Each time students engage in a classroom activity, they make tacit interpretations (about the nature of those activities) that influence how they reason and ultimately what they learn. For example, a student answering a physics question on a worksheet might draw on her everyday thinking to help make sense of the physics, or she might not even consider everyday thinking if its usefulness was not readily apparent. For many physics instructors, the reconciliation of everyday thinking and formal physics knowledge is part of what it means to fully understand physics.1 Despite this, many students do not see reconciling these two things as what they are supposed to do in the classroom. Often we see students whose interpretation of physics class causes them to “turn off” their everyday thinking. In this article, we argue for the importance of attending closely to whether students are reconciling their everyday and formal physics thinking and introduce “obvious” questions as a tool that can help instructors assess whether such reconciliation is taking place.

1.
See, e.g.,
D.
Levin
,
D.
Hammer
,
A.
Elby
, and
J.
Coffey
,
Becoming a Responsive Science Teacher: Focusing on Student Thinking in Secondary Science
(
National Science Teachers Association
,
Arlington, VA
,
2013
).
2.
David
Hammer
,
“Two approaches to learning physics,”
Phys. Teach.
27
,
664
671
(
Dec. 1989
).
3.
P.
Hutchison
and
A.
Elby
,
“Evidence of epistemological framing in survey question misinterpretation,”
AIP Conf. Proc.
1513
,
194
197
(
Jan. 2013
).
4.
See, e.g., the student “Roger” as described in
D.
Hammer
,
“Epistemological beliefs in introductory physics,”
Cog. Instr.
12
(
2
),
151
183
(
1994
).
5.
A.
Elby
,
“Helping physics students learn how to learn,”
Am. J. Phys.
69
,
S54
S64
(
July 2001
). In Elby's original question, the car is said to be parked initially. We omitted this statement from our version in order to reduce the number of students focused on the effect of the car's brakes. We now use a version of the question that involves a bowling ball colliding head-on with a bowling pin, which helps to avoid issues with vehicle damage and brakes altogether.
6.
W. K.
Adams
,
K. K.
Perkins
,
N. S.
Podolefsky
,
M.
Dubson
,
N. D.
Finkelstein
, and
C. E.
Wieman
,
“New instrument for measuring students beliefs about physics and learning physics: The Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey,”
Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res.
2
,
010101
(
2006
), and E. F. Redish, J. M. Saul, and R. N. Steinberg, “Student expectations in introductory physics,” Am. J. Phys. 66, 212-224 (March 1998).
7.
R. K.
Thornton
and
D. R.
Sokoloff
,
“Assessing student learning of Newton's laws: The force and motion conceptual evaluation and the evaluation of active learning laboratory and lecture curricula,”
Am. J. Phys.
66
,
338
352
(
April 1998
).
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.