Assessing student expertise in introductory physics with isomorphic problems. I. Performance on nonintuitive problem pair from introductory physics
Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 4, 010104 (2008)
Chandralekha Singh
Investigations related to expertise in problem solving and ability to transfer learning from one context to another are important for developing strategies to help students perform more expertlike tasks. Here we analyze written responses to a pair of nonintuitive isomorphic problems given to introductory physics students and discussions with a subset of students about them. Students were asked to explain their reasoning for their written responses. We call the paired problems isomorphic because they require the same physics principle to solve them. However, the initial conditions are different, and the frictional force is responsible for increasing the linear speed of an object in one of the problems while it is responsible for decreasing the linear speed in the other problem. We categorize student responses and evaluate student performance within the context of their evolving expertise. We compare and contrast the patterns of student categorization for the two isomorphic problems. We discuss why certain incorrect responses were better than others and shed light on the evolution of students’ expertise. We compare the performance of students who worked on both isomorphic problems with those who worked only on one of the problems to understand whether students recognized their underlying similarity and whether isomorphic pairs gave students additional insight into solving each problem.
©2008 The American Physical Society
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.4.010104
PACS: 01.40.Fk, 01.40.Ha, 01.50.Kw
Showing posts with label Singh. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Singh. Show all posts
2008-04-02
Singh - PRST-PER 2008
Assessing student expertise in introductory physics with isomorphic problems. II. Effect of some potential factors on problem solving and transfer
Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 4, 010105 (2008)
Chandralekha Singh
In this paper, we explore the use of isomorphic problem pairs (IPPs) to assess introductory physics students’ ability to solve and successfully transfer problem-solving knowledge from one context to another in mechanics. We call the paired problems “isomorphic” because they require the same physics principle to solve them. We analyze written responses and individual discussions for a range of isomorphic problems. We examine potential factors that may help or hinder transfer of problem-solving skills from one problem in a pair to the other. For some paired isomorphic problems, one context often turned out to be easier for students in that it was more often correctly solved than the other. When quantitative and conceptual questions were paired and given back to back, students who answered both questions in the IPP often performed better on the conceptual questions than those who answered the corresponding conceptual questions only. Although students often took advantage of the quantitative counterpart to answer a conceptual question of an IPP correctly, when only given the conceptual question, students seldom tried to convert it into a quantitative question, solve it, and then reason about the solution conceptually. Even in individual interviews when students who were given only conceptual questions had difficulty and the interviewer explicitly encouraged them to convert the conceptual question into the corresponding quantitative problem by choosing appropriate variables, a majority of students were reluctant and preferred to guess the answer to the conceptual question based upon their gut feeling. Misconceptions associated with friction in some problems were so robust that pairing them with isomorphic problems not involving friction did not help students discern their underlying similarities. Alternatively, from the knowledge-in-pieces perspective, the activation of the knowledge resource related to friction was so strongly and automatically triggered by the context, which is outside the conscious control of the student, that students did not look for analogies with paired problems or other aids that may be present.
©2008 The American Physical Society
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.4.010105
PACS: 01.40.Di, 01.50.−i
Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 4, 010105 (2008)
Chandralekha Singh
In this paper, we explore the use of isomorphic problem pairs (IPPs) to assess introductory physics students’ ability to solve and successfully transfer problem-solving knowledge from one context to another in mechanics. We call the paired problems “isomorphic” because they require the same physics principle to solve them. We analyze written responses and individual discussions for a range of isomorphic problems. We examine potential factors that may help or hinder transfer of problem-solving skills from one problem in a pair to the other. For some paired isomorphic problems, one context often turned out to be easier for students in that it was more often correctly solved than the other. When quantitative and conceptual questions were paired and given back to back, students who answered both questions in the IPP often performed better on the conceptual questions than those who answered the corresponding conceptual questions only. Although students often took advantage of the quantitative counterpart to answer a conceptual question of an IPP correctly, when only given the conceptual question, students seldom tried to convert it into a quantitative question, solve it, and then reason about the solution conceptually. Even in individual interviews when students who were given only conceptual questions had difficulty and the interviewer explicitly encouraged them to convert the conceptual question into the corresponding quantitative problem by choosing appropriate variables, a majority of students were reluctant and preferred to guess the answer to the conceptual question based upon their gut feeling. Misconceptions associated with friction in some problems were so robust that pairing them with isomorphic problems not involving friction did not help students discern their underlying similarities. Alternatively, from the knowledge-in-pieces perspective, the activation of the knowledge resource related to friction was so strongly and automatically triggered by the context, which is outside the conscious control of the student, that students did not look for analogies with paired problems or other aids that may be present.
©2008 The American Physical Society
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.4.010105
PACS: 01.40.Di, 01.50.−i
2008-03-18
Singh - AJP 2008
Interactive learning tutorials on quantum mechanics
American Journal of Physics, Volume 76, Number 4 (April 2008), pp. 400-405
Chandralekha Singh
We discuss the development and evaluation of quantum interactive learning tutorials (QuILTs), which are suitable for undergraduate courses in quantum mechanics. QuILTs are based on the investigation of student difficulties in learning quantum physics. They exploit computer-based visualization tools and help students build links between the formal and conceptual aspects of quantum physics without compromising the technical content. They can be used both as supplements to lectures or as self-study tools.
American Journal of Physics, Volume 76, Number 4 (April 2008), pp. 400-405
Chandralekha Singh
We discuss the development and evaluation of quantum interactive learning tutorials (QuILTs), which are suitable for undergraduate courses in quantum mechanics. QuILTs are based on the investigation of student difficulties in learning quantum physics. They exploit computer-based visualization tools and help students build links between the formal and conceptual aspects of quantum physics without compromising the technical content. They can be used both as supplements to lectures or as self-study tools.
2008-02-12
Singh - AJP 2008
Student understanding of quantum mechanics at the beginning of graduate instruction
American Journal of Physics -- March 2008 -- Volume 76, Issue 3, pp. 277-287
Chandralekha Singh
A survey was developed to probe student understanding of quantum mechanics at the beginning of graduate instruction. The survey was administered to 202 physics graduate students enrolled in first-year quantum mechanics courses from seven universities at the beginning of the first semester. We also conducted one-on-one interviews with fifteen graduate or advanced undergraduate students who had just completed a course in which all the content on the survey was covered. Although students from some universities performed better on average than others, we found that students share universal difficulties understanding the concepts of quantum mechanics. The difficulties were often due to overgeneralizations of concepts learned in one context to other contexts where they are not directly applicable. Difficulties in distinguishing between closely related concepts and making sense of the formalism of quantum mechanics were common. The results of this study can sensitize instructors of first-year graduate quantum physics to some of the difficulties students are likely to face.
doi:10.1119/1.2825387
American Journal of Physics -- March 2008 -- Volume 76, Issue 3, pp. 277-287
Chandralekha Singh
A survey was developed to probe student understanding of quantum mechanics at the beginning of graduate instruction. The survey was administered to 202 physics graduate students enrolled in first-year quantum mechanics courses from seven universities at the beginning of the first semester. We also conducted one-on-one interviews with fifteen graduate or advanced undergraduate students who had just completed a course in which all the content on the survey was covered. Although students from some universities performed better on average than others, we found that students share universal difficulties understanding the concepts of quantum mechanics. The difficulties were often due to overgeneralizations of concepts learned in one context to other contexts where they are not directly applicable. Difficulties in distinguishing between closely related concepts and making sense of the formalism of quantum mechanics were common. The results of this study can sensitize instructors of first-year graduate quantum physics to some of the difficulties students are likely to face.
doi:10.1119/1.2825387
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)