This paper reports on the results from administering a modified version of the Introductory Astronomy Questionnaire (IAQ) to middle school students and preservice science teachers in Norway. Ranking tasks formed a key part of the instrument, and we detail a new method for analyzing ranking task data. One of our main findings was that even after instruction, a significant proportion of students held erroneous views and conceptions regarding sizes, distances, and the nature of basic astronomical entities, such as stars and planets. We argue that the commonalities between some of the issues we identified and those presented in extant studies—from a variety of countries, with samples ranging from junior high school students and undergraduates to primary school teachers—may point to deeper cognitive issues inherent in, and possibly unique to, engaging with astronomy.

Federal legislation specifies equitable access to education for all students at all levels of education, including postsecondary. To explore how well the physics education research (PER) community is currently serving students who inherently vary in needs, abilities, and interests, four research-based curricula (Tutorials in Introductory Physics, Open Source Tutorials in Physics Sensemaking, Physics by Inquiry, and Next Generation Physical Science and Everyday Thinking) were compared with the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework. This framework originates in the education literature base and is composed of 3 guiding principles (1. Provide multiple means of representation, 2. provide multiple means of action and expression, and 3. provide multiple means for engagement) further described by 9 principles and 31 checkpoints. The UDL guidelines provide a framework for designing courses to be supportive of and accessible to all learners, taking into account variations among learners during curriculum development. Activities in these four curricula were analyzed for alignment between the in-class curricular elements and the UDL guidelines. Overall, all of the curricula aligned with two of the checkpoints: foster collaboration and community and support planning and strategy development. However, the curricula were unaligned with many of the checkpoints, specifically with regards to providing multiple means of engagement. Who we are prepared to teach indicates who we expect to participate in the physics community. We propose suggestions for modifications to existing curricula and for future curricula to better support all learners. We also argue that, if these research-based curricula do not meet federal legislative guidelines about accessibility for all students, the burden of creating an accessible environment and complying with these federal laws falls on the instructors, which could deter them from using the curricula. If we as a community want instructors to use high quality, research-based curricula, curriculum developers should prioritize supporting all learners.

The lack of an engaging pedagogy and the highly competitive atmosphere in introductory science courses tend to discourage students from pursuing science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors. Once in a STEM field, academic and social integration has been long thought to be important for students’ persistence. Yet, it is rarely investigated. In particular, the relative impact of in-class and out-of-class interactions remains an open issue. Here, we demonstrate that, surprisingly, for students whose grades fall in the “middle of the pack,” the out-of-class network is the most significant predictor of persistence. To do so, we use logistic regression combined with Akaike’s information criterion to assess in- and out-of-class networks, grades, and other factors. For students with grades at the very top (and bottom), final grade, unsurprisingly, is the best predictor of persistence—these students are likely already committed (or simply restricted from continuing) so they persist (or drop out). For intermediate grades, though, only out-of-class closeness—a measure of one’s immersion in the network—helps predict persistence. This does not negate the need for in-class ties. However, it suggests that, in this cohort, only students that get past the convenient in-class interactions and start forming strong bonds outside of class are or become committed to their studies. Since many students are lost through attrition, our results suggest practical routes for increasing students’ persistence in STEM majors.

Research on the test structure of the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) has largely ignored gender, and research on FCI gender effects (often reported as “gender gaps”) has seldom interrogated the structure of the test. These rarely crossed streams of research leave open the possibility that the FCI may not be structurally valid across genders, particularly since many reported results come from calculus-based courses where 75% or more of the students are men. We examine the FCI considering both psychometrics and gender disaggregation (while acknowledging this as a binary simplification), and find several problematic questions whose removal decreases the apparent gender gap. We analyze three samples (total $N_{\mathrm{pre}}=5391$, $N_{\mathrm{post}}=5769$) looking for gender asymmetries using classical test theory, item response theory, and differential item functioning. The combination of these methods highlights six items that appear substantially unfair to women and two items biased in favor of women. No single physical concept or prior experience unifies these questions, but they are broadly consistent with problematic items identified in previous research. Removing all significantly gender-unfair items halves the gender gap in the main sample in this study. We recommend that instructors using the FCI report the reduced-instrument score as well as the 30-item score, and that credit or other benefits to students not be assigned using the biased items.

