Physics Education Research In Perspective - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Physics Education Research In Perspective PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 5bdeb1-MTQ5N



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Physics Education Research In Perspective

Description:

Physics Education Research In Perspective David E. Meltzer Department of Physics and Astronomy Iowa State University Ames, Iowa – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:217
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 424
Provided by: physicsedu7
Learn more at: http://physicseducation.net
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Physics Education Research In Perspective


1
Physics Education Research In Perspective
  • David E. Meltzer
  • Department of Physics and Astronomy
  • Iowa State University
  • Ames, Iowa

2
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (Western Iowa TCC) Ngoc-Loan
Nguyen Larry Engelhardt Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
3
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (Western Iowa TCC) Ngoc-Loan
Nguyen Larry Engelhardt Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
4
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (Western Iowa TCC) Ngoc-Loan
Nguyen Larry Engelhardt Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
5
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (M.S. 2001 now at
UMSL) Larry Engelhardt Ngoc-Loan Nguyen Warren
Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
6
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (M.S. 2001 now at
UMSL) Larry Engelhardt Ngoc-Loan Nguyen (M.S.
2003) Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
7
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (M.S. 2001 now at
UMSL) Larry Engelhardt Ngoc-Loan Nguyen (M.S.
2003) Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
8
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (M.S. 2001 now at
UMSL) Larry Engelhardt Ngoc-Loan Nguyen (M.S.
2003) Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
9
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (M.S. 2001 now at
UMSL) Larry Engelhardt Ngoc-Loan Nguyen (M.S.
2003) Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
10
Collaborators Tom Greenbowe (Department of
Chemistry, ISU) Kandiah Manivannan (Southwest
Missouri State University) Laura McCullough
(University of Wisconsin, Stout) Leith Allen
(Ohio State University)
Graduate Students Jack Dostal (ISU/Montana
State) Tina Fanetti (M.S. 2001 now at
UMSL) Larry Engelhardt Ngoc-Loan Nguyen (M.S.
2003) Warren Christensen
Post-doc Irene Grimberg
Teaching Assistants Michael Fitzpatrick Agnès
Kim Sarah Orley David Oesper
Undergraduate Students Nathan Kurtz Eleanor
Raulerson (Grinnell, now U. Maine)
Funding National Science Foundation Division of
Undergraduate Education Division of Research,
Evaluation and Communication ISU Center for
Teaching Excellence Miller Faculty Fellowship
1999-2000 (with T. Greenbowe) CTE Teaching
Scholar 2002-2003
11
Outline
  • Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
  • Investigation of Students Reasoning
  • Students reasoning in calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Diverse representational modes in student
    learning
  • Curriculum Development
  • Curricular materials for calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Instructional methods and curricular materials
    for large-enrollment physics classes
  • Assessment of Instruction
  • Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
    Education majors
  • Measurement of learning gain

12
Outline
  • Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
  • Investigation of Students Reasoning
  • Students reasoning in calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Diverse representational modes in student
    learning
  • Curriculum Development
  • Curricular materials for calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Instructional methods and curricular materials
    for large-enrollment physics classes
  • Assessment of Instruction
  • Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
    Education majors
  • Measurement of learning gain

13
Outline
  • Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
  • Investigation of Students Reasoning
  • Students reasoning in calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Diverse representational modes in student
    learning
  • Curriculum Development
  • Curricular materials for calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Instructional methods and curricular materials
    for large-enrollment physics classes
  • Assessment of Instruction
  • Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
    Education majors
  • Measurement of learning gain

14
Outline
  • Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
  • Investigation of Students Reasoning
  • Students reasoning in calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Diverse representational modes in student
    learning
  • Curriculum Development
  • Curricular materials for calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Instructional methods and curricular materials
    for large-enrollment physics classes
  • Assessment of Instruction
  • Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
    Education majors
  • Measurement of learning gain

15
Outline
  • Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
  • Investigation of Students Reasoning
  • Students reasoning in calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Diverse representational modes in student
    learning
  • Curriculum Development
  • Curricular materials for calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Instructional methods and curricular materials
    for large-enrollment physics classes
  • Assessment of Instruction
  • Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
    Education majors
  • Measurement of learning gain

16
Preface Goals and Methods
  • Goals of Physics Education Research
  • Methods of Physics Education Research
  • What PER can NOT do

