Search for: All records

This NSF-IUSE exploration and design project began in Fall 2018 and features cross-disciplinary collaboration between engineering, math, psychology, and math education faculty to develop learning activities with 3D-printed models for integral calculus and engineering statics. We are exploring how such models can scaffold spatial abilities and support learners’ development of conceptual understanding and representational competence. The project is addressing these questions through parallel work piloting model-based learning activities in the classroom and by investigating specific attributes of the activities in lab studies and focus groups. To date we have developed and piloted a mature suite of activities covering a variety of topics for both calculus and statics. After a year of classroom implementation and data collection at the institution where the curriculum was developed, the project team recruited math and engineering faculty from three other colleges to pilot the models starting Fall 2020. The goal of this expansion was to increase sample sizes and diversity for statistical analysis of classroom data and to learn about the experiences of faculty as they integrated the curriculum materials into their own courses. The original vision was for faculty to use the models in face-to-face instruction, but the transition to online modality in response to the COVID-19 pandemic forced a rapid pivot during this expansion that we reported on previously. Faculty participants who chose to continue with the project worked to incorporate the models in parallel with their respective efforts to adapt to online teaching. This poster focuses on the experiences of the participating math faculty. Ultimately these faculty taught online calculus courses both with and without the models from Fall 2020 through Spring 2022. We conducted pre and post participation interviews and report on their experiences. All participants reported their intention to continue to use the models beyond conclusion of the project and planned to try them in face-to-face instruction. The paper will discuss more details about the interview findings and conclude by making some recommendations for others who may be interested in exploring the use of hands-on models in Calculus instruction. 

Abstract This paper describes the results from an ongoing project where hands-on models and associated activities are integrated throughout an undergraduate statics course with the goal of deepening students’ conceptual understanding, scaffolding spatial skills, and therefore developing representational competence with foundational concepts such as vectors, forces, moments, and free-body diagrams. Representational competence refers to the fluency with which a subject expert can move between different representations of a concept (e.g. mathematical, symbolic, graphical, 2D vs. 3D, pictorial) as appropriate for communication, reasoning, and problem solving. This study sought to identify the characteristics of modeling activities that make them effective for all learners. Student volunteers engaged in individual interviews in which they solved problems that included 2D diagrams, 3D models, and worked calculations. Participating students had prior experience with the models and related activity sheets earlier in the course. Data was collected at the end of the quarter and the activities emphasized conceptual understanding. Thematic analysis was used to develop codes and identify themes in students’ use of the models as it relates to developing representational competence. Students used the models in a variety of ways. They wrote directly on the models, touched and gestured with the model, adjusted components, and observed the model from multiple orientations. They added new elements and deconstructed the models to feel the force or imagine how measurements would be impacted if one parameter was changed while all others held constant. In interviews students made connections to previous courses as well as previous activities and experiences with the models. In addition to using the 3D models, participants also used more than one representation (e.g. symbolic or 2D diagram) to solve problems and communicate thinking. While the use of models and manipulatives is commonplace in mechanics instruction, this work seeks to provide more nuanced information about how students use these learning aids to develop and reinforce their own understanding of key concepts. The authors hope these findings will be useful for others interested in designing and refining hands-on mechanics activities toward specific learning goals. 

This work in progress paper describes ongoing work to understand the ways in which students make use of manipulatives to develop their representational competence and deepen their conceptual understanding of course content. Representational competence refers to the fluency with which a subject expert can move between different representations of a concept (e.g. mathematical, symbolic, graphical, 2D vs. 3D, pictorial) as appropriate for communication, reasoning, and problem solving. Several hands-on activities for engineering statics have been designed and implemented in face-to-face courses since fall 2016. In the transition to online learning in response to the COVID 19 pandemic, modeling kits were sent home to students so they could work on the activities at their own pace and complete the associated worksheets. An assignment following the vector activities required students to create videotaped or written reflections with annotated pictures using the models to explain their thinking around key concepts. Students made connections between abstract symbolic representations and their physical models to explain concepts such as a general 3D unit vector, the difference between spherical coordinate angles and coordinate direction angles, and the meaning of decomposing a vector into components perpendicular and parallel to a line. Thematic analysis of the video and written data was used to develop codes and identify themes in students’ use of the models as it relates to developing representational competence. The student submissions also informed the design of think-aloud exercises in one-on-one semi-structured interviews between researchers and students that are currently in progress. This paper presents initial work analyzing and discussing themes that emerged from the initial video and written analysis and plans for the subsequent think-aloud interviews, all focused on the specific attributes of the models that students use to make sense of course concepts. The ultimate goal of this work is to develop some general guidelines for the design of manipulatives to support student learning in a variety of STEM topics. 

