BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Carl E. Wieman

Carl E. Wieman appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
physics.ed-ph

Catalog footprint

What is connected

5works
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

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

5 published item(s)

preprint2016arXiv

Examining and contrasting the cognitive activities engaged in undergraduate research experiences and lab courses

While the positive outcomes of undergraduate research experiences (UREs) have been extensively categorized, the mechanisms for those outcomes are less understood. Through lightly structured focus group interviews, we have extracted the cognitive tasks that students identify as engaging in during their UREs. We also use their many comparative statements about their coursework, especially lab courses, to evaluate their experimental physics-related cognitive tasks in those environments. We find there are a number of cognitive tasks consistently encountered in physics UREs that are present in most experimental research. These are seldom encountered in lab or lecture courses, with some notable exceptions. Having time to reflect and fix or revise, and having a sense of autonomy, were both repeatedly cited as key enablers of the benefits of UREs. We also identify tasks encountered in actual experimental research that are not encountered in UREs. We use these findings to identify opportunities for better integration of the cognitive tasks in UREs and lab courses, as well as discussing the barriers that exist. This work responds to extensive calls for science education to better develop students' scientific skills and practices, as well as calls to expose more students to scientific research.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

On the Proper Use of Statistical Analyses; a Comment on "Evaluation of Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey" by Douglas et al

The paper "Evaluation of Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey" [1] proposes a new, much shorter, version of the CLASS based on standard factor analysis. In this comment we explain why we believe the analysis that is used is inappropriate, and the proposed modified CLASS will be measuring something quite different, and less useful, than the original. The CLASS was based on extensive interviews with students and is intended to be a formative measurement of instruction that is probing a much more complex construct and with different goals than what is handled with classic psychometrics. We are writing this comment to reiterate the value of combining techniques of cognitive science with statistical analyses as described in detail in Adams & Wieman, 2011 [2] when developing a test of expert-like thinking for use in formative assessment. This type of approach is also called for by the National Research Council in a recent report [3].

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Seeking instructional specificity: an example from analogical instruction

Broad instructional methods like interactive engagement have been shown to be effective, but such general characterization provides little guidance on the details of how to structure the instructional materials. In this study, we seek instructional specificity by comparing two ways of using an analogy to learn a target physical principle: (i) applying the analogy to the target physical domain on a Case-by-Case basis and (ii) using the analogy to create a General Rule in the target physical domain. In the discussion sections of a large, introductory physics course (N = 231), students who sought a General Rule were better able to discover and apply a correct physics principle than students who analyzed the examples Case-by-Case. The difference persisted at a reduced level after subsequent direct instruction. We argue that students who performed Case-by-Case analyses are more likely to focus on idiosyncratic problem-specific features rather than the deep structural features. This study provides an example of investigating how the specific structure of instructional materials can be consequential for what is learned.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Teaching Critical Thinking

The ability to make decisions based on data, with its inherent uncertainties and variability, is a complex and vital skill in the modern world. The need for such quantitative critical thinking occurs in many different contexts, and while it is an important goal of education, that goal is seldom being achieved. We argue that the key element for developing this ability is repeated practice in making decisions based on data, with feedback on those decisions. We demonstrate a structure for providing suitable practice that can be applied in any instructional setting that involves the acquisition of data and relating that data to scientific models. This study reports the results of applying that structure in an introductory physics lab course. Students in an experimental condition were repeatedly instructed to make and act on quantitative comparisons between datasets, and between data and models, an approach that is common to all science disciplines. These instructions were slowly faded across the course. After the instructions had been removed, students in the experimental condition were 12 times more likely to spontaneously propose or make changes to improve their experimental methods than a control group, who performed traditional experimental activities. They were also four times more likely to identify and explain a limitation of a physical model using their data. Students in the experimental condition also showed much more sophisticated reasoning about their data. These differences between the groups were seen to persist into a subsequent course taken the following year.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Transforming a 4th year Modern Optics Course Using a Deliberate Practice Framework

We present a study of active learning pedagogies in an upper division physics course. This work was guided by the principle of deliberate practice for the development of expertise, and this principle was used in the design of the materials and the orchestration of the classroom activities of the students. We present our process for efficiently converting a traditional lecture course based on instructor notes into activities for such a course with active learning methods. Ninety percent of the same material was covered and scores on common exam problems showed a 15 % improvement with an effect size greater than 1 after the transformation. We observe that the improvement and the associated effect size is sustained after handing off the materials to a second instructor. Because the improvement on exam questions was independent of specific problem topics and because the material tested was so mathematically advanced and broad (including linear algebra, Fourier Transforms, partial differential equations, vector calculus), we expect the transformation process could be applied to most upper division physics courses having a similar mathematical base.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access