Bulletin of the American Physical Society
APS April Meeting 2023
Volume 68, Number 6
Minneapolis, Minnesota (Apr 15-18)
Virtual (Apr 24-26); Time Zone: Central Time
Session C18: Student Content Understanding, Problem-Solving and ReasoningEducation Outreach
|
Hide Abstracts |
Sponsoring Units: GPER Chair: Natasha Holmes, Cornell University Room: Marquette IX - 2nd Floor |
Saturday, April 15, 2023 1:30PM - 1:42PM |
C18.00001: CHARACTERIZING STUDENT REASONING TRAJECTORIES THROUGH THE LENS OF DUAL-PROCESS THEORIES Em Sowles, Thomas M Fittswood, Drew J Rosen, MacKenzie R Stetzer An established body of research has found that students who have shown sufficient understanding of relevant physics concepts and skills (mindware) may perform inconsistently on analogous questions, even after research-based instruction. These inconsistencies can be explained through dual-process theories of reasoning (DPToR). According to DPToR, students engage in a variety of different reasoning trajectories when working on a physics question, and optimization of instructional interventions for these different trajectories may improve effectiveness. The focus of this investigation is thus to identify and characterize common reasoning trajectories as students work on a physics question (target question) that elicits incorrect, intuitive reasoning approaches. In this work, students were first served a screening-target pair of physics questions (with the screening question providing an independent measure of mindware), followed by a set of metacognitive prompts about their reasoning on the target. The use of response timing data and scores on the Cognitive Reflection Test allowed for a more thorough characterization of student reasoning trajectories. In this talk, we present recent results and discuss implications for research-based instructional materials. |
Saturday, April 15, 2023 1:42PM - 1:54PM |
C18.00002: Leveraging dual-process theories of reasoning to support students in reasoning consistently Thomas M Fittswood, Em Sowles, Drew J Rosen, MacKenzie R Stetzer Inconsistencies in student reasoning that persist after instruction have been documented in a wide variety of contexts within physics. Students who are able to reason productively on one question, thereby demonstrating that they possess relevant knowledge and skills, may abandon that correct line of reasoning when answering an analogous question. Recent research suggests that such inconsistencies in reasoning may stem from the nature of human reasoning itself. An emerging body of work has made use of dual-process theories of reasoning as a framework for investigating these reasoning inconsistencies in physics. As part of a larger effort to better support student reasoning by leveraging dual-process theories of reasoning, we have designed, implemented, and tested small-scale online interventions aimed at helping students apply knowledge and skills they already possess more consistently. In addition to examining the overall effectiveness of these interventions, we have investigated individual factors that may impact how students engage with the interventions. In this talk, we will present our findings and discuss implications for curriculum development and instruction. |
Saturday, April 15, 2023 1:54PM - 2:06PM |
C18.00003: Exploring how interventions aligned with dual-process theories support student reasoning MacKenzie R Stetzer, Em Sowles, Thomas M Fittswood, Drew J Rosen Research suggests that poor student performance on certain physics questions may stem, at least in part, from the nature of human reasoning itself. While students may demonstrate that they possess the requisite knowledge and skills (mindware) to reason correctly on one question, they may abandon that same line of reasoning on an analogous question containing a salient distracting feature. As part of a larger effort to investigate and support student reasoning in physics by leveraging dual-process theories of reasoning (DPToR), we have been working to identify and more thoroughly characterize factors that may impact how students respond to DPToR-aligned interventions. There are many factors of interest, including mindware, cognitive reflection skills, and the specific reasoning trajectories of students as they engage with the physics question prior to the intervention. In this talk, we describe our efforts to characterize some of these factors and relate them to the effectiveness of specific interventions. |
Saturday, April 15, 2023 2:06PM - 2:18PM |
C18.00004: Associations of Student Response Times with Course grades in Introductory Physics courses. Harish Moni Prakash, Andrew F Heckler While accuracy in basic math skills has been shown to predict the performance of students in introductory Physics courses, the predictiveness of response times (RT) on such outcomes remains largely unexplored. By examining data from online pre and post test assignments in the course, we find that RT can explain additional variance in student grades above accuracy alone. We find that we can also meaningfully categorize students based on their pre scores and RTs as well as their evolution to post test scores and RTs, and these categories have significantly different mean course grades. With regards to this evolution, we hypothesize that a meaningful improvement in speed (without any harm to accuracy) is more likely to happen if the student first reaches some minimum level of accuracy, and we provide correlational evidence to support this hypothesis. Finally, in a first step to better determine the evolution of performance and any causal link between RT and course grades, we explore the extent to which RT can be improved by using STEM Fluency, an online mastery practice application for basic STEM skills. |
