Source author record

Amy D. Robertson

Amy D. Robertson appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
1topics
2close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2015arXiv

Selection, Generalization, and Theories of Cause in Case-Oriented Physics Education Research

Case-oriented physics education research - which seeks to refine and develop theory by linking that theory to cases - incorporates distinct practices for selecting data for analysis, generalizing results, and making causal claims. Unanswered questions about these practices may constrain researchers more familiar with the recurrence-oriented research paradigm - which seeks to inform instructional predictions by discerning reproducible, representative patterns and relationships - from participating in or critically engaging with case-oriented research. We use results from interviews with physics education researchers, a synthesis of the literature on research methodologies, and published examples of case-oriented and recurrence-oriented research to answer "hard-hitting questions" that researchers may pose. In doing so, we aim to substantiate our position that both case-oriented and recurrence- oriented PER are rigorous but that the rigor is of a different nature in each paradigm.

preprint2013arXiv

Valuing Student Ideas Morally, Instrumentally, and Intellectually

The importance of valuing student ideas in science education stands on firm empirical, theoretical, and moral grounds. However, the reasons for which one might value student ideas are often not explicitly distinguished, even if implicit distinctions are made in the literature. In this paper, I define and distinguish between three ways of valuing student ideas: moral, instrumental, and intellectual. I demonstrate that novice teachers in the Seattle Pacific University (SPU) Learning Assistant (LA) Program instantiate all three ways of valuing student ideas. Not only this, over the course of their participation in the LA Program, novice teachers shift from foregrounding the moral and instrumental value of student ideas toward highlighting their intellectual value.