[This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Instructional labs: Improving traditions and new directions.] We report on a study of the effects of laboratory activities that model fictitious laws of physics in a virtual reality environment on (i) students’ epistemology about the role of experimental physics in class and in the world; (ii) students’ self-efficacy; and (iii) the quality of student engagement with the lab activities. We create opportunities for students to practice physics as a means of creating and validating new knowledge by simulating real and fictitious physics in virtual reality (VR). This approach seeks to steer students away from a confirmation mindset in labs by eliminating any form of prior or outside models to confirm. We refer to the activities using this approach as Novel Observations in Mixed Reality (NOMR) labs. We examined NOMR’s effects in 100-level and 200-level undergraduate courses. Using pre-post measurements, we find that after NOMR labs, students in both populations were more expertlike in their epistemology about experimental physics and held stronger self-efficacy about their abilities to do the kinds of things experimental physicists do. Through the lens of the psychological theory of flow, we found that students engage as productively with NOMR labs as with traditional hands-on labs. This engagement persisted after the novelty of VR in the classroom wore off, suggesting that these effects were due to the pedagogical design rather than the medium of the intervention. We conclude that these NOMR labs offer an approach to physics laboratory instruction that centers the development of students’ understanding of and comfort with the authentic practice of science.

As a result of the pandemic, many physics courses moved online. Alongside, the popularity of Internet-based problem-solving sites and forums rose. With the emergence of large language models, another shift occurred. One year into the public availability of these models, how has online help-seeking behavior among introductory physics students changed, and what is the effect of different patterns of online resource usage? In a mixed-method approach, we investigate student choices and their impact on assessment components of an online introductory physics course for scientists and engineers. We find that students still mostly rely on traditional Internet resources and that their usage strongly influences the outcome of low-stake unsupervised quizzes. We empirically found distinct clusters of help-seeking and resource-usage patterns among the students; the impact of students’ cluster membership on the supervised assessment components of the course, however, is nonsignificant.

Reforming the professionalization experiences of future faculty members, including their undergraduate experience, provides a possible means to create scalable change in higher education. However, this requires an understanding of where faculty undergraduate training occurs. We analyze data from 7748 tenure-line faculty members across 611 U.S. physics departments, including their undergraduate alma mater and their employer university. The resulting undergraduate professionalization network reveals a prestige hierarchy similar in strength to those previously found in hiring networks at the Ph.D. level, indicating that the road to faculty jobs begins during undergraduate admissions. Furthermore, 42% of physics faculty members earned their undergraduate degrees from institutions outside of the United States. These results reinforce the importance of institutional prestige in academia and offer a potential strategy for driving systemic change.

We investigate learning difficulties among second-year students in electromagnetism courses when they apply Ampère-Maxwell’s law. Using phenomenography, we analyzed written answers from 65 undergraduate physics students to four questions on Ampère’s and Ampère-Maxwell’s laws. We complemented our research by interviewing 12 students. To design the questionnaire, we ran an epistemological analysis of classical electromagnetism which helped us to identify a set of key essential concepts to understand this theory, guided the definition of learning objectives, and drew up the questions. The results revealed that the students found it hard to recognize the validity framework from Ampère’s law and to apply Ampère-Maxwell’s law. They face particular difficulties to recognize the appearance of the displacement current and the relationship between the circulation of the magnetic field and an electric field that is variable over time.

Photovoice is a type of participatory action research in which individuals document their experiences through photography. Through the taking, captioning, and reflecting on photographs that they have taken, participants are able to affect change within their communities. Participants also take part in an interview or focus group about their photos at the end of the photovoice process in which they determine themes that appear in their photos, allowing them to participate in the research being done. We used the photovoice methodology in a small, project-based, upper-division, physics capstone course at the University of Colorado Boulder, in which students worked on an authentic industry project in partnership with a company in the quantum industry. As an example of the types of research results and benefits one could obtain using photovoice, we present a discussion of how we implemented the photovoice process within this course and present some of our results, including students’ experiences with the photovoice process. Photovoice may be particularly useful in understanding new, unique courses, as it allows students to co-create research that highlights ideas about the course that researchers would not know to ask about in more traditional research methodologies such as reflection questions.