This work in progress paper describes ongoing work to understand the ways in which students make use of manipulatives to develop their representational competence and deepen their conceptual understanding of course content. Representational competence refers to the fluency with which a subject expert can move between different representations of a concept (e.g. mathematical, symbolic, graphical, 2D vs. 3D, pictorial) as appropriate for communication, reasoning, and problem solving. Several hands-on activities for engineering statics have been designed and implemented in face-to-face courses since fall 2016. In the transition to online learning in response to the COVID 19 pandemic, modeling kits were sent home to students so they could work on the activities at their own pace and complete the associated worksheets. An assignment following the vector activities required students to create videotaped or written reflections with annotated pictures using the models to explain their thinking around key concepts. Students made connections between abstract symbolic representations and their physical models to explain concepts such as a general 3D unit vector, the difference between spherical coordinate angles and coordinate direction angles, and the meaning of decomposing a vector into components perpendicular and parallel to a line. Thematic analysis of the video and written data was used to develop codes and identify themes in students’ use of the models as it relates to developing representational competence. The student submissions also informed the design of think-aloud exercises in one-on-one semi-structured interviews between researchers and students that are currently in progress. This paper presents initial work analyzing and discussing themes that emerged from the initial video and written analysis and plans for the subsequent think-aloud interviews, all focused on the specific attributes of the models that students use to make sense of course concepts. The ultimate goal of this work is to develop some general guidelines for the design of manipulatives to support student learning in a variety of STEM topics. 

Mechanics instructors frequently employ hands-on learning with goals such as demonstrating physical phenomena, aiding visualization, addressing misconceptions, exposing students to “real-world” problems, and promoting an engaging classroom environment. This paper presents results from a study exploring the importance of the “hands-on” aspect of a hands-on modeling curriculum we have been developing that spans several topics in statics. The curriculum integrates deep conceptual exploration with analysis procedure tutorials and aims to scaffold students’ development of representational competence, the ability to use multiple representations of a concept as appropriate for learning, problem solving, and communication. We conducted this study over two subsequent terms in an online statics course taught in the context of remote learning amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. The intervention section used a take-home adaptation of the original classroom curriculum. This adaptation consisted of eight activity worksheets with a supplied kit of manipulatives and model-building supplies students could use to construct and explore concrete representations of figures and diagrams used in the worksheets. In contrast, the control section used activity worksheets nearly identical to those used in the hands-on curriculum, but without the associated modeling parts kit. We only made minor revisions to the worksheets to remove reference to the models. The control and intervention sections were otherwise identical in how they were taught by the same instructor. We compare learning outcomes between the two sections as measured via pre-post administration of a test of 3D vector concepts and representations called the Test of Representational Competence with Vectors (TRCV). We also compare end of course scores on the Concept Assessment Test in Statics (CATS) and final exam scores. In addition, we analyze student responses on two “multiple choice plus explain” concept questions paired with each of five activities covering the topics of 3D moments, 3D particle equilibrium, rigid body equilibrium (2D and 3D), and frame analysis (2D). The mean pre/post gain across all ten questions was higher for the intervention section, with the largest differences observed on questions relating to 3D rigid body equilibrium. Students in the intervention section also made larger gains on the TRCV and scored better on the final exam compared to the control section, but these results are not statistically significant perhaps due to the small study population. There were no appreciable differences in end-of-course CATS scores. We also present student feedback on the activity worksheets that was slightly more positive for the versions with the models. 

Mechanics instructors frequently employ hands-on learning with goals such as demonstrating physical phenomena, aiding visualization, addressing misconceptions, exposing students to “real-world” problems, and promoting an engaging classroom environment. This paper presents results from a study exploring the importance of the “hands-on” aspect of a hands-on modeling curriculum we have been developing that spans several topics in statics. The curriculum integrates deep conceptual exploration with analysis procedure tutorials and aims to scaffold students’ development of representational competence, the ability to use multiple representations of a concept as appropriate for learning, problem solving, and communication. We conducted this study over two subsequent terms in an online statics course taught in the context of remote learning amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. The intervention section used a take-home adaptation of the original classroom curriculum. This adaptation consisted of eight activity worksheets with a supplied kit of manipulatives and model-building supplies students could use to construct and explore concrete representations of figures and diagrams used in the worksheets. In contrast, the control section used activity worksheets nearly identical to those used in the hands-on curriculum, but without the associated modeling parts kit. We only made minor revisions to the worksheets to remove reference to the models. The control and intervention sections were otherwise identical in how they were taught by the same instructor. We compare learning outcomes between the two sections as measured via pre-post administration of a test of 3D vector concepts and representations called the Test of Representational Competence with Vectors (TRCV). We also compare end of course scores on the Concept Assessment Test in Statics (CATS) and final exam scores. In addition, we analyze student responses on two “multiple choice plus explain” concept questions paired with each of five activities covering the topics of 3D moments, 3D particle equilibrium, rigid body equilibrium (2D and 3D), and frame analysis (2D). The mean pre/post gain across all ten questions was higher for the intervention section, with the largest differences observed on questions relating to 3D rigid body equilibrium. Students in the intervention section also made larger gains on the TRCV and scored better on the final exam compared to the control section, but these results are not statistically significant perhaps due to the small study population. There were no appreciable differences in end-of-course CATS scores. We also present student feedback on the activity worksheets that was slightly more positive for the versions with the models. 

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. 

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.