17
Goals of PER
  • Improve effectiveness and efficiency of physics
    instruction
  • measure and assess learning of physics (not
    merely achievement)
  • Develop instructional methods and materials that
    address obstacles which impede learning
  • Critically assess and refine instructional
    innovations

18
Goals of PER
  • Improve effectiveness and efficiency of physics
    instruction
  • measure and assess learning of physics (not
    merely achievement)
  • Develop instructional methods and materials that
    address obstacles which impede learning
  • Critically assess and refine instructional
    innovations

19
Goals of PER
  • Improve effectiveness and efficiency of physics
    instruction
  • measure and assess learning of physics (not
    merely achievement)
  • Develop instructional methods and materials that
    address obstacles which impede learning
  • Critically assess and refine instructional
    innovations

20
Goals of PER
  • Improve effectiveness and efficiency of physics
    instruction
  • measure and assess learning of physics (not
    merely achievement)
  • Develop instructional methods and materials that
    address obstacles which impede learning
  • Critically assess and refine instructional
    innovations

21
Methods of PER
  • Develop and test diagnostic instruments that
    assess student understanding
  • Probe students thinking through analysis of
    written and verbal explanations of their
    reasoning, supplemented by multiple-choice
    diagnostics
  • Assess learning through measures derived from
    pre- and post-instruction testing

22
Methods of PER
  • Develop and test diagnostic instruments that
    assess student understanding
  • Probe students thinking through analysis of
    written and verbal explanations of their
    reasoning, supplemented by multiple-choice
    diagnostics
  • Assess learning through measures derived from
    pre- and post-instruction testing

23
Methods of PER
  • Develop and test diagnostic instruments that
    assess student understanding
  • Probe students thinking through analysis of
    written and verbal explanations of their
    reasoning, supplemented by multiple-choice
    diagnostics
  • Assess learning through measures derived from
    pre- and post-instruction testing

24
What PER Can NOT Do
  • Determine philosophical approach toward
    undergraduate education
  • target primarily future science professionals?
  • focus on maximizing achievement of best-prepared
    students?
  • achieve significant learning gains for majority
    of enrolled students?
  • try to do it all?
  • Specify the goals of instruction in particular
    learning environments
  • physics concept knowledge
  • quantitative problem-solving ability
  • laboratory skills
  • understanding nature of scientific investigation

25
What PER Can NOT Do
  • Determine philosophical approach toward
    undergraduate education
  • focus on majority of students, or on subgroup?
  • Specify the goals of instruction in particular
    learning environments
  • proper balance among concepts, problem-solving,
    etc.
  • physics concept knowledge
  • quantitative problem-solving ability
  • laboratory skills
  • understanding nature of scientific investigation

26
What PER Can NOT Do
  • Determine philosophical approach toward
    undergraduate education
  • focus on majority of students, or on subgroup?
  • Specify the goals of instruction in particular
    learning environments
  • proper balance among concepts, problem-solving,
    etc.
  • physics concept knowledge
  • quantitative problem-solving ability
  • laboratory skills
  • understanding nature of scientific investigation

27
Outline
  • Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
  • Investigation of Students Reasoning
  • Students reasoning in calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Diverse representational modes in student
    learning
  • Curriculum Development
  • Curricular materials for calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Instructional methods and curricular materials
    for large-enrollment physics classes
  • Assessment of Instruction
  • Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
    Education majors
  • Measurement of learning gain

28
Outline
  • Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
  • Investigation of Students Reasoning
  • Students reasoning in calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Diverse representational modes in student
    learning
  • Curriculum Development
  • Curricular materials for calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Instructional methods and curricular materials
    for large-enrollment physics classes
  • Assessment of Instruction
  • Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
    Education majors
  • Measurement of learning gain

29
Active PER Groups in Ph.D.-granting Physics
Departments
gt 10 yrs old 6-10 yrs old lt 6 yrs old
U. Washington U. Maine Oregon State U.
Kansas State U. Montana State U. Iowa State U.
Ohio State U. U. Arkansas City Col. N.Y.
North Carolina State U. U. Virginia Texas Tech U.
U. Maryland U. Minnesota San Diego State U. joint with U.C.S.D. Arizona State U. U. Mass., Amherst Mississippi State U. U. Oregon U. California, Davis U. Central Florida U. Colorado U. Illinois U. Pittsburgh Rutgers U. Western Michigan U. Worcester Poly. Inst. U. Arizona New Mexico State U.
leading producers of Ph.D.s
30
Outlook for Physics Education Research
  • Experience suggests that PER is an attractive
    field for prospective graduate students
  • Recent employment prospects for PER graduates
    have been extremely favorable
  • Small numbers of personnel can have
    disproportionately large national impact

