Paper detail

Student thinking about the divergence and curl in mathematics and physics contexts

Undergraduate physics students are known to have difficulties with understanding mathematical tools, and with applying their knowledge of mathematics to physical contexts. Using survey statements based on student interviews and written responses to open-ended questions, we investigated the prevalence of correct and incorrect conceptions regarding the divergence and curl of vector fields, among both mathematics and physics students. We compare and contrast pre-instruction responses from intermediate-level E&M students at KU Leuven and the University of St Andrews, with post-instruction responses from St Andrews students enrolled in a vector calculus course. The differences between these student populations were primarily in areas having to do with physics-related concepts and graphical representations of vector fields. Our comparison of pre- and post-instruction responses from E&M students shows that their understanding of the divergence and curl improved significantly in most areas, though not as much as would be desired.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.