Graduate admissions play a critical gatekeeping role in the physics community not only because they select students who are allowed to begin their graduate studies, but also because they influence how students perceive graduate school, and in some cases whether or not they will even choose to apply. In conjunction with the APS Bridge Program, we conducted a national survey of graduate directors (and related faculty) of physics Ph.D. programs in the United States to explore graduate admissions practices. Our focus was on criteria used in determining admissions, mechanisms through which graduate applicants are handled, and how student representation considerations are incorporated into admissions (if at all). We report here on existing graduate admission practices in physics departments and highlight some critical issues for understanding barriers for diversifying graduate physics, including the use of GRE scores (and the relative importance placed on them). We find that the use of a minimum GRE score for admission, a practice in opposition to recommendations made by the tests designers, is reported to be used in many departments (more than one in three). We also find letters of recommendation to be highly valued in admissions decisions. Our data describe various initiatives at the institutional or individual level to increase gender diversity in admissions. A sizable number of departments also express a latent demand for greater numbers of students from traditionally marginalized racial or ethnic groups, but simultaneously report a lack of such applicants.

We investigate students’ sense of ownership of multiweek final projects in an upper-division optics lab course. Using a multiple case study approach, we describe three student projects in detail. Within-case analyses focused on identifying key issues in each project, and constructing chronological descriptions of those events. Cross-case analysis focused on identifying emergent themes with respect to five dimensions of project ownership: student agency, instructor mentorship, peer collaboration, interest and value, and affective responses. Our within- and cross-case analyses yielded three major findings. First, coupling division of labor with collective brainstorming can help balance student agency, instructor mentorship, and peer collaboration. Second, students’ interest in the project and perceptions of its value can increase over time; initial student interest in the project topic is not a necessary condition for student ownership of the project. Third, student ownership is characterized by a wide range of emotions that fluctuate as students alternate between extended periods of struggle and moments of success while working on their projects. These findings not only extend the literature on student ownership into a new educational domain—namely, upper-division physics labs—they also have concrete implications for the design of experimental physics projects in courses for which student ownership is a desired learning outcome. We describe the course and projects in sufficient detail that others can adapt our results to their particular contexts.

Considering the evidence that standard physics graduate admissions practices tend to exclude women and traditionally marginalized racial and ethnic groups from the discipline, we investigate (a) the characteristics of students that physics graduate admissions committee members seek to admit to their programs and (b) the practices associated with these admissions goals. The data for this investigation are interviews with 18 faculty who chair graduate admissions committees in programs that prioritize diversity in their graduate admissions practices. We find that some express elements of an implicit theory of intelligence known as a “fixed mindset,” in which intelligence is understood as an inherent capacity or ability primarily measured by standardized test scores and grades. Some also express elements of a “growth mindset,” in which intelligence is understood in terms of acquired knowledge and effort. Overall, most faculty interviewed expressed elements of both mindsets. A fixed mindset in physics graduate admissions is consistent with research identifying physics as a “brilliance-required” field, whose members tend to believe that raw, innate talent is a primary requirement for success in the discipline. Such a mindset directly affects the participation of women and some racial or ethnic groups, who are stereotyped as lacking such high-level intellectual ability.

Representation use is a critical skill for learning, problem solving, and communicating in science, especially in physics where multiple representations often scaffold the understanding of a phenomenon. University Modeling Instruction, which is an active-learning, research-based introductory physics curriculum centered on students’ use of scientific models, has made representation use a primary learning goal with explicit class time devoted to introducing and coordinating representations as part of the model building process. However, because of the semester break, the second semester course, Modeling Instruction-Electricity and Magnetism (MI-EM), contains a mixture of students who are returning from the Modeling Instruction-mechanics course (to whom we refer to as “returning students”) and students who are new to Modeling Instruction with the MI-EM course (to whom we refer to as “new students”). In this study, we analyze the impact of MI-EM on students’ representation choices across the introductory physics content for these different groups of students by examining both what individual representations students choose and their average number of representations on a modified card-sort survey with a variety of mechanics and EM questions. Using Wilcoxon-signed-rank tests, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests, Cliff’s delta effect sizes, and box plots, we compare students’ representation choices from pre- to postsemester, from new and returning students, and from mechanics and EM content. We find that there is a significant difference between returning and new students’ representation choices, which serves as a baseline comparison between Modeling Instruction and traditional lecture-based physics classes. We also find that returning students maintain a high representation use across the MI-EM semester, while new students see significant growth in their representation use regardless of content.

Although physics education researchers often use workshops to promote instructional change in higher education, little research has been done to investigate workshop design. Initial evidence suggests that many workshop sessions focus primarily on raising faculty’s awareness of research-based instructional strategies, a fairly straightforward goal that has been largely met. However, increasing faculty’s awareness of existing strategies alone has somewhat limited benefits. We argue that workshop leaders should also aim to cultivate faculty’s ability and motivation to engage in pedagogical sensemaking, i.e., the pursuit of robust pedagogical logic based on observations and interpretations of classroom events. This goal is likely more challenging to achieve, and thus presents a greater need for research. In this paper, we pursue in situ, qualitative analysis of two parallel workshop sessions that seem to have the potential to support ambitious outcomes. We demonstrate how faculty may engage in aspects of pedagogical sensemaking, such as using observations of student behavior to support their arguments. We also show how faculty may instead seem to engage in interactions reminiscent of students “doing school,” such as evaluating instruction based on “correctness” alone. We also show how differences in workshop facilitation seemed to contribute to faculty engaging in pedagogical sensemaking in one session only. These differences include (i) strictly enforcing session rules versus gently navigating faculty’s incoming expectations, (ii) highlighting the workshop leaders’ expertise versus working to minimize power differentials, and (iii) emphasizing the benefits of adoption of a prescribed strategy versus encouraging faculty to reason about possible adaptations. We consider the implications of this analysis for future research and workshop design.

