Physics faculty, experts in evidence-based research, often rely on anecdotal experience to guide their teaching practices. Adoption of research-based instructional strategies is surprisingly low, despite the large body of physics education research (PER) and strong dissemination effort of PER researchers and innovators. Evidence-based PER has validated specific non-traditional teaching practices, but many faculty raise valuable concerns toward their applicability. We address these concerns and identify future studies required to overcome the gap between research and practice.

This study empirically examines the relationship between students’ critical-thinking skills and scientific reasoning as reflected in undergraduate thesis writing in biology. Writing offers a unique window into studying this relationship, and the findings raise potential implications for instruction.

The Department of Chemistry at Duke University has endeavored to expand participation in undergraduate honors thesis research while maintaining the quality of the learning experience. Accomplishing this goal has been constrained by limited departmental resources (including faculty time) and increased diversity in students’ preparation to engage in the research and writing processes. Here we assessed the relationship between iterative changes in pedagogical and mentoring support of honors research that efficiently employed departmental resources (including the chemistry thesis assessment protocol, ChemTAP) and students’ scientific reasoning and writing skills reflected in their undergraduate theses. We found that, although we cannot disentangle some gradual changes over time from specific interventions, students exhibited the strongest performance when they participated in a course with structured scaffolding and used assessment tools explicitly designed to enhance the scientific reasoning in writing. Furthermore, less prepared students exhibited more positive changes.

Although confusion is generally perceived to be negative, educators dating as far back as Socrates, who asked students to question assumptions and wrestle with ideas, have challenged this notion. Can confusion be productive? How should instructors interpret student expressions of confusion? During two semesters of introductory physics that involved Just-in-Time Teaching (JiTT) and research-based reading materials, we evaluated performance on reading assignments while simultaneously measuring students' self-assessment of their confusion over the preclass reading material (N ¼ 137; N fall ¼ 106, N spring ¼ 88). We examined the relationship between confusion and correctness, confidence in reasoning, and (in the spring) precourse self-efficacy. We find that student expressions of confusion before coming to class are negatively related to correctness on preclass content-related questions, confidence in reasoning on those questions, and selfefficacy, but weakly positively related to final grade when controlling for these factors (β ¼ 0.23, p ¼ 0.03).

No abstract