We explore the overlap of two nationally recognized learning outcomes for physics lab courses, namely, the ability to model experimental systems and the ability to troubleshoot a malfunctioning apparatus. Modeling and troubleshooting are both nonlinear, recursive processes that involve using models to inform revisions to an apparatus. To probe the overlap of modeling and troubleshooting, we collected audiovisual data from think-aloud activities in which eight pairs of students from two institutions attempted to diagnose and repair a malfunctioning electrical circuit. We characterize the cognitive tasks and model-based reasoning that students employed during this activity. In doing so, we demonstrate that troubleshooting engages students in the core scientific practice of modeling.

Student learning in instructional physics labs represents a growing area of research that includes investigations of students’ beliefs and expectations about the nature of experimental physics. To directly probe students’ epistemologies about experimental physics and support broader lab transformation efforts at the University of Colorado Boulder and elsewhere, we developed the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey for experimental physics (E-CLASS). Previous work with this assessment has included establishing the accuracy and clarity of the instrument through student interviews and preliminary testing. Several years of data collection at multiple institutions has resulted in a growing national data set of student responses. Here, we report on results of the analysis of these data to investigate the statistical validity and reliability of the E-CLASS as a measure of students’ epistemologies for a broad student population. We find that the E-CLASS demonstrates an acceptable level of both validity and reliability on measures of item and test discrimination, test-retest reliability, partial-sample reliability, internal consistency, concurrent validity, and convergent validity. We also examine students’ responses using principal component analysis and find that, as expected, the E-CLASS does not exhibit strong factors (a.k.a. categories).

This study investigates how elite Turkish high school physics students claim to approach learning physics when they are simultaneously (i) engaged in a curriculum that led to significant gains in their epistemological sophistication and (ii) subject to a high-stakes college entrance exam. Students reported taking surface (rote) approaches to learning physics, largely driven by college entrance exam preparation and therefore focused on algorithmic problem solving at the expense of exploring concepts and real-life examples more deeply. By contrast, in recommending study strategies to “Arzu,” a hypothetical student who doesn’t need to take a college entrance exam and just wants to understand physics deeply, the students focused more on linking concepts and real-life examples and on making sense of the formulas and concepts—deep approaches to learning that reflect somewhat sophisticated epistemologies. These results illustrate how students can epistemically compartmentalize, consciously taking different epistemic stances—different views of what counts as knowing and learning—in different contexts even within the same discipline.

[This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Preparing and Supporting University Physics Educators.] Undergraduate students are increasingly being used to support course transformations that incorporate research-based instructional strategies. While such students are typically selected based on strong content knowledge and possible interest in teaching, they often do not have previous pedagogical training. The current training models make use of real students or classmates role playing as students as the test subjects. We present a new environment for facilitating the practice of physics pedagogy skills, a highly immersive mixed-reality classroom simulator, and assess its effectiveness for undergraduate physics learning assistants (LAs). LAs prepared, taught, and reflected on a lesson about motion graphs for five highly interactive computer generated student avatars in the mixed-reality classroom simulator. To assess the effectiveness of the simulator for this population, we analyzed the pedagogical skills LAs intended to practice and exhibited during their lessons and explored LAs’ descriptions of their experiences with the simulator. Our results indicate that the classroom simulator created a safe, effective environment for LAs to practice a variety of skills, such as questioning styles and wait time. Additionally, our analysis revealed areas for improvement in our preparation of LAs and use of the simulator. We conclude with a summary of research questions this environment could facilitate.

In this article we present several modifications of the mechanical waves conceptual survey, the most important test to date that has been designed to evaluate university students’ understanding of four main topics in mechanical waves: propagation, superposition, reflection, and standing waves. The most significant changes are (i) modification of several test questions that had some problems in their original design, (ii) standardization of the number of options for each question to five, (iii) conversion of the two-tier questions to multiple-choice questions, and (iv) modification of some questions to make them independent of others. To obtain a final version of the test, we administered both the original and modified versions several times to students at a large private university in Mexico. These students were completing a course that covers the topics tested by the survey. The final modified version of the test was administered to 234 students. In this study we present the modifications for each question, and discuss the reasons behind them. We also analyze the results obtained by the final modified version and offer a comparison between the original and modified versions. In the Supplemental Material we present the final modified version of the test. It can be used by teachers and researchers to assess students’ understanding of, and learning about, mechanical waves.

