Paper detail

Retention of conceptual learning after an interactive introductory physics course

The cyclic format of the undergraduate physics curriculum depends on students' ability to recall and utilize material covered in prior courses in order to reliably build on that knowledge in later courses. However, there is evidence to suggest that people often do not retain all, or even most, of what they learned previously. How much information is retained appears to be dependent both on the individuals' approach to learning as well as the style of instruction. In particular, there is evidence to suggest that active engagement techniques in the classroom can improve students' retention of the material over time. Here, we report the findings of a longitudinal investigation of students' retention of conceptual understanding as measured by the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation (FMCE) following a first-semester, calculus-based introductory physics course, which features significant active engagement in both lecture and recitation. By administering the FMCE at the end of a first-semester physics course and again at the beginning of the subsequent second-semester physics course, we examine students' knowledge retention over time periods ranging from 1-15 months. We find that the shift in students' FMCE scores between these two courses is positive but corresponds to a small effect size, indicating that students retained effectively all of their conceptual learning (as measured by the FMCE). This finding largely persists even as the length of the gap between the two courses increases. We also find that, when breaking out students' performance on individual questions, the majority of students maintain their score on individual questions. Averaged over all questions, roughly a fifth of the students switched their answers from right to wrong or wrong to right on any given item.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.