Physics faculty agree on many of the skills and habits of mind they expect physics students to acquire by the end of their degree, including mathematical sophistication, problem-solving expertise, and an ability to work independently and become expert learners. What is less clear is how these outcomes are best achieved within the context of upper-division courses. Focusing on one key course in the career of an undergraduate major—junior-level Electricity & Magnetism (E&M)—we have investigated this critical question over the course of 4 years and across multiple universities and instructors. With the aim of educating our majors based on a more complete understanding of the cognitive and conceptual challenges of upper-division courses, we transformed junior-level E&M using results and theory from education research. We present the process and content of the transformation and several measures of its success. Students and instructors enjoyed the new course materials. Students in courses using the new materials outperformed those in traditional lecture-based courses on a conceptual assessment and on some aspects of problem-solving, though not calculational skill. These results suggest that using student-centered methods at the upper-division can improve outcomes for many students.
REFERENCES
1.
J.
Bransford
, A.
Brown
, and R.
Cocking
(Eds). How People Learn
(National Academy Press
, Washington, DC
, 2000
).2.
E. F.
Redish
, Teaching Physics With the Physics Suite
(John Wiley & Sons
, New York
, 2003
).3.
For example,
L. C.
McDermott
, and E. F.
Redish
, “Resource letter: PER-1: Physics Education Research
,” Am. J. Phys.
67
, 755
–767
(1999
);R.
Chabay
and B.
Sherwood
, “Restructuring the introductory electricity and magnetism course
,” Am. J. Phys.
74
, 329
–336
(2006
).4.
C.
Singh
, “Student understanding of symmetry and gauss’s law of electricity
,” Am. J. Phys.
74
, 923
–936
(2006
).5.
C. A.
Manogue
, K.
Brown
, T.
Dray
, and B.
Edwards
, “Why is Ampère’s law so hard? A look at middle-division physics
,” Am. J. Phys.
74
, 344
–350
(2006
).6.
R. E.
Pepper
, S. V.
Chasteen
, S. J.
Pollock
, and K. K.
Perkins
, “Observations on student difficulties with mathematics in upper-division electricity and magnetism
,” Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.
(in press);R. E.
Pepper
, S. V.
Chasteen
, S. J.
Pollock
, and K. K.
Perkins
, “Our best juniors still struggle with Gauss’s Law: characterizing their difficulties
,” AIP Conf. Proc.
1289
, 1
–4
(2010
);C.
Wallace
and S. V.
Chasteen
, “Upper-division students’ difficulties with Ampère’s law
,” Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.
, 6
, 1
–8
(2010
);S. V.
Chasteen
and S. J.
Pollock
, “A research-based approach to assessing student learning issues in upper-division electricity & magnetism
,” AIP Conf. Proc.
1179
, 7
–10
(2009
).7.
C. A.
Manogue
, P. J.
Siemens
, J.
Tate
, K.
Brown
, and A. J.
Wolfer
, “Paradigms in physics: a new upper-Division curriculum
,” Am. J. Phys.
69
, 978
–990
(2001
);B. R.
Patton
, “Group learning-based approach to the graduate electrodynamics course: Jackson by inquiry
,” APS Forum Educ.
August, 25
–26
(1996
);S. V.
Chasteen
and S. J.
Pollock
, “Transforming upper-division electricity and magnetism
,” AIP Conf. Proc.
1064
, 91
–94
(2008
).8.
See, for example,
B. S.
Ambrose
, “Investigating student understanding in intermediate mechanics: identifying the need for a tutorial approach to instruction
,” Am. J. Phys.
72
(4
), 453
–459
(2004
), and first six references within.9.
S. J.
Pollock
, “Longitudinal study of student conceptual understanding in electricity and magnetism
,” Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.
5
, 020110
–1
(2009
).10.
E. F.
Redish
, “Problem solving and the use of math in physics courses
,” World View on Physics Education in 2005
. Part of the Focusing on Change series, Delhi, August 21–22, 2005
, pp. 1
–10
.11.
S. V.
Chasteen
, R. E.
Pepper
, S. J.
Pollock
, and K. K.
Perkins
, “But does it last? Sustaining a research-based curriculum in upper-division electricity & magnetism
,” AIP Conf. Proc.
1413
, 139
–142
(2012
).12.
S. V.
Chasteen
, R. E.
Pepper
, S. J.
Pollock
, and K. K.
