Physics I MOOC – Educational Outcomes David Lieberman*, Michael Dubson ¶, Katherine Goodman ¶, Ed Johnsen ¶, Jack Olsen ¶ and Noah Finkelstein ¶ * Department.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A Discrepancy in Online vs. Traditional Teaching!!!.... say it isn’t so. Heather Seitz Johnson County Community College Overland Park, KS.
Advertisements

Improving on the Recitation Section: Tutorials in Introductory Physics Wed Brown Bag SJP Fa '05.
When Top Down Meets Bottom Up: Supporting Educational Transformation in a Physics Department Steven Pollock, Noah Finkelstein, Katherine Perkins, Stephanie.
Life Sciences Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative.
Lecture 2 PY 427 Statistics 1 Fall 2006 Kin Ching Kong, Ph.D
Building on a Base: tools, practices, and implications from physics education research (PER) S.J. Pollock N.D. Finkelstein Physics Department Thanks for.
Tracking Transformed Courses: Impacts of Tutorials, Instructor, Text, … SJP Summer '05.
Examining the Gender Gap in Introductory Physics Lauren Kost Steven Pollock, Noah Finkelstein Department of Physics, University of Colorado at Boulder.
How do we evaluate how effective we are in helping our students master course material? In promoting our broader educational agendas? -Prelim and final.
CRCD Intelligent Systems Curriculum Impact Assessment and Evaluation of YEAR 1 OUTCOMES (Implemented 1 and/or Projected ) 1 Levels at which Implemented.
Comparing Explicit and Implicit Teaching of Multiple Representation Use in Physics Problem Solving Patrick Kohl, Noah Finkelstein University of Colorado,
Learning in MOOCs! Evidence and Correlates Dave Pritchard and //RELATE.MIT.edu S. Rayyan, R. Teodorescu, A. Pawl, Y. Bergner, A. Barrantes, Chen, D. Seaton,
Gender Differences in Students' Perceived Experiences in Introductory Physics Lauren Kost Steven Pollock, Noah Finkelstein Department of Physics University.
Colorado Learning About Science Survey for Experimental Physics Benjamin Zwickl, Heather Lewandowski & Noah Finkelstein University of Colorado Physics.
TEMPLATE DESIGN © Measuring Students’ Beliefs about Physics in Saudi Arabia H. Alhadlaq 1, F. Alshaya 1, S. Alabdulkareem.
Students worked through two to four representations of each quiz. In many cases, student solution strategies varied strongly from representation to representation.
PER-based Techniques in a Large Lecture Modern Physics Course for Engineers Sam McKagan, Katherine Perkins, and Carl Wieman University of Colorado at Boulder.
METHODS Study Population Study Population: 224 students enrolled in a 3-credit hour, undergraduate, clinical pharmacology course in Fall 2005 and Spring.
Teaching Critical Thinking in a Statistics Course Prabha Betne LaGuardia Community College Mathematics Department November 18, 2006 NYSMATYC Region IV.
P Technology Enabled Active Learning (TEAL) Redesign of Mechanics and Electromagnetism at MIT Course Redesign Workshop October 17, 2008 Dr. Peter.
Office of Institutional Research, Planning and Assessment January 24, 2011 UNDERSTANDING THE DIAGNOSTIC GUIDE.
Quasi-Experimental Designs Manipulated Treatment Variable but Groups Not Equated.
Student Engagement Survey Results and Analysis June 2011.
Transformation of the Traditional Organic Chemistry Lecture Sequence into a Hybrid of Face to Face Peer Learning and Online Lecture Vincent Maloney.
EVALUATION REPORT Derek R. Lane, Ph.D. Department of Communication University of Kentucky.
Are there “Hidden Variables” in Students’ Initial Knowledge State Which Correlate with Learning Gains? David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy.
Marsha Lovett, Oded Meyer and Candace Thille Presented by John Rinderle More Students, New Instructors: Measuring the Effectiveness of the OLI Statistics.
The Impact of the History of Physics on Student Attitude and Conceptual Understanding of Physics Often the pre and posttest show negative shift in introductory.
College Completion Reports and Return on Investment March 28, 2014.
The Genetics Concept Assessment: a new concept inventory for genetics Michelle K. Smith, William B. Wood, and Jennifer K. Knight Science Education Initiative.
College Algebra: An Overview of Program Change Dr. Laura J. Pyzdrowski Dr. Anthony S. Pyzdrowski Dr. Melanie Butler Vennessa Walker.
