Most introductory physics instructors administer several quizzes and/or exams each term. Instructors are willing to invest the significant time it takes to develop, administer, and grade these assessments because they believe that regular assessments help students learn. However, instructors also believe that students do not make full use of the learning potential of these assessments. For example, in an interview study, six college physics instructors were asked how they expect their students to utilize an instructor solution after a test. All said they expect students to compare the instructor solution with their own and learn from any mistakes made. However, the instructors all thought that most students do not do this sort of comparison and only look at solutions superficially, if at all.1

Topics
Education, Interviews, Corrections
1.
E.
Yerushalmi
,
C.
Henderson
,
K.
Heller
,
P.
Heller
, and
V.
Kuo
, “
Physics faculty beliefs and values about the teaching and learning of problem solving. I. Mapping the common core
,”
Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.
3
(
2
),
020109
(
2007
).
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
 
2.
K. A. Harper, R. W. Brown, and M. Finnerty, “A treatment for post‐exam syndrome,” paper presented at the AAPT Winter Meeting, Miami Beach, FL (2004).
3.
Note that this is similar to that described in
K. D.
Pinkerton
, “
Learning from mistakes
,”
Phys. Teach.
43
,
510
–
513
(Nov.
2005
).
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
 
4.
Readers can download a copy of the “Detailed Description of Quiz Correction Assignment” at
http://ftp.aip.org/cgi‐bin/epaps?ID=
 E-PHTEAH-47-013909.
For more information on EPAPS, see http://www.aip.org/pubservs/epaps.htm.
5.
P.
Black
 and
D.
Wiliam
, “
Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment
,”
Phi Delta Kappan
80
(
2
),
139
–
148
(Oct.
1998
).
Google Scholar
 
6.
National Research Council, How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1999).
7.
E. F. Redish, Teaching Physics with the Physics Suite (Wiley, Hoboken, NJ, 2003).
8.
A.
 
Elby
, “
Another reason that physics students learn by rote
,”
Am. J. Phys.
 
67
(
7
),
S52
–
S57
(July
1999
);
Google Scholar
 
D.
Hammer
, “
Two approaches to learning physics
,”
Phys. Teach.
57
,
664
–
670
(Dec.
1989
).
Google Scholar
 
9.
E. F.
Redish
,
J. M.
Saul
, and
R. N.
Steinberg
, “
Student expectations in introductory physics
,”
Am. J. Phys.
66
(
3
),
212
–
224
(March
1998
).
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
 
10.
D.
Maloney
,
T.
O'Kuma
,
C. J.
Hieggelke
, and
A.
Van Heuvelen
, “
Surveying students' conceptual knowledge of electricity and magnetism
,“
Am. J. Phys.
69
(
7
),
S12
–
S23
(March
2001
).
Google Scholar
 
11.
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
(Jan.
1998
).
Google Scholar
Crossref
Search ADS
 
12.
Although we were unable to find peer‐reviewed data for CSEM gains in innovative physics courses, the SCALE‐UP website (Ref. 13) reports CSEM gains of <g> = .20 to <g> = .29 for the innovative SCALE‐UP course.
13.
R. Beichner, “Conceptual Learning,” SCALE‐UP website; http://www.ncsu.edu/per/SCALEUP/ConceptualLearning.html.
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2009 American Association of Physics Teachers.
2009
American Association of Physics Teachers

Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material- zip file
AAPT members receive access to The Physics Teacher and the American Journal of Physics as a member benefit. To learn more about this member benefit and becoming an AAPT member, visit the Joining AAPT page.