Custom CSS
double-click to edit, do not edit in source
LB01 (01:50 to 02:00 PM) | Contributed | Claims, Evidence and Reasoning in the Introductory Mechanics Lab
Presenting Author: Andrew Pawl, University of Wisconsin-Platteville
| ,
| ,
| ,
| ,
Introductory mechanics is classified as a general education laboratory science at many colleges and universities. General education outcomes often include the ability to reason from evidence or justify claims with evidence. These skills are also central components of the Next Generation Science Standards for K-12 education. In contrast to this mandate to focus on empirical reasoning, both the teaching and the assessing of the ability to reason from evidence are often implicit rather than explicit parts of the introductory mechanics laboratory curriculum. In this presentation I report the first results of an ongoing attempt to scaffold the learning of reasoning from evidence and to make the assessment of this skill explicit by employing the “Claim, Evidence and Reasoning”[1] framework in a college-level, algebra-based introductory mechanics laboratory.
[1] K.L. McNeill and J. Krajcik, 2011.
Custom CSS
double-click to edit, do not edit in source
LB02 (02:00 to 02:10 PM) | Contributed | Physics labs that resonate with pre-med students
Presenting Author: Alexandra Hopps, Brigham Young University
Additional Author | Madeline Shumway, Brigham Young University
Additional Author | Nathan D Powers, Brigham Young University
Additional Author | M. Jeannette Lawler, Brigham Young University
Additional Author | Adam Bennion, Brigham Young University
A primary learning outcome for our introductory physics labs for non-majors is scientific modeling. With over 80% of our students planning to enter the health profession, we have been seeking to create project-based labs with obvious applications to medical fields. We recently designed a lab where students model MRI principles, such as gradient magnetic fields and the relationship between magnetic field strength and magnetic resonance, using electromagnets. In this talk, I will discuss the lab prompts and present experimental data collected in the lab.
Co-author Nathan D Powers is the AAPT member sponsor for this presentation
Custom CSS
double-click to edit, do not edit in source
LB03 (02:10 to 02:20 PM) | Contributed | Innovative experiments with inexpensive lab kits for introductory Physics labs
Presenting Author: Kavindya Senanayake, Saginaw Valley State University
Additional Author | Ming-Tie Huang, Saginaw Valley State University
Additional Author | Benjamin Keen, Saginaw Valley State University
Additional Author | Christopher Nakamura, Saginaw Valley State University
Additional Author | Marian P Shih, Saginaw Valley State University
Covid-19 made physics teachers think creatively about presenting hands-on introductory lab courses. In spring of 2020, the SVSU physics department began developing a lab curriculum with the flexibility to execute mechanics and E&M experiments in remote, in-person, or hybrid modalities. A returnable equipment kit may be picked up by or mailed to the student at the start of the term. The kit consists of a combination of inexpensive, commonly available materials and custom 3-D printed components. Data collection is facilitated by the mobile app Phyphox. The experiments were designed to be simple but produce good results. This project gave us the opportunity to look at our curriculum and pedagogy goals in a new way. An internal grant is funding efforts to integrate the inexpensive kit-based experiments with more traditional lab experiences. Our current work and future goals will be presented.
Additional Author: Matthew D. Vannette, Saginaw Valley State University
Custom CSS
double-click to edit, do not edit in source
LB04 (02:20 to 02:30 PM) | Contributed | Flux Concept Discovery Lab
Presenting Author: Gabriel Spalding, Illinois Wesleyan University
Additional Author | Jacqueline R. Rupprecht, Illinois Wesleyan University
Additional Author | Matthew A. Fritsch, Illinois Wesleyan University
Additional Author | Ethan C. Ruth, Illinois Wesleyan University
Additional Author | Matthew Kubas, Illinois Wesleyan University
We will share our “Flux Concept Discovery Lab,” an instructional lab for our first-year students to do in "Physics I," which was developed by our students in "Intermediate Experimental Methods," a course taught at the second-year level. We will describe progress our students have made, using $5 plate magnets and a turntable (which, for remote students, can be made from paper plates), as well as ways this activity can be extended or connected to other intro-lab exercises.
Custom CSS
double-click to edit, do not edit in source
LB05 (02:30 to 02:40 PM) | Contributed | How did they time that? An Investigation of Fall Time
Presenting Author: Eugene Torigoe, Thiel College
| ,
| ,
| ,
| ,
During an introductory physics lab on drop times, I asked my students to time intervals less than the average human reaction time. To my surprise almost all the students were able to accurately time these short falls. It led to the possibility that students were not merely reacting to the falling object but were predicting when the ball would hit the ground. I used this surprising observation as an opportunity to explore competing explanatory models. Students came up with fun and interesting experiments to distinguish these two models. In this talk I will discuss the experiments, and what my students found.
Custom CSS
double-click to edit, do not edit in source
LB06 (2:40 to 02:50 PM) | Contributed | What Went Wrong in Mass-Spring Conservation of Energy?
Presenting Author: Guofen (Heather) Yu, The University of Findlay
| Steven Wild, The University of Findlay
| ,
| ,
| ,
We have a General Physics I lab activity for students to investigate conservation of energy in a mass-spring system. A mass is hanging on a spring and oscillates up and down. The speed and height are recorded using a Pasco 850 universal interface and a motion sensor. The kinetic energy, potential energy, and total energy are calculated and graphed. Initially, the mass of spring was not taken into account. The variation of the system's energy with time could be as high as 40% of the maximum energy. After including the mass of the spring and testing for lighter and heavier springs, there was still 5-20% oscillation of a system’s total energy. Our measurements and findings are to be reported.