Search for: All records

The American Physical Society calls on its members to improve the diversity of physics by sup- porting an inclusive culture that encourages women and people of color to become physicists. Becoming a physicist demands a set of beliefs about what it means to learn and do physics. Rather than physics courses and degree programs supporting students in developing these beliefs, evidence shows that physics education filters out students without sufficient beliefs. To better understand the role of beliefs in the lack of diversity in physics, we investigated the intersectional nature of race/racism and gender/sexism in inequities in student beliefs towards learning and doing physics using a critical quantitative intersectionality framework. The analyses used hierarchical linear models to examine students’ beliefs as measured by the Colorado learning attitudes about science survey. The data came from the LASSO database and included 1248 students in 29 calculus-based mechanics courses. Like prior studies, we found that beliefs either did not change or slightly decreased for most groups. Results identified large differences across intersecting race and gender groups. White students, particularly White men, tended to have more expert-like beliefs than any other group of students. Physics instruction must address these educational debts to move toward an inclusive culture supportive of diverse students and professionals. 

Assessments of students’ attitudes and beliefs often rely on questions with rating scales that ask students the extent to which they agree or disagree with a statement. Unlike traditional physics problems with a single correct answer, rating scale questions often have a spectrum of 5 or more responses, none of which are correct. Researchers have found that responses on rating scale items can generally be treated as continuous and that unless there is good evidence to do otherwise, response categories should not be collapsed [1–3]. We discuss two potential reasons for collapsing response categories (lack of use and redundancy) and how to empirically test for them. To illustrate these methods, we use them on the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey. We found that students used all the response categories on the CLASS but that three of them were potentially redundant. This led us to conclude that the CLASS should be scored on a 5-point or 3-point scale, rather than the 2-point scale recommended by the instrument developers [4]. More broadly, we recommend the judicious use of data manipulations when scoring assessments and retaining all response categories unless there is a strong rational for collapsing them. 

We investigated the intersectional nature of race/racism and gender/sexism in broad scale inequities in physics student learning using a critical quantitative intersectionality. To provide transparency and create a nuanced picture of learning, we problematized the measurement of equity by using two competing operationalizations of equity: Equity of Individuality and Equality of Learning. These two models led to conflicting conclusions. The analyses used hierarchical linear models to examine student’s conceptual learning as measured by gains in scores on research-based assessments administered as pretests and posttests. The data came from the Learning About STEM Student Outcomes’ (LASSO) national database and included data from 13,857 students in 187 first-semester college physics courses. Findings showed differences in student gains across gender and race. Large gender differences existed for White and Hispanic students but not for Asian, Black, and Pacific Islander students. The models predicted larger gains for students in collaborative learning than in lecture-based courses. The Equity of Individuality operationalization indicated that collaborative instruction improved equity because all groups learned more with collaborative learning. The Equality of Learning operationalization indicated that collaborative instruction did not improve equity because differences between groups were unaffected. We discuss the implications of these mixed findings and identify areas for future research using critical quantitative perspectives in education research.We investigated the intersectional nature of race/racism and gender/sexism in broad scale inequities in physics student learning using a critical quantitative intersectionality. To provide transparency and create a nuanced picture of learning, we problematized the measurement of equity by using two competing operationalizations of equity: Equity of Individuality and Equality of Learning. These two models led to conflicting conclusions. The analyses used hierarchical linear models to examine student’s conceptual learning as measured by gains in scores on research-based assessments administered as pretests and posttests. The data came from the Learning About STEM Student Outcomes’ (LASSO) national database and included data from 13,857 students in 187 first-semester college physics courses. Findings showed differences in student gains across gender and race. Large gender differences existed for White and Hispanic students but not for Asian, Black, and Pacific Islander students. The models predicted larger gains for students in collaborative learning than in lecture-based courses. The Equity of Individuality operationalization indicated that collaborative instruction improved equity because all groups learned more with collaborative learning. The Equality of Learning operationalization indicated that collaborative instruction did not improve equity because differences between groups were unaffected. We discuss the implications of these mixed findings and identify areas for future research using critical quantitative perspectives in education research. Keywords: gender, race, physics, hierarchical linear model, equity, equality, critical quantitative intersectionality, higher education, learning 

The Learning Assistant (LA) model supports instructors in implementing research-based teaching practices in their own courses. In the LA model undergraduate students are hired to help facilitate research-based collaborative-learning activities. Using the Learning About STEM Student Out- comes (LASSO) database, we examined student learning from 112 first-semester physics courses that used either lecture-based instruction, collaborative instruction without LAs, or LA supported instruction. We measured student learning using 5959 students’ responses on the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation (FMCE) or Force Concept Inventory (FCI). Results from Hierarchical Linear Models (HLM) indicated that LA supported courses had higher posttest scores than collaborative courses without LAs and that LA supported courses that used LAs in laboratory and recitation had higher posttest scores than those that used LAs in lecture. 

Successful outcomes of the Learning Assistant (LA) model include increased learning outcomes in STEM gateway courses and increased persistence to graduation among LAs and the students they serve. While there are many possible reasons that the LA program is effective, the pedagogical development of the LAs themselves has not yet been systematically studied. The research reported here investigated how deeply first-time LAs enrolled in a one-semester pedagogy course took up the language associated with the course’s essential pedagogical principles. By reviewing prior research as well as assessing our target population and our pedagogy course learning goals, we developed a set of three essential pedagogical principles that are critical for effective classroom instruction and developed a coding scheme for identifying these principles in LAs’ written work. We then looked at LA’s development of language with respect to these principles by analyzing weekly teaching reflections submitted by LAs during five iterations of our pedagogy course.