Biomechanics Concept Inventory Research Articles

Measuring Learning and Promoting Academic Integrity in Online Instruction

The COVID-19 pandemic shifted kinesiology courses into more hybrid and online delivery, creating new challenges and opportunities for evaluating learning and online testing. Research using the Biomechanics Concept Inventory indicates that both high-tech and low-tech active learning experiences implemented in hybrid and online formats in biomechanics courses improve student learning above levels for lecture alone. However, online pre- and posttesting using concept inventories or major exams are vulnerable to cheating. Experience and research on proctoring online testing indicate only partial success in detecting cheating absent substantial faculty commitment to investigate suspicious behavior. These difficulties with online testing provide an opportunity for kinesiology faculty to implement more authentic, holistic assessments that are less vulnerable to violations of academic integrity. The importance of well-designed, rigorous assessment methods that uphold academic integrity standards will continue to evolve as kinesiology departments expand online learning.

The effect of course format on student learning in introductory biomechanics courses that utilise low-tech active learning exercises

ABSTRACT Low-tech active learning (AL) exercises in face-to-face (F2F) undergraduate biomechanics courses improve student learning vs. lecture alone. This study compared learning of biomechanics concepts with AL implemented in two course formats (hybrid: HB vs. F2F). Additional aims were to investigate if student perceptions of learning epistemology and learning factors were related to course format. Students (n = 110) in four introductory biomechanics courses (two F2F, two HB) completed the 24-question Biomechanics Concept Inventory (BCI) at the beginning and the end of the course to determine their learning of biomechanical concepts. An additional eight questions were given with the post-test to determine student perceptions of the AL exercises and their epistemology of learning. Learning in the HB format was equivalent to the F2F course format when both implement AL in these students. Student perceptions of AL were generally positive and learning scores consistent with previous research on AL in biomechanics. There were mixed results of the effect of course format with one significant difference of three ratings of the nature of learning biomechanics and one significant difference of four ratings of AL by students. These results should be replicated and potential interactions with student perceptions and characteristics explored.

A tale of two instructional experiences: student engagement in active learning and emergency remote learning of biomechanics

ABSTRACT This study documents student engagement in face-to-face low-tech active learning and student perceptions of emergency remote instruction due to the COVID-19 pandemic in introductory biomechanics. Students in two classes received 8 weeks of face-to-face instruction with five low-tech active learning techniques and then received 6 weeks of emergency remote, online instruction. Learning was measured using pre-test and post-test administrations of the biomechanics concept inventory (BCI). A survey of engagement in active learning with additional questions on active learning and online instruction were collected with the post-test. No student perceptions of engagement in active learning or online instruction were correlated with learning measured by normalised gain. Student’s perception of the ‘value of group activity’ factor from survey was significantly correlated (r 2 = 12%) with the number of students typically in active learning groups. There was a significant correlation (r 2 = 46%) between student perception of reading the textbook before online video lessons and perception of value of the video lessons in the online portion of the course. Most students (59%) preferred face-to-face instruction in biomechanics. While up to 28% of students may have reported resistance to group-based active learning, low-tech active learning significantly improved mastery of biomechanics concepts above levels previously reported for lecture alone.

Incorporating problem-based learning with direct instruction improves student learning in undergraduate biomechanics

Problem-based learning (PBL) is based on a ‘problem based structure’ and may have higher learning efficacy than direct instruction. We quantified PBL on student learning in undergraduate biomechanics. Students (n = 109) at two comprehensive universities in the USA completed the Biomechanics Concept Inventory before and after biomechanics classes that integrated PBL for the seven course topics. Learning increased by 25 ± 14%, which is greater than reported for lecture with low-tech active learning. Eighty-three percent of students “agree(d)” to “strongly agree(d)” PBL was “helpful and effective” at aiding their learning. PBL can be an effective teaching method in undergraduate biomechanics.

Do low-tech active-learning exercises influence biomechanics student’s epistemology of learning?

