Analysis of institutional data for physics majors showing predictive relationships between required mathematics and physics courses in various years is important for contemplating how the courses build on each other and whether there is need to make changes to the curriculum for the majors to strengthen these relationships. We used 15 years of institutional data at a US-based large research university to investigate how introductory physics and mathematics courses predict male and female physics majors’ performance on required advanced physics and mathematics courses. We used structure equation modeling (SEM) to investigate these predictive relationships and find that among introductory and advanced physics and mathematics courses, there are gender differences in performance in favor of male students only in the introductory physics courses after controlling for high school GPA. We found that a measurement invariance fully holds in a multi-group SEM by gender, so it was possible to carry out analysis with gender mediated by introductory physics and high school GPA. Moreover, we find that these introductory physics courses that have gender differences do not predict performance in advanced physics courses. In other words, students could be using invalid data about their introductory physics performance to make their decision about whether physics is the right field for them to pursue, and those invalid data in introductory physics favor male students. Also, introductory mathematics courses predict performance in advanced mathematics courses which in turn predict performance in advanced physics courses. Furthermore, apart from the introductory physics courses that do not predict performance in future physics courses, there is a strong predictive relationship between the sophomore, junior and senior level physics courses.
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10285195
- Author(s) / Creator(s):
- ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; more »
- Editor(s):
- Andrews, Tessa C.
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- CBE—Life Sciences Education
- Volume:
- 20
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 1931-7913
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- ar40
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
more » « less
Abstract Gender disparities in retention in pathways to science continue to vary widely by course. Undergraduates intending to study prehealth and premedicine often represent a majority of students enrolled in introductory science courses, contribute to a large number of eventual science degree earners, and are a population that typically includes a high number of women. However, gender differences in attrition, grades, and attitudes persist in the introductory science courses required by undergraduate preheath and premedical programs, particularly within the physical sciences (i.e., Chemistry and Physics). We use structural equation modeling to study 416 undergraduate students across multiple sections of an Algebra‐based Physics course, a common course on the prehealth and premedical track where large gender differences in grades, retention and competency beliefs have been documented. Our analysis focuses on identifying potential academic and attitudinal sources for gender differences in students' beliefs about their Physics abilities at the end of the course, and retention to the second physics course, which is often influenced by these competency beliefs. Results suggest that while men's ability beliefs in Physics are relatively stable and largely derived from early performance indicators, this is a smaller source of ability beliefs for women. Instead, women's ability beliefs are mediated during the course through their sense of belonging in Physics, and the extent to which they believe that Physics ability is fixed or malleable. These findings can inform the design of interventions in Physics courses that specifically target the development of ability beliefs for women intending medical careers.
-
Creating equitable performance outcomes among students is a focus of many instructors and researchers. One focus of this effort is examining disparities in physics student performance across genders, which is a well-established problem. Another less common focus is disparities across racial and ethnic groups, which may have received less attention due to low representation rates making it difficult to identify gaps in their performance. In this investigation we examined associations between Learning Assistant (LA) supported courses and improved equity in student performance. We built Hierarchical Linear Models of student performance to investigate how performance differed by gender and by race/ethnicity and how LAs may have moderated those differences. Data for the analysis came from pre-post concept inventories in introductory mechanics courses collected through the Learning About STEM Student Outcomes (LASSO) platform. Our models show that gaps in performance across genders and races/ethnicities were similar in size and increased from pre to post instruction. LA-support is meaningfully and reliably associated with improvement in overall student performance but not with shifts in within-course performance gaps.more » « less
-
Education researchers often compare performance across race and gender on research-based assessments of physics knowledge to investigate the impacts of racism and sexism on physics student learning. These investigations' claims rely on research-based assessments providing reliable, unbiased measures of student knowledge across social identity groups. We used classical test theory and differential item functioning (DIF) analysis to examine whether the items on the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) provided unbiased data across social identifiers for race, gender, and their intersections. The data was accessed through the Learning About STEM Student Outcomes platform and included responses from 4,848 students posttests in 152 calculus-based introductory physics courses from 16 institutions. The results indicated that the majority of items (22) on the FCI were biased towards a group. These results point to the need for instrument validation to account for item bias and the identification or development of fair research-based assessments.more » « less
-
more » « less
Abstract Massive Online Open Courses (MOOCs) provide opportunities to learn a vast range of subjects. Because MOOCs are open to anyone with computer access and rarely have prerequisite requirements, the range of student backgrounds can be far more varied than in conventional classroom‐based courses. Prior studies have shown that misconceptions have a huge impact on students' learning performance; however, no study has empirically examined the relationship between misconceptions and learning persistence. This study of 12,913 MOOC‐takers examines how students' misconceptions about the upcoming course material affect course completion. Using a survival analysis approach, we found that, controlling for the score in a pre‐course test, students holding more misconceptions had a higher dropout rate at the start of the course, an effect that diminished over time. Other student variables were found to have a positive impact on survival that persisted throughout the entire course: U.S. location, higher age, an intention to complete, better English skills, prior familiarity with the subject, motivation to earn a certificate, and score and time spent on the previous problem set (homework). By contrast, student gender, education level, number of previous MOOCs completed, and motivation to participate in online discussion forums did not affect survival.
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.20-11-0260
