Teaching Strategy. Ronald E. Kumon Department of Physics Kettering University. Highlights from the Summer 2012 AAPT New Faculty Workshop

Transcription

1 Using Peer Instruction as a Teaching Strategy Highlights from the Summer 2012 AAPT New Faculty Workshop Ronald E. Kumon Department of Physics Kettering University 23 October 2012

2 Overview Peer Instruction What is it? Examples Complementary methods Just-in-Time Teaching PhET Simulations Case Study PHYS-224, Summer 2012 Results & Reflections

3 Peer Instruction Interactive teaching method developed by Eric Mazur in Physics Dept. at Harvard University in the early 1990s Student-centered approach Implements flipped classroom Information transfer moved out Information assimilation moved in Evidence-based method Expanded d to many disciplinesi [Images from

4 Mazur on Peer Instruction Watch the video clip showing an edited introduction to Mazur s presentation Confessions of a Converted Lecturer : Videos of his whole presentation are available at :

5 Peer Instruction: Inspiration Students t bring pre-conceived common-sense beliefs about physics to classroom that are not easily changed by conventional teaching [Am. J. Phys. 53, (1985)] [Am. J. Phys. 53, (1985)]

6 Memorization vs. Understanding Qualitative ti Question Quantitative Question Mean: 4.9/10 Mean: 6.9/10 [Mazur, Peer Instruction (1997)]

7 Memorization vs. Understanding Observe that in some cases students who scored well on the conventional problem scored very poorly on the conceptual problem, despite the problems similarity in physics. This may suggest that some students are memorizing how to solve problems with a cookbook approach without a good handle on the underlying physical principles. [Mazur, Peer Instruction (1997)]

8 Effect on Problem-Solving Mazur gave his 1985 final exam with conventional Mean = problems to students in 1991 taught using Peer Instruction His 1991 students showed improved performance, suggesting improved conceptual understanding led to improved problem- solving skills 62.7/100 Mean = 69.4/100 [Mazur, Peer Instruction (1997)]

9 Peer Instruction: Results Students showed significant improvement Gain metric: g = S post 100% S S pre pre S post : Post-test t t score S pre : Pre-test score [Crouch & Mazur, Am. J. Phys. 69, 970 (2001)]

10 Peer Instruction: Method Summary: 1. Instructor poses question. 2. Students t reflect on the question. 3. Students commit to an individual answer. 4. Instructor reviews student responses. 5. Students discuss their thinking and answers with their peers. 6. Students then commit again to an individual answer. 7. The instructor again reviews responses and decides whether more explanation is needed before moving on to the next concept. [

11 Peer Instruction: Questions Questions are constructed around each key concept (Mazur: ConcepTests ): focused on a single concept not solvable by relying on equations have adequate multiple-choice answers must tbe unambiguously worded d be neither too easy nor too difficult ( sweet spot is to have 30 70% correct on initial survey)

12 Peer Instruction: Implementation In-Class Flowchart: [Lasry et al., Am. J. Phys. 76, (2008)] Feedback Methods: Clicker Response System Flashcards

13 ConcepTest Example Consider a rectangular metal plate with a circular hole in it. When the plate is uniformly heated, what happens to the diameter of the hole? A. Increases B. Stays the same C. Decreases [from Eric Mazur, Interactive Teaching DVD]

14 Peer Instruction: Advantages Peer instruction 1. Allows instructor to challenge students preconceptions and understanding through a series of questions ( formative assessment ) 2. Allows students the opportunity to interact with one another in a safe environment and learn on their own terms 3. Provides immediate feedback for both students and instructors

15 Peer Instruction: Other Disciplines Peer instruction has been used in Biology Chemistry Computer Science Engineering Geology Mathematics Philosophy Psychology

16 Just-in-Time Teaching (JiTT) Pedagogical strategy developed by various university physics professors in the mid to late 1990s Method by which h some or all of the time students spend in preparation for class is used to leverage the quality of the time spent in class Evidence-based method Expanded to many disciplines [Images from

17 Just-in-Time Teaching: Method Summary: 1. Students complete reading or other preparatory work 2. Students t complete pre-class assignment, often online 3. Faculty member reviews pre-class assignments, and considers changes to classroom emphasis. 4. Faculty member selects quotes from pre-class assignments to refer to during class. 5. During class, faculty member uses quotes from student work to lead discussion of the material. 6. Faculty member creates or adjusts next pre-class assignment to best meet students needs in light of progress made during class.