ABSTRACT Some students have negative perceptions of group work common in several active learning (AL) pedagogies. This study documented the potential change in student beliefs (epistemology) of learning biomechanical concepts over an introductory biomechanics course implementing low-tech AL exercises. Fifty-eight students in two biomechanics courses agreed to participate and completed a pre- and post-test consisting of the Biomechanics Concept Inventory (BCI3) version 3 and additional questions on their perceptions about group work and the nature of learning in biomechanics. Low-tech AL exercises resulted in a large (d > 0.8) mean improvement in student learning compared previous data on lecture alone. This improvement in learning of biomechanical concepts with AL may be unrelated to student perceptions of working with other students, the nature of biomechanical knowledge or learning. There was inconsistent evidence that student perceptions can be changed over a biomechanics course implementing low-tech AL exercises, with significant reductions in positive attitudes on one question and no difference on another from pre- to post-test. While the majority of students had positive perceptions about working with other students, some had negative perceptions, and how these perceptions changed over the term was not systematic with addition of low-tech AL exercises.

Student perceptions of low-tech active learning and mastery of introductory biomechanics concepts

ABSTRACT This study documented student perceptions of five low-tech active learning exercises, their epistemology of learning, and examined the association between these variables and mastery of biomechanics concepts. Students (N = 152) in four introductory biomechanics courses at two universities completed the Biomechanics Concept Inventory (BCI) at the beginning and the end of the course. An additional 10-question survey was used at the end of the course to determine student perceptions of the active learning exercises and their epistemology of learning. Student learning of biomechanical concepts improved over levels reported in previous studies of traditional lecture instruction, but not as much as seen in other studies of active learning pedagogy in biomechanics and physics. Student perceptions of active learning were positive, particularly in individual rather than group exercises. A minority (12—16%) of these students had negative perceptions of group-based active learning exercises. Student perception of epistemology of learning was primarily constructivist; however, there was no evidence of these perceptions had associations with learning biomechanical concepts. Biomechanics instructors planning to use low-tech active learning exercises should communicate their philosophy of learning, expectations for the course, and progressively implement individual-based and group-based active learning experiences early in the course.

Important learning factors in high- and low-achieving students in undergraduate biomechanics

The purpose of the present study was to document crucial factors associated with students’ learning of biomechanical concepts, particularly between high- and-low achieving students. Students (N = 113) from three introductory biomechanics classes at two public universities volunteered for the study. Two measures of students’ learning were obtained, final course grade and improvement on the Biomechanics Concept Inventory version 3 administered before and after the course. Participants also completed a 15-item questionnaire documenting student learning characteristics, effort, and confidence. Partial correlations controlling for all other variables in the study, confirmed previous studies that students’ grade point average (p < 0.01), interest in biomechanics, (p < 0.05), and physics credits passed (p < 0.05) are factors uniquely associated with learning biomechanics concepts. Students’ confidence when encountering difficult biomechanics concepts was also significantly (p < 0.05) associated with final grade. There were significant differences between top 15% and bottom 15% achievers on these variables (p < 0.05), as well as on readings completed, work to pay for college per week, and learning epistemology. Consequently, instructors should consider strategies to promote students’ interest in biomechanics and confidence in solving relevant professional problems in order to improve learning for both low- and high-ability students.

Teaching undergraduate biomechanics with Just-in-Time Teaching

Biomechanics education is a vital component of kinesiology, sports medicine, and physical education, as well as for many biomedical engineering and bioengineering undergraduate programmes. Little research exists regarding effective teaching strategies for biomechanics. However, prior work suggests that student learning in undergraduate physics courses has been aided by using the Just-in-Time Teaching (JiTT). As physics understanding plays a role in biomechanics understanding, the purpose of study was to evaluate the use of a JiTT framework in an undergraduate biomechanics course. This two-year action-based research study evaluated three JiTT frameworks: (1) no JiTT; (2) mathematics-based JiTT; and (3) concept-based JiTT. A pre- and post-course assessment of student learning used the biomechanics concept inventory and a biomechanics concept map. A general linear model assessed differences between the course assessments by JiTT framework in order to evaluate learning and teaching effectiveness. The results indicated significantly higher learning gains and better conceptual understanding in a concept-based JiTT course, relative to a mathematics-based JiTT or no JiTT course structure. These results suggest that a course structure involving concept-based questions using a JiTT strategy may be an effective method for engaging undergraduate students and promoting learning in biomechanics courses.