31
Outlook for Physics Education Research
  • Experience suggests that PER is an attractive
    field for prospective graduate students
  • Recent employment prospects for PER graduates
    have been extremely favorable
  • Small numbers of personnel can have
    disproportionately large national impact

32
Outlook for Physics Education Research
  • Experience suggests that PER is an attractive
    field for prospective graduate students
  • Recent employment prospects for PER graduates
    have been extremely favorable
  • Small numbers of personnel can have
    disproportionately large national impact

33
Outlook for Physics Education Research
  • Experience suggests that PER is an attractive
    field for prospective graduate students
  • Recent employment prospects for PER graduates
    have been extremely favorable
  • Small numbers of personnel can have
    disproportionately large national impact

34
Primary Trends in PER
  • Research into Student Understanding
  • Research-based Curriculum Development
  • Assessment of Instructional Methods
  • Preparation of K-12 Physics and Science Teachers

35
Primary Trends in PER
  • Research into Student Understanding
  • Research-based Curriculum Development
  • Assessment of Instructional Methods
  • Preparation of K-12 Physics and Science Teachers

36
Primary Trends in PER
  • Research into Student Understanding
  • Research-based Curriculum Development
  • Assessment of Instructional Methods
  • Preparation of K-12 Physics and Science Teachers

37
Primary Trends in PER
  • Research into Student Understanding
  • Research-based Curriculum Development
  • Assessment of Instructional Methods
  • Preparation of K-12 Physics and Science Teachers

38
Primary Trends in PER
  • Research into Student Understanding
  • Research-based Curriculum Development
  • Assessment of Instructional Methods
  • Preparation of K-12 Physics and Science Teachers

39
Major Curriculum Development Projects
  • U.S. Air Force Academy
  • Just-in-Time Teaching large classes
  • U. Arizona Montana State
  • Lecture Tutorials for Introductory Astronomy
  • Arizona State U.
  • Modeling Instruction primarily high-school
    teachers
  • Davidson College
  • Physlets
  • Harvard
  • ConcepTests Peer Instruction
  • Indiana University
  • Socratic-Dialogue Inducing Labs
  • Iowa State U.
  • Workbook for Introductory Physics
  • Kansas State U.
  • Visual Quantum Mechanics
  • U. Massachusetts, Amherst
  • Minds-On Physics high school

40
Major Curriculum Development Projects contd
  • U. Maryland U. Maine CCNY
  • New Model Course in Quantum Physics
    Activity-based Physics Tutorials
  • U. Minnesota
  • Cooperative Group Problem Solving
  • U. Nebraska Texas Tech U.
  • Physics with Human Applications
  • North Carolina State U. Central Florida
  • SCALE-UP large classes Matter and Interactions
  • Oregon State U.
  • Paradigms in Physics upper-level
  • Rutgers Ohio State U.
  • Investigative Science Learning Environment
  • San Diego State U.
  • Constructing Physics Understanding
  • Tufts U. Oregon Dickinson College
  • Real-time Physics Workshop Physics MBL
  • U. Wash
  • Physics by Inquiry Tutorials in Introductory
    Physics

41
Types of Curriculum Development(lots of overlaps)
  • Lab-based
  • Large-class (interactive lectures)
  • Small-class (group learning)
  • High-School
  • Technology-based
  • Upper-level
  • Teacher Preparation

42
Types of Curriculum Development(lots of overlaps)
  • Lab-based
  • Large-class (interactive lectures)
  • Small-class (group learning)
  • High-School
  • Technology-based
  • Upper-level
  • Teacher Preparation

ISU PER projects
43
Major PER Research Trends
  • Students conceptual understanding
  • Development and analysis of diagnostic and
    assessment instruments and methods
  • Students attitudes toward and beliefs about
    learning physics
  • Analysis of students knowledge structure
    (context-dependence of students knowledge)
  • Assessment of students problem-solving skills
  • Faculty beliefs about teaching problem solving
  • Investigation of group-learning dynamics

