Effect of instructional environment on physics students' representational skills

Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research

Volumn 2, Issue 1, 2006, Pages

  Kohl, Patrick B ^a   Finkelstein, Noah D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34547854052     PISSN: 15549178     EISSN: 15549178     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.2.010102     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. P. B. Kohl and N. D. Finkelstein, Student representational competence and self-assessment when solving physics problems, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 1, 010104 (2005).
2. D. E. Meltzer, Relation between students' problem-solving performance and representational mode, Am. J. Phys. 73, 463 (2005).
3. R. J. Beichner, Testing student interpretation of kinematics graphs, Am. J. Phys. 62, 750 (1994).
4. F. M. Goldberg and J. H. Anderson, Student difficulties with graphical representations of negative values of velocity, Phys. Teach. 27, 254 (1989).
5. L. C. McDermott, M. L. Rosenquist, and E. H. Van Zee, Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: Examples from kinematics, Am. J. Phys. 55, 503 (1987).
6. A. Van Heuvelen and X. Zou, Multiple representations of work-energy processes, Am. J. Phys. 69, 184 (2001).
7. A. Van Heuvelen, Learning to think like a physicist: A review of research-based instructional strategies, Am. J. Phys. 59, 891 (1991).
8. R. J. Dufresne, W. J. Gerace, and W. J. Leonard, Solving physics problems with multiple representations, Phys. Teach. 35, 270 (1997).
9. A. A. diSessa and B. L. Sherin, Meta-representation: an introduction, J. Math. Behav. 19, 385 (2000).
10. A. A. diSessa, D. Hammer, B. L. Sherin, and T. Kolpakowski, Inventing graphing: Meta-representational expertise in children, J. Math. Behav. 10, 117 (1991).
11. A. A. diSessa, Students' criteria for representational adequacy, in Symbolizing, Modeling and Tool Use in Mathematics Education, edited by K. Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, B. van Oers, and L. Vershaffel (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2003).
12. F. Reif, Understanding and teaching important scientific thought processes, Am. J. Phys. 63, 17 (1995).
13. D. Giancoli, Physics, 5th ed. (Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1998).
14. E. Mazur, Peer Instruction: A User's Manual (Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1996).
15. http://www.h-itt.com/ (retrieved July 4, 2005).
16. K. R. Koedinger and M. J. Nathan, The real story behind story problems: Effects of representations on quantitative reasoning, J. Learn. Sci. 13, 129 (2004).
17. Note that the students in the reformed 202 section were largely those from the reformed 201 section. The students in the traditional 202 course had, for the most part, taken a traditional 201 course as well. Thus, when we compare the two 202 sections, we should be aware that any significant differences may be the cumulative result of two semesters of instruction, not one.
18. One potential weakness in our data stems from the fact that if student absolute performance is too low, relative performances will necessarily be very even regardless of student representational skill. However, only one of the four reform course quizzes [two in 202 presented here and two in 201 (Ref. 11)] shows very low absolute numbers, and these are not present if one considers the likely student misinterpretation described above. Thus, we are confident that the lack of choice/control splits in the reform courses is a genuine effect.
19. The LearningOnline network with capa, http://www.lon-capa.org (retrieved July 4, 2005).
20. We chose one-minute intervals as that seemed a reasonable order of magnitude for discrete portions of a discussion or explanation. Intervals on the order of several seconds result in all intervals containing single representations. Intervals of several minutes tend to include all or nearly all possible representations. As a check, we repeated the analysis with two-minute intervals. The figures for multiple representational use were modestly increased, the other categories increased less, and the relative class-to-class variations (which are of the most interest here) were essentially unchanged.
21. N. D. Finkelstein, Learning physics in context: A study of student learning about electricity and magnetism, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 27, 1187 (2005).