Teaching practices of the undergraduate introductory biomechanics faculty: a North American survey

Instruction and assessment strategies of undergraduate introductory biomechanics instructors have yet to be comprehensively examined. The purpose of this study was to identify the current instruction and assessment practices of North American undergraduate introductory biomechanics instructors and equipment needed for effective instruction in lecture and laboratory sessions. One hundred and sixty-five respondents (age: 42.5 ± 10.3 years) who currently teach or have taught an introductory biomechanics course in North America were recruited by electronic mail. Subjects completed a web-based survey, consisting of 60 open- and closed-ended questions. Pearson's correlation coefficients were used to assess relationships between instructor's familiarity with either the Biomechanics Concept Inventory or the NASPE Guidelines for Undergraduate Biomechanics, and instructor and course characteristics (number of years teaching, age, faculty rank, number of quizzes given, etc.) A number of variables were significantly (p < 0.05) correlated. Answers to open-ended questions were processed using content analysis, with results categorized in content areas including: instructor and course characteristics; lecture instruction; assessment and equipment; laboratory instruction; assessment and equipment; and instructor's perspectives. Many active learning strategies for lecture and laboratory instruction were identified by faculty. Limited student preparation and limited resources were noted as the instructor's most common challenges.

Student factors related to learning in biomechanics

The aim of this study was to identify the student behaviours and characteristics that are related to learning biomechanical concepts. The Biomechanics Concept Inventory (BCI) was given to 53 kinesiology majors before and after an introductory biomechanics class together with a survey of student behaviours to determine factors that assisted in learning. Analysis of scores from 49 students showed significant (P < 0.001) improvement following instruction. Variables that significantly (P < 0.05) and uniquely correlated with improvement were grade point average (r = 0.46) and student interest in biomechanics (r = 0.41). Thirty-one percent of the variance in learning could be accounted for by these two variables, with no distinctive associations with student behaviours like course reading, hours studying, and credits earned in maths and physics. However, grade point average was significantly correlated with several student behaviour variables. Consequently, student learning of biomechanical concepts is likely a complex phenomenon with individual learning related to variables that interact with student interest and overall academic ability.

Biomechanics Concept Inventory

A third version of a biomechanics concept inventory was developed and administered to 41 kinesiology majors before and after an introductory biomechanics class to build a larger pool of questions for course evaluation. The test measured understanding of four prerequisite and eight competencies based on national standards. Mean and standard deviation normalized gain was 29% (21) of maximum possible improvement and was similar to previous versions of the test given to students at the same university. Biomechanics instructors can use questions from all versions of the Biomechanics Concept Inventory to customize tests for evaluating instructional techniques in biomechanics.

Development and evaluation of a biomechanics concept inventory

To help instructors in evaluating innovations in biomechanics instruction, a standardised test of the key concepts taught in the introductory biomechanics course was developed. The Biomechanics Concept Inventory (BCI) consists of 24 questions that test four prerequisite competencies and eight biomechanics competencies. Three hundred and sixty seven students from ten universities throughout the United States took the test at the beginning and the end of the introductory biomechanics course. Analysis of a sub‐sample of the students showed that the BCI was reliable with typical errors in internal consistency and test‐retest conditions of 1.4 and 2.0 questions, respectively. Mean pre‐test scores (8.5 ± 2.0) significantly (p < 0.0001) improved to 10.5 ± 3.2 in the post‐test (n = 305). Typical biomechanics students could correctly answer half of the prerequisite questions on the pre‐test. Instruction resulted in a mean normalised gain (g) of 13.0% of maximum possible improvement that was consistent with research on traditional instruction in introductory physics courses. It was concluded that the BCI could be an effective tool to evaluate the overall effect of pedagogical strategies on student learning of key biomechanical concepts in the introductory biomechanics course.