Bulletin of the American Physical Society
2006 APS April Meeting
Saturday–Tuesday, April 22–25, 2006; Dallas, TX
Session S10: Focus Session: Undergraduate and Graduate Education |
Hide Abstracts |
Sponsoring Units: FEd Chair: Bruce Ackerson, Oklahoma State University Room: Hyatt Regency Dallas Cumberland C |
Monday, April 24, 2006 3:30PM - 4:06PM |
S10.00001: Assessing the Effectiveness of the HBL Pedagogy Invited Speaker: An exploratory set of studies was conducted to compare the effectiveness of the Hypothesis-Based Learning (HBL) and Physics by Inquiry (PBI) pedagogies. During two different semesters (fall 2003 and spring 2004), 83 Oklahoma State University elementary education students (77 female, 6 male) received identical content instruction differing only in pedagogy. Students were assessed regarding self-efficacy, physics expectations, science process skills, and physics content. Analyses reveal that HBL and PBI cause statistically similar gains in elementary education students' self-efficacy scores and physics expectations. Both populations were similar before and after instruction, with similar changes in performance occurring on the same items; no statistically significant differences were caused by pedagogy. Analysis revealed that both groups scored approximately 90{\%} on the process instrument and were not statistically different. While no significant differences in Exam Item performance existed for Light and Color or Astronomy by Sight problems, HBL caused a significant student score improvement on the Electric Circuits problem. The major analysis conclusion is that HBL produces largely the same results as PBI, providing explicit evidence that open and directed inquiry pedagogies can be equally effective. [Preview Abstract] |
Monday, April 24, 2006 4:06PM - 4:18PM |
S10.00002: Implementation, Analysis, and Assessment of On-Line Teaching Evaluations Jerry Artz, Andrew Rundquist This ongoing project involves the introduction of the new, on-line teaching evaluation that enables students to anonymously assess their teachers and courses via computer. Over the past three years of this program, student compliance has been voluntary and has varied from a high of 73{\%}, during the pilot program, to a low of 46{\%} during the spring of 2005. Possible reasons for the lower compliance and measures that were taken in order to increase the compliance will be discussed. Such measures may have helped increase the compliance to 64{\%} during the fall of 2005. The evaluation instrument, student compliance, analysis of data, and assessment will be discussed. Comparisons continue to be made (1) by grade received, (2) by class standing, (3) by ethnicity, (4) by gender and (5) of science versus non-science courses. In addition to common questions answered by all students, the on-line form allows instructors to add course-specific questions. Additional disciplinary-breadth assessment questions were added for the fall 2004 evaluation. Ongoing problems that have resulted from the introduction of on-line teaching evaluations will be discussed along with successes. [Preview Abstract] |
Monday, April 24, 2006 4:18PM - 4:30PM |
S10.00003: Teaching Einstein: from epicycles to the equivalence principle Ben Bromley, Maria Cranor In Fall 2005, under the auspices of the University of Utah's Office of Undergraduate Studies, we launched a new physics course on the life and work of Albert Einstein. A condition imposed on the new class was that it be taught completely free of mathematical content. In this talk we discuss our goals for the course, and present our conclusions about its effectiveness. We propose further innovations, such as structuring our history-based curriculum to admit students of varied mathematical abilities, from incoming freshmen to physics graduate students who are largely ignorant of the historical development of their science. This course has made us converts to the idea that an historical approach can greatly increase the appeal of science to the general student population. [Preview Abstract] |
Monday, April 24, 2006 4:30PM - 4:42PM |
S10.00004: Teaching Quantum Physics Without Paradoxes in Introductory Physics Courses Art Hobson Although the resolution to the wave-particle paradox has been known for 80 years, it is seldom presented. Briefly, the resolution is that both material particles and photons are the quanta of spatially continuous but energetically quantized fields. But because the resolution resides in quantum field theory and is not usually spelled out in ordinary language, it is neither generally understood nor generally taught, especially not in the context of non-relativistic quantum physics in general introductory physics courses for scientists and non-scientists. Why not teach from the beginning that electrons are quantized excitations of a real physical field, the ``electron field''? Four experimental results form a good framework for teaching: interference fringes in the double-slit experiments for light and for electrons, and the isolated photon and electron interactions that appear on the screen in the same two experiments done with low-intensity beams. [Preview Abstract] |
Monday, April 24, 2006 4:42PM - 4:54PM |
S10.00005: Clickers in the Classroom: More than just Interactive Engagement Brian Pyper Classroom personal response systems and their effective use have been demonstrated and reported on previously. (1) This past semester, we performed a small experiment using the `clickers' to investigate student learning in somewhat more depth, telling us some interesting things about how students are able to gauge their own learning, as well as differences in approaches to the material by gender. (1) N.W. Reay, et al, ``Toward the effective use of voting machines in physics lectures,'' Am. J. Phys. 73(6) (June 2005) p.554-558 [Preview Abstract] |
Monday, April 24, 2006 4:54PM - 5:06PM |
S10.00006: Peer-led instruction for a qualifying exam preparatory course or: How I learned to stop worrying and love the PhD Qualifying Exam Warren Christensen, Larry Engelhardt In the spring of 2004, the authors were charged with the task of creating and administering a qualifying exam preparation curriculum that would strive to assist graduate students studying for their comprehensive physics exam. We incorporated many pedagogical techniques that have been proven effective at nearly all levels of instruction by leading researchers in the field of physics education. Our primary focus was on peer-led instruction and time-on-task doing actual problems from previous qualifying exams. After a brief but precise lecture covering essential ideas over a particular subject matter, students spend most of class time working in small groups and presenting worked problems at the board. At all times, the focus was on student explanations concerning the fundamental concepts behind a specific problem, as well as contemplating variations to broaden understanding and challenge students to think on their feet. We found that students who attended and participated regularly in class could be correlated with those students who achieved high marks on the exam. [Preview Abstract] |
Monday, April 24, 2006 5:06PM - 5:18PM |
S10.00007: Defend Science: The Attack on Scientific Thinking and What Must Be Done Jason Curtis ``In the United States today science, as science, is under attack as never before (\textit{Defend Science}, defendscience.org).'' Beyond, and underlying, the many particular attacks and outrages in different spheres and policy areas is the question of the scientific method and whether it is going to be upheld and applied, or whether -- even in the realm of science itself -- that method is going to be replaced by something antagonistically opposed to the scientific method. These attacks are increasingly coming from powerful forces, in and out of the Bush administration, with an extreme right-wing political agenda, a Biblical-literalist ideological agenda, and theocratic aspirations for society. Individual scientists may be atheists, agnostics, or may hold various religious beliefs, but if religious and theistic elements are forced into the definition of science, then the scientific process is undermined and science cannot really be practiced. We can and must develop a society wide battle, initiated by scientists, but involving ever growing masses of people to defend science and scientific thinking. Scientists from various fields must be mobilized to issue a public call to millions with this urgent message as the beginning of this effort. I will discuss the necessity, possibility, and some initial efforts toward developing this kind of societal movement in defense of science. [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. |
© 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