Bridging the gap between teaching and learning in geometrical optics: The role of research

Optics and Photonics News

Volumn 9, Issue 9, 1998, Pages 30-36

  Heron, Paula R L ^a   McDermott, Lillian C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0012188549     PISSN: 10476938     EISSN: None     Source Type: Trade Journal    
DOI: 10.1364/OPN.9.9.000030     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. This statement and its implications are discussed in general terms in L.C. McDermott, "Millikan lecture 1990: What we teach and what is learned - closing the gap," Am. J. Phys. 59, 301-315 (1991), and L.C. McDermott, "Guest comment: How we teach and how students learn - a mismatch?," Am. J. Phys. 61, 295-298 (1993).
2. This statement and its implications are discussed in general terms in L.C. McDermott, "Millikan lecture 1990: What we teach and what is learned - closing the gap," Am. J. Phys. 59, 301-315 (1991), and L.C. McDermott, "Guest comment: How we teach and how students learn - a mismatch?," Am. J. Phys. 61, 295-298 (1993).
3. This statement is supported by evidence presented in many papers that report on research by the Physics Education Group at the Univ. of Washington. See, e.g., L.C. McDermott and P.S. Shaffer, "Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part I: Investigation of student understanding," Am. J. Phys. 60, 994-1003 (1992), and erratum to Part I, ibid. 61, 81 (1993); P.S. Shaffer and L.C. McDermott, "Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part II: Design of instructional strategies," ibid. 60, 1003-1013 (1992); L.C. McDermott et al., "Research as a guide for teaching introductory mechanics: An illustration in the context of the Atwood's machine," ibid. 62, 46-55 (1994); and T.E. O'Brien Pride, S. Vokos, and L.C. McDermott, "The challenge of matching learning assessments to teaching goals: An example from the work-energy and impulse-momentum theorems," ibid. 68, 147-157 (1998).
4. This statement is supported by evidence presented in many papers that report on research by the Physics Education Group at the Univ. of Washington. See, e.g., L.C. McDermott and P.S. Shaffer, "Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part I: Investigation of student understanding," Am. J. Phys. 60, 994-1003 (1992), and erratum to Part I, ibid. 61, 81 (1993); P.S. Shaffer and L.C. McDermott, "Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part II: Design of instructional strategies," ibid. 60, 1003-1013 (1992); L.C. McDermott et al., "Research as a guide for teaching introductory mechanics: An illustration in the context of the Atwood's machine," ibid. 62, 46-55 (1994); and T.E. O'Brien Pride, S. Vokos, and L.C. McDermott, "The challenge of matching learning assessments to teaching goals: An example from the work-energy and impulse-momentum theorems," ibid. 68, 147-157 (1998).
5. This statement is supported by evidence presented in many papers that report on research by the Physics Education Group at the Univ. of Washington. See, e.g., L.C. McDermott and P.S. Shaffer, "Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part I: Investigation of student understanding," Am. J. Phys. 60, 994-1003 (1992), and erratum to Part I, ibid. 61, 81 (1993); P.S. Shaffer and L.C. McDermott, "Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part II: Design of instructional strategies," ibid. 60, 1003-1013 (1992); L.C. McDermott et al., "Research as a guide for teaching introductory mechanics: An illustration in the context of the Atwood's machine," ibid. 62, 46-55 (1994); and T.E. O'Brien Pride, S. Vokos, and L.C. McDermott, "The challenge of matching learning assessments to teaching goals: An example from the work-energy and impulse-momentum theorems," ibid. 68, 147-157 (1998).
6. This statement is supported by evidence presented in many papers that report on research by the Physics Education Group at the Univ. of Washington. See, e.g., L.C. McDermott and P.S. Shaffer, "Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part I: Investigation of student understanding," Am. J. Phys. 60, 994-1003 (1992), and erratum to Part I, ibid. 61, 81 (1993); P.S. Shaffer and L.C. McDermott, "Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part II: Design of instructional strategies," ibid. 60, 1003-1013 (1992); L.C. McDermott et al., "Research as a guide for teaching introductory mechanics: An illustration in the context of the Atwood's machine," ibid. 62, 46-55 (1994); and T.E. O'Brien Pride, S. Vokos, and L.C. McDermott, "The challenge of matching learning assessments to teaching goals: An example from the work-energy and impulse-momentum theorems," ibid. 68, 147-157 (1998).