In this paper, we investigate some of the ways in which students, when given the opportunity and an appropriate learning environment, spontaneously engage in collaborative inquiry. We studied small groups of high school students interacting around and with an interactive whiteboard equipped with Algodoo software, as they investigated orbital motion. Using multimodal discourse analysis, we found that in their discussions the students relied heavily on nonverbal meaning-making resources, most notably hand gestures and resources in the surrounding environment (items displayed on the interactive whiteboard). They juxtaposed talk with gestures and resources in the environment to communicate ideas that they initially were not able to express using words alone. By spontaneously recruiting and combining a diverse set of meaning-making resources, the students were able to express relatively fluently complex ideas on a novel physics topic, and to engage in practices that resemble a scientific approach to exploration of new phenomena.

Instructional labs are widely seen as a unique, albeit expensive, way to teach scientific content. We measured the effectiveness of introductory lab courses at achieving this educational goal across nine different lab courses at three very different institutions. These institutions and courses encompassed a broad range of student populations and instructional styles. The nine courses studied had two key things in common: the labs aimed to reinforce the content presented in lectures, and the labs were optional. By comparing the performance of students who did and did not take the labs (with careful normalization for selection effects), we found universally and precisely no added value to learning course content from taking the labs as measured by course exam performance. This work should motivate institutions and departments to reexamine the goals and conduct of their lab courses, given their resource-intensive nature. We show why these results make sense when looking at the comparative mental processes of students involved in research and instructional labs, and offer alternative goals and instructional approaches that would make lab courses more educationally valuable.

In this exploratory qualitative study, we describe instructors’ self-reported practices for teaching and assessing students’ ability to troubleshoot in electronics lab courses. We collected audio data from interviews with 20 electronics instructors from 18 institutions that varied by size, selectivity, and other factors. In addition to describing participants’ instructional practices, we characterize their perceptions about the role of troubleshooting in electronics, the importance of the ability to troubleshoot more generally, and what it means for students to be competent troubleshooters. One major finding of this work is that, while almost all instructors in our study said that troubleshooting is an important learning outcome for students in electronics lab courses, only half of instructors said they directly assessed students’ ability to troubleshoot. Based on our findings, we argue that there is a need for research-based instructional materials that attend to both cognitive and noncognitive aspects of troubleshooting proficiency. We also identify several areas for future investigation related to troubleshooting instruction in electronics lab courses.

Through the transformation of undergraduate STEM courses, the Colorado Learning Assistant Program recruits and prepares talented STEM majors for careers in teaching by providing them with early, sustained teaching experiences. The research reported here compares teaching practices of K-12 teachers who served as learning assistants (LAs) as undergraduates to colleagues that were certified through the same teacher certification program but did not serve as LAs. Observations of teacher practices revealed that former LAs used significantly more reformed teaching practices than their colleagues, especially in their first year of teaching. These results suggest the LA Program serves as a valuable supplement to traditional teacher certification programs.

Teaching assistants (TAs) that lead reformed recitations and labs must understand and buy into the design of the course and the research-based instructional strategies that the course requires in order to create high-fidelity implementations. We present a model that outlines possible influences on TAs’ buy-in and their in-class actions coupled with a method, using a Real-time Instructor Observation Tool-based [E. A. West et al. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 9, 010109 (2013)] exercise, to measure the effect of these influences that is not only quicker than interviews but also allows one to quantify these effects. We use this method to measure the influences on six graduate TAs teaching algebra-based introductory mechanics and electricity and magnetism recitations and labs (“mini studios”) at the University of Central Florida. The results from the exercise are confirmed by interview responses from the TAs. We find a relatively high degree of buy-in to the design of the course, yet this is not reflected in the TAs’ actions. The TAs’ actions appear to be most influenced by student responses and expectations which do not align with the design of the course. Our study examines the effect of three influences shown in our model, and we argue that our method could be easily adapted to examine additional influences.

