More Like this

1. Online administration of research-based assessments

   https://doi.org/10.1119/10.0002888  

   Lewandowski, H.J. (January 2021, American journal of physics)

   null (Ed.)

   Research-based assessments (RBAs; e.g., the Force Concept Inventory) that measure student content knowledge, attitudes, or identities have played a major role in transforming physics teaching practices. RBAs offer instructors a standardized method for empirically investigating the efficacy of their instructional practices and documenting the impacts of course transformations. Unlike course exams, the common usage of standardized RBAs across institutions uniquely supports instructors to compare their student outcomes over time or against multi-institutional data sets. While the number of RBAs and RBA-using instructors has increased over the last three decades, barriers to administering RBAs keep many physics instructors from using them.1,2 To mitigate these barriers, we have created full-service online RBA platforms (i.e., the Learning About STEM Student Outcomes [LASSO],3 Colorado Learning Attitudes About Science Survey for Experimental Physics [E-CLASS],4 and Physics Lab Inventory of Critical thinking [PLIC]5 platforms) that host, administer, score, and analyze RBAs. These web-based platforms can make it easier for instructors to use RBAs, especially as many courses have been forced to transition to online instruction. We hope that this editorial can serve as a guide for instructors considering administering RBAs online. In what follows, we examine common barriers to using RBAs, how online administration can remove those barriers, and the research into online administration of RBAs. In the supplementary material,6 we also include a practical how-to for administering RBAs online and sample student email wording. 

   more » « less
2. Online administration of research-based assessments

   Van Dusen, Ben; Shultz, Mollee; Nissen, Jayson; Wilcox, Bethany; Holmes, N.G..; Jariwala, Manher; Close, Eleanor; Lewandowski, Heather; Pollock, Steven (December 2020, American journal of physics)

   null (Ed.)

   Research-based assessments (RBAs; e.g., the Force Concept Inventory) that measure student content knowledge, attitudes, or identities have played a major role in transforming physics teaching practices. RBAs offer instructors a standardized method for empirically investigating the efficacy of their instructional practices and documenting the impacts of course transformations. Unlike course exams, the common usage of standardized RBAs across institutions uniquely supports instructors to compare their student outcomes over time or against multi-institutional data sets. While the number of RBAs and RBA-using instructors has increased over the last three decades, barriers to administering RBAs keep many physics instructors from using them.1,2 To mitigate these barriers, we have created full-service online RBA platforms (i.e., the Learning About STEM Student Outcomes [LASSO],3 Colorado Learning Attitudes About Science Survey for Experimental Physics [E-CLASS],4 and Physics Lab Inventory of Critical thinking [PLIC]5 platforms) that host, administer, score, and analyze RBAs. These web-based platforms can make it easier for instructors to use RBAs, especially as many courses have been forced to transition to online instruction. We hope that this editorial can serve as a guide for instructors considering administering RBAs online. In what follows, we examine common barriers to using RBAs, how online administration can remove those barriers, and the research into online administration of RBAs. In the supplementary material,6 we also include a practical how-to for administering RBAs online and sample student email wording. 

   more » « less
3. COMPASS - Combining Mathematics and Physics to Raise Mathematical Achievement

   Black, Kelly; Yao, Guangming; Wiegert, Craig; Ramsdell, Michael (January 2017, 2017 Joint Mathematics Meetings)

   Increased retention of students in STEM disciplines is one vital part to increase the number of students who are able to succeed in STEM fields. Our efforts focus on the first year Calculus and Physics curriculum, and we explicitly bring these two closely connected areas together. The program has two parts. First is the identification of students who can benefit the most from a coordinated experience. This is done by identifying students strength in mathematics as well as physics prior to entry into the courses, and our focus is on students whose have a relative strength in physics and a relative weakness in mathematics skills. The second step is to bring the two courses together into a vibrant whole. This is done by making use of fundamental physics models, and our students are challenged to increase their analytic abilities through the development of physics based models and an exploration and analysis of the resulting models. 

   more » « less
4. Introductory quantum information science coursework at US institutions: content coverage

   https://doi.org/10.1140/epjqt/s40507-024-00226-0  

   Meyer, Josephine_C; Passante, Gina; Pollock, Steven_J; Wilcox, Bethany_R (March 2024, EPJ Quantum Technology)

   Abstract Despite rapid growth of quantum information science (QIS) workforce development initiatives, perceived lack of agreement among faculty on core content has made prior research-based curriculum and assessment development initiatives difficult to scale. To identify areas of consensus on content coverage, we report findings from a survey of N=63 instructors teaching introductory QIS courses at US institutions of higher learning. We identify a subset of content items common across a large fraction (≥ 80%) of introductory QIS courses that are potentially amenable to research-based curriculum development, with an emphasis on foundational skills in mathematics, physics, and engineering. As a further guide for curriculum development, we also examine differences in content coverage by level (undergraduate/graduate) and discipline. Finally, we briefly discuss the implications of our findings for the development of a research-based QIS assessment at the postsecondary level. 

   more » « less
5. Scaffolding Spatial Abilities in Integral Calculus

   Davishahl, E.; Singleton, L.; Haskell, T.; Rupe, K.; Glen, L. (June 2022, 2022 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition)

   This NSF-IUSE exploration and design project began in fall 2018 and features cross-disciplinary collaboration between engineering, math, and psychology faculty to develop learning activities with hands-on models and manipulatives. We are exploring how best to design these activities to support learners’ development of conceptual understanding and representational competence in integral calculus and engineering statics, two foundational courses for most engineering majors. A second goal is to leverage the model-based activities to scaffold spatial skills development in the context of traditional course content. As widely reported in the literature, well-developed spatial abilities correlate with student success and persistence in many STEM majors. We provided calculus students in selected intervention sections taught by four instructors at three different community colleges with take-home model kits that they could reference for a series of asynchronous learning activities. Students in these sections completed the Purdue Spatial Visualization Test: Rotations (PSVT:R) in the first and last weeks of their course. We also administered the assessment in multiple control sections (no manipulatives) taught by the same faculty. This paper analyzes results from fall 2020 through fall 2021 to see if there is any difference between control and intervention sections for the courses as a whole and for demographic subgroups including female-identifying students and historically-underserved students of color. All courses were asynchronous online modality in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We find that students in intervention sections of calculus made slightly larger gains on the PSVT:R, but this result is not statistically significant as a whole or for any of the demographic subgroups considered. We also analyzed final course grades for differences between control and intervention sections and found no differences. We found no significant effect of the presence of the model-based activities leading to increased PSVT:R gains or improved course grades. We would not extend this conclusion to face-to-face implementation, however, due primarily to the compromises made to adapt the curriculum from in-person group learning to asynchronous individual work and inconsistent engagement of the online students with the modeling activities. 

   more » « less