Physics by Inquiry - The UTeach Institute

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Jill Marshall
Science & Math Education
University of Texas at Austin
1

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Overview of course
Housed in Science & Math Ed Center
10-22 students (usually no TA).
Pre-service elementary & high school science
teachers (UTeach), SME graduate students,
general education students
No prerequisite
Based on Physics by Inquiry
Typically covers 3 PBI units (or parts of units).
2

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Physics by Inquiry
McDermott, L.C. & the Physics Education Group at the
University of Washington (1996). Physics by inquiry.
New York: John Wiley and Sons.
3

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Format
Modeled after UW course (Physics
405/407).
No lecture: Students work through
exercises in small groups (2-3) with
regular instructor check points,
occasional group discussion.
2-3 in-class exams, including a
comprehensive final.
Writing assignments, including journals,
reflections and papers.
4

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Why do we need a special
physics course for teachers?
“60% might be good enough for
engineers, but not for teachers.”
Key areas of precollege curriculum
neglected in university programs.
Teachers need to develop “PCK”,
metacognitive strategies.
Provides opportunities for research into
learning and teaching.
5

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Robust content understanding
Students typically leave traditional
courses, even well taught ones, without
solid content understanding. (e.g.,
McDermott & Shaffer, 1992; Thacker et
al., 1994)
Even reformed lecture-lab-tutorial courses
do not reach the level of student
achievement possible in a course
emphasizing teaching and learning
(Redish,1998; Marshall & Dorward,
2000).
6

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Robust content understanding
More than 20 peer-reviewed articles
documenting effectiveness
Typical pretest scores (10-15%) and
typical ‘second generation’ post test
scores (80-90%)
“I never thought this hard in my whole life.
My brain hurts.”
7

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Empowerment
What’s so interesting for me, when it came time
to study, I thought, I don’t need to study
because I already know all this […] That was
cool. I liked not having to cram for the final
exam.
8

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Critique of previous
instruction
Cause it’s embarrassing to me… when I
did that pretest, I should have known it
absolutely, even as a science teacher not
even as an engineer, as a science
teacher I should know that, that’s my job,
to know that stuff for my kids and I
didn’t... How dare they have given me an
A!
9

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Dave: And again, it’s this confusing
equation that people don’t like. But it’s
what I was brought up on and I can’t run
away from it. I don’t know…
Linda: You were brought up on that, eh?
Dave: Yeah, it was like my [pacifier].
Linda: Here’s your bottle and here’s your
equation.
10

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Artifacts of instruction
“Yeah, just wait. You’re about to have to
unlearn everything you thought you
learned.”
11

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Metacognition
12

Jill Marshall
“[Expletive deleted]! How
can I know this and not
know it!”
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
13

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Pedagogical Content Knowledge
Student without prior physics experience
developed alternative mathematical
model of motion: d = “a” t 2 ; “a” is the
change in average velocities over time.
“It’s like Good Will Hunting.”
“I would go home at night and I would
think it about for hours. Like I would fall
asleep thinking about we had this one
question that was asked at this point, and
why was it asked…”
14

Jill Marshall
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
Teachers need to learn by
inquiry
And I know now, having gone through it, it’s not
something that I could just look at the book and
say OK, I’ve got this. It’s something that you
have to do, in order to learn it.
…there is only so much you can learn in college
the way it’s taught, it’s taught traditionally for
the most part in a big classroom and then you
just solve problem and problem and problem …
If I would have learned [the PBI] way in college,
oh! “
15

Jill Marshall
HANDOUT
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
SCI 360-3: Physical Science (Unique Number 12565) Fall 2009
“What you have been obliged to discover for yourself leaves a path in your mind that you can use
again when the need arises.” (G.C. Lichtenberg)
INSTRUCTOR: JILL MARSHALL, marshall@mail.utexas.edu, SZB 462E, 232-9685 (O)
OFFICE HOURS: TUESDAY 3:00-3:45 IN SZB 462E OR BY APPOINTMENT.
ATTENDANCE POLICY: The work in this course is largely hands-on and will be done in groups.
Therefore it is mandatory that you attend class sessions as arranged. In the case of an excused absence
(documented University business, illness, family or personal emergency, religious observances), please
contact the instructor and your partners as soon as possible, preferably in advance, to arrange a makeup
session. Unexcused absences will result in loss of credit.
ACCOMMODATIONS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES: As part of our commitment to educational
equity, the University of Texas at Austin and your instructor will provide, upon request, appropriate
academic accommodations for qualified students with disabilities. For more information, please
contact your instructor or the Office of the Dean of Students at 471-6259, 471-4641 TTY.
COURSE GOALS:
- Students will develop a deeper conceptual understanding of targeted concepts from the precollege
physical science curriculum, and create a coherent conceptual model of the target
content topics.
- Students will learn to reflect on and characterize their own learning and that of others.
- Students will experience this content through a process of guided inquiry and develop an
understanding of how the process of inquiry interacts with student learning.
- Students will develop an understanding of what is meant by pedagogical content knowledge
and enhance and characterize their own pedagogical content knowledge in physical science.
- Students will become familiar student difficulties in learning particular topics in physical
science, and the effectiveness of various modes of teaching and learning to overcome these.
TEXT: Physics by Inquiry, Volume 2, (McDermott and the University of Washington PEG), available
at the University Coop, online booksellers, and sometimes at Half Price Books.
COURSE GRADE: Performance in the course will be assessed on the basis of
(1) Oral assessments (checkouts) (20%)
(2) Homework (10%)
(3) Paper (25%)
(4) Midterm (20%) & Final Exam (25%)
ORAL ASSESSMENTS: Certain key experiments and exercises direct you to have your responses
checked. Discuss the relevant issues with your partners and prepare a written response. After
reviewing it and discussing portions of your response with you, a staff member will either give your
response a check (√) or will ask you to revise your response. In general, you should not proceed to the
next experiment or exercise until you have been “checked off.”
NOTEBOOK: You will need to keep a notebook of your observations about your work with summaries
of important results. You will be asked to summarize the main findings of each day’s work, identifying
H - 1

