1. ADDRESSING THE NATIONAL NEED FOR NEW LABORATORY EXPERIENCES IN PHYSICS Ben Zwickl Heather Lewandowski Noah Finkelstein University of Colorado, Boulder

2. PER@C Graduate students Stephanie Barr Ben Van Dusen Kara Gray May Lee Mike Ross Benjamin Spike Bethany Wilcox Really Recent PhDs Lauren Kost- Smith Faculty Melissa Dancy Mike Dubson Noah Finkelstein Heather Lewandowski Valerie Otero Kathy Perkins Steven Pollock Carl Wieman (on leave) Post-docs Charles Baily Danny Caballero Stephanie Chasteen Laurel Mayhew Ariel Paul Rachel Pepper Noah Podolefsky Benjamin Zwickl

3. The genesis of the project Junior Faculty AMO Physics/JILA HS PhD, Yale Instructor Post-doc BS

4. THE NATIONAL CALL ONE MILLION… …more STEM graduates in a decade!

6. The Gist 1. Keep USA economically competitive 2. Need a million additional STEM degrees over decade 3. Improve retention during first 2 years.

7. 5 Recommendations 1.Adopt validated effective teaching practices. 2.Do research and design oriented lab courses 3.Fix the math gap. 4.Link new STEM graduates with new STEM jobs. 5.Create a Presidential Council on STEM Education Also includes: More undergraduate research experiences

8. Grassroots efforts 100’s of professors and instructors Innovating at the upper-division labs 4 year lab curriculum How can we respond?

9. Opportunities for involvement Students Physics Faculty Education Researchers

10. THE LAB TRANSFORMATION Learning goals, renovations, course redesign, curriculum redesign, assessment

11. Particular opportunities of a lab Ready for active engagementSignificant investment Lots of space Expert experimentalists Small class sizes How can we take advantage?

12. Goal #1: Course transformation Excellent for students Develop experimental expertise Modernize Motivating Excellent for faculty Easier to teach Easier to manage and maintain Broader impacts A target for our lab sequence A model for other schools No lab manager NSF funded. Share it!

13. Goal #2: A PER Research Project Expanding research in PER Minimal PER in labs What should a lab for the 21 st century look like? What are students really learning? Research-based resources Example course materials Assessments A framework for redesigning labs

14. Spring 2011 classroom observations 1. Clear goals needed. 2. Applications needed. 3. Data analysis help. 4. Lab reports heavily emphasized. 5. It’s the best lab course.

15. Science Education Initiative Transformation Model What should students learn? What are students learning? What approaches improve student learning? Consensus learning goals Assessments Research-based curriculum development Department Faculty PER Postdocs

16. Development of Learning Goals 22 facultyLiteratureCommunity LEARNING GOALS ModelingDesign Technical lab skills Communication Model: Simplified Predictive Limited applicability Model: Simplified Predictive Limited applicability Modeling Developing Testing Refining Modeling Developing Testing Refining

17. Four broad themes emerged 1. Modeling 2. Design 3. Communication 4. Technical skills

18. Development of Learning Goals LEARNING GOALS Modeling Design Technical lab skills Communication Math-physics-data connection Statistical error analysis Systematic error analysis Modeling the measurement Experimental design Engineering design Troubleshooting Basic test and measurement equipment Computer-aided data analysis LabVIEW Argumentation Integration into the physics discourse community

19. Development of Learning Goals LEARNING GOALS Modeling Design Technical lab skills Communication Math-physics-data connection Statistical error analysis Systematic error analysis Modeling the measurement Experimental design Engineering design Troubleshooting Basic test and measurement equipment Computer-aided data analysis LabVIEW Argumentation Integration into the physics discourse community Systematic error analysis Students should be able to test and develop models for sources of systematic error in their measurement devices and systems under study. Why? 1.Understanding systematic error is regarded by faculty as an expert skill, yet it is largely absent from our lab courses. 2.Modeling provides a natural framework for discussing systematic error. Systematic error analysis

