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

N. G. Holmes

N. G. Holmes 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

11works
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

11 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Group roles in unstructured labs show inequitable gender divide

Instructional labs are being transformed to better reflect authentic scientific practice, often by removing aspects of pedagogical structure to support student agency and decision-making. We explored how these changes impact men's and women's participation in group work associated with labs through clustering methods on the quantified behavior of students. We compared the group roles students take on in two different types of instructional settings; (1) highly structured traditional labs, and (2) less structured inquiry-based labs. Students working in groups in the inquiry-based (less structured) labs assumed different roles within their groups, however men and women systematically took on different roles and men behaved differently when in single- versus mixed-gender groups. We found no such systematic differences in role division among male and female students in the traditional (highly-structured) labs. Students in the inquiry-based labs were not overtly assigned these roles, indicating that the inequitable division of roles was not a result of explicit assignment. Our results highlight the importance of structuring equitable group dynamics in educational settings, as a gendered division of roles can emerge without active intervention. As the culture in physics evolves to remove systematic gender biases in the field, instructors in educational settings must not only remove explicitly biased aspects of curricula but also take active steps to ensure that potentially discriminatory aspects are not inadvertently reinforced.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Preliminary evidence for available roles in mixed-gender and all-women lab groups

Group work during lab instruction can be a source of inequity between male and female students. In this preliminary study, we explored the activities male and female students take on during a lab session at a university in Denmark. Different from many studies, the class was majority-female, so three of the seven groups were all female and the rest were mixed-gender. We found that students in mixed-gender groups divide tasks in similar ways to mixed-gender groups at North American institutions, with men handling the equipment and women handling the computer more often. We also found that women in single-gender groups took on each of the available roles with approximately equal frequency, but women in single-gender groups spent more time on the equipment than students in mixed-gender groups. We interpret the results through poststructual gender theory and the notion of `doing physics' and `doing gender' in physics labs.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Ready Student One: Exploring the predictors of student learning in virtual reality

Immersive virtual reality (VR) has enormous potential for education, but classroom resources are limited. Thus, it is important to identify whether and when VR provides sufficient advantages over other modes of learning to justify its deployment. In a between-subjects experiment, we compared three methods of teaching Moon phases (a hands-on activity, VR, and a desktop simulation) and measured student improvement on existing learning and attitudinal measures. While a substantial majority of students preferred the VR experience, we found no significant differences in learning between conditions. However, we found differences between conditions based on gender, which was highly correlated with experience with video games. These differences may indicate certain groups have an advantage in the VR setting.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Sense of agency, gender, and students' perception in open-ended physics labs

Instructional physics labs are critical junctures for many STEM majors to develop an understanding of experimentation in the sciences. Students can acquire useful experimental skills and grow their identities as scientists. However, many traditionally-instructed labs do not necessarily involve authentic physics experimentation features in their curricula. Recent research calls for a reformation in undergraduate labs to incorporate more student agency and choice in the learning processes. In our institution, we have adopted open-ended lab teaching in the introductory physics courses. By using reformed curricula that provide higher student agency, we analyzed approximately 100 students in the introductory-level lab courses to examine their views towards the open-ended physics labs. Between the start and the end of the semester, we found a statistically significant shift in students' perceptions about the agency afforded in lab activities. We also examined students' responses to "Which lab unit was your favorite and why?". The analysis showed that majority of the students preferred Project Lab, which had the highest student agency and coding analysis showed that "freedom" was the most frequent response for students' reason for picking Project Lab. Finally, we also examined student views across gender and found no significant gender effect on students' sense of agency.

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
preprint2020arXiv

What do equitable physics lab groups look like in light of inchargeness?

In physics labs, students experience a wide range of equitable and inequitable interactions. We developed a methodology to characterize different lab groups in terms of their bid exchanges and inchargeness. An equitable group is one in which every student's bids are heard and acknowledged. Our analysis of equitable and inequitable groups raises questions about how inchargeness and gender interact to affect the functionality of a lab group.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2018arXiv

Confirming what we know: Understanding questionable research practices in intro physics labs

Many institutions are changing the focus of their introductory physics labs from verifying physics content towards teaching students about the skills and nature of science. As instruction shifts, so too will the ways students approach and behave in the labs. In this study, we evaluated students' lab notes from an early activity in an experimentation-focused lab course. We found that about 30% of student groups (out of 107 groups at three institutions) recorded questionable research practices in their lab notes, such as subjective interpretations of results or manipulating equipment and data. The large majority of these practices were associated with confirmatory goals, which we suspect stem from students' prior exposure to verification labs. We propose ways for experimentation-focused labs to better engage students in the responsible conduct of research and authentic scientific practice.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
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

Measuring the Impact of Introductory Physics Labs on Learning

Our recent study showed that two lab courses, whose goals were exclusively to reinforce material developed in the lecture courses, do not have any impact on exam performance at the 1% level. In this study, we replicated this analysis with a modified version of one of these lab courses whose goals also included modeling, designing experiments, and analyzing and visualizing data. This modified course used the same sets of apparatus as the previous version, but changed the pre-lab and in-lab activities to focus on developing and testing models with data. The study evaluated the impact of these additional goals and activities. We found that they did not affect students' performance on the final exam.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2015arXiv

Quantitative comparisons to promote inquiry in the introductory physics lab

In a recent report, the American Association of Physics Teachers has developed an updated set of recommendations for curriculum of undergraduate physics labs.1 This document focuses on six major themes: constructing knowledge, modeling, designing experiments, developing technical and practical laboratory skills, analyzing and visualizing data, and communicating physics. These themes all tie together as a set of practical skills in scientific measurement, analysis, and experimentation. In addition to teaching students how to use these skills, it is important for students to know when to use them so that they can use them autonomously. This requires, especially in the case of analytical skills, high-levels of inquiry behaviours to reflect on data and iterate measurements, which students rarely do in lab experiments. In this paper, we describe a simple framework for structuring the critical thinking and inquiry behaviours relevant to lab work, which focuses on iterative cycles of comparisons between data sets. We describe the framework and demonstrate examples of its use in an introductory physics lab course.

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