We present two studies to investigate the extent to which attending a planetarium presentation increases secondary school students’ understanding of the apparent motion of the Sun and stars. In the first study, we used the Apparent Motion of Sun and Stars (AMoSS) test in a pretest/post-test/retention test setting to measure learning gains and improved insight of 404 students (16- to 17-year-olds) after attending a classical planetarium presentation at the Brussels Planetarium. The AMoSS test is a questionnaire on the daily and yearly apparent motion and the observer’s position. It consists of six multiple-choice questions about the Sun and six similar multiple-choice questions about the stars. We asked the students to explain their choices. The learning gains are rather small and the scores improve more on the Sun questions than on the star questions. This difference is largest for questions about the yearly apparent motion. We found that this is due to the fact that many students copy their knowledge about the Sun to the stars. Based on the results of this survey, we developed a new planetarium presentation with particular attention to the use of the celestial sphere model. We also developed a learning module that prepares students at school for this planetarium presentation. In a second study, we measured the learning gains after attending this new planetarium presentation among 339 students, also 16- to 17-year-olds. Some school groups had worked through the preparatory learning module at school and others had not. We find that the learning gains on the star questions are significantly higher than in the first study, due to better scores on the yearly apparent motion questions. In this regard, it is notable that we do not see significant differences between those students who prepared the presentation at school and those who did not. In the second study, the number of students who answer all questions correctly after attending the planetarium presentation or working through the learning module increases, but only significantly for those students who worked through the learning module at school.

While many previous studies have indicated that encouraging a growth mindset can improve student learning outcomes, this conclusion’s applicability to college-level astronomy classrooms remains poorly understood owing to the variation in students’ overall and domain-specific learning attitudes. To address this, we surveyed undergraduate students in an introductory astronomy class about their attitudes towards learning astronomy over the course of five semesters. Overall, students felt an affinity for astronomy, felt moderately competent, perceived astronomy to be intermediate in terms of difficulty, and agreed strongly with standard statements reflecting a “growth mindset,” i.e., the belief that intelligence is malleable rather than fixed from birth. Their responses were stable over the course of the semester and did not appear to depend strongly on student demographics. The unexpected start of the COVID-19 pandemic and the associated shift to all-virtual learning correlated with a drop in their affinity for astronomy, a small decrease in their perceived competence, and an increase in the perceived difficulty of the topic. Their overall learning mindset showed negligible change during this time, emphasizing the stability of their belief in a growth mindset as compared to other measured learning attitudes. However, more nuanced questions about their behaviors and interpretations in the classroom, about how they felt “in the moment,” and about what factors were most important for their success in the class revealed significantly lower alignment with a growth mindset. This suggests that while introductory astronomy students may believe that they have a growth mindset, this mindset is not necessarily reflected in their self-reported classroom behaviors or measured responses to actual learning challenges.

Doctoral qualifying exams are considered essential in assessing a student’s readiness for research and advanced studies. Despite their significant role in many physics programs, questions have been raised about their format, execution, and relevance. Our research investigates perceptions held by faculty members regarding the graduate doctoral examination (GDE), a written qualifying exam in Auburn University’s physics department doctoral program. We used a combination of semistructured interviews and a survey to probe their viewpoints about the purpose and necessity of written qualifying exams, their role in student preparation for these exams, and the efficacy of these exams in measuring students’ comprehensive knowledge and potential for success in physics. Despite the general consensus on the necessity of the GDE, faculty members expressed doubts about its ability to accurately predict students’ future research success and its alignment with other graduate program elements such as coursework. Proposed modifications ranged from an emphasis on oral assessments and research presentations to a complete overhaul of the examination structure. Despite these suggestions for change, the lack of agreement on a specific alternative underscores the complexity of executing substantial modifications to the GDE. Our study contributes to the ongoing dialogue on optimizing doctoral qualifying exams to better serve students and academic institutions.

Efforts to build the workforce in support of the second quantum revolution are growing, including the creation of education programs that will prepare students for jobs in this area. We surveyed 186 undergraduate students with majors across the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) disciplines and followed up with group interviews to understand their perspectives. The project was designed to understand what these STEM students know about quantum and quantum career opportunities and their level of interest in pursuing a career related to quantum. We found that most of the students know very little about quantum. Nevertheless, except for students in the life sciences, there was an interest in quantum careers. Across STEM majors, women were less likely to express interest in quantum careers than men, but this difference disappeared when we examined only physical and computer science majors. Of the few students who had knowledge of quantum concepts, most learned about this topic from online media, especially online videos. Some students reported learning about quantum in high school classes, where it was taught as an extension beyond the usual topics of the course. The undergraduate STEM students in our study identified multiple ways they would like to learn more about quantum, including short videos, seminars, courses, certificates, and degree programs.