Saturday, April 15, 2023 2:18PM - 2:30PM |
C18.00005: The evolution of accuracy and speed in online mastery practice Andrew F Heckler, Megan Nieberding We present results on a study investigating the evolution of accuracy and speed during repeated practice spanning multiple weeks via an online mastery learning application for skills relevant to introductory physics. The participants were enrolled in algebra or calculus-based introductory physics at a large public research University. We investigated several potentially important factors, including the number and timing of practice trials, gender, ACT math score, submission time before deadline, and growth mindset. We find that mean improvements in accuracy and speed vary with initial practice category performance and student population, consistent with well-documented general learning curves. Further we find that the initial performance gaps between students with low and High ACT math scores and between women and men decreases with practice. We also find that students who procrastinate improved their completion times significantly less than non-procrastinators, even controlling for ACT score, and that mindset did not predict any performance measures. |
Saturday, April 15, 2023 2:30PM - 2:42PM |
C18.00006: Helping introductory physics students check for the validity of their responses* Safana ismael, Mila Kryjevskaia A growing body of research suggests that many students need help to recognize how to apply relevant physics knowledge to check for the validity of their answers in situations that elicit intuitively appealing (but incorrect) ideas. We designed instructional interventions that consisted of two phases. In Phase 1, students completed a web-based assignment individually outside of class, and in Phase 2, this assignment was reviewed in class in an instructor-led discussion. The web-based assignments consisted of sequences of questions intended to guide students to re-examine their initial intuition-based responses and override them, if necessary, by applying formal physics knowledge. Results show that only a small fraction of the students (<20%) recognize and override mistakes in their initial responses. Most students (1) answer the intervention questions in a manner that supports their intuitive responses (i.e., confirmation bias) or (2) do not recognize and examine inconsistencies in their answers. After phase 2, however, about half of the students improved their performance on the assessment included in the test. The results suggest that many students need help building confidence in their physics knowledge and reasoning approaches. |
Saturday, April 15, 2023 2:42PM - 2:54PM |
C18.00007: Investigating student understanding with a screening-target methodology* Brianna Santangelo, Mila Kryjevskaia One of the goals of physics instruction is to help students improve their reasoning. Research from cognitive psychology suggests that to reason productively, students need to possess content understanding (i.e., mindware) and apply appropriate reasoning strategies. We are developing an instrument designed to assess student content understanding and their reasoning consistency through a screening-target methodology. Screening questions probe student conceptual understanding, while target questions require students to apply this understanding in situations that present reasoning challenges. By comparing performance on these questions, we can pinpoint more specifically factors that contribute to student response patterns. We will present data from student interviews and discuss implications for research, assessment development, and instruction. |
Saturday, April 15, 2023 2:54PM - 3:06PM |
C18.00008: Assessing the effectiveness of instruction that makes the duality of reasoning explicit Mila Kryjevskaia, Alistair McInerny, Andrew Boudreaux A tacit assumption underlying classroom teaching and learning is that students will engage in analytic thinking to apply physics principles and concepts to analyze novel situations. According to dual-process theories of reasoning (DPToR), however, cognition is initiated when the fast, automatic process constructs an initial mental model of the novel context; only then can the slower, analytic process intervene to examine the validity of the first available model. If confidence in the initial mental model is high, the analytic process may not engage, perhaps leaving previously learned physics concepts inactive. We speculated that explicit instruction about the dual nature of human cognition might help physics students reflect on and improve their reasoning. To investigate, we implemented an intervention in an introductory physics course. Over multiple weeks, we introduced DPToR to students, engaged students in discussions of how DPToR is relevant to reasoning in physics, and provided opportunities for students to reflect on their own reasoning through the lens of DPToR. Assessment data will be presented, and implications for instruction will be discussed. |
Follow Us |
Engage
Become an APS Member |
My APS
Renew Membership |
Information for |
About APSThe American Physical Society (APS) is a non-profit membership organization working to advance the knowledge of physics. |
© 2024 American Physical Society
| All rights reserved | Terms of Use
| Contact Us
Headquarters
1 Physics Ellipse, College Park, MD 20740-3844
(301) 209-3200
Editorial Office
100 Motor Pkwy, Suite 110, Hauppauge, NY 11788
(631) 591-4000
Office of Public Affairs
529 14th St NW, Suite 1050, Washington, D.C. 20045-2001
(202) 662-8700