Abstract
We have found that non-STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) majors taking either a conceptual physics or astronomy course at two regional comprehensive institutions score significantly lower preinstruction on the Lawson's Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning (LCTSR) in comparison to national average STEM majors. Based on LCTSR score, the majority of non-STEM students can be classified as either concrete operational or transitional reasoners in Piaget's theory of cognitive development, whereas in the STEM population formal operational reasoners are far more prevalent. In particular, non-STEM students demonstrate significant difficulty with proportional and hypothetico-deductive reasoning. Prescores on the LCTSR are correlated with normalized learning gains on various concept inventories. The correlation is strongest for content that can be categorized as mostly theoretical, meaning a lack of directly observable exemplars, and weakest for content categorized as mostly descriptive, where directly observable exemplars are abundant. Although the implementation of research-verified, interactive engagement pedagogy can lead to gains in content knowledge, significant gains in theoretical content (such as force and energy) are more difficult with non-STEM students. We also observe no significant gains on the LCTSR without explicit instruction in scientific reasoning patterns. These results further demonstrate that differences in student populations are important when comparing normalized gains on concept inventories, and the achievement of significant gains in scientific reasoning requires a reevaluation of the traditional approach to physics for non-STEM students.
Highlights
University courses in conceptual physics and astronomy typically serve as students’ terminal science experience
We have found that students in our conceptual physics and astronomy courses score significantly lower on the Lawson’s Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning (LCTSR) compared to students enrolled in courses typically populated with science majors
As described by Lawson, students scoring below 25% on the LCTSR were classified as concrete operational reasoners, students scoring between 25% and 58% were classified as transitional reasoners, and students scoring above 58% were classified as formal operational reasoners [15]
Summary
University courses in conceptual physics and astronomy typically serve as students’ terminal science experience. Significant work has gone into developing researchverified pedagogical methods for preservice teachers and the algebra- and calculus-based physics courses typically populated by natural and physical science majors [1]; there is significantly less volume in the literature concerning the nonscience, general education population [2]. This is quickly changing, and large, repeatable gains on concept tests are being reported, within the astronomy education community [3]. We look at the effectiveness of ‘‘reformed’’ pedagogy for learning gains in scientific reasoning and discuss possible implications for instruction
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
