1. Logistics of a secondary implementation of the Washington Tutorials University of Colorado at Boulder per.colorado.edu For the last four semesters, we have been using the Washington Tutorials in our 1 st or 2 nd -semester Calc-based introductory physics courses at the University of Colorado at Boulder. The Tutorials replace traditional TA-lead recitation sections with group-work exercises that emphasize sense-making, model-building, and oral/written articulation of concepts. At CU, successful implementation required: Dedicated space with appropriate furniture Moderate investment in equipment Increased personnel Proper training of staff Introduction Increased Personnel Training of Staff and Students Battlefield Conditions Space and Equipment Acknowledgements Special thanks to the MaryAnn Shea and the University of Colorado’s Faculty Teaching Excellence Program (FTEP), PhysTEC (APS/AIP/NSF), NSF STEM-TP, NSF CCLI (DUE #0410744), the CU Physics Dep't, the entire Physics Education Research at Colorado group, and the Physics Education Group at the University of Washington. References 1.Physics Education Technology Project, http://phet.colorado.edu. 2.L.C. McDermott, P.S. Schaffer. “Tutorials in Introductory Physics.” Prentice Hall, New Jersey. 2002. Tutorials work best when the teacher:student ratio is 1:10. The Physics Department provides only 1 graduate TA per 30-student recitation section. To increase staff, we use undergraduate “Learning Assistants” (LAs) recruited from the students who have recently taken the course. Each LA teaches in 3 or 4 recitations, so that each Tutorial section has 1 TA and 1 or 2 LAs. Funds for LAs come from an NSF-funded STEM-TP grant. Due to limited funds and space, we can only run Tutorials for one course at a time. Plans are on-going to sustain the program once the STEM-TP grant expires. Michael Dubson, Steven Pollock, and Noah Finkelstein In Tutorials, the TA/LAs do not lecture or simply "tell" answers; rather, their job is to guide students with the Socratic method, to probe student understanding with provocative questions, and to keep students on-task, allowing them to construct their own understanding. Often, both staff and students are uncomfortable with this format. A weekly 1-hour staff meeting is necessary to provide continuing pedagogical and content training. During the training session, TAs and LAs work through the upcoming Tutorial lesson and role-play teacher/student interactions. In Lecture, our instructors explicitly address student suspicions and communicate the philosophy of Tutorials. Traditional classroom arrangement (left) discourages group work. Tutorials space (right) requires appropriate furniture: small tables for groups of four. Movable partitions were built to separate Tutorial areas from surrounding lab areas. WRONG: Students working alone or off-task. More skillful staff presence needed. RIGHT: Students engaged, interactive, working in groups. Staff keeps students on-task with gentle interventions. Desirable Teacher/Student Ratio: 2 undergraduate LA’s and 1 graduate TA in this class of 28 students. Outcomes We have seen significant learning gains, as measured by pre/post-tests and by standardized exam questions. Rechargeable batteries – a must. Some Tutorial experiments: RC circuits, currents and B-fields, galvanometer, electric motor. Note spring-switches in circuits to preserve battery life. Much equipment is purchased, but some is hand-made. In PhysicsII, about 80% of Tutorials involve mini-labs. All experiments are taken directly from the Tutorial Instructor's Manual, with some local adaptations. Start-up Costs for a 500-student Physics II class: Furniture (15 tables, cabinets, partitions): $10K Mini-lab equipment: $8K Faculty time to purchase/design/build: 60 hrs Conclusions Tutorials work, if you take them seriously. For us, this meant:  Dedicated space / appropriate furniture  Purchase/construction of mini-labs  Increased staff to approach optimum teacher:student ratio of 1:10  Weekly training sessions for staff  Ongoing enculturation of faculty/staff/students. Tutorials work…...but are often viewed with suspicion Some vocal student complaints initially, but these died away after 3 rd semester of use. Student “approval rating” consistently ~ 50%. Some faculty refuse to use Tutorials because they don't perceive their value, yet freshmen using Tutorials haves post-test scores that are higher than post-test scores for our Junior-level E&M students. To learn more… Poster DI10 Tues 2:15pm, "Assessing Multiple Transformations in 2 nd Semester Physics", Steven Pollock Talk FF01 Weds 3:30pm, "Characterizing a Successful Secondary Implementation of Washington Tutorials", Steven Pollock and Noah Finklestein