18 Just-in-Time Teaching: Method [Image from A. Gavrin]

19 JiTT WarmUp Exercises WarmUp Exercises = Online, pre-class reading quiz Due few hours before class A few open-ended conceptual questions Covers that day s material Should stimulate student thinking about a particular topic and should provide the instructor with actionable information about student understanding. Answers need not be complete or even correct to receive credit

20 JiTT WarmUp: Example For electricity & magnetism: Can there be an electric field at a point where there is no charge? Can there be a charge at a place where there is no field? Please write one- or two sentence answers to each of these questions. Additional questions are available for various disciplines via JiTT Digital Library biology, chemistry, geoscience, math, physics

21 JiTT Puzzles Puzzles = Post-class questions May involve a real-world scenario Should be good discussion starters More complex than than WarmUps Should integrate ideas about a particular topic Answers should have greater precision and should be evaluated more rigorously than WarmUps Answers should be technically correct and well-stated

22 JiTT Puzzle: Example For electricity & magnetism: [From Novak et al, Just-in-Time Teaching, p. 104]

23 PhET Simulations Originally a set of Java applets to simulate various physics concepts Now expanded to a variety of disciplines Freely available online

24 Case Study: PHYS-224 PHYS-224: Electricity & Magnetism, Summer 2012, Sections 2 & 3 Class demographics: students (~80% male, ~20% female) Mostly MechE, ChemE, EE majors Assessment: Conceptual Survey in Electricity and Magnetism (CSEM) Pre-Test on 1 st Monday Post-Test on 11 th Monday [Maloney et al., Am. J. Phys. 69 (7), S12 S23 (2001)]

25 Peer Instruction: Example

26 Peer Instruction: Example

27 JiTT: Example Blackboard Discussion Forum: Discussion Forum for Monday, July 9 [due at 11 pm] (Reading: Knight, Sections ) a. Summarize (~100 words or less) the major concepts in the assigned reading in your own words. You should use plain English as much as possible. b. Identify briefly the single point of the reading that you found most difficult or confusing. If you did not find any part of it difficult or confusing, identify what part(s) you found most interesting. You may also find it useful to read and/or respond to other students' comments.

28 JiTT: Example Student Response:

29 PhET: Example [

30 PhET + Peer Instruction [

31 Case Study: Results Pre-Test (N = 41) Mean = 29 ± 10% (Min = 13%, Max = 55%) Post-Test (N = 41) Mean = 59 ± 16% (Min = 23%, Max = 90%) Significant ifi difference (T-test: t p = ) Normalized Gain: Mean = 42% ± 21% (Min = 0%, Max = 86%) g = S post 100% S S pre pre

32 Case Study: Results CSEM Pre vs Post Grade vs CSEM-Post CSEM Po ost-test % 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% PHYS PHYS % 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% e Grade Cours 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% PHYS y = x R² = PHYS Linear (PHYS ) 50% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% CSEM Pre-Test % CSEM Post-Test %

33 Comparison [Am. J. Phys. 66, (1998)] One of largest studies of effectiveness of IE I.E. methods (N = 6542) I.E.: <g> = 52±10% Trad.: <g> = 22±5% Not electricity & magnetism course

34 Comparison Georgia Tech Purdue N.C. State Carnegie Mellon Large multi-university study (N = 2537) Higher gains with conceptual curriculum Used different diagnostic instrument (BEMA)

35 Comparison Current 0.42 [Gok, Intl. J. Sci. Math. Ed. 10, (2012)]

36 Course Learning Outcomes 1. Define and distinguish between conductors and insulators, current and voltage, electric field strength, electric potential and potential energy, magnetic fields strength, capacitance, resistance, inductance. 2. Find the resultant vector force on a point charge due to other point charges in a two-dimensional plane. 3. Find the resultant electric field strength and electric potential due to a collection of point charges. 4. Determine the resulting torque on an electric dipole in an electric field. 5. Given the electric potential at a point find the potential energy of a charge placed at the point. 6. Using integration, derive the expression for the electric field strength and electric potential due to continuous non-conducting lines, rings, and arcs of charge. 7. Use Gauss ss law to determine the expression for the electric field due to continuous non-conducting and conducting charge distributions. 8. Use the gradient to determine the electric field strength from the electric potential, and use integration to determine the electric potential from the electric field strength. 9. Determine the equivalent capacitance or resistance of series and parallel combinations of capacitors and resistors. 10.Find the force on a moving charge, force on a current carrying wire, and torque on a current loop in a magnetic field. 11.Find the resultant force on a long straight current carrying wire due to other parallel current carrying wires. 12.Use Ampere s law to determine the expression for the magnetic field due to current carried by long straight wires, and solenoids. 13.Use Faraday s Law to determine the emf induced in loops of conducting wire, and Lenz s Law to determine the direction of the induced emfs. 14.Solve problems involving self and mutual inductance.

