Section: Physics Education Research-based Active Engagement Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of evidence-based flipped or active-engagement non-flipped courses on student performance in introductory physics

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We describe the impact of physics education research-based pedagogical techniques in flipped and active-engagement non-flipped courses on student performance on validated conceptual surveys. We compare student performance in courses that make significant use of evidence-based active engagement (EBAE) strategies with courses that primarily use lecture-based (LB) instruction. All courses had large enrollment and often had 100–200 students. The analysis of data for validated conceptual surveys presented here includes data from large numbers of students from two-semester sequences of introductory algebra-based and calculus-based introductory physics courses. The conceptual surveys used to assess student learning in the first and second semester courses were the Force Concept Inventory and the Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism, respectively. In the research discussed here, the performance of students in EBAE courses at a particular level is compared with LB courses in two situations: (i) the same instructor taught two courses, one of which was a flipped course involving EBAE methods and the other an LB course, while the homework, recitations, and final exams were kept the same; (ii) student performance in all of the EBAE courses taught by different instructors was averaged and compared with LB courses of the same type also averaged over different instructors. In all cases, we find that students in courses that make significant use of active-engagement strategies, on average, outperformed students in courses using primarily LB instruction of the same type on conceptual surveys even though there was no statistically significant difference on the pretest before instruction. We also discuss correlation between the performance on the validated conceptual surveys and the final exam, which typically placed a heavy weight on quantitative problem solving.

show abstract

Section: Physics Education Research-based Active Engagement Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of evidence-based flipped or active-engagement non-flipped courses on student performance in introductory physics

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies have focused on students' motivation (e.g., factors such as fascination and value associated with physics, self-efficacy, grit, intelligence mindset, and physics epistemology) . For example, researchers have focused on students' interest in and value of science and their relationship to performance and STEM degree achievement [25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35]. Research suggests that interest in math and science is associated with the number of math and science courses taken in high school and career aspirations [28].…”

Section: A Factors 1 and 2: Internal Characteristics Of Learning Toomentioning

confidence: 99%

A longitudinal analysis of students’ motivational characteristics in introductory physics courses: Gender differences

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The lack of diversity and the under-performance of underrepresented students in STEM courses have been the focus of researchers in the last decade. In particular, many hypotheses have been put forth for the reasons for the under-representation and under-performance of women in physics. Here, we present a framework for helping all students learn in science courses that takes into account four factors: (1) the characteristics of instruction and learning tools, (2) student characteristics, (3) implementation of instruction and learning tools, and (4) the students’ environments. While there has been much research on factor 1 (characteristics of instruction and learning tools), there has been less focus on factor 2 (students’ characteristics, and in particular, motivational factors). Here, we focus on the baseline characteristics of introductory physics students obtained from survey data to inform factor 2 of the framework. A longitudinal analysis of students’ motivational characteristics in two-semester introductory physics courses was performed by administering pre- and post-surveys that evaluated students’ self-efficacy, grit, fascination with physics, value associated with physics, intelligence mindset, and physics epistemology. We found that female students reported lower levels of self-efficacy, fascination, and value associated with physics, and held a more “fixed” view of intelligence in the context of physics compared to male students. Female students’ fascination and value associated with physics decreased significantly more than males’ after an introductory physics course sequence. In addition, females’ view of physics intelligence became more “fixed” compared to males’ by the end of an introductory physics course sequence. Grit was the only factor on which females reported averages that were equal to or higher than males throughout introductory physics courses. The findings inform the framework and have implications for the development and implementation of effective pedagogies and learning tools to help all students learn.

show abstract

“…When labs are used in service of theory, the purpose is typically to provide hands-on, real-world experience of theoretical models. Students generally expect that labs will have this purpose [1][2][3] . Labs may achieve this aim by having students discover the models through their experiments or demonstrate models seen previously in lecture or the textbook.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Department of Physics, Colorado School of Mines,Golden, CO, USA 2. Laboratory of Atomic and Solid State Physics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Best practice for instructional labs

Smith

Holmes

2021

Nat. Phys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Students’ opinions on the educational value of physics laboratories: a cross-sectional survey

Cited by 9 publications

References 46 publications

Impact of evidence-based flipped or active-engagement non-flipped courses on student performance in introductory physics

Impact of evidence-based flipped or active-engagement non-flipped courses on student performance in introductory physics

A longitudinal analysis of students’ motivational characteristics in introductory physics courses: Gender differences

Best practice for instructional labs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About