اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدTransforming a 4th year Modern Optics Course Using a Deliberate Practice Framework
126
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
We present a study of active learning pedagogies in an upper division physics course. This work was guided by the principle of deliberate practice for the development of expertise, and this principle was used in the design of the materials and the orchestration of the classroom activities of the students. We present our process for efficiently converting a traditional lecture course based on instructor notes into activities for such a course with active learning methods. Ninety percent of the same material was covered and scores on common exam problems showed a 15 % improvement with an effect size greater than 1 after the transformation. We observe that the improvement and the associated effect size is sustained after handing off the materials to a second instructor. Because the improvement on exam questions was independent of specific problem topics and because the material tested was so mathematically advanced and broad (including linear algebra, Fourier Transforms, partial differential equations, vector calculus), we expect the transformation process could be applied to most upper division physics courses having a similar mathematical base.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
Laboratory courses are key components of most undergraduate physics programs. Lab courses often aim to achieve the following learning outcomes: developing students experimental skills, engaging students in authentic scientific practices, reinforcing
concepts, and inspiring students interest and engagement in physics. Some of these outcomes can be measured by the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey for Experimental Physics (E-CLASS), a research-based assessment that measures students views about experimental physics. We used E-CLASS at the University of Colorado Boulder to measure learning outcomes during a course transformation process in which views about experimental physics were reflected in the learning goals. We collected over 600 student responses per semester from the large introductory laboratory course, both before and after implementing the course transformation. While we observed no statistically significant difference in overall post-instruction E-CLASS scores before and after the transformation, in the transformed course, student responses to three E-CLASS items that related to the goals of the transformation were more favorable than in the original course.
We investigate students sense of ownership of multiweek final projects in an upper-division optics lab course. Using a multiple case study approach, we describe three student projects in detail. Within-case analyses focused on identifying key issues
in each project, and constructing chronological descriptions of those events. Cross-case analysis focused on identifying emergent themes with respect to five dimensions of project ownership: student agency, instructor mentorship, peer collaboration, interest and value, and affective responses. Our within- and cross-case analyses yielded three major findings. First, coupling division of labor with collective brainstorming can help balance student agency, instructor mentorship, and peer collaboration. Second, students interest in the project and perceptions of its value can increase over time; initial student interest in the project topic is not a necessary condition for student ownership of the project. Third, student ownership is characterized by a wide range of emotions that fluctuate as students alternate between extended periods of struggle and moments of success while working on their projects. These findings not only extend the literature on student ownership into a new educational domain---namely, upper-division physics labs---they also have concrete implications for the design of experimental physics projects in courses for which student ownership is a desired learning outcome. We describe the course and projects in sufficient detail that others can adapt our results to their particular contexts.
We describe an undergraduate course where physics students are asked to conceive an outreach project of their own. The course alternates between the project conception and teachings about pedagogy and outreach, and ends in a public show. We describe
its practical implementation and benefits. Through a student survey and an analysis of their projects, we discuss the merits and flaws of this learning-by-doing teaching approach for physics.
This is the third series of the lab manuals for virtual teaching of introductory physics classes. This covers fluids, waves, thermodynamics, optics, interference, photoelectric effect, atomic spectra, and radiation concepts. A few of these labs can b
e used within Physics I and a few other labs within Physics II depending on the syllabi of Physics I and II classes. Virtual experiments in this lab manual and our previous Physics I (arXiv.2012.09151) and Physics II (arXiv.2012.13278) lab manuals were designed for 2.45 hrs long lab classes (algebra-based and calculus-based). However, all the virtual labs in these three series can be easily simplified to align with conceptual type or short time physics lab classes as desired. All the virtual experiments were based on open education resource (OER) type simulations. Virtual experiments were designed to simulate in-person physical laboratory experiments. Student learning outcomes (understand, apply, analyze and evaluate) were studied with detailed lab reports per each experiment and end of the semester written exam which was based on experiments. Special emphasis was given to study the student skill development of computational data analysis.
Models of physical systems are used to explain and predict experimental results and observations. The Modeling Framework for Experimental Physics describes the process by which physicists revise their models to account for the newly acquired observat
ions, or change their apparatus to better represent their models when they encounter discrepancies between actual and expected behavior of a system. While modeling is a nationally recognized learning outcome for undergraduate physics lab courses, no assessments of students model-based reasoning exist for upper-division labs. As part of a larger effort to create two assessments of students modeling abilities, we used the Modeling Framework to develop and code think-aloud problem-solving activities centered on investigating an inverting amplifier circuit. This study is the second phase of a multiphase assessment instrument development process. Here, we focus on characterizing the range of modeling pathways students employ while interpreting the output signal of a circuit functioning far outside its recommended operation range. We end by discussing four outcomes of this work: (1) Students engaged in all modeling subtasks, and they spent the most time making measurements, making comparisons, and enacting revisions; (2) Each subtask occurred in close temporal proximity to all over subtasks; (3) Sometimes, students propose causes that do not follow logically from observed discrepancies; (4) Similarly, students often rely on their experiential knowledge and enact revisions that do not follow logically from articulated proposed causes.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
