Thinking like a physicist: A multi-semester case study of junior-level electricity and magnetism

American Journal of Physics

Volumn 80, Issue 10, 2012, Pages 923-930

  Chasteen, Stephanie V ^a   Pollock, Steven J ^b   Pepper, Rachel E ^a   Perkins, Katherine K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^b 109 McLaughlin Hall   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84866499551     PISSN: 00029505     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1119/1.4732528     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Bransford J. Brown A. Cocking R. How People Learn 2000(Eds). (National Academy Press, Washington, DC).
2. Redish E.F. Teaching Physics With the Physics Suite 2003, (John Wiley & Sons, New York).
3. McDermott L.C. Redish E.F. Chabay R. Sherwood B. Restructuring the introductory electricity and magnetism course. Am. J. Phys. 2006, 74:329-336. 10.1119/1.19122, 10.1119/1.2165249, For example
4. Singh C. Student understanding of symmetry and gauss's law of electricity. Am. J. Phys. 2006, 74:923-936. 10.1119/1.2238883
5. Manogue C.A. Brown K. Dray T. Edwards B. Why is Ampère's law so hard? A look at middle-division physics. Am. J. Phys. 2006, 74:344-350. 10.1119/1.2181179
6. Pepper R.E. Chasteen S.V. Pollock S.J. Perkins K.K. Pepper R.E. Chasteen S.V. Pollock S.J. Perkins K.K. Wallace C. Chasteen S.V. Chasteen S.V. Pollock S.J. A research-based approach to assessing student learning issues in upper-division electricity & magnetism. AIP Conf. Proc. 2009, 1179:7-10. 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.6.020115, 10.1063/1.3266759 (in press);
7. Manogue C.A. Siemens P.J. Tate J. Brown K. Wolfer A.J. Patton B.R. Chasteen S.V. Pollock S.J. Transforming upper-division electricity and magnetism. AIP Conf. Proc. 2008, 1064:91-94. 10.1119/1.1374248, 10.1063/1.3021282, August
8. Ambrose B.S. Investigating student understanding in intermediate mechanics: identifying the need for a tutorial approach to instruction. Am. J. Phys. 2004, 72(4):453-459. 10.1119/1.1648684, See, for example, first six references within.
9. Pollock S.J. Longitudinal study of student conceptual understanding in electricity and magnetism. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 2009, 5:020110-1-17. 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.020110
10. Redish E.F. Problem solving and the use of math in physics courses. World View on Physics Education in 2005 2005, 1-10. Part of the Focusing on Change series, Delhi, August 21-22
11. Chasteen S.V. Pepper R.E. Pollock S.J. Perkins K.K. But does it last? Sustaining a research-based curriculum in upper-division electricity & magnetism. AIP Conf. Proc. 2012, 1413:139-142. 10.1063/1.3680014
12. Chasteen S.V. Pepper R.E. Pollock S.J. Perkins K.K. Transforming the Junior-Level: Outcomes from instruction and research in E&M. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 2012, 8:020107. 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.020107
13. Griffiths D.J. Introduction to Electrodynamics 1999, 3rd ed. (Prentice Hall, New Jersey).
14. Pepper R.E. Chasteen S.V. Pollock S.J. Perkins K.K. Facilitating faculty conversations: development of consensus learning goals. AIP Conf. Proc. 2012, 1413:291-294. 10.1063/1.3680052
15. See EPAPS Document No. E-AJPIAS-80-003209 for supplementary material.
16. Chasteen S.V. Perkins K.K. Beale P. Pollock S.J. Wieman C.E. A thoughtful approach to instruction: course transformations for the rest of us. J. College Sci. Teach 2011, 70-76. and March/April.
17. These course transformation efforts were facilitated by the grant-funded employment of one of the authors (SVC)-a postdoctoral Science Teaching Fellow (STF) supported by internal and external grant funding through the Science Education Initiative.
18. The Science Education Initiative is a 5-year $5 million project to improve student learning by approaching the teaching of science as a science through systematic course transformation in multiple departments at CU-Boulder.
19. The full set of course materials, including learning goals, clicker questionsassessments, are available at and on Compadre at.
20. Mazur E. Peer Instruction, A User's Manual 1997, (Prentice Hall, New Jersey).
21. Ding L. Chabay R. Sherwood B. Evaluating an electricity and magnetism assessment tool: brief electricity and magnetism assessment. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 2006, 2:1-7. 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.2.010105
22. Chasteen S.V. Pepper R.E. Caballero M.D. Pollock S.J. Perkins K.K. Chasteen S.V. Pollock S.J. Tapping into Juniors' Understanding of E&M: the Colorado Upper-Division Electrostatics (CUE) diagnostic. AIP Conf. Proc. 2009, 1179:109-112. 10.1063/1.3266689 (in press);
23. Perkins K.K. Turpen C. Student perspectives on the use of clickers in upper-division physics courses. AIP Conf. Proc. 2009, 1179:225-228. 10.1063/1.3266721
24. Chasteen S.V. Teasing out the effect of tutorials via multiple regression. AIP Conf. Proc. 2012, 1413:143-146. 10.1063/1.3680015
25. Attendance at homework help sessions only recorded in two courses: PER-C and PER-A.
26. Goldhaber S. Pollock S. Dubson M. Beale P. Perkins K. Transforming upper-division quantum mechanics: learning goals and assessment. AIP Conf. Proc. 2009, 1179:145-148. 10.1063/1.3266699
27. Turpen C. Finkelstein N. Not all interactive engagement is the same: variations in physics professors' implementation of Peer Instruction. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 2009, 5:020101-1-18. 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.020101
28. Hake R.R. Interactive engagement vs. traditional methods: a six-thousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. Am. J. Phys. 1998, 66:64-74. 10.1119/1.18809
29. Breslow L. Wrestling with Pedagogical change: The TEAL Initiative at MIT. Change 2010, 23-29. 10.1080/00091383.2010.503173, For example, September.
30. Pollock S.J. Finkelstein N.D. Sustaining educational reforms in introductory physics. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 2008, 4:010110-1-8. 10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.4.010110
31. Manogue C.A. Siemens P.J. Tate J. Brown K. Wolfer A.J. Paradigms in physics: new upper-division curriculum. Am. J. Phys. 2001, 69:978-990. 10.1119/1.1374248 Materials available online at.