44
Major PER Research Trends
  • Students conceptual understanding
  • Development and analysis of diagnostic and
    assessment instruments and methods
  • Students attitudes toward and beliefs about
    learning physics
  • Analysis of students knowledge structure
    (context-dependence of students knowledge)
  • Assessment of students problem-solving skills
  • Faculty beliefs about teaching problem solving
  • Investigation of group-learning dynamics

ISU PER projects
45
Major PER Research Trends
  • Students conceptual understanding
  • Development and analysis of diagnostic and
    assessment instruments and methods
  • Students attitudes toward and beliefs about
    learning physics
  • Analysis of students knowledge structure
    (context-dependence of students knowledge)
  • Assessment of students problem-solving skills
  • Faculty beliefs about teaching problem solving
  • Investigation of group-learning dynamics

ISU PER projects
46
www.physics.iastate.edu/per/
47
Outline
  • Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
  • Investigation of Students Reasoning
  • Students reasoning in calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Diverse representational modes in student
    learning
  • Curriculum Development
  • Curricular materials for calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Instructional methods and curricular materials
    for large-enrollment physics classes
  • Assessment of Instruction
  • Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
    Education majors
  • Measurement of learning gain

48
Outline
  • Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
  • Investigation of Students Reasoning
  • Students reasoning in calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Diverse representational modes in student
    learning
  • Curriculum Development
  • Curricular materials for calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Instructional methods and curricular materials
    for large-enrollment physics classes
  • Assessment of Instruction
  • Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
    Education majors
  • Measurement of learning gain

49
Teacher Preparation(1998-1999)
  • Development of Elementary Physics Course Based
    on Guided Inquiry
  • Supported by NSF Course and Curriculum
    Development Program
  • Multiple Goals
  • Improve students content knowledge through
    guided discovery
  • Develop students teaching ability and
    understanding of scientific process
  • Mixed Outcomes
  • Measurable, but limited, learning gains
  • Student attitudes dependent on previous
    background

50
Teacher Preparation(1998-1999)
  • Development of Elementary Physics Course Based
    on Guided Inquiry
  • Supported by NSF Course and Curriculum
    Development Program
  • Multiple Goals
  • Improve students content knowledge through
    guided discovery
  • Develop students teaching ability and
    understanding of scientific process
  • Mixed Outcomes
  • Measurable, but limited, learning gains
  • Student attitudes dependent on previous
    background

51
Teacher Preparation(1998-1999)
  • Development of Elementary Physics Course Based
    on Guided Inquiry
  • Supported by NSF Course and Curriculum
    Development Program
  • Multiple Goals
  • Improve students content knowledge through
    guided discovery
  • Develop students teaching ability and
    understanding of scientific process
  • Mixed Outcomes
  • Measurable, but limited, learning gains
  • Student attitudes dependent on previous
    background

52
Teacher Preparation(1998-1999)
  • Development of Elementary Physics Course Based
    on Guided Inquiry
  • Supported by NSF Course and Curriculum
    Development Program
  • Multiple Goals
  • Improve students content knowledge through
    guided discovery
  • Develop students teaching ability and
    understanding of scientific process
  • Mixed Outcomes
  • Measurable, but limited, learning gains
  • Student attitudes dependent on previous
    background

53
Outline
  • Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
  • Investigation of Students Reasoning
  • Students reasoning in calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Diverse representational modes in student
    learning
  • Curriculum Development
  • Curricular materials for calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Instructional methods and curricular materials
    for large-enrollment physics classes
  • Assessment of Instruction
  • Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
    Education majors
  • Measurement of learning gain

54
Outline
  • Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
  • Investigation of Students Reasoning
  • Students reasoning in calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Diverse representational modes in student
    learning
  • Curriculum Development
  • Curricular materials for calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Instructional methods and curricular materials
    for large-enrollment physics classes
  • Assessment of Instruction
  • Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
    Education majors
  • Measurement of learning gain

55
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
  • Investigate student learning with standard
    instruction
  • Explore areas of conceptual difficulty
  • Develop new materials based on research
  • Test and modify materials
  • Iterate as needed

56
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
  • Investigate student learning with standard
    instruction
  • Explore areas of conceptual difficulty
  • Develop new materials based on research
  • Test and modify materials
  • Iterate as needed

