440 likes | 578 Views
Improving on the Recitation Section: Tutorials in Introductory Physics. Wed Brown Bag SJP Fa '05. What are Tutorials?. Research-based Student-centered “Elicit-confront-resolve” Process (discussion, consensus) + Sense-making. The Tutorial space (basement, across from Jerry Leigh).
E N D
Improving on the Recitation Section:Tutorials in Introductory Physics Wed Brown Bag SJP Fa '05
What are Tutorials? • Research-based • Student-centered • “Elicit-confront-resolve” • Process (discussion, consensus) + Sense-making
Tutorials at CU • Used in 1110 & 1120, twice each (+ 1120, now) • Part of successful courses => motivation to continue • Today: some data Continue support?
Resources • Space, material, training, personnel Ongoing support necessary. • “Learning Assistants” (LA’s) - undergrad STEM majors (interested in teaching)
Courses studied so far Recitation HomeworkText: • Phys 1110 • Fa 03 Tutorials CAPA HRW • Sp 04 Tutorials CAPA HRW • Fa 04 Knight workbookMP Knight • Sp 05 Trad recitations MP Knight • Phys 1120 • Fa 04 Tutorials CAPA HRW • Sp 05 Tutorials CAPA Knight
pre/post measures • Phys 1110: FMCE • Phys 1120: BEMA • common exam questions • formal + informal survey questions
Phys 1110: Distinguishing features 1: “Tut” (Sp04) Tutorials + CAPA 2: “Workbook” (Fa04) Small groups/Knight (+ Mastering Physics) 3: “(More) Trad” (Sp05) Mostly traditional recit’s (Otherwise much like "2" above) (different instructors, semesters …)
1110 summary - up front! • Tutorial courses : strongest results on learning gains and attitude surveys • Middle course (“2”) (research-based text and hw, clickers + small-group recitations, not Tutorials): good results. • Last course (like “2” except recitations): gains solid, lowest of three.
Ave Phys 1110 PretestFMCE (Force and Motion concept evaluation)A nationally validated conceptual exam, like the FCI (but harder) Matched, valid data only. (Eliminate pre>93%) Pre ave = 28%(1) / 34%(2) / 28%(3) Spring (2) higher (fall term)
Ave Phys 1110 Posttest Post ave = 74%(1) / 69%(2) / 58%(3)
Phys 1110 normalized gains gain(1)= .66 +/-.02
Phys 1110 normalized gains gain(1)= .66 +/-.02 g(2)= .585 +/-.02 7.5 points lower => (more than half a letter grade)
Phys 1110 normalized gains gain(1)= .66 +/-.02 g(2)= .585 +/-.02g(3)= .45 +/-.02 (trad recit.) => significantly lower gains. (still, double nat’l standards!)
Course (1) (2) (3) Impact on different pretest populations:"low starters" pretest <=12.5% (% of class in this pool)
Course (1) (2) (3) Impact on different pretest populations:"high starters" 50<pre<93% (% of class in this pool)
Beyond the FMCE: Exam comparisons • #2 (Knight workbooks/small groups): 34 common exam q’s • #3 (Trad recitations): 30 common q’s (17 are “tutor. materials”, 9 are “quant/trad”) (12 are “tutor. materials” 6 are “quant/trad”)
Beyond the FMCE: Exam comparisons ( Tutorial score - other course score) All q’ Tut mater. quant/trad (2) Workbook:+6 +7 +6 (3) Trad: +10 +14 +10 (All ± 2) N.B. 12 points is roughly 1 letter grade. Tutorial courses: significantly better exam scores: both conceptual and quantitative/traditional.
Other data • Replication study (compare with UW) • CLASS (attitudes/beliefs) • Surveys (did you like, did it help?) All favorable (or neutral) for tutorials, ask for details!
1110 Summary • Compare Tut-based with “workbook/small group” • measurable diffs (FMCE, exams, CLASS) • Compare Tut-based with “more trad rec” • significant diffs. • Tutorials only one effect. (Instructors, course structure …!?) • But in 1120, changing instructors + text => no impact
Phys 1120: Tut1 (Fa04) and Tut2 (Sp05) Attempt at replication. Main differences: Tut2 has… • different instructor • different semester • different textbook • follows up 1110 without Tutorials • no long answer on exams
Summary (up front!) • Despite changes in course elements, we replicated Tutorials + basic course structure. • Result: identical (high) learning gains. (Final score matches our juniors. Hard exam!)
1120 BEMA pre/post BEMA = “Brief E&M Assessment”, F04 (N=319) Pretest ave 26%
1120 BEMA pre/post F04 (N=319) Pretest: 26% S05 (N=232): 27%
1120 BEMA pre/post F04 (N=319) 26% -> 59%, S05 (N=232) 27% -> 59% g(ave, F04) = .44+/- .01 g(ave, S05)=.43+/- .01
Other data • Common exam questions (no change) • Replication study (compare with UW) • CLASS (attitudes/beliefs) • Surveys (did you like, did it help?) All results similar for both semesters!
Affect: survey results 1120 (Tut2) followed 1110 using Knight “workbook” small-group recitations. Asked at end: Which is better, Tut or trad rec? 39% vs 40% Which would you enjoy more? 39% vs 39%
1120 mini-summary Different instructors, text, exam structures, semesters… same Tutorials and Conceptests: no sig diffon BEMA, CLASS, exams. Validated survey scores high. Slight differencesin surveys: ~neutral student satisfaction. No disasters, room to improve
Bottom line Tutorials successful, productive course elements. • Cost:$1500/LA/semester * (6-8 LA’s per course) • Need 1.5 hr/week training session (TA’s too!) • Benefits: Some LA’s => K-12 cert. (+ their learning gains very high) • TA’s exposed to research-based learning.
Recommendation • We should continue implementing Tutorials (and collecting data) • Need support for LA’s, and training infrastructure (=> faculty or experienced grad student assigned to teach the TA’s/LA’s)
Replication McDermott et al., AJP 62, 1994
1-Tut 2-Workbook 3-Trad “Beliefs” survey: CLASS pre/post
CLASS pre/post (full scale) Tutorial-based course: no shift Two others: small but statistically significant declines
CLASS pre/post Tut2 Tut1 pre- to post shifts (attitudes and beliefs survey). Slightly negative (!), though it’s usually worse.
CLASS pre/post (Shown on full 0-100 scales)
Affect: survey results 1110(Likert scale 1= “no” to 5=“yes”) • Did the Tutorial help you learn Physics in 1110? 3.53 +/- .05 • Did you like the Tutorials? • 2.41 +/- .05 (62% neg, 21% pos) (20% neg, 60% pos)
Affect: survey results 1120Likert scale 1-5: “very bad” to “very good”) • How do you feel about the use of Tutorials in Phys 1120? Tut1: 3.32 +/- .07 Tut2: 2.96 +/- .09 (33% neg, 53% pos) (46% neg, 43% pos) • How much help was the Tutorial? • Tut1: 3.33 +/- .06 • Tut2: 2.90 +/- .08
FCI at CU <g> = post-pre100-pre Fa98 Fa03/Sp04 Force Concept Inventory (FCI) red = trad, blue = interactive engagement R. Hake, ”…A six-thousand-student survey…” AJP 66, 64-74 (‘98).
Beyond the BEMA - exam q’s • 31 common exam q’s (13 explicitly “tutorial material”, rest => other topics) All Tut material only (Fa04-Sp05)-1.9% ± 2% -1.8%
~75% ~40% * Mazur, E. Peer Instruction, Prentice Hall