37 Case Study: Survey Course Learning Outcomes 5 PHYS Mean Lik kert Score Course Learning Outcome Number Mean = 3.7 ± 0.4 5: Strongly Agree 4: Agree 3: Neither Agree or Disagree 2: Disagree 1: Strongly Disagree

38 Course Teaching Elements 1. Writing the discussion postings about the pre-class reading assignments helped me to prepare for class. 2. The use of QuickCheck questions during class were effective for evaluating my understanding of course material. 3. The use of QuickCheck questions during class helped me to learn the course material. 4. The interaction with other students during class while answering QuickCheck questions helped me to learn the course material. 5. The student workbook exercises helped me to learn the concepts of the course. 6. The worksheets helped me to learn how to solve problems in the course. 7. The MasteringPhysics problems helped me to learn the course material. 8. Computer simulations (e.g., PhET, ActivPhysics) helped me to learn the course material. 9. The instructor ss solving of problems during class helped me to learn the course material. 10. Working with a tutor or other knowledgeable person helped me to learn the course material. 11. My preparation for exams helped me to learn the course material.

39 Case Study: Survey Strengths The warm up discussions are a very good way to introduce us to the concepts we will be learning. He made it a requirement to read and post about the readings. This made it a lot easier to remember and learn the material. It was a lot easier when it came time to take the test t The amount of interactive learning. The quick checks and working out of problems really helped me learn this material. The questions posted in class that have us talk it out with our classmates helped me to understand several concepts. The strength of this course and instructor was the in class demonstrations.

40 Case Study: Survey Weaknesses I would get rid of the discussion postings, I don't feel that I was learning by doing these readings rather just getting them done to receive the points. I would omit it altogether, we are in college not high school we should be able to take responsibility for our learning not forced to do the readings. I would suggest not relying on the students reading so much. Many students at Kettering do not have the strongest reading skills. I would work more problems in class and not assume the students have any prior knowledge gained from the reading (even if we do). I often don't fully understand the reading and then get lost early in lecture. There were too many quick checks, and not enough problem solving and example in the class. I would like to see the professor provide tests that are on theory instead of problem solving if we are going over theory in class.

41 Case Study: Survey Course Teaching Elements Mean Likert Score Readin gs Worksheets sphys Onlin ne HW Simluations In-class Pblm-Solvin ng Exam Prep Course Teaching Method Neutral 5: Strongly Agree 4: Agree 3: Neither Agree or Disagree 2: Disagree 1: Strongly Disagree

42 Case Study: Survey Course Teaching Elements 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% Strongly Agree Agree Response % 20% 10% 0% Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Readings CT: In-Class CT: Learning Peer Instruction Workbook Worksheets Online HW Simluations In-class Pblm-Solving Tutor/Others Exam Prep Course Teaching Method

43 Case Study: Conclusions Peer Instruction ti + JiTT is effective method for teaching introductory E&M Advantages Allows instructor to know what students need Allows instructor & students to get feedback Disadvantages/Problems Takes more time to do & hard to cover all material Harder for students with reading disability/weakness Harder for introverted students Does not provide expected plug & chug environment May be different from culture of teaching at K.U.

44 Other Workshop Topics Tutorials in Introductory Physics Interactive Lecture Demonstrations Teaching Context-Rich Problem-Solving Physlets Physics Ed. Resources in Digital it Librariesi Upper-Level Physics Tenure Matters Dealing with Student Behavior Time Management Mentoring for Retention Research Grant Opportunities

45 Closing Quote As you enter a classroom ask yourself this question: If there were no students in the room, could I do what I am planning to do? If your answer to the question is yes, don t do it. Gen. Ruben Cubero, Dean of the Faculty, U.S. Air Force Academy [quoted in Novak, et al., Just-In-Time Teaching: Blending Active Learning with Web Technology, Prentice-Hall Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ (1999)]

46 Acknowledgments National Science Foundation American Association of Physics Teachers Department of Physics Bahram Roughani Physics Faculty & Staff Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning Terri Lynch-Caris CETL Advisory Board Eric Mazur, Harvard University Michael Dubson & Steve Pollack, University of Colorado Kettering Physics

47 Bibliography Eric Mazur, Peer Instruction: A User s Manual (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 1997) /P t ti / / G. M. Novak, E. T. Patterson, A. D. Gavrin, W. Christian, Just-In-Time Teaching: Blending Active Learning with Web Technology (Prentice Hall, Upple Saddle River, NJ, 1999) Scott Simkins and Mark H. Maier, Just in Time Teaching: Across the Disciplines, and Across the Academy (Stylus Publishing, Sterling, VA, 2010)

48 Online Resources Peer Instruction Just-in-Time Teaching Main Site JiTT Digital Library p p _ on/ PhET Simulations