Jill Marshall
HANDOUT
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
the key events that led to those findings, and sometimes discuss how they apply to a specific problem
or question. This journal will be an important resource for your reflection paper and should serve as a
guide to organize your thinking and help you study for exams.
PAPER AND ESSAY ASSIGNMENTS: This course is designed to promote reflection on learning and
understanding. A great deal of emphasis is placed on your ability to provide a written discussion of the
concepts you are studying, as well as the reasoning you use to arrive at your conclusions. A paper and
several essay assignments will be given during the course. A description of each paper assignment,
with a scoring rubric, will be distributed separately. All work on papers should be done individually.
Any material that you include that is not in your own words must be cited clearly as to its source.
Likewise, you should give credit for ideas that originate from another source. Using another person’s
words or ideas (including words and ideas posted on the Internet!) without due credit is plagiarism and
is a violation of University rules.
ACADEMIC HONESTY: Students who violate University rules on scholastic dishonesty are subject to
disciplinary penalties, including the possibility of failure in the course and/or dismissal from The
University. Since such dishonesty harms the individual, all students, and the integrity of The
University, policies on scholastic dishonesty will be strictly enforced.
READINGS
Brown, T.R., Slater, T.F., & Adams, J.P., (1998). Gender differences with batteries and bulbs, The
Physics Teacher, 36 (9), 526-527.
McDermott, L.C. & P.S. Shaffer (1992). Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example
from introductory electricity, Part I: Investigation of student understanding, American Journal of
Physics, 60 (11), 994-1003.
Shaffer, P.s. & McDermott, L.C. (1992) Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example
from introductory electricity, Part II: Design of instructional strategies, American Journal of
Physics, 60, 1003-1013.
Wosilait, K., Heron, P.R.L., Shaffer, P.S. & McDermott, L.C. (1998). Development and
assessment of a research-based tutorial on light and shadow, American Journal of Physics,
66 (10), 906-913.
H - 2

Jill Marshall
HANDOUT
UTeach Institute - NMSI Annual Conference
Austin, TX / May 25 – 27, 2010
SCHEDULE
Date Homework due at beginning of class Experiments/Exercises in class
9/1 •
PBI VOL.2, ELECTRIC
CIRCUITS 1.1-1.11
• EC 1.12-1.14, Summary and CRITIQUE OF
BROWN, SLATER & ADAMS (1998) AND THE
9/8
LETTER IN RESPONSE. HOW DID THE WAY
YOUR GROUP APPROACHED THE TASK OF
LIGHTING THE BULB COMPARE WITH THE
WAY THESE STUDENTS DID IT? (1-2 PAGES)
EC 2.1-2.6, EC 3.1-3.4
9/15 • EC 2.7, p.494 2.1, 2.3,3.3 EC 3.5-3.10, EC 4.1-4.6
9/22 • p.498 3.5, p. 499-500 4.2-4.4 EC 4.7-4.11, EC 5.1-5.5
9/29 • p.501 4.5,4.6, 5.4 EC 5.6-5.7, EC 6.1-6.5
10/6
- P.503 5.5, p.504 6.1-6.3, READ
MCDERMOTT & SHAFFER (1992)
• EC 7.1-7.11, 7.14-7.16
10/13 - p.505 7.1, p.506 7.3-7.4 • EC 8.1-8.6
10/17 - Midterm Paper due by 8AM • Saturday (no class)
10/20 - P.507 8.1-8.3 • EC Review
10/27 -
11/3
- DESCRIPTION OF WHAT DETERMINES
HOW AN IMAGE FROM A LIGHT SOURCE
WILL LOOK. HOW DOES THE
SHAPE/POSITION OF THE LIGHT SOURCE
AFFECT IT? HOW DOES THE
SHAPE/POSITION OF A MASK BETWEEN
THE LIGHT SOURCE AND THE SCREEN
AFFECT THE IMAGE?
• EC Midterm, Light &
Shadows Intro
• LO 1.1-1.8, 2.1-2.5
11/10
- p.619 1.2-1.5, Summary/reflection on
Wosilait et al.
• LO 2.6-2.11, 4.1-4.8
11/17 - LO 2.7-2.9, 2.12, p.622 2.1, 2.2, • LO 6.1-6.3, 7.1-7.4
11/24 - p.625 4.1-4.3, p.629 6.1 • LO 7.5-7.6, LO 8.1-8.3
12/1 - p. 630 7.2, p.631 8.1-8.2, LO 8.6-8.8 • LO 10.1-10.11
12/8 - LO 8.9, p.633 10.1-10.3 • Optional Review, 4-7 PM
12/9
(Wed.)
-
• Final Exam, 2:00-5:00 PM,
SZB 316
H - 3