1. Why should we change how we teach physics? Derek Muller & Manju Sharma Sydney University Physics Education Research (SUPER)

2. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Conceptual Inventories Tests to evaluate conceptual physics understandings –Force Concept Inventory –Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation –Mechanics Baseline Developed based on interviews/surveys Used before and after courses to assess effectiveness

3. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Force Concept Inventory Do the questions ask about important conceptual topics? Is the wording appropriate? Is the test easier/more difficult than a standard mechanics test or the HSC? Do you think a student could understand Newton’s laws well and score poorly? Do you think a student without a good conceptual understanding could score well?

4. June 16, 2006Derek Muller How would your students do? How would year 11’s fair on this test before instruction? After instruction? How would year 12’s go? First year Uni? Fundamentals, Regular, Advanced? 20%40%60%80% 100%

5. June 16, 2006Derek Muller The facts Before instruction, students average 20-30% After traditional lecturing or instruction, most students gain 10-20% with a max of 30%

6. June 16, 2006Derek Muller

7. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Sydney University 2006

8. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Confidence?

9. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Questions Why do students do so poorly? Why do they think that they’re going well?

10. June 16, 2006Derek Muller diSessa (1996) Early Interviews

11. June 16, 2006Derek Muller diSessa (1996) cont.

12. June 16, 2006Derek Muller diSessa (1996) Final interviews

13. June 16, 2006Derek Muller

14. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Misconceptions Long history in physics education research (many documented) Strategies devised for changing misconceptions –Tutorials –Studio physics –Peer Instruction –Interactive Lecture Demonstrations –Interactive Engagement Lectures

15. June 16, 2006Derek Muller What makes these methods more effective? Students paying more attention? Actual tangible contexts? Discussion with other students? Behavioral activity? Misconceptions raised? Slower pace? Less math? Teaching to the test?

16. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Research Questions Do students learn more by watching other students discuss misconceptions? (no activity required) Do students learn more by just hearing common misconceptions raised and refuted? Are students confused when misconceptions are raised in instruction? Will addressing misconceptions increase the effectiveness of a multimedia segment? Does student prior knowledge matter?

17. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Experiment Design Four treatments created to explain Newton’s First and Second Laws Administered through a website (QuickTime videos) with pre-post testing All first year students (~800) asked to participate for one assignment mark (fundamental, regular, advanced)

18. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Four Treatments TreatmentExpositionExtended Exposition RefutationDialogue Number of speakers 1112 Length7:0211:229:3311:22 Addresses Misconceptions No Yes

19. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Results Create measure of gain (Gain = Post-test – Pre-test)

20. June 16, 2006Derek Muller To see the video treatments The videos are available in QuickTime and Windows Media video formats through the following web links –ExpositionExposition –Extended ExpositionExtended Exposition –RefutationRefutation –DialogueDialogue Keep in mind these are research tools produced in a very short time frame

21. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Data analysis Simple measure of improvement for each student Gain = Posttest – Pretest All values are actual numbers of questions correct out of 26

22. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Gain for Fundamental Students

23. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Gain for Regular Students

24. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Gain for Advanced students

25. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Do the treatments have different effects?

26. June 16, 2006Derek Muller ANOVA Effect size (difference in mean)/(Standard Deviation) =.83,.79 for the Dialogue and Refutation respectively The K-S statistics indicate that the distributions are not significantly different from normal so the ANOVA comparison of variance is a reliable analysis tool in this case

27. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Does Gain Depend on Prior Knowledge?

28. June 16, 2006Derek Muller What about Confidence Gain?

29. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Future Investigation Is there a difference between Dialogue and Refutation methods? Interviews to gauge student perceptions of videos Applications of ‘vicarious learning’ in classrooms Comparison with other online methods, collaborative learning

30. June 16, 2006Derek Muller If you want to try the FCI Use a different name (Mechanics Concepts etc.) Make sure copies don’t get passed out among students Find data and research papers on its use with thousands of students Normalized gain Gain/(Max Gain) is usually ~.23 for typical courses and.48 for ‘reform method’ teaching practices

31. June 16, 2006Derek Muller Should we change how we teach physics? Many researchers believe physics lectures/classes need to be significantly altered Teaching physics at a slower pace with more hands-on activities and more discussion Implemented in schools and universities internationally (Curtain University in Australia) But is it sustainable? At the very least, students seem to need explicit exposure to misconceptions