Search for: All records

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.

 

Recent years have seen a movement within the research-based assessment development community towards item formats that go beyond simple multiple-choice formats. Some have moved towards free-response questions, particularly at the upper-division level; however, free-response items have the constraint that they must be scored by hand. To avoid this limitation, some assessment developers have moved toward formats that maintain the closed-response format, while still providing more nuanced insight into student reasoning. One such format is known as coupled, multiple response (CMR). This format pairs multiple-choice and multiple-response formats to allow students to both commit to an answer in addition to selecting options that correspond with their reasoning. In addition to being machine-scorable, this format allows for more nuanced scoring than simple right or wrong. However, such nuanced scoring presents a potential challenge with respect to utilizing certain testing theories to construct validity arguments for the assessment. In particular, Item Response Theory (IRT) models often assume dichotomously scored items. While polytomous IRT models do exist, each brings with it certain constraints and limitations. Here, we will explore multiple IRT models and scoring schema using data from an existing CMR test, with the goal of providing guidance and insight for possible methods for simultaneously leveraging the affordances of both the CMR format and IRT models in the context of constructing validity arguments for research-based assessments. 

Changing basis is a common task when solving quantum mechanical problems. As part of a research project investigating student understanding of basis and change of basis in quantum mechanics, we developed a tutorial to support students in learning about basis in the context of spin-1/2 systems. We have since created an interactive online version of the basis tutorial as part of a freely available suite of online quantum tutorials called ACE Physics (https://acephysics.net). The ACE Physics tutorials include dynamic guidance elements and, unlike other tutorials, are intended for use outside the classroom without instructor facilitation. After extensive study in an instructor-supported environment, we assigned the ACE Physics basis tutorial as homework in two semesters of upper-division quantum mechanics, and we report on the effectiveness of the activity based on pre-/post-testing and comparison of student exam performance with a similar semester that did not include the activity. We find that the tutorial produces sufficient learning gains to justify continued assignment as a homework problem in our classes. 

Significant attention in the PER community has been paid to student cognition and reasoning processes in undergraduate quantum mechanics. Until recently, however, these same topics have remained largely unexplored in the context of emerging interdisciplinary quantum information science (QIS) courses. We conducted exploratory interviews with 22 students in an upper-division quantum computing course at a large R1 university crosslisted in physics and computer science, as well as 6 graduate students in a similar graduate-level QIS course offered in physics. We classify and analyze students' responses to a pair of questions regarding the fundamental differences between classical and quantum computers. We specifically note two key themes of importance to educators: (1) when reasoning about computational power, students often struggled to distinguish between the relative effects of exponential and linear scaling, resulting in students frequently focusing on distinctions that are arguably better understood as analog-digital than classical-quantum, and (2) introducing the thought experiment of analog classical computers was a powerful tool for helping students develop a more expertlike perspective on the differences between classical and quantum computers. 

As the field of Quantum Information Science (QIS) continues to advance, there is an increased need for a quantum-smart workforce to address the needs of the growing quantum industry. As institutions begin to expand their course offerings, there is a unique opportunity for discipline-based education researchers to have an impact on the curricular and pedagogical choices being made in these courses. As a first step, it is necessary for education researchers to have a representative picture of what QIS education currently looks like. We reviewed recent course catalogues from a large sample of institutions in the United States looking for courses focused on QIS content. Our conservative analysis reveals that roughly a quarter of the institutions we reviewed offer QIS courses. While encouraging for such an emerging field, we found disparities in the types of institutions offering these courses as the vast majority were Doctoral-granting institutions. Additionally, we found that some classifications of minority serving institutions were much less likely to offer a QIS course (for example Historically Black Colleges and Universities or Predominantly Black Institutions), while Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander serving institutions were more likely than the national average to offer a QIS course. These disparities may lead to further racial, socioeconomic, and geographic disparity in the future quantum workforce. We also found that there was no single department that offered a majority of the QIS courses, indicating that the best efforts to improve QIS education will need to consider the multi-disciplinary nature of the field of quantum information science.