program_wb_i - page 82

Monday afternoon
PST1C08: 9:15-10 p.m. Student Srategies Solving Graphically
Based Physics Problems Invoking the Fundamental
Theorem of Calculus
Poster – Rabindra R. Bajracharya. University of Maine. Orono, ME 04469;
John R. Thompson, University of Maine
We have been investigating student understanding and application of the
Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (FTC) in different physics contexts
involving definite integrals. We conducted 14 semi-structured indi-
vidual interviews with introductory physics students. Our analysis, using
grounded theory, elicited various strategies to solve graphically based FTC
problems. While many students struggled initially, at some point during
the interviews students displayed the relevant and requisite mathematical
knowledge, suggesting that they failed to access and/or apply the knowl-
edge in the given physics contexts. Similar to prior studies on students
dealing with mathematically based physics problems, we found the analysis
perspectives of epistemological framing and epistemic games productive
in interpreting some of the choices of strategies, the strategies themselves,
and some individual steps observed. The framing perspective helps explain
students’ strategy-switching based on representations available or context
familiarity. We discuss our findings and relate our results to those in the
PST1C09: 8:30-9:15 p.m. Eye-Gazing Behavior of Students
Solving Graphically Based Physics Problems
Poster – Rabindra R. Bajracharya, University of Maine, Orono, ME 04469;
Jennifer L. Docktor, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse
John R. Thompson, University of Maine
We report on one aspect of our multi-mode study—using written surveys,
interviews, and eye tracking—of student problem-solving of graphically
based Fundamental Theorem of Calculus problems in mathematics and
physics contexts. A free-head eye-tracking instrument recorded visual
attention in the form of direction and duration of eye gaze in real time. We
focused particularly on the proportion of time spent on various stimulus
domains—lexicons, equations & symbols, graphs, and distractors. We also
separately analyzed the proportion of time spent by participants on various
features of the graphs. Our initial analysis of the direction and duration of
participants’ eye gaze indicate more time spent on equations and symbols
than on other domains. We also found that participants who gave incorrect
responses spent more time attending to irrelevant graphical features. We
will present a summary of these findings and compare eye-tracking results
to responses from interviews and written surveys.
PST1C10: 9:15-10 p.m. From Instructional Goals to Grading
Practices: The Case of Graduate TAs
Poster – Emily M. Marshman, University of Pittsburgh, 3941 O’Hara St.,
Pittsburgh, PA 15260;
Alex Maries, Chandralekha Singh, University of Pittsburgh
Edit Yerushalmi, Weizmann Institute
Charles Henderson, Western Michigan University
Teaching assistants (TAs) are often responsible for grading student solu-
tions. Grading communicates instructors’ expectations, thus TAs have a
crucial role in forming students’ approaches to problem solving in physics.
We investigated the grading practices and considerations of 43 first-year
graduate students participating in a TA training course. The study utilized
four student solutions, selected to reflect expert and novice approaches
to problem solving and to elicit conflicting considerations in assigning
grades. TAs were asked to list solution features and to explain how and why
they weighed the different features to obtain a final score. We will describe
how discussions of grading practices in the course, as well as one semester
of teaching experience, impacted how the TAs grade student solutions.
We will relate our results to the findings of a larger study to understand
instructors’ considerations regarding the learning and teaching of problem
solving in an introductory physics course.
that the optimal level of support for a given student population can only be
determined by research of the type discussed here. In particular, we found
that more scaffolding may hinder students’ performance and students may
not even discern the relevance of the added support. We provide possible
interpretations of these findings which were developed after in-depth
interviews with some students.
PST1C05: 8:30-9:15 p.m. Influence of Visual Cueing on Eye
Movements Using Think-Aloud Protocol
Poster – Elise Agra, Kansas State University, Department of Physics, Man-
hattan, KS 66506;
Xian Wu, John Hutson, Lester C. Loschky, N. Sanjay Rebello, Kansas State
Research has shown that using visual cues to direct students’ attention to
relevant areas of a diagram can facilitate problem solving. In this study, we
investigate the effect of visual cues on students’ visual attention while they
solve conceptual physics problems with diagrams. The diagrams contained
features relevant to correctly solving the problem, as well as features at-
tributed to common incorrect answers. Students enrolled in an introduc-
tory mechanics course were individually interviewed using a think-aloud
protocol. Participants worked through four problem sets while their eye
movements were recorded and they thought aloud about the problem
solution. Each set contained an initial problem, six isomorphic training
problems, and two transfer problems. Students in the cued condition saw
visual cues overlaid on the training problems. We discuss the influence of
both visual cueing and feedback on students’ eye movements and think
aloud data. This material is based upon work supported by the National
Science Foundation under Grant Nos. 1138697 and 1348857.
PST1C06: 9:15-10 p.m. Metacognition and Epistemic Games in
IPLS Problem Solving
Poster – Charles J. Bertram, University of Central Arkansas, Conway, AR
Andrew Mason, University of Central Arkansas
A metacognitive exercise in problem solving was given to an introductory
physics for life sciences (IPLS) class over the course of the fall 2013 and
spring 2014 semester. The exercise featured scaffolding in the form of a
rubric students could use to note where they struggled in a group problem-
solving effort. One of the concerns was that students who are not physics
majors do not necessarily have the same epistemic framework as physics
majors would for the classroom. As such, we examine written artifacts
from the students’ reflection activities for evidence of different epistemic
games. We also describe a comparison of written artifacts to pre-post data
from the FCI, MPEX, and CLASS surveys.
PST1C07: 8:30-9:15 p.m. Epistemic Impact on Metacognition in
Cooperative Group Problem Solving
Poster – Andrew J. Mason, University of Central Arkansas, Conway, AR
Charles Bertram, Cassandra Lange, University of Central Arkansas
Cognitive apprenticeship for physics problem solving has been demon-
strated to show potential for students to reflect upon their problem-solving
attempts. In the context of introductory physics for life sciences (IPLS), a
concern exists that non-physics science majors may have attitudes towards
physics that mitigate the efficacy of a metacognitive problem-solving exer-
cise. A weekly metacognitive intervention was administered in a lab group
problem solving setting for a first semester algebra-based introductory
physics course. MPEX and CLASS surveys were used in a pre-post format
for respectively the fall 2013 and spring 2014 semesters. Other forms of
data include written artifacts from the students themselves about aspects of
problem solving with which they struggled, as well as an end-of-semester
survey about the usefulness of the exercise. We discuss the effectiveness of
the reflection task with respect to the students? attitudes towards problem
1...,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81 83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,92,...170
Powered by FlippingBook