Broad instructional methods like “interactive engagement” have been shown to be effective, but such general characterization provides little guidance on the details of how to structure instructional materials. In this study, we seek instructional specificity by comparing two ways of using an analogy to learn a target physical principle: (i) applying the analogy to the target physical domain on a case-by-case basis and (ii) using the analogy to create a general rule in the target physical domain. In the discussion sections of a large, introductory physics course ($N=231$), students who sought a general rule were better able to discover and apply a correct physics principle than students who analyzed the examples case by case. The difference persisted at a reduced level after subsequent direct instruction. We argue that students who performed case-by-case analyses were more likely to focus on idiosyncratic problem-specific features rather than the deep structural features. This study provides an example of investigations into how the specific structure of instructional materials can be consequential for what is learned.

Separation of variables can be a powerful technique for solving many of the partial differential equations that arise in physics contexts. Upper-division physics students encounter this technique in multiple topical areas including electrostatics and quantum mechanics. To better understand the difficulties students encounter when utilizing the separation of variables technique, we examined students’ responses to midterm exam questions and a standardized conceptual assessment and conducted think-aloud, problem-solving interviews. Our analysis was guided by an analytical framework that focuses on how students activate, construct, execute, and reflect on the separation of variables technique when solving physics problems. Here we focus on student difficulties with separation of variables as a technique to solve Laplace’s equation in both Cartesian and spherical coordinates in the context of junior-level electrostatics. Challenges include recognizing when separation of variables is the appropriate tool, recalling or justifying the separated form of the potential and the need for the infinite sum, identifying implicit boundary conditions, and spontaneously reflecting on their solutions. Moreover, the type and frequency of errors was often different for separation of variables problems in Cartesian and spherical geometries. We also briefly discuss implication of these findings for instruction.

We have conducted an investigation into how well students in introductory science classes (both physics and chemistry) are able to predict which questions they will or will not be able to answer correctly on an upcoming assessment. An examination of the data at the level of students’ overall scores reveals results consistent with the Dunning-Kruger effect, in which low-performing students tend to overestimate their abilities, while high-performing students estimate their abilities more accurately. Similar results have been widely reported in the science education literature. Breaking results out by students’ responses to individual questions, however, reveals that students of all ability levels have difficulty distinguishing questions which they are able to answer correctly from those that they are not able to answer correctly. These results have implications for the future study and reporting of students’ metacognitive abilities.

Peer Instruction, a well-known student-centered teaching method, engages students during class through structured, frequent questioning and is often facilitated by classroom response systems. The central feature of any Peer Instruction class is a conceptual question designed to help resolve student misconceptions about subject matter. We provide students two opportunities to answer each question—once after a round of individual reflection and then again after a discussion round with a peer. The second round provides students the choice to “switch” their original response to a different answer. The percentage of right answers typically increases after peer discussion: most students who answer incorrectly in the individual round switch to the correct answer after the peer discussion. However, for any given question there are also students who switch their initially right answer to a wrong answer and students who switch their initially wrong answer to a different wrong answer. In this study, we analyze response switching over one semester of an introductory electricity and magnetism course taught using Peer Instruction at Harvard University. Two key features emerge from our analysis: First, response switching correlates with academic self-efficacy. Students with low self-efficacy switch their responses more than students with high self-efficacy. Second, switching also correlates with the difficulty of the question; students switch to incorrect responses more often when the question is difficult. These findings indicate that instructors may need to provide greater support for difficult questions, such as supplying cues during lectures, increasing times for discussions, or ensuring effective pairing (such as having a student with one right answer in the pair). Additionally, the connection between response switching and self-efficacy motivates interventions to increase student self-efficacy at the beginning of the semester by helping students develop early mastery or to reduce stressful experiences (i.e., high-stakes testing) early in the semester, in the hope that this will improve student learning in Peer Instruction classrooms.

The Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey (CLASS) is a widely used instrument designed to measure student attitudes toward physics and learning physics. Previous research revealed a fairly complex factor structure. In this study, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted on data from an undergraduate introductory physics course ($n=3844$) to determine whether a more parsimonious factor structure exists. Exploratory factor analysis results indicate that many of the items from the original CLASS have poor psychometric properties and could not be used in a revised factor structure. The cross validation showed acceptable fit statistics for a three factor model found in the exploratory factor analysis. This research suggests that a more optimum measurement of students’ attitudes about physics and learning physics is obtained with a 15-item instrument, which describes the factors of personal application, personal effort, and problem solving. The proposed revised version of the CLASS offers researchers the opportunity to test a shortened version of the instrument that may be able to provide information about students’ attitudes in the areas of personal application of physics, personal effort in a physics course, and approaches to problem solving.