In this paper, we present the results of an investigation into the effects of engaging with robotic telescopes during an Astronomy 101 (Astro101) course in the United States and Canada on the self-efficacy of students. Using an astronomy self-efficacy survey that measures both astronomy personal self-efficacy and instrumental self-efficacy, the authors probed their covariance with the respondents’ experience of an Astro101 course that uses robotic telescopes to collect astronomical data. Strong effects on both self-efficacy scales were seen over the period of a semester utilizing a scalable educational design using robotic telescopes. After participation in the course, the results show that the gender gap in self-efficacy between self-identified men and women is largely reduced to statistically insignificant differences compared to the initial large significant difference.

Joining a research group is one of the most important events on a graduate student’s path to becoming an independent physics researcher and earning a Ph.D. However, graduate students’ perspectives on the experience of finding a research group are not well documented in the literature. Understanding these perspectives is crucial for evaluating whether departments are providing students with adequate support while they search for a research group, and how difficulties during this process contribute to attrition. Semistructured interviews with $N=20$ first and second year physics Ph.D. students reveal that incoming graduate students see joining a research group as a significant decision, and recognize that it may impact whether they will be able to complete the program. We found that students who struggled to find a group felt isolated and worried about falling behind their peers, whereas students who were able to immerse themselves in a positive group environment reported increased sense of belonging in their programs. The process of finding a research group often held differential importance for students identifying as women and nonbinary, who at times reported having to deprioritize their preferred research topic in order to be part of a more inclusive working environment. Although incoming graduate students characterized joining a research group as a significant decision, they often felt unprepared to make it. Moreover, they perceived an overall lack of guidance and structure from their departments, and characterized coursework as a barrier to searching for a group. Our findings suggest that providing students with better support during their group search process could help improve retention, particularly for traditionally underrepresented students, and improve students’ overall satisfaction in their graduate programs.

Over the years, there have been various calls to increase and better represent astronomy in curricula. This is motivated by views within the astronomy and astronomy education communities that the awe, wonder, and interdisciplinary nature of astronomy has the potential to engage students in STEM across disciplines. Reviews of curricula have shown that astronomy topics are represented in most mandated curricula around the world and although there is a homogeneity of astronomy topics in most mandated curricula, this representation has its limitations. By using the Australian National Curriculum, the USA-based Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), and the Swedish National Curriculum as examples, this study unpacks ideas around “How much astronomy is enough?”, the mismatches between astronomy topics in curricula and what constitutes astronomical literacy within the context of the Big Ideas in Astronomy document. The results identify that there is a significant gap at the galactic and extragalactic scales when considering the typical progression of astronomy topics when considering the conceptual, spatial, and temporal scales of the topics. Specifically, topics in curricula jump from tangible concepts within the student’s immediate and Solar System spatial scales in primary school to cosmological spatial scales in upper high school, without reference to spatial and conceptual connecting topics at galactic scales. Potential sample curriculum statements drawn from the Big Ideas are presented as a suggested curriculum inclusion. This curricula gap is identified as a potential source of a similar gap in education research in these topics at these levels, which in turn perpetuates the problem by there being a lack of research-based evidence for inclusion in the curriculum.

Peer Instruction gives practice in the abstract language of physics, addresses common misconceptions among students, and is more effective than traditional lecturing. However, it is not clear what makes Peer Instruction effective nor how we might improve the method. An emerging perspective is that what makes Peer Instruction effective is how it stimulates certain cognitive processes. Research also indicates that providing rules for discussion may improve the effect of peer instruction. Hence, we wanted to answer two research questions in this study: (i) What cognitive learning processes occur during peer discussions? (ii) How do students follow discussion rules? To answer our research questions, we recorded and thematically analyzed peer discussions during Peer Instruction in an introductory physics course. The most prevalent cognitive process during peer discussions was decoding the problem. The most prevalent type of explanation was explanations with physics concepts, which usually led the students to an incorrect answer. The next most prevalent type of explanation was explanation with physics models, which usually led the students to the correct answer. The students also explained with reference to their experience or examples—intuitive or analogical explanations—and it usually added little to the conversation, was wrong, or created confusion. Some discussion rules had limited impact, prompting suggestions for rule improvements to optimize Peer Instruction. Our work contributes to the literature on Peer Instruction with a cognitively based description of the learning processes and how we might further improve and ensure the effectiveness of Peer Instruction.

