Workshop II: Physics Education

This paper reports on the results of an experiment to test the use of a Peer Instruction (PI) pedagogical model in a small class, high school environment. The study reports findings based on a population of 213 high school students attending algebra based physics courses, both Honors and A level, taught by 5 different instructors. The results show a correlation between use of Peer Instruction and improved student conceptual understanding, as demonstrated by gains on a pre‐/post‐ assessment instrument (FCI). However, there also appears to be a number of other factors that strongly influence the resulting gains. In addition to instructor differences, the data seem to indicate that students who are more "physics‐inclined" and can answer questions correctly prior to instruction and prior to any Peer Instruction discussion subsequently achieve higher gains as measured by the FCI. While this is to be expected, the use of normalized gains is intended to mitigate this result, but it appears to be prevalent nonetheless. This raises questions as to what degree the FCI gains can be attributed to the use of Peer Instruction, to teacher differences, to student ability level or to simply increased familiarity with the question types presented on the FCI.

Faculty choose to use Peer Instruction because it is not lecture, and because they have had positive experiences with it.

In my paper for the First IUPAP International Conference on Women in Physics in 2002, I noted that in Indonesia there is no different treatment between men and women physicists in their careers. The differences of opportunity for career development between men and women physicists are caused by natural characteristics and the biological function of women. In addition, women have more responsibility for household work compared with men. Therefore, generally it is very difficult for women to achieve a doctoral degree or develop their careers. Because those women who have the opportunity to work or develop their careers exist in a very conducive condition/environment, generally they will work hard to achieve their success. It would be nice if all parties, such as government, research institutions, universities, and—last but not least—family (especially the husband), would pay attention to women scientists’ problems and give special support/facilities to the women seeking to develop their careers. In 2002 Indonesia had only about 10 women holding doctoral degrees in physics; now we have about 24. This increment is very significant. The majority of new PhD holders are working as university lecturers (20), with the rest at research institutions. In the last two decades the Indonesian government has pushed scientist researchers and lecturers to obtain their PhDs, in order to accelerate science and technology development in Indonesia. The number of women physicists also increases every year. Currently we have about 250 women physicists, or about 16% of the total number of physicists in Indonesia (data from the Indonesian Physical Society). Women’s specialties are similar to men’s: materials science (66), education (56), instrumentation (22), particle physics (5), astronomy (8), biophysics (8), computation (2), energy (6), earth/geophysics (9), mathematical physics (4), medical physics (10), nuclear physics (7), optics (11), and others (29). Figure 1 compares the numbers of men and women physicists in each subject area.

Our previous study exploring the use of an Audience Response System (ARS) to promote active learning and group interactivity in a medical school histology laboratory determined the method to be effective in stimulating discussion, enhancing peer interaction, and applying the material. Separately, the instructional strategy known as Peer Instruction (PI) provides a model for student interaction using a controlled questioning process. Upon implementation of PI, published studies report increases in students’ conceptual reasoning and quantitative problem solving skills. Our study seeks to further develop the concept of ARS in a histology course by implementing the use of PI in a medical histology laboratory setting.Presenting clinically‐relevant questions associated with microscope images using the PI model provides a system through which visual learning, pattern recognition, group interaction, and clinical application are simultaneously addressed. The benefits of Peer Instruction Laboratory Sessions (PILS) are evaluated by obtaining individual student assessments from the PILS using ARS data and comparing them to corresponding student laboratory exam scores. This data comparison thus helps to quantify the impact of PILS on visual application and long term material retention.

