Dr. Dedra Demaree Assistant Professor of Physics Oregon State University

1. From concept tests to student identity development – what to look for when assessing your classroom Dr. Dedra Demaree Assistant Professor of Physics Oregon State University

2. History • Paradigms in Physics program for 400 level courses • Faculty hire to extend reform to 200 level courses

3. Context • Large-lecture, calculus-based physics • ~200 students per section • 2-3 sections per term (typically multiple instructors) • Primarily ‘service’ course, predominately male • Active-engagement even in lecture hall

4. GOAL: CONTENT Standard Assessment Tests • Force Concept Inventory ACCEPTED that active engagement Is necessary but not sufficient for Improving student learning gains!!

5. FCI scores for multiple sections/terms • Red circled sections are the reformed sections, scores are significantly different

6. Potential concerns:Is the reform favoring the already successful? Or just boosting up the weak? Women/minorities? Thankfully, NO! Checking Statistics

7. What about drop-out/fail rate? • Averages for traditional sections: • 8.34% of students get below a C • 18.0% of students have an I/F/W • Averages for studio sections: • 6.50% of students get below a C • 8.84% of students have an I/F/W

8. GOAL: SophisticationAttitude/Reasoning surveys • Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey • Lawson Test of Scientific Reasoning • Dr. Sissi Li (PhD OSU, Sept 2011): Physics Identity Survey

9. Goal: Increasing Physics IdentityPreliminary Physics Identity Findings Pre-day 1        Week 10 1= Strongly Agree 5 = Strongly Disagree Mean = 4.35 Shared responsibility for learning 4.20* Mean = 3.53 Value group work for learning physics 3.76* How confident are you…? 1= Not at all 5 = Totally Mean = 3.44 SE for communicating and explaining physics knowledge 3.51 Mean = 3.31 SE for problem solving using ISLE cycle 3.46 Mean = 3.88 3.48* SE for academic success in math and physics

10. Goal: Improving reformIn-class observations

11. Post-discussion with observer • The instructor wasn't happy • 1:30 – 1:58 Observer can clearly state what the problem was with the students – they didn't understand the task – I was confused/surprised • 1:58 – 2:33 Observer noticed the difference between my instruction in the two classes that made an improvement • 2:33 – 2:47 Observer can tell clearly when students are on/off topic • 2:47 – 3:06 Observer can explain student behavior

12. Goal: Assessing teaching & learningMore extensive data collection Green is non-recorded area

13. Gap in Participation between Classrooms Fall ’08 Winter ‘09 Spring ‘09 p-value: 0.0019

14. Instructor Actions Yielding High Participation • Listening to students’ reasoning, answering student questions, or recognizing students as contributors to the classroom community in a whole-class discussion before a small group activity. • Referring to the small group activity as a chance for students to take an active role in their learning. • Asking students to “convince” a peer of their reasoning, rather than simply asking them to discuss or talk. • Voicing the expectation that students will perform well on the activity or problem.

15. Analysis of teacher/student discourse One student in a group asked a question too softly for the teacher to hear. T: Hmm? S1: Will the bullet have a trajectory like that or will it just go straight? S2: The bullet’s gonna drop a little bit… S1: Yeah. T: It will drop a little bit. So you are both right, the bullet’s gonna slow down but does that tell us what’s going to happen? Teacher listens but does not respond until the group members have their chance to speak. Authority to teacher, asking for the ‘right answer’ Student taking authority to express understanding Student validating S2’s right to answer in place of the teacher Teacher taking authority but also validating both students’ ideas and return meaning making to the students with question

16. Discourse analysis: do students adopt skills? Skills and practices demonstrated: Origin choices, assumptions, interpreting task/open-ended question, sense-making, system choices, analysis of set-up, justifying choices, checking if reasoning makes sense