|
|
What is the focus of this investigation? Physics Education Research (PER) argues compellingly that traditional large lectures fail at various levels - in student attitudes about physics, classroom engagement, and student academic performance. A promising approach advocated by Mazur's group at Harvard involves Peer Instruction: frequent in-lecture multiple choice conceptual questions, with peer-discussion and votes. Several colleagues and I have observed a discouraging fade phenomenon, in which student participation (measured by discussion intensity and number of votes) peters out with time. The focus of my investigation has been to ask: why is this happening, and what might be done to change it?
|
|
|
|
What evidence was gathered? End of semester surveys.
We asked members of Mazur/Crouch's web forum (Project Galileo) and CU faculty using concept tests for comments.
I held two focus groups of former students.
I introduced a class participation activity, asking questions requiring a paragraph written response. I modified a "Just in Time Teaching" web script to collect, format, and process responses online. This was the most significant single source of data for my project.
Mazur's Project Galileo
Eric Mazur's comprehensive website about Concept Tests (and more)
JITT
Just in Time Teaching, the original source of the web script I adapted to collect student responses
|
|
|
|
What results have emerged? 1) Fatigue: Students get increasingly tired. Novelty wears off.
2) Social issues:
A) Attendance decreases.
B) Peer pressure. It is not "cool" to raise cards and participate actively. The fewer other students who do it, the more socially awkward it is to participate.
C) Fear of appearing wrong/foolish. Your vote is visible to everyone.
D) High level of confusion. A confused student has little to say, and may also fear hearing incorrect or misleading discussion of their peers.
3)Procedural/logistical aspects:
A) Lack of grade incentive. In large lectures, individuals are anonymous.
B) Lack of time. If students are cut off too quickly, they may feel discouraged.
4)Student Epistemology: The answer is all that appears to matter. The idea that the process is important is not emphasized. Students are trained to learn that if they wait, they will still get the answer.They may incorrectly conclude that discussion and engagement are irrelevant.
5) Cognitive/Pedagogical issues: Problems/physics get harder. Questions may be more involved, less basic, less amenable to encourage or promote discussion.
|
|
|