1 L643: Evaluation of Information Systems Week 5: February 4, 2008.
1 Physics 1110: Mechanics Tutorial pretest due at 4pm today Tutorials tomorrow in G2B60, G2B75, & G2B77 Web page:
Science Case Network GAPS IN REACHING DIVERSE AUDIENCES Aditi Pai Networking Conference August 6-7, 2012 RCN-UBE Project #
Chapter 2 Frequency Distributions
A Pre-Calculus Course: From classroom to online to MOOC Sarah Eichhorn Associate Dean, Distance Learning & Faculty, School of Physical Sciences.
Using Discipline Specific Action Research to Inform Curriculum Development & Classroom Practice A Case Study: Workshop Physics.
How do these groups of students think about and learn genetics?
Service Learning Dr. Albrecht. Presenting Results 0 The following power point slides contain examples of how information from evaluation research can.
Assessing multiple research-based transformations in second semester physics. Steven J. Pollock University of Colorado at Boulder ( per.colorado.edu) We.
Physics Education Research The University of Edinburgh Attitudes and Beliefs about Physics from a UK Academics’ Perspectives Robyn Donnelly 1, Cait MacPhee.
Philip W. Young Dept. of Chemistry & Engineering Physics, University of Wisconsin-Platteville, Platteville, WI Correlation between FCI Gains and.
Student Preferences For Learning College Algebra in a Web Enhanced Environment Dr. Laura J. Pyzdrowski, Pre-Collegiate Mathematics Coordinator Institute.
Learning Gains in Physics in Relation to Students' Mathematics Skills David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy Iowa State University.
The Persistence of the Gender Gap in Introductory Physics Lauren Kost Steven Pollock, Noah Finkelstein Department of Physics, University of Colorado at.
P.W. Young University of Wisconsin-Platteville Sponsored by NSF-DUE CCLI #
Choice and Application of Keypads to Small Classes Paul Williams Department of Physics Austin Community College Austin, Texas
Learning Gains, Student Attitudes, and impacts on LA’s in Phys 1110 (Sp ‘03) S. Pollock With NSF/STEM-TP support.
Outcomes for Mathematical Literacy: Do Attitudes About Math Change?
Student Opinions of Online Learning Systems Nicholas Verno, Senior CIS Major Westminster College Faculty Advisor - Dr. Terri Lenox.
Learning Assessment Loop Closing Activity in the Biology Department Vivian Navas Biology Department Assessment Coordinator May 2006.
Assessing Gender Differences in Students' Understanding of Magnetism using Magnetism Conceptual Survey Jing Li Department of Physics and Astronomy University.
Physics Education Research at CU S.J. Pollock SPS Fall 05 or why do I keep filling out those online surveys at the start of every course?
Implications of the inclusion of students collaborative group work on advanced course materials in introductory physics courses Sunil Dehipawala and Vazgen.
Interactive Classroom: Why Use a Classroom Response System.
MT ENGAGE Student Learning Outcomes and Assessment April 27, 2015.
Chapter 2 Frequency Distributions PowerPoint Lecture Slides Essentials of Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences Seventh Edition by Frederick J Gravetter.
Innovative Applications of Formative Assessments in Higher Education Beyond Exams Dan Thompson M.S. & Brandy Close M.S. Oklahoma State University Center.
Changing student attitudes about science and their confidence in understanding real-world connections Annia Fayon Department of Postsecondary Teaching.
Philip W. Young Dept. of Chemistry & Engineering Physics, University of Wisconsin-Platteville, Platteville, WI Correlation between FCI Gains and.
and Michael Justason - Faculty of Engineering, McMaster University
Assessing Students' Understanding of the Scientific Process Amy Marion, Department of Biology, New Mexico State University Abstract The primary goal of.
Cumulative centrality plots
Instructor Made Videos Enhance Student Learning
Starting Small Converting a Single Lecture to an Active Format
Instructor and/or Author Information
Gender Differences in both Force Concept Inventory and Introductory Physics Performance Jennifer Docktor, Kenneth Heller, + UM PER Group University.
Gender Differences in both Force Concept Inventory and Introductory Physics Performance Jennifer Docktor, Kenneth Heller, + UM PER Group University.
