Search for: All records

In this study, we have explored the effectiveness of two instructional approaches in the context of the motion of objects falling at terminal speed in the presence of air resistance. We ground these instructional approaches in dual-process theories of reasoning, which assert that human cognition relies on two thinking processes. Dual-process theories suggest multiple possible avenues by which instruction might impact student reasoning. In this paper, we compare two possible instructional approaches: one designed to reinforce the normative approach (improving the outputs of the intuitive process) and another that guides students to reflect on and analyze their initial ideas (supporting the analytic process). The results suggest that for students who have already demonstrated a minimum level of requisite knowledge, instruction that supports analysis of their likely intuitive mental model leads to greater learning benefits in the short term than instruction that focuses solely on providing practice with the normative mindware. These results have implications for the design of instructional materials and help to demonstrate how dual-process theories can be leveraged to explain the success of existing research-based materials. Published by the American Physical Society2024 

Abstract BackgroundWhile laboratory practices have traditionally been conducted in-person, online asynchronous laboratory learning has been growing in popularity due to increased enrollments and the recent pandemic, creating opportunities for accessibility. In remote asynchronous learning environments, students have more autonomy to choose how they participate with other students in their laboratory classes. Communities of practice and self-efficacy may provide insights into why students are making their participation choices and how they are interacting with peers in asynchronous physics laboratory courses. ResultsIn this mixed methods, explanatory sequential study, students in an introductory physics remote asynchronous laboratory (N = 272) were surveyed about their social learning perceptions and their physics laboratory self-efficacy. Three groups of students were identified based upon their self-reported participation level of communication with peers in asynchronous courses: (1)contributors, who communicated with peers via instant messaging software and posted comments; (2)lurkers, who read discussions on instant messaging software without posting comments; and (3)outsiders, who neither read nor posted comments to peer discussions. Analysis of variance with post hoc Tukey tests showed significant differences in social learning perceptions among contributors, lurkers, and outsiders, with a large effect size, and differences between contributing and lurking students’ self-efficacy, with a small effect size. Qualitative findings from open-ended survey responses indicated contributors felt the structure of the learning environment, or their feeling of connectedness with other students, facilitated their desire to contribute. Many lurkers felt they could get what they needed through vicarious learning, and many expressed their lack of confidence to post relevant, accurate comments. Outsiders felt they did not have to, did not want to, or could not connect with other students. ConclusionsWhile the classroom laboratory traditionally requires all students to participate in the learning process through active socialization with other students, students in a remote asynchronous laboratory may still gain the benefits of participation through lurking. Instructors may consider lurking in an online or remote science laboratory as a legitimate form of participation and engagement.