Use of peer instruction and facilitation has surged in undergraduate education at large colleges and universities in recent years. Studies on peer instruction have been directed primarily at student learning gains and affective outcomes among the facilitators. For peer instructors, the relationship between their teaching effectiveness and their foundational content knowledge is assumed but understudied. In an effort to promote instructional coherence (i.e., instructional same-pageness) in the introductory organic chemistry program at the University of Michigan, we observed peer-led study group facilitators’ involvement in their study groups (as teachers of groups of 6–12 students) and in a companion course (as learners) designed to reinforce and enhance their content knowledge. Audiovisual recordings of the facilitators in both the companion course and, for ten of them, leading their study groups, were captured over each of the two week periods covering the topics of stereochemistry and also conformational analysis. Recordings were subsequently coded for topic and correctness in presentation of subject matter. Errors made in either study group or the companion course were investigated for error resolution (corrected or uncorrected), source of error, and propagation of corrected errors. Analysis of recordings revealed that facilitators who have their own errors corrected in the companion course, or observe their peers’ errors corrected in the companion course, correctly describe these concepts in study groups. On examining errors made by facilitators when they are leading study group sessions, a backwards analysis showed consistently that either the topics had not been addressed in the antecedent companion course, or the facilitator was not actively engaged with the discussion when the topics were being discussed. These findings have implications to inform not only our own implementation of peer-led study groups, but also those interested in designing subject matter companion courses for peer leaders in other instructional settings.

The number of women physicists doing research in Armenia is far less than the number of men, because women put their family and children ahead of their careers. Only a small number of women physicists who try to combine family life and career are successful. Armenia is a small country with few research positions; in spite of this there are several women physicists in Armenia. They are working very well in various areas of physics such as theoretical physics, nuclear physics, elementary particle physics, biophysics, and solid-state physics. Due to hard and fruitful work, some women physicists occupy high positions; for example, A. Danagulyan is the Chair of Nuclear Physics of Yerevan State University. In the three years since the First IUPAP International Conference on Women in Physics, female scientists of Armenia have worked very effectively. Four defended their PhD theses (Candidate) and one defended her Doctorate thesis during this period. Many papers of female scientists were presented at international conferences and printed in refereed journals. The women scientists at Yerevan State University (Dr. Prof. A. Danagulyan, Dr. A. Balabekyan, PhD student J. Drnoyan, and young researcher G. Hovhannisyan) have participated in six international conferences devoted to the problems of nuclear physics: International Seminar on Heavy Ion Physics. Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, 2002 25th International Colloquium on Group Theoretical Methods in Physics, Cocoyoc, Mexico 2004 52nd, 53rd, and 54th International Conference on Nuclear Spectroscopy and Nuclear Structure, Moscow 2002, St. Petersburg 2003, and Belgorod 2004 VI Conference of Young Scientists of JINR, Dubna 2002 The main results are presented in 11 scientific papers published in refereed journals such as Nuclear Physics and Physics of Atomic Nuclei. Along with their research activities, these women scientists also have wide teaching experience. They are lecturers in nuclear physics, nuclear reactions, and elementary particle physics. Gohar Haroutunyan, the Doctor of Science at the Chair of Theoretical Physics of Yerevan State University, investigates the theory of gravitation and its astrophysical application. Six of her papers were published from 2002 to 2005. She teaches theoretical mechanics, statistical physics, and Green’s functions. Dr. Prof. Yeva Dalyan is a specialist in macromolecular physics, the physics of nucleic acids, and structural biology, and works in molecular pharmacology as well. Her papers are published in Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics, Experimental and Molecular Medicine, Molecular and Cellular Proteomics, and Biophysics. Dr. Prof. Dalyan reported the results of her work at the international conference “URM-2004” in Yerevan in 2004 and at the “International Symposium on Hydration and Thermodynamics of Molecular Recognition” in Armenia in 2005. She teaches courses in molecular physics, introduction to biophysics, and the physics of proteins and nucleic acids. Two female scientists (Dr. A. Djotyan and Sh. Gasparyan) participated in the International Women’s Conference on BIEN-Technology in Daejeon, Korea, in 2003 and presented two scientific reports. The papers are included in the proceedings of the conference in a special issue of the journal Key Engineering Materials. Dr. I.G. Aznauryan (Yerevan Institute of Physics) works in the field of quantum chromodynamics (QCD), which is the fundamental theory accepted now for the description of strong interactions of elementary particles. Dr. Aznauryan works in close cooperation with experimental physicists at Jefferson Lab in the United States. Her investigation of experimental data obtained at Jefferson Lab led to the determination that up to a momentum transfer of 5 GeV, there is no indication of an approaching perturbative region of QCD. The results of her work were published in Physical Review C67 and C68 (2003) and C71 (2005).