57
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
  • Investigate student learning with standard
    instruction
  • Explore areas of conceptual difficulty
  • Develop new materials based on research
  • Test and modify materials
  • Iterate as needed

58
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
  • Investigate student learning with standard
    instruction
  • Explore areas of conceptual difficulty
  • Develop new materials based on research
  • Test and modify materials
  • Iterate as needed

59
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
  • Investigate student learning with standard
    instruction
  • Explore areas of conceptual difficulty
  • Develop new materials based on research
  • Test and modify materials
  • Iterate as needed

60
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
  • Investigate student learning with standard
    instruction
  • Explore areas of conceptual difficulty
  • Develop new materials based on research
  • Test and modify materials
  • Iterate as needed

61
Addressing Learning Difficulties A Model
ProblemStudent Concepts of GravitationJack
Dostal and DEM
  • 10-item free-response diagnostic administered to
    over 2000 ISU students during 1999-2000.
  • Newtons third law in context of gravity
    direction and superposition of gravitational
    forces inverse-square law.
  • Worksheets developed to address learning
    difficulties tested in Physics 111 and 221, Fall
    1999

62
Addressing Learning Difficulties A Model
ProblemStudent Concepts of GravitationJack
Dostal and DEM
  • 10-item free-response diagnostic administered to
    over 2000 ISU students during 1999-2000.
  • Newtons third law in context of gravity
    direction and superposition of gravitational
    forces inverse-square law.
  • Worksheets developed to address learning
    difficulties tested in Physics 111 and 221, Fall
    1999

63
Addressing Learning Difficulties A Model
ProblemStudent Concepts of GravitationJack
Dostal and DEM
  • 10-item free-response diagnostic administered to
    over 2000 ISU students during 1999-2000.
  • Newtons third law in context of gravity
    direction and superposition of gravitational
    forces inverse-square law.
  • Worksheets developed to address learning
    difficulties tested in Physics 111 and 221, Fall
    1999

64
Example Newtons Third Law in the Context of
Gravity
  • Is the magnitude of the force exerted by the
    asteroid on the Earth larger than, smaller than,
    or the same as the magnitude of the force exerted
    by the Earth on the asteroid? Explain the
    reasoning for your choice.
  • Presented during first week of class to all
    students taking calculus-based introductory
    physics (PHYS 221-222) at ISU during Fall 1999.
  • First-semester Physics (N 546) 15 correct
    responses
  • Second-semester Physics (N 414) 38 correct
    responses
  • Most students claim that Earth exerts greater
    force because it is larger

65
Example Newtons Third Law in the Context of
Gravity
  • Is the magnitude of the force exerted by the
    asteroid on the Earth larger than, smaller than,
    or the same as the magnitude of the force exerted
    by the Earth on the asteroid? Explain the
    reasoning for your choice.
  • Presented during first week of class to all
    students taking calculus-based introductory
    physics (PHYS 221-222) at ISU during Fall 1999.
  • First-semester Physics (N 546) 15 correct
    responses
  • Second-semester Physics (N 414) 38 correct
    responses
  • Most students claim that Earth exerts greater
    force because it is larger

66
Example Newtons Third Law in the Context of
Gravity
  • Is the magnitude of the force exerted by the
    asteroid on the Earth larger than, smaller than,
    or the same as the magnitude of the force exerted
    by the Earth on the asteroid? Explain the
    reasoning for your choice.
  • Presented during first week of class to all
    students taking calculus-based introductory
    physics (PHYS 221-222) at ISU during Fall 1999.
  • First-semester Physics (N 546) 15 correct
    responses
  • Second-semester Physics (N 414) 38 correct
    responses
  • Most students claim that Earth exerts greater
    force because it is larger

67
Example Newtons Third Law in the Context of
Gravity
  • Is the magnitude of the force exerted by the
    asteroid on the Earth larger than, smaller than,
    or the same as the magnitude of the force exerted
    by the Earth on the asteroid? Explain the
    reasoning for your choice.
  • Presented during first week of class to all
    students taking calculus-based introductory
    physics (PHYS 221-222) at ISU during Fall 1999.
  • First-semester Physics (N 546) 15 correct
    responses
  • Second-semester Physics (N 414) 38 correct
    responses
  • Most students claim that Earth exerts greater
    force because it is larger

