1 / 15

Peer Instruction and ConcepTests in Introductory Physics

Peer Instruction and ConcepTests in Introductory Physics. Georgetown Innovations Day 2003 Ed Van Keuren Physics Department. Peer Instruction. Developed by Eric Mazur, Harvard University Active learning Conceptual understanding of phenomena. Understanding concepts vs. solving problems.

eggleston
Download Presentation

Peer Instruction and ConcepTests in Introductory Physics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Peer Instruction and ConcepTests in Introductory Physics Georgetown Innovations Day 2003 Ed Van Keuren Physics Department

  2. Peer Instruction Developed by Eric Mazur, Harvard University • Active learning • Conceptual understanding of phenomena

  3. Understanding concepts vs. solving problems • A basic goal of traditional physics courses has been to enable students to solve complex physics problems. • This often leads to overemphasis on learning “plug-and chug” strategies. • The underlying concepts, often simple but important, can be completely missed.

  4. Peer instruction • Traditional physics lecture: relaying facts • Peer instruction: short lecture segments, followed by students “teaching each other” • The focal point of the peer instruction method is the ConcepTest

  5. ConcepTests • Multiple choice questions focused on qualitative understanding of physics concepts. • Questions force students to think about their own understanding of a topic.

  6. ConcepTests • Short lecture segment (& demo). • ConcepTest presented. • Class votes on correct answer. • Results are tallied (if most are correct – move on). • Discussion with peers – 1~2 minutes. • Second vote and tally. • Discussion of correct and incorrect answers.

  7. Example - kinematics • Reading assignment • Short discussion of the meaning of velocity (speed with direction) and acceleration (change in velocity over time) • Emphasize the relation between the two.

  8. Example You are throwing a ball straight up in the air. At the highest point, the ball’s 1. velocity and acceleration are zero. 2. velocity is nonzero but its acceleration is zero. 3. acceleration is nonzero, but its velocity is zero. 4. velocity and acceleration are both nonzero.

  9. Benefits • Break up monotony of lecture. • Encourages deeper thinking about phenomena. • Promotes participation on less-threatening level than full-class. • “To teach is to learn twice.” • Besides the improvement in conceptual understanding, quantitative assessment has shown an increase in the problem solving ability.

  10. Difficulties • Writing good questions. • single concept • no equations • adequate number of choices • unambiguous • appropriate level • Participation (heavy hands phenomenon).

  11. Personal Response System (PRS) • IR transmitter (similar to TV remote control). • Receiver(s) at front, coupled to PC. • Students can enter multiple times. • Numerical values can also be input. • Anonymous or linked to unit number. • Software tabulates results.

  12. PRS benefits • Students much less hesitant to contribute. • No “follow the crowd” in answering. • Immediate and clear feedback.

  13. Typical responses

  14. Demo

  15. ConcepTests in other areas • Chemistry • Astronomy • Calculus • Geology • More info at: http://galileo.harvard.edu/galileo/lgm/pi/

More Related