Post on 30-Dec-2015
STUDIO PHYSICSAT THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA
Supported by the US Dept. of Education and The University of Alabama
Statement of the Problem
Traditional physics course: 3 lectures per week 1 laboratory (separate) Large size
Issues with Traditional Lecture Inactive learning Poor attendance Lack of coordination of labs/lectures
Inefficient use of technology Impersonal
The studio approach is: Integrated lecture/labs Active learning Technology Almost daily assignments Group work (mostly)
STUDIO IS ALSO: Flexible
Adapts to instructor’s tastes, styles Adapts to students’ needs
Only a structure
A LITTLE HISTORY
Foundation Coalition (NSF: Engineering) Active Learning Technology in the classroom Teaming More technology in labs
DETAILS
Schedule: 2hrs, 2 days a week; 1 hr recitation per week
Short lectures Labs and activities for most of the 2-
hr sessions 50-60 students per section Technology driven
The University of Alabama Department of Physics and Astronomy
Studio Physics Classroom
The University of Alabama Department of Physics and Astronomy
Students in Studio Physics Classroom doing optics experiment
The faculty role Professor: lectures, guides GTA: guides, leads recitation section
UTA: guides Student/teacher ratio: 20/1
LABS
Take data electronically Analyze data numerically …But also do paper/pencil analysis
WHAT GOES ON IN A 2-HOUR CLASS?
Some lecture Problem-solving examples Clicker questions Exercises Simulations Labs once a week
RESOURCES
https://bama.ua.edu/~stjones/ph101.htm
http://bama.ua.edu/~jharrell/PH105-F08/
http://bama.ua.edu/~rschad/teaching/LABs/
http://www.as.ua.edu/ph/courses/Studio.html
http://bama.ua.edu/~stjones/PH101-105activities.htm
DO YOU COVER EVERYTHING?
No Must pick and choose Cover main items well Students responsible for rest This is a 4-hour course!
MISCONCEPTIONS
Students have preconceived ideas These are hard to dislodge People can hold conflicting concepts
simultaneously Students must be confronted by a
conflict in order to abandon a misconception More than once
EXAMPLE
Consider a boat loaded with scrap iron in a swimming pool. If the iron is thrown overboard into the pool, will the water level at the edge of the pool
A. rise, B. fall, or C. remain unchanged?
WHAT WE KNOW
Interactive engagement techniques outstrip “traditional” in conceptual learning (Hake,1997)
Conceptual learning in mechanics often measured with Force Concept Inventory (Hestenes et al., 1992, 1995)
Hake gain: g = (post – pre)/(100% - pre)
HAKE’S RESULTS
STUDIO FORMAT ALONE DOES NOT GUARANTEE CONCEPTUAL LEARNING
Cummings et al. (1999): Interactive Lecture Demonstrations (Sokoloff and Thornton, 1997) and Cooperative Group Problem Solving (Heller et al., 1992) are effective in a studio context.
Many of Hake’s examples of interactive engagement were lecture courses
OBSERVATIONS
Hake (1998): Students won’t take seriously tasks they don’t get credit for.
Students are not necessarily actively (or even inactively) engaged when we think they are.
021 023 024 024 031 054 054 064 071 071 73 074 0740
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
FCI gain PH 105 sections
studio sectionslecture sections
Term
Ga
in
023 054 071 071 073 074 0740
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
PH101
PH101
RECITATION SESSIONS
Quiz? Help with homework Exercises Simulations Structured problem-solving
e.g. https://bama.ua.edu/~stjones/ph101.htm
CONCLUSIONS
Active learning Considerable student/teacher
interaction Integration of labs and lecture material Collaborative learning Effective use of technology