Times are displayed in (UTC-04:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada) Change
(IF) PER: Diverse Investigations II
7/13/2022 | 9:10 AM to 10:10 AM
Room: CC: Grand Gallery E
Moderator: / Co-Organizer:
Session Code: IF | Submitting Committee: Committee on Research in Physics Education / Co-Sponsoring Committee:
IF01 (9:10 to 9:20 AM) | Contributed | Qualitative Social Network Analysis and Applications in Physics Education Research
Presenting Author: Camila Amaral, University of Utah
Additional Author | Madison Swirtz, University of Utah
Additional Author | Justin A Gutzwa, University of Utah
Additional Author | Ramón Barthelemy, University of Utah
| ,
Social Network Analysis (SNA) has been used to study the interactions and connections between physics students in the classroom. Although there are different approaches to SNA, most research in PER collects complete networks of classrooms and utilizes quantitative methods, analyzing students’ position in the network and focusing on numerical metrics. In this presentation other approaches to SNA will be discussed, including Egocentric SNA and other qualitative approaches. That talk will end with examples from recent PER literature focused on possible uses of SNA.
IF02 (9:20 to 9:30 AM) | Contributed | Trajectories of Transfer Students Toward a Bachelor's Granting University
Presenting Author: Frank Dachille, San Jose State University
Additional Author | Gina Quan, San Jose State University
| ,
| ,
| ,
In this presentation, we will discuss the trajectories of undergraduate physics transfer students into a bachelor’s granting university.
Students in the study attend a large, public bachelor’s granting university in which a significant fraction of undergraduate physics majors are transfer students.
In one-on-one interviews, students discussed their academic and personal experiences before, during, and after their transition from community college(s) to a bachelor’s granting university. During the interviews, we adapted the life grid methodology to track student’s career and skill development over time.
In this talk, we will discuss how their career and skill development evolves through their higher education path. We then consider how these paths complicate common narratives about the time students spend in a community college and bachelor’s granting university.
Students in the study attend a large, public bachelor’s granting university in which a significant fraction of undergraduate physics majors are transfer students.
In one-on-one interviews, students discussed their academic and personal experiences before, during, and after their transition from community college(s) to a bachelor’s granting university. During the interviews, we adapted the life grid methodology to track student’s career and skill development over time.
In this talk, we will discuss how their career and skill development evolves through their higher education path. We then consider how these paths complicate common narratives about the time students spend in a community college and bachelor’s granting university.
IF03 (9:30 to 9:40 AM) | Contributed | Using a Mixed Methods Approach to Study Complex Motivational Constructs
Presenting Author: Rachel Henderson, Michigan State University
Additional Author | Carissa Myers, Michigan State University
Additional Author | Vashti Sawtelle, Michigan State University
| ,
| ,
Traditionally, measurement of quantitative changes in students’ motivational characteristics over an academic semester have been measured using pre- and post-test surveys. However, with the complexity of such constructs, a pre-post design may limit deeply understanding the impacts that curricular and co-curricular activities have on students. In this research, we have designed and implemented a mixed methods approach to investigate one such complex construct, students’ self-efficacy -- or the confidence in one’s own ability to perform a task. We employ the Experience Sampling Method (ESM) with in-the-moment survey measurements to quantify a shift in their self-efficacy followed by a qualitative daily reflection to further investigate the threats and/or supports that may have influenced that change. In this talk, I will present our research design and discuss our efforts toward validating our methodology. Generally, we are hopeful that this research design has possible versatility within STEM education research more broadly.
IF04 (9:40 to 9:50 AM) | Contributed | Changing Notation That Represents Force Changes How Students Say It
Presenting Author: brant hinrichs, drury university
Additional Author | dayna swanson, drury university
| ,
| ,
| ,
Force symbols in University Modeling Instruction explicitly represent forces as detailed descriptions of interactions to facilitate (i) coordinating force with the system schema and (ii) learning force. For example, represents the gravitational force by Earth on ball, where “g” represents gravitational (i.e. the type of interaction), “E” represents Earth, represents “by” and “on”, and “B” represents ball. Although students are taught to say as “gravitational force”, audio data from student-led whole-class discussions shows that more than 40% percent of the time was referred to as “force gravity” instead. Analogous results were obtained for contact force symbols as well. Because language plays such a crucial role in learning physics, several years ago, as an experiment, the notation was changed from to to make it more closely match how it is to be read. Student use of “force gravity” and “force contact” dropped to less than 5% with this notation switch. Energy.
IF05 (9:50 to 10:00 AM) | Contributed | Effectiveness of introductory physics laboratory courses in supporting learning goals
Presenting Author: Rachel White, Old Dominion University
Additional Author | Dr. Alexander Godunov, Old Dominion University, Department of Physics
Additional Author | Dr. Charles Sukenik , Old Dominion University, Department of Physics
| ,
| ,
This mixed methods research case study addresses the design of introductory physics lab courses at a university from the perspective of the physics teaching faculty and students. The data from this research is being used for the development of a theoretical framework to strengthen the global need for integrated STEM education. The AAPT Physics Education recommendations for the Undergraduate Physics Laboratory Curriculum (2014) identified six focus areas: constructing knowledge, modeling, designing experiments, developing technical and practical laboratory skills, analyzing, and visualizing data, and communicating physics. Participants responded to a four-point Likert scale on each of the AAPT six focus areas with open-ended questions to further articulate their experiences with physics lab courses. Students were administered a pre-and post-survey as well as five Likert scale questions on their STEM self-efficacy. The results, as well as the development of the integrated STEM theoretical framework, will be discussed.
IF06 (10:00 to 10:10 AM) | Contributed | Modeling Pathways to Access in Physics Learning and Research Environments
Presenting Author: Jacquelyn Chini, University of Central Florida
Additional Author | Erin Scanlon, University of Connecticut- Avery Point
| ,
| ,
| ,
We draw on data from interviews with physics instructors and research mentors, interviews with physics students, and surveys of the physics community to model how physics gatekeepers respond to the access and inclusion needs of disabled undergraduate and graduate students. While we continue to develop this model, we will discuss a priori and emergent model features. We compare the differential pathways to access through two common mechanisms: institutional accommodations and inclusive practices. Then, we discuss an emergent mechanism from our data: gatekeepers provide access to “students who need it”. We argue that gatekeepers who provide access to “students who need it” likely have good intentions, such as demonstrating care and treating disability as a facet of diversity. However, we describe several challenges with this mechanism, such as the role of power in which students share their access needs and which students are evaluated by gatekeepers as “needing” alternative access.
(IF) PER: Diverse Investigations II
Description