BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Gina Passante

Gina Passante contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
physics.ed-phquant-ph

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

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

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

The interdisciplinary quantum information classroom: Themes from a survey of quantum information science instructors

Interdisciplinary introduction to quantum information science (QIS) courses are proliferating at universities across the US, but the experiences of instructors in these courses have remained largely unexplored in the discipline-based education research (DBER) communities. Here, we address this gap by reporting on the findings of a survey of instructors teaching introduction to QIS courses at institutions across the US, primarily at the undergraduate or hybrid undergraduate/graduate level, as well as follow-up focus interviews with six individual instructors. Key themes from this analysis include challenges and opportunities associated with the diversity of instructor and student backgrounds, student difficulties with the mathematical formalism (especially though not exclusively with linear algebra), and the need for better textbooks and curricular materials. We also find that while course topics are ostensibly similar, each course is crafted by its instructor to tell a different story about QIS and to uniquely balance goals such as accessibility and academic rigor, such that no canonical introduction to QIS course emerges from our dataset. We discuss the implications of this finding with regard to the benefits and risks associated with standardization of curricula as QIS coursework matures.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Characterizing and monitoring student discomfort in upper-division quantum mechanics

We investigate student comfort with the material in an upper-division spins-first quantum mechanics course. Pre-lecture surveys probing students' comfort were administered weekly, in which students assigned themselves a "discomfort level" on a scale of 0--10 and provided a written explanation for their choice. The weekly class-wide average discomfort level was effectively constant over the semester, suggesting that the class found no single unit especially jarring nor especially easy. Student written responses were coded according to their reported source of discomfort---math, math-physics connection, physics, and notation. The relative prevalence of these categories varied significantly over the semester, indicating that students find that different units present different challenges, and also that some of these challenges fade in importance as the semester progresses. Semi-structured interviews with students in a similar quantum mechanics course at a different institution provided additional context and insight into these results.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Student evaluation of more or better experimental data in classical and quantum mechanics

Prior research has shown that physics students often think about experimental procedures and data analysis very differently from experts. One key framework for analyzing student thinking has found that student thinking is more point-like, putting emphasis on the results of a single experimental trial, whereas set-like thinking relies on the results of many trials. Recent work, however, has found that students rarely fall into one of these two extremes, which may be a limitation of how student thinking is evaluated. Measurements of student thinking have focused on probing students' procedural knowledge by asking them, for example, what steps they might take next in an experiment. Two common refrains are to collect more data, or to improve the experiment and collect better data. In both of these cases, the underlying reasons behind student responses could be based in point-like or set-like thinking. In this study we use individual student interviews to investigate how advanced physics students believe the collection of more and better data will affect the results of a classical and a quantum mechanical experiment. The results inform future frameworks and assessments for characterizing students thinking between the extremes of point and set reasoning in both classical and quantum regimes.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access