7. This statement is also consistent with the conclusion reached by experienced physics instructors who have probed student understanding in less formal ways in the classroom. See, e.g., A.B. Arons, A Guide to Introductory Physics Teaching (John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, N.Y., 1990) and E. Mazur, "Qualitative vs. quantitative thinking: Are we teaching the right thing?," Opt. & Phot. News 3 (2), 38 (1992).
8. This statement is also consistent with the conclusion reached by experienced physics instructors who have probed student understanding in less formal ways in the classroom. See, e.g., A.B. Arons, A Guide to Introductory Physics Teaching (John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, N.Y., 1990) and E. Mazur, "Qualitative vs. quantitative thinking: Are we teaching the right thing?," Opt. & Phot. News 3 (2), 38 (1992).
9. The work described in this article has been presented at many talks and faculty development workshops from 1995-1998.
10. L.C. McDermott and the Physics Education Group at the Univ. of Washington, Physics by Inquiry, Vols. I and II (John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, N.Y., 1996).
11. L.C. McDermott, P.S. Shaffer, and the Physics Education Group at the Univ. of Washington, Tutorials in Introductory Physics, Preliminary Edition (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J., 1998).
12. E.F. Redish et al., "Student expectations in introductory physics," Am. J. Phys. 66, 212-224 (1998).
13. F.M. Goldberg and L.C. McDermott, "Student difficulties in understanding image formation by a plane mirror," Phys. Teach. 24, 472-480 (1986) and "An investigation of student understanding of the real image formed by a converging lens or concave mirror," Am. J. Phys. 55, 108-119 (1987).
14. F.M. Goldberg and L.C. McDermott, "Student difficulties in understanding image formation by a plane mirror," Phys. Teach. 24, 472-480 (1986) and "An investigation of student understanding of the real image formed by a converging lens or concave mirror," Am. J. Phys. 55, 108-119 (1987).
15. K. Wosilait, P.R.L. Heron, P.S. Shaffer, and L.C. McDermott, "Development and assessment of a research-based tutorial on light and shadow," Am. J. Phys. (1998), in press.
16. B.S. Ambrose, P.S. Shaffer, R.N. Steinberg, and L.C. McDermott, "An investigation of student understanding of single-slit diffraction and double-slit interference," Am. J. Phys., in press.
17. See the second article in Ref. 8.
18. See the last article in Ref. 2 and R.N. Steinberg, G.E. Oberem, and L.C. McDermott, "Development of a computer-based tutorial on the photoelectric effect," Am. J. Phys. 64, 1370-1379 (1996).
19. See the last three articles in Ref. 2 and Ref. 9 for greater detail.
20. In the discussion of the tutorial, the term image refers to the geometric image, which differs from the real image formed by a converging lens.
21. Alternatively, one can think of the triangular hole as a collection of closely spaced pinholes. Each pinhole produces a sharp, inverted image of the line source. The resultant image is a superposition of the individual pinhole images.
22. Other examples in which student performance on certain questions is essentially the same before or after standard instruction can be found in the second paper in Ref. 1 and the papers in Ref. 2, as well as in other reports of research by our group.
23. In the case of the O-shaped bulb, both the F-shaped hole and the inverted-L-shaped hole result in an image that is not precisely circular. However, we considered as correct or nearly correct all student diagrams showing a circular ring for the image due to the O-shaped bulb.
24. In addition to the second article in Ref. 2, see, e.g., B. Thacker et al., "Comparing problem solving performance of physics students in inquiry-based and traditional introductory physics courses," Am. J. Phys. 62, 627-633 (1994) and E. Mazur, Peer Instruction, A User's Manual (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J., 1997).
25. In addition to the second article in Ref. 2, see, e.g., B. Thacker et al., "Comparing problem solving performance of physics students in inquiry-based and traditional introductory physics courses," Am. J. Phys. 62, 627-633 (1994) and E. Mazur, Peer Instruction, A User's Manual (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J., 1997).