We report on a project to introduce interactive learning strategies (ILS) to physics classes at the Université Pierre et Marie Curie, one of the leading science universities in France. In Spring 2012, instructors in two large introductory classes, first-year, second-semester mechanics, and second-year introductory electricity and magnetism, enrolling approximately 500 and 250 students, respectively, introduced ILS into some, but not all, of the sections of each class. The specific ILS utilized were think-pair-share questions and Peer Instruction in the main lecture classrooms, and University of Washington Tutorials for Introductory Physics in recitation sections. Pre- and postinstruction assessments [Force Concept Inventory (FCI) and Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism (CSEM), respectively] were given, along with a series of demographic questions. Since not all lecture or recitation sections in these classes used ILS, we were able to compare the results of the FCI and CSEM between interactive and noninteractive classes taught simultaneously with the same curriculum. We also analyzed final exam results, as well as the results of student and instructor attitude surveys between classes. In our analysis, we argue that multiple linear regression modeling is superior to other common analysis tools, including normalized gain. Our results show that ILS are effective at improving student learning by all measures used: research-validated concept inventories and final exam scores, on both conceptual and traditional problem-solving questions. Multiple linear regression analysis reveals that interactivity in the classroom is a significant predictor of student learning, showing a similar or stronger relationship with student learning than such ascribed characteristics as parents’ education, and achieved characteristics such as grade point average and hours studied per week. Analysis of student and instructor attitudes shows that both groups believe that ILS improve student learning in the physics classroom and increase student engagement and motivation. All of the instructors who used ILS in this study plan to continue their use.

We review the literature on the gender gap on concept inventories in physics. Across studies of the most commonly used mechanics concept inventories, the Force Concept Inventory and Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, men’s average pretest scores are always higher than women’s, and in most cases men’s posttest scores are higher as well. The weighted average gender difference on these tests is 13% for pretest scores, 12% for posttest scores, and 6% for normalized gain. This difference is much smaller than the average difference in normalized gain between traditional lecture and interactive engagement (25%), but it is large enough that it could impact the results of studies comparing the effectiveness of different teaching methods. There is sometimes a gender gap on commonly used electricity and magnetism concept inventories, the Brief Electricity and Magnetism Assessment and Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism, but it is usually much smaller and sometimes is zero or favors women. The weighted average gender difference on these tests is 3.7% for pretest scores, 8.5% for posttest scores, and 6% for normalized gain. There are far fewer studies of the gender gap on electricity and magnetism concept inventories and much more variation in the existing studies. Based on our analysis of 26 published articles comparing the impact of 30 factors that could potentially influence the gender gap, no single factor is sufficient to explain the gap. Several high-profile studies that have claimed to account for or reduce the gender gap have failed to be replicated in subsequent studies, suggesting that isolated claims of explanations of the gender gap should be interpreted with caution. For example, claims that the gender gap could be eliminated through interactive engagement teaching methods or through a “values affirmation writing exercise” were not supported by subsequent studies. Suggestions that the gender gap might be reduced by changing the wording of “male-oriented” questions or refraining from asking demographic questions before administering the test are not supported by the evidence. Other factors, such as gender differences in background preparation, scores on different kinds of assessment, and splits between how students respond to test questions when answering for themselves or for a “scientist” do contribute to a difference between male and female responses, but the size of these differences is smaller than the size of the overall gender gap, suggesting that the gender gap is most likely due to the combination of many small factors rather than any one factor that can easily be modified.

Previous research suggests that students’ prior knowledge can interfere with how they observe and remember lecture demonstrations. We measured students’ prior knowledge in introductory mechanics and electricity and magnetism at two large universities. Students were then asked to predict the outcome of lecture demonstrations. We compare students’ predictions before having seen the demonstration to what they report having seen both right after the demonstration and several weeks later. We report four main findings. First, roughly one out of every five observations of a demonstration is inconsistent with the actual outcome. Second, students who understand the underlying concepts before observing the demonstration are more likely to observe it and remember it correctly. Third, students are roughly 20% (23%) more likely to observe a demonstration correctly if they predict the outcome first, regardless of whether the prediction is correct or not. Last, conceptual learning is contingent on the student making a correct observation. This study represents an initial step towards understanding the disconnect reported between demonstrations and student learning.

Physics education research (PER) is a relatively new and rapidly growing area of Ph.D. specialization. To sustain the field of PER, a steady pipeline of talented scholars needs to be developed and supported. One aspect of building this pipeline is understanding how students come to graduate and postdoctoral work in PER and what their career goals are. This paper presents the first study on the experiences and career pathways of students in PER. Data were collected through open-ended interviews with 13 graduate students and postdoctoral scholars in PER. Results show that many of these PER graduate students and postdoctoral scholars were not aware of PER as undergraduates. PER graduate students that were aware of PER as undergraduates chose to study PER as they were applying to graduate schools. The graduate school experiences of the interviewees were overwhelmingly positive, with participants reporting a positive climate that was facilitated by communicative and productive relationships with their advisors. However, some participants reported concerns about the acceptance of PER within some departments, including open hostility towards the field. The majority of participants were interested in pursuing a career as a university faculty member, with more participants preferring a position at a research-intensive university. These results suggest that a further large-scale study of graduate students in PER may be able to highlight the field as being a leader in student mentoring and community development while collecting important demographic information that could show PER to have more gender diversity than other subfields of physics.