Students’ beliefs about the extent to which meaningful others, including their peers, recognize them as a strong science student are correlated with their persistence in science courses and careers. Yet, prior work has found a gender bias in peer recognition, in which student nominations of strong peers disproportionately favor men over women, in some instructional science contexts. Researchers have hypothesized that such a gender bias diminishes over time, as determined by students’ academic year: studies have found a gender bias in peer recognition in science courses aimed at first-year students, but not in science courses aimed at beyond first-year students. This hypothesis that patterns of peer recognition change over time, however, has yet to be tested with longitudinal data—previous studies only examine snapshots of different students in different science courses. In this study, we isolate the effect of time on peer recognition by analyzing student nominations of strong peers across a two-semester introductory physics course sequence, containing the same set of students and the same instructor in both semesters, at a mostly women institution. Using a combination of social network analysis and qualitative methods, we find that while many students receive similar levels of peer recognition over time, the four most highly nominated students—the recognition celebrities—exhibit some change between semesters even in this highly controlled setting. Furthermore, we observe that these changes in the celebrities track closely with changes in student outspokenness and that being outspoken is likely more important for gaining recognition than earning a high grade in the class. These findings lend support to prior work’s hypothesis that peer recognition changes over time, but also challenge the generalizability of previous results (i.e., that patterns of recognition are related to students’ academic year). Instead, peer recognition seems highly sensitive to variables such as individual students’ participation and, therefore, may be course specific. We provide recommendations for both when and how instructors may intervene on peer recognition based on our results.

Leaders, policymakers, and researchers have called attention to the need to improve critical aspects of physics programs, from teaching and pedagogy to making physics more diverse and equitable. As such programmatic changes are challenging and require a second-order change to be effective, many physics faculty responsible for carrying them out are not equipped with the necessary experience and support to do so. This can result in a significant waste of resources and time. Moreover, while there is a robust body of literature in higher education focusing on institutional and cultural change, there is a limited understanding of the baseline of the culture of physics programs (where physics programs are starting from), a critical aspect that shapes the change effort. Dr. David Craig and Dr. Joel Corbo with the support of the American Physical Society and the American Association of Physics Teachers developed the Departmental Action Leadership Institutes (DALIs) to meet the needs of the physics community by supporting physics faculty to effectively design and implement departmental change focusing on areas needing improvement. In this research project, we developed case studies of five DALI-active physics programs from two DALI cohorts. We use a cultural dynamics lens to document facets of the dominant culture around how physics faculty approach and pursue change work. We see evidence of DALI participants’ growing awareness of taken-for-granted assumptions about educational change processes and assessment practices within their departmental cultures and coming to recognize and value alternative ways of collaborating and enacting change in their local contexts. We found that physics faculty typically approach change work in a rushed and ad hoc way ignoring the use of formal evidence. In particular, we found that any data collection efforts are the primary responsibility of a single person, rarely becoming the focus of joint attention. Whenever data did receive joint attention, it was approached in a cursory way without meaningfully informing collective change efforts. This study lays the foundation to explore critical aspects of the dominant physics culture that may constrain enacting particular forms of programmatic change. In future work, we document the cultural shifts made by these DALI-active departments around change work.

Driven in large part by the National Quantum Initiative Act of 2018, quantum information science (QIS) coursework and degree programs are rapidly spreading across U.S. institutions. Yet prior work suggests that access to quantum workforce education is unequally distributed, disproportionately benefiting students at private research-focused institutions whose student bodies are unrepresentative of U.S. higher education as a whole. We use regression analysis to analyze the distribution of QIS coursework across 456 institutions of higher learning as of Fall 2022, identifying statistically significant disparities across institutions in particular along the axes of institution classification, funding, and geographic distribution suggesting today’s QIS education programs are largely failing to reach low-income and rural students. We also conduct a brief analysis of the distribution of emerging dedicated QIS degree programs, discovering much the same trends. We conclude with a discussion of implications for educators, policymakers, and education researchers including specific policy recommendations to direct investments in QIS education to schools serving low-income and rural students, leverage existing grassroots diversity and inclusion initiatives that have arisen within the quantum community, and update and modernize procedures for collecting QIS educational data to better track these trends.