Student Satisfaction Results
Choice and Application of Keypads to Small Classes
Presentation transcript:

Physics I MOOC – Educational Outcomes David Lieberman*, Michael Dubson ¶, Katherine Goodman ¶, Ed Johnsen ¶, Jack Olsen ¶ and Noah Finkelstein ¶ * Department of Physics, CUNY/Queensborough Community College, Bayside NY ¶ Department of Physics, University of Colorado at Boulder, UCB 390, Boulder CO Abstract: While enrollment and retention figures often grab headlines for Massively Open Online Courses (MOOCs), the more telling measures of MOOCs’ effectiveness may be found in the educational outcomes. The performance of students enrolled in the University of Colorado Physics I MOOC was evaluated with the use of numerous instruments. These instruments include exams, homework assignments, the FMCE and the CLASS. The performance of students in the MOOC was tracked across the semester and compared with that of students in similar “Brick and Mortar” classes at the University of Colorado. For some measures (FMCE) their performance was compared with the results from large scale studies. On all measures the MOOC students performed at least as well as and had learning gains at least as great as those in more traditional settings. This may be due, in part, to a massive self-selection process skewing the MOOC population over time. MOOC Structure vs. “Brick and Mortar” The lectures for the MOOC were video-recorded versions of the Phys 1110 lectures with dead time edited out and concept tests from the lectures (“clicker” questions) edited in. The homework assignments were, for the most part, identical to the Phys 1110 assignments as were the exams. The major differences between the MOOC and Phys 1110 were the use of tutorial-based recitation sections and peer discussion during concept tests in Phys 1110 and the use of discussion forums in the MOOC. MOOC VS. PHYS 1110 The performance of students enrolled in the MOOC was evaluated with the use of numerous instruments. The instruments used were homework assignments, exams, the FMCE and the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey (CLASS). Student performance was tracked across the semester and compared with students in Phys 1110 for all measures except the CLASS. As table 1 shows, the students who completed the MOOC performed at least as well those who completed Phys 1110 on all measures. The MOOC students scored better on the exams and statistically the same on the homework, 89.3(.5) for the MOOC versus 88.7(.3) for Phys Their normalized gains on the FMCE were comparable as well, 0.58(.047) for the MOOC versus 0.59(.033) for Phys MOOCPhys 1110 Homework Homework Homework Homework Homework Homework Homework Homework Homework Homework Homework Homework Exam Exam Exam FMCE normalized gain Table 1. Average scores on individual homework assignments and exams and normalized FMCE gains for students who completed the MOOC (N=225) and students who completed Phys 1110 (N=708). FMCE and CLASS In order to place their performance within the broader realm of physics classes, the FMCE was used as a measure of learning gains and the CLASS was used to measure changes in attitudes towards physics. As with the FMCE pre and post CLASS were administered online as surveys. The MOOC outperforms traditional lecture classes by a wide margin. It outperforms most classes with lectures incorporating interactive engagement. If compared only to classes incorporating both interactive engagement in the lectures and tutorials in recitations, the MOOC would still be placed in the upper half. Typical physics classes including those incorporating interactive engagement in lectures and/or recitation do not improve students’ attitudes towards physics and in many cases have a negative impact on those attitudes. As table 2 shows, the opposite is true for the MOOC. For students completing the MOOC CLASS scores improve and in some categories improve substantially. PRE(%)POST(%)SHIFT(%)StdErrTypical Overallfavorable All categoriesfavorable Personal Interestfavorable Real World Connectionfavorable Problem Solving Generalfavorable Problem Solving Confidencefavorable Problem Solving Sophisticationfavorable SensesMaking/Effortfavorable Conceptual understandingfavorable Applied Conceptual understanding favorable TABLE 2. CLASS pre, post and shifts for the physics MOOC. The survey consists of 36 questions for the overall and 26 total for the various categories. While changes in favorable and unfavorable responses can be reported, only shifts in favorable responses are displayed. A shift is considered large if it exceeds 2 standard errors. The typical class is taken from K.K. Perkins, M.M. Gratny*, W.K. Adams, N.D. Finkelstein and C.E. Wieman, 2005 Proceedings of the Physics Education Research Conference MOOC Fraction of courses with given FCI or MD normalized gains from R. Hake, Am. J. Phys., Vol. 66, No. 1, January Red are traditional lecture and green classes with interactive engagement. CU data taken from S. Pollock and N. Finkelstein, Phys. Rev. ST – PER 4, (2008). CU – IE lecture & trad recitations CU – IE lecture & Tutorials SELF-SELECTION Students who completed the MOOC are not typical in many ways. The demographics of students who completed the MOOC have been studied and compared with those completing Phys Regardless of their demographics MOOC students are different in another way. Over the course of the semester they go through a process of self-selection so that the best performers complete the course (for the most part). As shown in table 3, in all measures (Exam scores, FMCE pre, CLASS) the average scores of students who were still on track to complete the course improve at each stage (exam 1, exam2, completion). FMCE preCLASS preExam 1Exam 2 start exam exam completion TABLE 3. Average scores (out of 100), for all MOOC students still active at each stage in the course. Another view of the self-selection process is the shift in the FMCE pretest score distribution MOOC FMCE pre-test distributions. Top: all students who took the FMCE pre. Bottom: all students who took the FMCE pre and completed the course. Note the elimination of most of the very low scores and the shift of the distribution such that the mode is 100 for those who complete the course. The y-axis indicates the number of students and the x-axis the FMCE score in percent.