We provide evidence that a learning activity called Energy Theater engages learners with key conceptual issues in the learning of energy, including disambiguating matter flow and energy flow and theorizing mechanisms for energy transformation. A participationist theory of learning, in which learning is indicated by changes in speech and behavior, supports ethnographic analysis of learners’ embodied interactions with each other and the material setting. We conduct detailed analysis to build plausible causal links between specific features of Energy Theater and the conceptual engagement that we observe. Disambiguation of matter and energy appears to be promoted especially by the material structure of the Energy Theater environment, in which energy is represented by participants, while objects are represented by areas demarcated by loops of rope. Theorizing mechanisms of energy transformation is promoted especially by Energy Theater’s embodied action, which necessitates modeling the time ordering of energy transformations.

As part of a larger study to understand instructors’ considerations regarding the learning and teaching of problem solving in an introductory physics course, we investigated beliefs of first-year graduate teaching assistants (TAs) regarding the use of example solutions in introductory physics. In particular, we examine how the goal of promoting expertlike problem solving is manifested in the considerations of graduate TAs’ choices of example solutions. Twenty-four first-year graduate TAs were asked to discuss their goals for presenting example solutions to students. They were also provided with different example solutions and asked to discuss their preferences for prominent solution features. TAs’ awareness, preferences, and actual practices related to solution features were examined in light of recommendations from the literature for the modeling of expertlike problem-solving approaches. The study concludes that the goal of helping students develop an expertlike problem-solving approach underlies many TAs’ considerations for the use of example solutions. TAs, however, do not notice and do not use many features described in the research literature as supportive of this goal. A possible explanation for this gap between their belief and practices is that these features conflict with another powerful set of values concerned with keeping students engaged, setting adequate standards, as well as pragmatic considerations such as time requirements and the assignment of grades.

The SCALE-UP studio physics class involves the physical redesign of a classroom to encourage more collaborative interactions and student-centered teaching, an approach shown to increase student learning on several different measures. However, research into the contextual issues involved in implementing a studio course using the SCALE-UP model remains limited. The research presented here explores the impact of situational factors on the implementation and maintenance of a research-based instructional innovation in a large research university. The specific focus of this investigation was the development and implementation of a studio version of an introductory physics course sequence at a large research university in the southeast United States using the SCALE-UP model. Interview, observation, and artifact data (including documents and Email conversations), collected over a period of two years, were analyzed. Using the Teacher Centered Systemic Reform framework, the data were analyzed to develop themes describing forces that both encouraged and restricted the growth of this studio course. Influential forces operated at the classroom, department, university, and broad cultural levels. The results demonstrate the importance of considering the specific nature of innovations implemented and their alignment with desired learning goals and outcomes. The importance of faculty collegiality emerges as a critical departmental force, as does administrative intervention at the department and university level. Broader, societal conversations related to improving undergraduate science education also provided important contextual framing for the change effort studied. The findings highlight important factors to contemplate when undertaking similar change efforts and recommendations from this study are offered for consideration.

In a previous paper that focused on the transmission of periodic waves at the boundary between two media, we documented difficulties with the basic concepts of wavelength, frequency, and propagation speed, and with the relationship $v=f\lambda$. In this paper, we report on student attempts to apply this relationship in problems involving two-source and thin-film interference. In both cases, interference arises from differences in the path lengths traveled by two waves. We found that some students (up to 40% on certain questions) had difficulty with a task that is fundamental to understanding these phenomena: expressing a physical distance, such as the separation between two sources, in terms of the wavelength of a periodic wave. We administered a series of questions to try to identify factors that influence student performance. We concluded that most incorrect responses stemmed from erroneous judgment about the type of reasoning required, not an inability to do said reasoning. A number of students do not seem to treat the spacing of moving wave fronts as analogous to immutable measurement tools (e.g., rulers).

We introduce a linguistic framework through which one can interpret systematically students’ understanding of and reasoning about force and motion. Some researchers have suggested that students have robust misconceptions or alternative frameworks grounded in everyday experience. Others have pointed out the inconsistency of students’ responses and presented a phenomenological explanation for what is observed, namely, knowledge in pieces. We wish to present a view that builds on and unifies aspects of this prior research. Our argument is that many students’ difficulties with force and motion are primarily due to a combination of linguistic and ontological difficulties. It is possible that students are primarily engaged in trying to define and categorize the meaning of the term “force” as spoken about by physicists. We found that this process of negotiation of meaning is remarkably similar to that engaged in by physicists in history. In this paper we will describe a study of the historical record that reveals an analogous process of meaning negotiation, spanning multiple centuries. Using methods from cognitive linguistics and systemic functional grammar, we will present an analysis of the force and motion literature, focusing on prior studies with interview data. We will then discuss the implications of our findings for physics instruction.