68
Example Newtons Third Law in the Context of
Gravity
  • Is the magnitude of the force exerted by the
    asteroid on the Earth larger than, smaller than,
    or the same as the magnitude of the force exerted
    by the Earth on the asteroid? Explain the
    reasoning for your choice.
  • Presented during first week of class to all
    students taking calculus-based introductory
    physics (PHYS 221-222) at ISU during Fall 1999.
  • First-semester Physics (N 546) 15 correct
    responses
  • Second-semester Physics (N 414) 38 correct
    responses
  • Most students claim that Earth exerts greater
    force because it is larger

69
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)
  • Guide students through reasoning process in which
    they tend to encounter targeted conceptual
    difficulty
  • Allow students to commit themselves to a response
    that reflects conceptual difficulty
  • Guide students along alternative reasoning track
    that bears on same concept
  • Direct students to compare responses and resolve
    any discrepancies

70
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)
  • Guide students through reasoning process in which
    they tend to encounter targeted conceptual
    difficulty
  • Allow students to commit themselves to a response
    that reflects conceptual difficulty
  • Guide students along alternative reasoning track
    that bears on same concept
  • Direct students to compare responses and resolve
    any discrepancies

71
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)
  • Guide students through reasoning process in which
    they tend to encounter targeted conceptual
    difficulty
  • Allow students to commit themselves to a response
    that reflects conceptual difficulty
  • Guide students along alternative reasoning track
    that bears on same concept
  • Direct students to compare responses and resolve
    any discrepancies

72
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)
  • Guide students through reasoning process in which
    they tend to encounter targeted conceptual
    difficulty
  • Allow students to commit themselves to a response
    that reflects conceptual difficulty
  • Guide students along alternative reasoning track
    that bears on same concept
  • Direct students to compare responses and resolve
    any discrepancies

73
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)
  • Guide students through reasoning process in which
    they tend to encounter targeted conceptual
    difficulty
  • Allow students to commit themselves to a response
    that reflects conceptual difficulty
  • Guide students along alternative reasoning track
    that bears on same concept
  • Direct students to compare responses and resolve
    any discrepancies

74
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)
  • One of the central tasks in curriculum reform is
    development of Guided Inquiry worksheets
  • Worksheets consist of sequences of closely linked
    problems and questions
  • focus on conceptual difficulties identified
    through research
  • emphasis on qualitative reasoning
  • Worksheets designed for use by students working
    together in small groups (3-4 students each)
  • Instructors provide guidance through Socratic
    questioning

75
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)
  • One of the central tasks in curriculum reform is
    development of Guided Inquiry worksheets
  • Worksheets consist of sequences of closely linked
    problems and questions
  • focus on conceptual difficulties identified
    through research
  • emphasis on qualitative reasoning
  • Worksheets designed for use by students working
    together in small groups (3-4 students each)
  • Instructors provide guidance through Socratic
    questioning

76
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)
  • One of the central tasks in curriculum reform is
    development of Guided Inquiry worksheets
  • Worksheets consist of sequences of closely linked
    problems and questions
  • focus on conceptual difficulties identified
    through research
  • emphasis on qualitative reasoning
  • Worksheets designed for use by students working
    together in small groups (3-4 students each)
  • Instructors provide guidance through Socratic
    questioning

77
Implementation of Instructional ModelElicit,
Confront, Resolve (U. Washington)
  • One of the central tasks in curriculum reform is
    development of Guided Inquiry worksheets
  • Worksheets consist of sequences of closely linked
    problems and questions
  • focus on conceptual difficulties identified
    through research
  • emphasis on qualitative reasoning
  • Worksheets designed for use by students working
    together in small groups (3-4 students each)
  • Instructors provide guidance through Socratic
    questioning

78
Example Gravitation Worksheet (Jack Dostal and
DEM)
  • Design based on research (interviews written
    diagnostic tests), as well as instructional
    experience
  • Targeted at difficulties with Newtons third law,
    and with use of proportional reasoning in
    inverse-square force law

79
Example Gravitation Worksheet (Jack Dostal and
DEM)
  • Design based on research (interviews written
    diagnostic tests), as well as instructional
    experience
  • Targeted at difficulties with Newtons third law,
    and with use of proportional reasoning in
    inverse-square force law