[This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Gender in Physics.] This article analyzes masculinity and experimental practices within three different physics communities. This work is premised on the understanding that the discipline of physics is not only dominated by men, but also is laden with masculine connotations on a symbolical level, and that this limited and limiting construction of physics has made it difficult for many women to find a place in the discipline. Consequently, we argue that in order to further the understanding of gender dynamics within physics communities and enrich the current understandings about the lack of women in physics, perspectives from masculinity studies are crucial. The article draws on three different ethnographic case studies dealing with undergraduate students, graduate students, and research scientists.

[This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Gender in Physics.] Sexism occurs when men are believed to be superior to women, and is thought to be one of the reasons for women’s underrepresentation in physics and astronomy. The issue of sexism in physics and astronomy has not been thoroughly explored in the physics education literature and there is currently no clear language for discussing sexism in the field. This article seeks to begin a conversation on sexism in physics and astronomy and offer a starting point for language to discuss sexism in research groups and departments. Interviews with 21 women in graduate physics and astronomy programs are analyzed for their individual experiences of sexism. Although a subset of women did not report experiencing sexual discrimination, the majority experienced subtle insults and slights known as microaggressions. Other participants also experienced more traditional hostile sexism in the form of sexual harassment, gender role stereotypes, and overt discouragement. These results indicate the existence of sexism in the current culture of physics and astronomy, as well as the importance departments must put on eliminating it and educating students about sexism and microaggressions.

We explore the overlap of two nationally recognized learning outcomes for physics lab courses, namely, the ability to model experimental systems and the ability to troubleshoot a malfunctioning apparatus. Modeling and troubleshooting are both nonlinear, recursive processes that involve using models to inform revisions to an apparatus. To probe the overlap of modeling and troubleshooting, we collected audiovisual data from think-aloud activities in which eight pairs of students from two institutions attempted to diagnose and repair a malfunctioning electrical circuit. We characterize the cognitive tasks and model-based reasoning that students employed during this activity. In doing so, we demonstrate that troubleshooting engages students in the core scientific practice of modeling.

Student learning in instructional physics labs represents a growing area of research that includes investigations of students’ beliefs and expectations about the nature of experimental physics. To directly probe students’ epistemologies about experimental physics and support broader lab transformation efforts at the University of Colorado Boulder and elsewhere, we developed the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey for experimental physics (E-CLASS). Previous work with this assessment has included establishing the accuracy and clarity of the instrument through student interviews and preliminary testing. Several years of data collection at multiple institutions has resulted in a growing national data set of student responses. Here, we report on results of the analysis of these data to investigate the statistical validity and reliability of the E-CLASS as a measure of students’ epistemologies for a broad student population. We find that the E-CLASS demonstrates an acceptable level of both validity and reliability on measures of item and test discrimination, test-retest reliability, partial-sample reliability, internal consistency, concurrent validity, and convergent validity. We also examine students’ responses using principal component analysis and find that, as expected, the E-CLASS does not exhibit strong factors (a.k.a. categories).

This study investigates how elite Turkish high school physics students claim to approach learning physics when they are simultaneously (i) engaged in a curriculum that led to significant gains in their epistemological sophistication and (ii) subject to a high-stakes college entrance exam. Students reported taking surface (rote) approaches to learning physics, largely driven by college entrance exam preparation and therefore focused on algorithmic problem solving at the expense of exploring concepts and real-life examples more deeply. By contrast, in recommending study strategies to “Arzu,” a hypothetical student who doesn’t need to take a college entrance exam and just wants to understand physics deeply, the students focused more on linking concepts and real-life examples and on making sense of the formulas and concepts—deep approaches to learning that reflect somewhat sophisticated epistemologies. These results illustrate how students can epistemically compartmentalize, consciously taking different epistemic stances—different views of what counts as knowing and learning—in different contexts even within the same discipline.

[This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Preparing and Supporting University Physics Educators.] Undergraduate students are increasingly being used to support course transformations that incorporate research-based instructional strategies. While such students are typically selected based on strong content knowledge and possible interest in teaching, they often do not have previous pedagogical training. The current training models make use of real students or classmates role playing as students as the test subjects. We present a new environment for facilitating the practice of physics pedagogy skills, a highly immersive mixed-reality classroom simulator, and assess its effectiveness for undergraduate physics learning assistants (LAs). LAs prepared, taught, and reflected on a lesson about motion graphs for five highly interactive computer generated student avatars in the mixed-reality classroom simulator. To assess the effectiveness of the simulator for this population, we analyzed the pedagogical skills LAs intended to practice and exhibited during their lessons and explored LAs’ descriptions of their experiences with the simulator. Our results indicate that the classroom simulator created a safe, effective environment for LAs to practice a variety of skills, such as questioning styles and wait time. Additionally, our analysis revealed areas for improvement in our preparation of LAs and use of the simulator. We conclude with a summary of research questions this environment could facilitate.