20. Overhaul of the entire lab Before: Abandoned darkroom. Always locked. After: Modern physics.

21. Physically integrating lecture and lab Old:  Unused space  Lecture across the street.  Topics tangential to lab work. “lecture” space in same room as lab New:  Space for 16 students  Activities in  Mathematica  LabVIEW  Data analysis  Student oral presentations

22. Modernization of the optics labs New:  10 versatile optics workstations  research grade equipment  More open space. Standard optics workstation

23. 4 Redesigned Optics Labs

24. A New Suite of Lab Activities

25. RESEARCH AND ASSESSMENT DDeveloping a framework of modeling in experiment SStudents’ expertise in modeling AAssessing students’ attitudes about experiment EExperimental skills development (computation, design, …)

26. Modeling (almost) a century ago “In 1930, I wondered how Newton’s laws of motion could give such a good description of phenomena studied in the undergraduate laboratory which was an integral part of Physics 1A. After some fruitless speculations, I decided that the most important object of physics was to study interesting laboratory phenomena, and to try to make a mathematical model in which the mathematical symbols imitated, in a way to be determined, the motions of the physical system. I regarded this as a game, to be taken seriously only if it worked well.” -Willis Lamb 1955 Nobel Prize for the “Lamb Shift”

27. Modeling in the 1980’s “For the most part, the modeling theory should appear obvious to physicists, since it is supposed to provide an explicit formulation of things they know very well. That does not mean that the theory is trivial or unnecessary. Much of the knowledge it explicates is so basic and well known to physicists that they take it for granted and fail to realize that it should be taught to students.” -David Hestenes Theoretical physicists and innovator of the model-centered instructional strategy in physics a.k.a. “Modeling Instruction”

28. Modeling in high school and intro college High School Approx. 10% of HS physics courses Intro college (examples) Rutgers physics lab for non-majors Intro calculus- based physics RealTime Physics Labs (Wiley): Technology enhanced modeling But will it work in the upper-division lab course? If so, what would a “model-centered” curriculum look like?

29. Modeling is implicit in traditional labs Key ingredients of the traditional lab: 1)Interesting physical systems: complex, but model-able. 2)Quantitative comparison between theory and experiment. The main problem: Students only play part of the “modeling game.” Where’s the building and refining of models?

30. Toward a framework of modeling in experiment Hestenes, D. Toward a modeling theory of physics instruction. American Journal of Physics 55, 440 (1987). Description StageFormulation StageRamification StageValidation Stage David Hestenes’ Modeling framework

31. Essentials of a traditional lab course REAL WORLD STUFF DATA AND THEORY COLLIDE Measurement probes Real-world physical system interrogated Comparison Is the current data good enough? How can I get better agreement? Stop YesNo

32. “Theory” = a model of the physical system Two contributions to the model: (1)fundamental principles (2)Specific situation Two limits on model validity Real-world physical system Comparison Is the current data good enough? Specific situation Idealizations? Unknown parameters? Physical system model Principles Approximations? abstract predictions

33. Define a measurement model, too. Principles Approximations? Specific situation Idealizations? Unknown parameters? Measurement probes Data Comparison Is the current data good enough? Measurement model Results with uncertainties

34. Full modeling framework Specific situation Idealizations? Unknown parameters? Principles Approximations? Physical system model abstract predictions Principles Approximations? Specific situation Idealizations? Unknown parameters? Data Measurement model Results with uncertainties Real-world physical system Measurement probes Comparison Is the current data good enough? How can I get better agreement? Stop YesNo Improve the measurement model Improve the physical model Tradition: No model refinement -OR- One parameter left unspecified

35. Example: Pendulum for measuring g Specific situation Simple pendulum g is unknown Newton’s laws Physical system model abstract predictions Oscillation period Simple pendulumTiming gate Comparison Is the current data good enough? How can I get better agreement? Stop YesNo Improve the physical model