Perkins
, “Transforming the Junior-Level: Outcomes from instruction and research in E&M
,” Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.
8
, 020107
(2012
).13.
D. J.
Griffiths
, Introduction to Electrodynamics
, 3rd ed. (Prentice Hall
, New Jersey
, 1999
).14.
R. E.
Pepper
, S. V.
Chasteen
, S. J.
Pollock
, and K. K.
Perkins
, “Facilitating faculty conversations: development of consensus learning goals
,” AIP Conf. Proc.
, 1413
, 291
–294
(2012
).15.
See EPAPS Document No. http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.4732528 for supplementary material.
17.
S. V.
Chasteen
, K. K.
Perkins
, P.
Beale
, S.J.
Pollock
, and C. E.
Wieman
, “A thoughtful approach to instruction: course transformations for the rest of us
,” J. College Sci. Teach
March/April, 70
–76
(2011
).18.
These course transformation efforts were facilitated by the grant-funded employment of one of the authors (SVC)—a postdoctoral Science Teaching Fellow (STF) supported by internal and external grant funding through the Science Education Initiative.
19.
The Science Education Initiative is a 5-year $5 million project to improve student learning by approaching the teaching of science as a science through systematic course transformation in multiple departments at CU-Boulder. http://colorado.edu/sei
20.
The full set of course materials, including learning goals, clicker questions, and assessments, are available at http://www.colorado.edu/sei/departments/physics_3310.htm and on Compadre at http://www.compadre.org/psrc/items/detail.cfm?ID=7891
21.
E.
Mazur
, Peer Instruction, A User’s Manual
(Prentice Hall
, New Jersey
, 1997
).22.
L.
Ding
, R.
Chabay
, and B.
Sherwood
, “Evaluating an electricity and magnetism assessment tool: brief electricity and magnetism assessment
,” Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.
2
, 1
–7
(2006
).23.
S. V.
Chasteen
, R. E.
Pepper
, M. D.
Caballero
, S. J.
Pollock
, and K. K.
Perkins
, “The Colorado Upper-Division Electrostatics (CUE) diagnostic: a conceptual assessment for the junior level
,” Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.
(in press);S. V.
Chasteen
and S. J.
Pollock
, “Tapping into Juniors’ Understanding of E&M: the Colorado Upper-Division Electrostatics (CUE) diagnostic
,” AIP Conf. Proc.
1179
, 109
–112
(2009
).24.
K. K.
Perkins
and C.
Turpen
, “Student perspectives on the use of clickers in upper-division physics courses
,” AIP Conf. Proc.
1179
, 225
–228
(2009
).25.
S. V.
Chasteen
, “Teasing out the effect of tutorials via multiple regression
,” AIP Conf. Proc.
1413
, 143
–146
(2012
).26.
Attendance at homework help sessions only recorded in two courses: PER-C and PER-A.
27.
S.
Goldhaber
, S.
Pollock
, M.
Dubson
, P.
Beale
, and K.
Perkins
, “Transforming upper-division quantum mechanics: learning goals and assessment
,” AIP Conf. Proc.
1179
, 145
–148
(2009
).28.
C.
Turpen
and N.
Finkelstein
, “Not all interactive engagement is the same: variations in physics professors’ implementation of Peer Instruction
,” Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.
5
, 020101
–1
(2009
).29.
R. R.
Hake
, “Interactive engagement vs. traditional methods: a six-thousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses
,” Am. J. Phys.
66
, 64
–74
(1998
).30.
For example,
L.
Breslow
, “Wrestling with Pedagogical change: The TEAL Initiative at MIT
,” Change
September, 23
–29
(2010
).31.
S. J.
Pollock
and N. D.
Finkelstein
, “Sustaining educational reforms in introductory physics
,” Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.
4
, 010110
–1
(2008
).32.
C. A.
Manogue
, P. J.
Siemens
, J.
Tate
, K.
Brown
, and A. J.
Wolfer
, “Paradigms in physics: a new upper-division curriculum
,” Am. J. Phys.
69
, 978
–990
(2001
). Materials available online at http://www.physics.oregonstate.edu/portfolioswiki© 2012 American Association of Physics Teachers.
2012
American Association of Physics Teachers
AAPT members receive access to the American Journal of Physics and The Physics Teacher as a member benefit. To learn more about this member benefit and becoming an AAPT member, visit the Joining AAPT page.