First Page

In this study, we evaluate an innovative method to improve the teaching of linear algebra. The use of peer instruction in conjunction with a seminar strategy and supported by didactic engineering is proposed as a means to facilitate the mastery of abstract concepts, the undertaking of innovative research in problem solving, and the practical application of educational concepts. To assess the method’s effectiveness, the Students’ Evaluation of Educational Quality (SEEQ) questionnaire was administered and assessed. In addition, to determine whether this new teaching approach leads to better learning results than the traditional method, a comparison between control and experimental groups was conducted. The results indicate that the mixed method creates a more dynamic learning environment for students than the traditional method, contributes to students’ development of social interaction skills and learning process. In sum, the proposed method has been shown to enhance student motivation and reflection, which are critical to a productive, collaborative learning environment that directly impacts academic retention and performance.

A ll over the world, women are drawn to physics and practice physics for the same reasons and in the same ways as men. But women physicists are still rare, they're seen as different, and their abilities are undervalued. That's the overall impression from the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics (IUPAP)-sponsored international conference on women in physics held 7 to 9 March 2002 in Paris and from a 50-country pre-meeting survey of women in physics reported at the conference. With over 300 participants, 15 percent male, in 65 national teams, the conversation ranged widely, from putative cognitive differences (a claim heard mainly in the United States), to the benefits of a rigorous secondary school preparation (59 percent of the women present had chosen physics in high school), to the importance of arranging one's own marriage, even in cultures where this is not the norm. No matter how many women start out in physics, a common trend across countries is their attrition in going from undergraduate and graduate studies to permanent positions. Many attributed this to the overlap of the early professional years with the peak marriage and childbearing years and/or to the requirements for frequent relocation and travel. But family issues do not seem to inhibit women in scientific disciplines that are equally demanding, such as biology and chemistry, where women are far more numerous, both absolutely and proportionately. Nor are there large numbers of women physicists in countries with strong family support mechanisms (day care and maternity leave), such as the Scandinavian nations. Rather, there appear to be small but cumulative barriers to the progress of women, such as lack of openness in recruiting, hiring, and promotion processes; subtle but nonetheless debilitating harassment and discrimination; and “fuzzy” (meaning unspecified and unquantified) standards of success. Even in countries where there are more women in physics, few are in leadership positions. Interestingly, despite these problems, three out of four respondents to the pre-meeting survey said they would choose physics again. Differences between developed and developing countries were smaller than one might have expected, both in the statistical report and in the small group discussions. The pluck and energy of women from developing countries stole the show: a Malaysian mother of eight, now a university dean, having combined a successful research career with administration; a Russian woman physicist for whom “24 hours in the day is a lot of time”; dozens of young East and South Asian women fully expecting to succeed in physics and mystified by the suggestion that cognitive differences could account for women's lesser participation in physics. Indeed, the perception of physics as appropriate or inappropriate for girls and women turns out to be far from universal. Whereas in parts of Europe and North America women may have to explain or even apologize for studying physics, elsewhere women apparently choose physics freely and for the same reasons men do. Several Italian women, surprised by the question of why they chose physics, explained that in their country, studying physics opens more doors than studying engineering. Although there was broad agreement on a set of recommendations, including relaxing the age limits in competitions for positions, grants, and fellowships to accommodate a delayed career pace, and adding women physicists' contributions to the next generation of physics textbooks, some issues, most particularly affirmative action, were hotly contested. French delegates were adamant that perceived advantages for women would backfire. But, as the German delegation pointed out, had positions not been designated for women over the past decade by the Max Planck Institutes in Germany, German women physicists would be even less well represented in research physics than they are today (3 percent at the assistant professor level, as compared to 26 percent for France). Neither the speakers in the formal sessions nor the delegates entertained the postmodernist position that without women, science must be biased. Rather, the distinction was drawn between the conduct of science and the behavior of scientists, in this case physicists. To be sure, women need to better understand the mechanisms of hiring, funding, and promotion; that is, how to play the game. But the game itself has to be purged of cloning, patronage, and outright discrimination if transparency in hiring and promotion is to become the rule. “Excellent men have nothing to fear from transparency,” concluded a French delegate. Indeed.

