Bulletin of the American Physical Society
APS March Meeting 2015
Volume 60, Number 1
Monday–Friday, March 2–6, 2015; San Antonio, Texas
Session Q33: Physics Education Research |
Hide Abstracts |
Sponsoring Units: FEd Chair: Monica Plisch, American Physical Society Room: 208 |
Wednesday, March 4, 2015 2:30PM - 2:42PM |
Q33.00001: Potential Utility of Non-Cognitive Constructs in Graduate Admissions Casey Miller It is becoming clear that the methods employed by many graduate admissions committees need updating. Regarding outcomes, we cannot select students that will actually graduate much better than would a coin toss. Further, the GRE is often misused. For example, the most recent GRE general test data (2006-2007) shows that for US citizens in the physical sciences, a cut-off score of $\sim$64th percentile (700/155 on old/new test) would eliminate from eligibility: 63\% of women vs 42\% of men; 76\% of all under-represented minorities vs 38\% of Asian and 47\% of White applicants. Fortunately, Organizational Psychologists have identified and validated several ``non-cognitive constructs'' for admissions: aspects of personality (conscientiousness); and self-management factors. Some intriguing facts about these parameters: they are measurable with the help of social scientists; they do not show race/ethnicity/gender performance differences; they are orthogonal to cognitive metrics measured by GPA and tests scores. These are proven to enhance both validity and diversity in admissions. My goals for this talk are to overview the non-cognitive constructs with the most potential for being used in physics graduate admissions, and to suggest example admissions protocols. [Preview Abstract] |
Wednesday, March 4, 2015 2:42PM - 2:54PM |
Q33.00002: Beyond detection: nuclear physics with a webcam in an educational setting Arthur Pallone Nuclear physics affects our daily lives in such diverse fields from medicine to art. I believe three obstacles -- limited time, lack of subject familiarity and thus comfort on the part of educators, and equipment expense -- must be overcome to produce a nuclear-educated populace. Educators regularly use webcams to actively engage students in scientific discovery as evidenced by a literature search for the term webcam paired with topics such as astronomy, biology, and physics. Inspired by YouTube videos that demonstrate alpha particle detection by modified webcams, I searched for examples that go beyond simple detection with only one education-oriented result -- the determination of the in-air range of alphas using a modified CCD camera. Custom-built, radiation-hardened CMOS detectors exist in high energy physics and for soft x-ray detection. Commercial CMOS cameras are used for direct imaging in electron microscopy. I demonstrate charged-particle spectrometry with a slightly modified CMOS-based webcam. When used with inexpensive sources of radiation and free software, the webcam charged-particle spectrometer presents educators with a simple, low-cost technique to include nuclear physics in science education. [Preview Abstract] |
Wednesday, March 4, 2015 2:54PM - 3:06PM |
Q33.00003: Unveiling Angular Momentum Stephen Robinson Angular momentum is a notoriously difficult concept to grasp. Visualization often requires three-dimensional pictures of vectors pointing in seemingly arbitrary directions. A simple student-run laboratory experiment coupled with intuitive explanations by an instructor can clear up some of the inherent ambiguity of rotational motion. Specifically, the precessional period of a suspended spinning bicycle wheel can be related to the spinning frequency through a simple algebraic expression. An explanation of this precession apart from the concept of angular momentum will be given. [Preview Abstract] |
Wednesday, March 4, 2015 3:06PM - 3:18PM |
Q33.00004: Tracking student progress in a game-like physics learning environment with a Monte Carlo Bayesian knowledge tracing model Gey-Hong Gweon, Hee-Sun Lee, Chad Dorsey, Robert Tinker, William Finzer, Daniel Damelin In tracking student learning in on-line learning systems, the Bayesian knowledge tracing (BKT) model is a popular model. However, the model has well-known problems such as the identifiability problem or the empirical degeneracy problem. Understanding of these problems remain unclear and solutions to them remain subjective. Here, we analyze the log data from an online physics learning program with our new model, a Monte Carlo BKT model. With our new approach, we are able to perform a completely unbiased analysis, which can then be used for classifying student learning patterns and performances. Furthermore, a theoretical analysis of the BKT model and our computational work shed new light on the nature of the aforementioned problems. [Preview Abstract] |
Wednesday, March 4, 2015 3:18PM - 3:30PM |
