Synthesis of discipline-based education research in physics

Abstract

This paper presents a comprehensive synthesis of physics education research at the undergraduate level. It is based on work originally commissioned by the National Academies. Six topical areas are covered: (1) conceptual understanding, (2) problem solving, (3) curriculum and instruction, (4) assessment, (5) cognitive psychology, and (6) attitudes and beliefs about teaching and learning. Each topical section includes sample research questions, theoretical frameworks, common research methodologies, a summary of key findings, strengths and limitations of the research, and areas for future study. Supplemental material proposes promising future directions in physics education research.

Value added or misattributed? A multi-institution study on the educational benefit of labs for reinforcing physics content

“…We also note that "studio" physics courses (where labs, lectures, and recitation are commingled in the same space and instructors move fluidly between the three forms of instruction) have demonstrated significant conceptual learning gains compared to traditional instruction [7,22,23,44]. It is impossible to separate the contributions of the labs in this integrated context, but they may provide greater benefits when used in this way.…”

“…In addition to other potential goals, labs are assumed to enhance the learning of course content beyond what is provided by the lectures, recitation sections, and homework [3][4][5]. There has been very little evaluation, however, of their actual educational value [3,4,6,7]. With the evergreater concerns about college affordability, it is incumbent on university educators to measure what value labs are providing, given their high costs in terms of equipment, space, and instructional staff.…”

Transforming a fourth year modern optics course using a deliberate practice framework

“…While there are many reports of improved results on conceptual inventories and targeted conceptual tests, the results on standard quantitative problems are often unchanged [2]. This raises serious questions as to the efficacy of such teaching methods in upper-division courses, particularly the most advanced ones.…”

“…These strategies involve a variety of different types of activities including: "…assigning open-ended tasks (e.g., problems) that are authentic and challenging…, "…opportunities to work collaboratively with their peers…," "…providing appropriate scaffolding for activities…," and "…exploration, concept introduction, and concept application (Karplus learning cycles)…" [2]. There are "concept tests" during lecture and "peer instruction" [11].…”

“…A review across the sciences was commissioned by the National Research Council [1] and, in a specific paper within this report, Docktor and Mestre specifically synthesized the results of physics education research (PER) to date [2]. As these results are so extensive, it is often assumed that these teaching strategies have been shown to work equivalently in upper-division physics courses.…”