An official website of the United States government
Measuring strike and dip is a common but complicated spatial task introduced to students in undergraduate geology courses. Students must employ multiple spatial reasoning skills in addition to geology-specific content knowledge. These spatial skills include disembedding - to recognize a suitable bedding or foliation plane to measure, spatial perception - to understand the plane’s relationship to horizontal and vertical, and aspects of spatial visualization, perspective taking, and mental rotation to determine how to position and read the compass tool. We tested a virtual reality (VR) training module to help teach the use of the compass tool to measure strike and dip. Students in a large introductory course in a public university were placed by lab section into either a “standard” classroom instruction or VR instruction for their initial training, then all completed a simplified mapping exercise in which they measured five planes set up around the classroom. Pre and post tests of spatial skills and scores on the measurement portion of the map assignment were collected and compared between the 2 types of training groups. Of 12 lab sections, half were assigned to VR and the other half to standard. The instructional assistants each taught at least one section of each type, and the instruction types were distributed evenly across the scheduled lab times. The VR group showed 11% higher improvement scores on the Water Level Task (WLT) compared to the standard group (p = 0.008, n=159). Because students in some lab sections had identical responses to the strike and dip task, we used a subset of four lab sections in which students submitted unique responses (n=41). We found no significant differences on the strike and dip task except with application of the right hand rule (RHR). The classroom instruction group performed 26% higher on the strike task when the RHR was taken into account (p = 0.006), but this difference does not persist when scoring is agnostic to the RHR. The VR module contains only a text explanation of the RHR. These results suggest that VR is at least as good as classroom instruction for building geology skills and, through targeted instruction, can significantly impact performance on a spatial test. Feedback on the VR activity will be used to further refine the module and develop best practice strategies for VR spatial training.
more »
« less
Dimensions of Variation in group work within the “same” multi-section undergraduate course
This paper reports a qualitative study of how small group problem solving was enacted differently across sections of a multi-section undergraduate introduction to proof course. Common course materials, common guidelines for instruction, and weekly instructor meetings led by a faculty course coordinator supported similar instruction across sections, including an emphasis on in-class group work. But within that shared structure, classroom observations revealed important differences in how group work was introduced, organized, and managed. Our results focus on differences in the time allotted to group work, the rationale for group work, the selection and organization of groups, and aspects of student activity and participation. We suggest that these differences shaped different opportunities to learn proof writing in small groups. These results have implications for the design and teaching of collegiate mathematics courses where group work is a regular element of classroom work.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1835946
- PAR ID:
- 10215627
- Editor(s):
- Karunakaran, S. S.
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 606-613
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Engineers must understand how to build, apply, and adapt various types of models in order to be successful. Throughout undergraduate engineering education, modeling is fundamental for many core concepts, though it is rarely explicitly taught. There are many benefits to explicitly teaching modeling, particularly in the first years of an engineering program. The research questions that drove this study are: (1) How do students’ solutions to a complex, open-ended problem (both written and coded solutions) develop over the course of multiple submissions? and (2) How do these developments compare across groups of students that did and did not participate in a course centered around modeling?. Students’ solutions to an open-ended problem across multiple sections of an introductory programming course were explored. These sections were all divided across two groups: (1) experimental group - these sections discussed and utilized mathematical and computational models explicitly throughout the course, and (2) comparison group - these sections focused on developing algorithms and writing code with a more traditional approach. All sections required students to complete a common open-ended problem that consisted of two versions of the problem (the first version with smaller data set and the other a larger data set). Each version had two submissions – (1) a mathematical model or algorithm (i.e. students’ written solution potentially with tables and figures) and (2) a computational model or program (i.e. students’ MATLAB code). The students’ solutions were graded by student graders after completing two required training sessions that consisted of assessing multiple sample student solutions using the rubrics to ensure consistency across grading. The resulting assessments of students’ works based on the rubrics were analyzed to identify patterns students’ submissions and comparisons across sections. The results identified differences existing in the mathematical and computational model development between students from the experimental and comparison groups. The students in the experimental group were able to better address the complexity of the problem. Most groups demonstrated similar levels and types of change across the submissions for the other dimensions related to the purpose of model components, addressing the users’ anticipated needs, and communicating their solutions. These findings help inform other researchers and instructors how to help students develop mathematical and computational modeling skills, especially in a programming course. This work is part of a larger NSF study about the impact of varying levels of modeling interventions related to different types of models on students’ awareness of different types of models and their applications, as well as their ability to apply and develop different types of models.more » « less