This study aimed (i) to investigate how epistemic cognition in physics and metacognition, together with three dimensions of physics identity framework—recognition, physics self-efficacy, and interest—predicted the overall physics identity of Turkish high school students and also (ii) to investigate gender differences in study constructs. A sample of 1197 high school students participated in the study. The collected data were analyzed using structural equation modeling. The analysis results indicated that the model fitted the data well, further motivating intervention studies to test the causal relations proposed in the model. The results showed that recognition and interest directly predicted physics identity and mediated the relation of physics self-efficacy to it. Metacognition and epistemic cognition predicted physics identity through physics self-efficacy. The study also observed significant direct and indirect relations among metacognition, epistemic cognition, self-efficacy, recognition, and interest. Furthermore, gender differences were found in the current study. While no gender difference was observed in metacognition and epistemic cognition in physics, male students scored higher than female students in physics identity, self-efficacy, recognition, and interest. However, the mediation analysis further indicated that gender differences in physics self-efficacy might explain gender differences in physics identity, recognition, and interest. The results of this study could motivate future interventions testing the effect of metacognitive and epistemic activities on both physics self-efficacy and identity, and also, the interventions testing whether practices that reduce the gender gap in physics self-efficacy will help eliminate the gender gap in physics identity, recognition, and interest.

Data comparison problems are used in teaching and science education research that focuses on students’ ability to compare datasets and their conceptual understanding of measurement uncertainties. However, the evaluation of students’ decisions in these problems can pose a problem: e.g., students making a correct decision for the wrong reasons. Three previous studies, that share the same context and data comparison problem but where participants had increasing conceptual knowledge of measurement uncertainties, are revisited. The comparison shows a troublesome result: increasing conceptual knowledge does not lead to better decision making in the data comparison problem. In this research, we have looked into this apparent discrepancy by comparing and reanalyzing the data from these three studies. We have analyzed students’ justifications by coding them based on the compared quantity and the deciding criterion, giving a highly detailed insight into what they do when comparing the datasets. The results show clear differences in the quality of the justifications across the studies and by combining the results with the decisions, we could successfully identify four cases of correct and incorrect decisions for right or wrong reasons. This analysis showed a high prevalence of correct decisions for wrong reasons in two of the studies, resolving the discrepancy in the initial comparison of these studies. The implication of our analysis is that simply asking students to make a decision in data comparison problems is not a suitable probe to gauge their ability to compare datasets or their conceptual understanding of measurement uncertainties and a probe like this should always be complemented by an analysis of the justification.

Computational thinking in physics has many different forms, definitions, and implementations depending on the level of physics or the institution it is presented in. To better integrate computational thinking in introductory physics, we need to understand what physicists find important about computational thinking in introductory physics. We present a qualitative analysis of 26 interviews asking academic ($N\_a=18$) and industrial ($N\_i=8$) physicists about the teaching and learning of computational thinking in introductory physics courses. These interviews are part of a long-term project toward developing an assessment protocol for computational thinking in introductory physics. We find that academic and industrial physicists value students’ ability to read code and that python (or vpython) and spreadsheets were the preferred computational language or environment used. Additionally, the interviewees mentioned that identifying the core physics concepts within a program, explaining code to others, and good program hygiene (i.e., commenting and using meaningful variable names) are important skills for introductory students to acquire. We also find that while a handful of interviewees note that the experience and skills gained from computation are quite useful for student’s future careers, they also describe multiple limiting factors of teaching computation in introductory physics, such as curricular overhaul, not having “space” for computation’, and student rejection. The interviews show that while adding computational thinking to physics students’ repertoire is important, the importance really comes from using computational thinking to learn and understand physics better. This informs us that the assessment we develop should only include the basics of computational thinking needed to assess introductory physics knowledge.