This paper presents a comprehensive synthesis of physics education research at the undergraduate level. It is based on work originally commissioned by the National Academies. Six topical areas are covered: (1) conceptual understanding, (2) problem solving, (3) curriculum and instruction, (4) assessment, (5) cognitive psychology, and (6) attitudes and beliefs about teaching and learning. Each topical section includes sample research questions, theoretical frameworks, common research methodologies, a summary of key findings, strengths and limitations of the research, and areas for future study. Supplemental material proposes promising future directions in physics education research.

We have applied the heuristic-analytic theory of reasoning to interpret inconsistencies in student reasoning approaches to physics problems. This study was motivated by an emerging body of evidence that suggests that student conceptual and reasoning competence demonstrated on one task often fails to be exhibited on another. Indeed, even after instruction specifically designed to address student conceptual and reasoning difficulties identified by rigorous research, many undergraduate physics students fail to build reasoning chains from fundamental principles even though they possess the required knowledge and skills to do so. Instead, they often rely on a variety of intuitive reasoning strategies. In this study, we developed and employed a methodology that allowed for the disentanglement of student conceptual understanding and reasoning approaches through the use of sequences of related questions. We have shown that the heuristic-analytic theory of reasoning can be used to account for, in a mechanistic fashion, the observed inconsistencies in student responses. In particular, we found that students tended to apply their correct ideas in a selective manner that supported a specific and likely anticipated conclusion while neglecting to employ the same ideas to refute an erroneous intuitive conclusion. The observed reasoning patterns were consistent with the heuristic-analytic theory, according to which reasoners develop a “first-impression” mental model and then construct an argument in support of the answer suggested by this model. We discuss implications for instruction and argue that efforts to improve student metacognition, which serves to regulate the interaction between intuitive and analytical reasoning, is likely to lead to improved student reasoning.

Peer Instruction (PI) is an evidence based pedagogy commonly used in undergraduate physics instruction. When asked questions designed to test conceptual understanding, it has been observed that the proportion of students choosing the correct answer increases following peer discussion; however, relatively little is known about what takes place during these discussions or how they are beneficial to the processes of learning physics [M. C. James and S. Willoughby, Am. J. Phys. 79, 123 (2011)]. In this paper a framework for analyzing PI discussions developed through the lens of the “resources model” [D. Hammer, Am. J. Phys. 64, 1316 (1996); D. Hammer et al., Information Age Publishing (2005)] is proposed. A central hypothesis for this framework is that the dialogue with peers plays a crucial role in activating appropriate cognitive resources, enabling the students to see the problem differently, and therefore to answer the questions correctly. This framework is used to gain greater insights into the PI discussions of first year undergraduate physics students at the University of Edinburgh, UK, which were recorded using Livescribe Smartpens. Analysis of the dialogues revealed three different types of resource activation corresponding to increasing cognitive grain size. These were activation of knowledge elements, activation of linkages between knowledge elements, and activation of control structures (epistemic games and epistemological frames). Three case studies are examined to illustrate the role that peer dialogue plays in the activation of these cognitive resources in a PI session. The implications for pedagogical practice are discussed.

Previously, we analyzed the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation in terms of a resources-based model that allows for clustering of questions so as to provide useful information on how students correctly or incorrectly reason about physics. In this paper, we apply model analysis to show that the associated model plots provide more information regarding the results of investigations using these question clusters than normalized gain graphs. We provide examples from two different institutions to show how the use of model analysis with our redefined clusters can provide previously hidden insight into the effectiveness of instruction.

Many science education researchers have argued that learners’ commitment to a substance (matter-based) ontology impedes the learning of scientific concepts that scientists typically conceptualize as processes or interactions, such as force, electric current, and heat. By this account, students’ tendency to classify these entities as substances or properties of substances leads to robust misconceptions, and instruction should steer novices away from substance-based reasoning. We argue that substance-based reasoning can contribute to the learning and understanding of these very same physics concepts. Our case study focuses on a group of elementary school science teachers in our professional development program. Starting from substance-based metaphors for gravity, the teachers build a sophisticated explanation for why objects of different masses fall with the same acceleration. We argue that, for conceptual, epistemological, and affective reasons, instructional interventions should focus on tapping these productive substance-based resources when they arise rather than attempting to suppress them.