-
Engineers must understand how to build, apply, and adapt various types of models in order to be successful. Throughout undergraduate engineering education, modeling is fundamental for many core concepts, though it is rarely explicitly taught. There are many benefits to explicitly teaching modeling, particularly in the first years of an engineering program. The research questions that drove this study are: (1) How do students’ solutions to a complex, open-ended problem (both written and coded solutions) develop over the course of multiple submissions? and (2) How do these developments compare across groups of students that did and did not participate in a course centered around modeling?. Students’ solutions to an open-ended problem across multiple sections of an introductory programming course were explored. These sections were all divided across two groups: (1) experimental group - these sections discussed and utilized mathematical and computational models explicitly throughout the course, and (2) comparison group - these sections focused on developing algorithms and writing code with a more traditional approach. All sections required students to complete a common open-ended problem that consisted of two versions of the problem (the first version with smaller data set and the other a larger data set). Each version had two submissions – (1) a mathematical model or algorithm (i.e. students’ written solution potentially with tables and figures) and (2) a computational model or program (i.e. students’ MATLAB code). The students’ solutions were graded by student graders after completing two required training sessions that consisted of assessing multiple sample student solutions using the rubrics to ensure consistency across grading. The resulting assessments of students’ works based on the rubrics were analyzed to identify patterns students’ submissions and comparisons across sections. The results identified differences existing in the mathematical and computational model development between students from the experimental and comparison groups. The students in the experimental group were able to better address the complexity of the problem. Most groups demonstrated similar levels and types of change across the submissions for the other dimensions related to the purpose of model components, addressing the users’ anticipated needs, and communicating their solutions. These findings help inform other researchers and instructors how to help students develop mathematical and computational modeling skills, especially in a programming course. This work is part of a larger NSF study about the impact of varying levels of modeling interventions related to different types of models on students’ awareness of different types of models and their applications, as well as their ability to apply and develop different types of models.more » « less
-
Historically, physics education primarily consisted of lectures in which students have a largely passive role. Proponents of educational reform have rallied around active learning to increase engagement and retention in STEM fields, particularly advocating peer interactions to build a foundation of deep understanding. However, little is known about how students' prior preparation for introductory courses impacts their mastery of course material when instructors incorporate active learning. In the present study, we examine learning outcomes in two sections of an introductory mechanics course at an institution with a wide range of students' prior mathematics preparation as assessed by quantitative SAT scores. For each of three years, one section was taught using peer instruction in which much of the class time was spent in small-group discussions between students. The other section was taught by the same instructor using interactive lectures in which discussions primarily took place between volunteers from the class and the instructor. We find that students enrolled in the peer instruction sections earned lower grades in the course than did students in the interactive sections. We also find students in the peer instruction sections with lower quantitative SAT scores showed lower gains in understanding foundational concepts as assessed by the Force Concept Inventory and were less likely to earn an A in the course than comparable students in the interactive sections. While further research is needed to confirm these results, this study suggests that peer instruction might not be the optimal pedagogy for heterogeneous populations.more » « less
-
This paper will provide the first-year results of the impact of implementing the flipped approach in lower level math and aerospace engineering courses. A quasi-experimental between-groups research design was used for assessing the effectiveness of this methodology. The control group consisted of students who were in the same course but in sections with traditional teaching delivery while the intervention group consisted of students who were registered in the sections with the flipped approach. All students were from underrepresented groups. A positive impact on the students’ attitudes and learning strategies was observed as a result of the flipped classroom with active learning. Data pertaining to the effectiveness of the flipped classroom pedagogy is shared in this paper. Analysis of students’ cognitive engagement and their attitudes towards flipped classroom is discussed. The paper also includes best practices, their impact on student performance, and challenges in implementing a flipped classroom pedagogy.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