Q33.00005: Quality of Undergraduate Physics Students' Written Scientific Arguments: How to Promote Students' Appropriation of Scientific Discourse in Physics Laboratory Reports? Mehmet Aydeniz, Kubra Yeter-Aydeniz In this study we challenged 18 undergraduate physics students to develop four written scientific arguments across four physics labs: 1) gravity-driven acceleration, 2) conservation of mechanical energy, 3) conservation of linear momentum and 4) boyle's law, in a mechanics and thermodynamics laboratory course. We evaluated quality of the written scientific arguments developed by the participants using the Claim, Evidence, Reasoning and Rebuttal (CERR) rubric. The results indicate that while students developed adequate scientific explanations that summarized the findings of their experiments, they experienced unique difficulties in using a persuasive and critical discourse in their written arguments. Students experienced the most difficulty in considering alternative explanations in formulating their written scientific arguments. We elaborate on the implications of these findings for teaching physics laboratories and assessing students' learning in physics laboratories. We especially focus on the importance of framing in helping students to appropriate the epistemic norms of science in writing scientific arguments. [Preview Abstract] |
Wednesday, March 4, 2015 3:30PM - 3:42PM |
Q33.00006: Comparison of Students' Ability to Measure Distance using Wavelength in 1D and 2D Settings Gary White When physics students are asked to measure the distance between two fixed locations using a concrete object like a pencil, virtually all respond successfully; however, in some settings, when asked to perform a similar measurement using wavelength as a ruler, there is less success, especially if the students are first asked to note that the ``ruler'' to be used is not fixed in length (see ``Is a Simple Measurement Task a Roadblock to Student Understanding of Wave Phenomena?,'' by M. Kryjevskaia, M. Stetzer, and P. Heron, The Physics Teacher 51,560, (2103) and references therein). I will show some data from introductory classes (algebra- and calculus-based) that replicate this latter result, and also show some interesting features when comparing particular 1D and 2D contexts. [Preview Abstract] |
Wednesday, March 4, 2015 3:42PM - 3:54PM |
Q33.00007: Can you build intuition about quantum mechanics through a game? Charles Tahan We made an app called Meqanic for iOS. To the world, it is a pattern matching game whose rules are very unusual. In reality, it is a functional quantum simulator designed to visualize quantum states and to challenge the user to reconstruct them. The app was released on the Apple App Store in 2014. Here's what we learned. [Preview Abstract] |
Wednesday, March 4, 2015 3:54PM - 4:06PM |
Q33.00008: Facts and Methods need to be taught George Zimmerman Current trends in the K-12 educational establishment tend to concentrate on ``understanding'', both the ``understanding `` of how the student thinks and the student's ``understanding'' of a concept. In many cases the teaching of facts upon which the student might base his/her ``understanding'' is neglected. The lack of facts is amplified in our digital age where the exposure to reality is replaced by a virtual experience. This is one of the reasons for the limitations our college students exhibit. Examples in physics and math will be discussed, as well as possible remedies. [Preview Abstract] |
Wednesday, March 4, 2015 4:06PM - 4:18PM |
Q33.00009: Assessing student reasoning in upper-division electricity and magnetism at Oregon State University Justyna Zwolak, Corinne Manogue Standardized assessment tests that allow researchers to compare the performance of students under various curricula are highly desirable. There are several research-based conceptual tests that serve as instruments to assess and identify students’ difficulties in lower-division courses. At the upper-division level, however, assessing students’ difficulties is a more challenging task. Although several research groups are currently working on such tests, their reliability and validity are still under investigation. We analyze the results of the Colorado Upper-Division Electrostatics diagnostic from Oregon State University and compare it with data from University of Colorado. In particular, we show potential shortcomings in the Oregon State University curriculum regarding separation of variables and boundary conditions. Our work complements and extends the previous findings from the University of Colorado by highlighting important differences in student learning that may be related to the curriculum, illuminating difficulties with the rubric for certain problems and verifying decay in post-test results over time. [Preview Abstract] |
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. |
© 2025 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