36. Fresnel Equations Lab Plane wave Monochromatic Linear polarized light Infinite dielectric interface Detector close to interface Maxwell’s equations and boundary conditions T(θ), R(θ) Photodiode, Op-amp Defining “zero angle” Calibrating the incident power Finite detector width. T(θ i ), R(θ i ) Physical system model abstract Laser beam, Rotation stage, Lucite slab (angle, voltage) pairs Measurement model Photodetector, voltmeter Comparison Is the current data good enough? How can I get better agreement? Stop YesNo Improve the measurement model Improve the physical model Gaussian beam? Polarization? Absorption? Scattering? Second reflection?

37. Implications of model-centered approach 1.Model both measurement and physical systems. 2.Systematic error is integrated into the experimental process. 3.Lecture courses provide the modeling tools for lab.

38. ASSESSMENT

39. Just a cheap knock-off survey? VS. The Original CLASS

40. How do our labs impact students? “Traditional introductory laboratory courses generally do not capture the creativity of STEM disciplines. They often involve repeating classical experiments to reproduce known results, rather than engaging students in experiments with the possibility of true discovery. Students may infer from such courses that STEM fields involve repeating what is known to have worked in the past rather than exploring the unknown.” -” PCAST Report,, Engage To Excel: Producing One Million Additional College Graduates With Degrees In STEM (2012)

41. Use learning goals for question topics + enjoyment, teamwork, confidence

42. E-CLASS Design Pairs of question Post only Pre & Post Actionable evidence for instructor Gray, Kara, et al. Students know what physicists believe, but they don’t agree: A study using the CLASS survey. PRST--PER 020106 (2008)

43. Example: (modeling the measurement system) Pre- and Post-semester Post-semester only

44. Validation 19 interviews. Students take survey and then explain how they answered it. Ambiguity: “What do I think vs. what should I think?” Add: “What would a physicist say?” (about lab class or their research lab?) Modify: “What would a physicist say about their research?” (what about theoreticians?) Modify: “What would do experimental physicists say about their research?” (final)

45. Initial implementation Post-test results from Spring 2012 in early May 1140 (Intro) Experimental Physics 1 2150 Experimental Modern Physics 3330 Electronics for the Physical Sciences 3340/4430 Advanced Lab (Optics and Modern Physics) Questions we can answer in December. Do we see any pre/post shifts in E-CLASS scores? Do transformed intro labs at other institutions impact E-CLASS scores? Questions we can answer in May… Do students’ perceive course goals same as the instructors? Is there a progression toward expert-like attitudes, beliefs, and practices?

46. Conclusions & Open Questions Lab transformation is intellectually engaging, fun, and important. Students, faculty, and PER researchers all have something to offer. There is a lot of work left to be done!

47. FOR MORE INFO Personal website: http://spot.colorado.edu/~bezw0974/ Advanced Lab website: http://www.colorado.edu/physics/phys3340/phys3340_sp12/index.html

48. BONUS (DELETED) SLIDES

49. Comparison between pre-transformed PHYS 3340 and other institutions Typical 1) Mostly seniors. 2) 25-30 students per semester 3) Optics and modern physics content Labs not connected to lecture course content 4) Assessment based mostly on the lab reports. 5) Fairly cookbook. 6) Emphasis on statistical error analysis 7) Expected 10-15 hours per week 8) Students work in pairs.. Not typical 1) The instructors rotate often (like the lecture courses) 2) 10 weeks of guided labs, 5 week final project 3) 2 “lecture” hours per week. STM of gold diffraction grating

50. Full modeling framework Real-world physical system Specific situation Idealizations? Unknown parameters? Physical Model of System Principles Approximations? abstract predictions Principles Approximations? Specific situation Idealizations? Unknown parameters? Measurement probes Data Measurement model Results with uncertainties Comparison Is the current data good enough? How can I get better agreement? Stop YesNo Improve the measurement model Improve the physical model