Launching a successful career encompasses many issues related to creating appropriate conditions for development, such as providing training and resources for research. Since the First IUPAP International Conference on Women in Physics in 2002, some countries have made excellent progress on some issues, but overall results are mixed. Discussions focused on developing SMART (i.e., Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Timed) recommendations, and on spreading the word about proven successful approaches and practices implemented in some countries and institutions. Recommendations include a call for increased networking at all levels, suggestions for national physical societies and employers, personal development training for women physicists, and advice for individuals.

The focus on women in physics in Australia has increased substantially since the last report at the International Conference of Women in Physics (ICWIP) in 2014. This is evident in many aspects; however, the number of women studying physics has remained static at levels that are far too low. In addition, many different organizations and groups are actively working on combating stereotype problems in culture as well as supporting women in their professional career path. The outlook for women in physics in Australia is now very promising.

<xhtml:span xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en"> Five years ago the <a href="http://www.aip.org/statistics/">Statistical Research Center</a> of the American Institute of Physics conducted a web-based survey of women physicists around the world. The survey coincided with the <a href="http://www.cbpf.br/~women-physics/">second International Conference on Women in Physics</a>, which was convened in Rio de Janeiro by the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics.</xhtml:span>

The disparity in persistence between males and females studying physics has been a topic of concern to physics educators for decades. Overall, while female students perform as well as or better than male students,1 they continue to lag considerably in terms of persistence. The most significant drop in females studying physics occurs between high school and college.2 Since most female physicists report that they became attracted to physics and decided to study it further while in high school, according to the International Study of Women in Physics,3 it is problematic that high school is also the stage at which females begin to opt out at much higher rates than males. Although half of the students taking one year of physics in high school are female, females are less likely than males to take a second or Advanced Placement (AP) physics course.4 In addition, the percentage of females taking the first physics course in college usually falls between 30% and 40%.1 In other words, although you may see gender parity in a first high school physics course, this parity does not usually persist to the next level of physics course. In addition, even if there is parity in a high school physics course, it does not mean that males and females experience the course in the same way. It is this difference in experience that may help to explain the drop in persistence of females.

New holistic reforms in the system of higher education and the State Academy of Sciences have been carried out in Russia recently. New types of universities were founded, and funding of science is shifting to a grants model. The Russian Ministry of Higher Education and Science is also working to attract well-known foreign scientists, especially expatriate Russians, through megagrants of $3–5 million to establish modern laboratories. Women are participating to an adequate degree in all parts of the ongoing reforms.

Although Inquiry-Based Science Teaching (IBST) and the Nature of Science (NOS) are well documented as important aspects of teaching science subjects in schools, little research has been undertaken to understand how these aspects feature in secondary school science curricula in Tanzania. Thus, this study examined the extent to which IBST and NOS are featured in secondary school curriculum documents for science subjects. In addition, the challenges facing the integration of IBST and NOS in science teaching in Tanzanian secondary schools are highlighted. By analysing five curriculum documents and the Basic Education Statistics in Tanzania, the study established that IBST and NOS are neither formally recognised as important aspects of science education, nor given due attention in curriculum documents. Moreover, a lack of coherence among various elements of the curriculum, which can affect the integration of IBST and NOS, was observed. Finally, it was established that several challenges such as larger class sizes, insufficient time allocation and overemphasis on content coverage need to be addressed so that IBST and NOS could be fully integrated into science teaching in Tanzania. The study does not only highlight the theoretical trends related to IBST and NOS, but also discusses their theoretical and practical implications for science teaching.