80
Example Gravitation Worksheet (Jack Dostal and
DEM)
  • Design based on research (interviews written
    diagnostic tests), as well as instructional
    experience
  • Targeted at difficulties with Newtons third law,
    and with use of proportional reasoning in
    inverse-square force law

81
Protocol for Testing Worksheets(Fall 1999)
  • 30 of recitation sections yielded half of one
    period for students to do worksheets
  • Students work in small groups, instructors
    circulate
  • Remainder of period devoted to normal activities
  • No net additional instructional time on
    gravitation
  • Conceptual questions added to final exam with
    instructors approval

82
Protocol for Testing Worksheets(Fall 1999)
  • 30 of recitation sections yielded half of one
    period for students to do worksheets
  • Students work in small groups, instructors
    circulate
  • Remainder of period devoted to normal activities
  • No net additional instructional time on
    gravitation
  • Conceptual questions added to final exam with
    instructors approval

83
Protocol for Testing Worksheets(Fall 1999)
  • 30 of recitation sections yielded half of one
    period for students to do worksheets
  • Students work in small groups, instructors
    circulate
  • Remainder of period devoted to normal activities
  • No net additional instructional time on
    gravitation
  • Conceptual questions added to final exam with
    instructors approval

84
Protocol for Testing Worksheets(Fall 1999)
  • 30 of recitation sections yielded half of one
    period for students to do worksheets
  • Students work in small groups, instructors
    circulate
  • Remainder of period devoted to normal activities
  • No net additional instructional time on
    gravitation
  • Conceptual questions added to final exam with
    instructors approval

85
Protocol for Testing Worksheets(Fall 1999)
  • 30 of recitation sections yielded half of one
    period for students to do worksheets
  • Students work in small groups, instructors
    circulate
  • Remainder of period devoted to normal activities
  • No net additional instructional time on
    gravitation
  • Conceptual questions added to final exam with
    instructors approval

86
Protocol for Testing Worksheets(Fall 1999)
  • 30 of recitation sections yielded half of one
    period for students to do worksheets
  • Students work in small groups, instructors
    circulate
  • Remainder of period devoted to normal activities
  • No net additional instructional time on
    gravitation
  • Conceptual questions added to final exam with
    instructors approval

87
(No Transcript)
88
(No Transcript)
89
b
90
common student response
c
b
91
e)     Consider the magnitude of the
gravitational force in (b). Write down an
algebraic expression for the strength of the
force. (Refer to Newtons Universal Law of
Gravitation at the top of the previous page.)
Use Me for the mass of the Earth and Mm for the
mass of the Moon.         f)      Consider the
magnitude of the gravitational force in (c).
Write down an algebraic expression for the
strength of the force. (Again, refer to Newtons
Universal Law of Gravitation at the top of the
previous page.) Use Me for the mass of the Earth
and Mm for the mass of the Moon.         g)    
Look at your answers for (e) and (f). Are they
the same?   h)     Check your answers to (b) and
(c) to see if they are consistent with (e) and
(f). If necessary, make changes to the arrows in
(b) and (c).
92
e)     Consider the magnitude of the
gravitational force in (b). Write down an
algebraic expression for the strength of the
force. (Refer to Newtons Universal Law of
Gravitation at the top of the previous page.)
Use Me for the mass of the Earth and Mm for the
mass of the Moon.         f)      Consider the
magnitude of the gravitational force in (c).
Write down an algebraic expression for the
strength of the force. (Again, refer to Newtons
Universal Law of Gravitation at the top of the
previous page.) Use Me for the mass of the Earth
and Mm for the mass of the Moon.         g)    
Look at your answers for (e) and (f). Are they
the same?   h)     Check your answers to (b) and
(c) to see if they are consistent with (e) and
(f). If necessary, make changes to the arrows in
(b) and (c).
93
e)     Consider the magnitude of the
gravitational force in (b). Write down an
algebraic expression for the strength of the
force. (Refer to Newtons Universal Law of
Gravitation at the top of the previous page.)
Use Me for the mass of the Earth and Mm for the
mass of the Moon.         f)      Consider the
magnitude of the gravitational force in (c).
Write down an algebraic expression for the
strength of the force. (Again, refer to Newtons
Universal Law of Gravitation at the top of the
previous page.) Use Me for the mass of the Earth
and Mm for the mass of the Moon.         g)    
Look at your answers for (e) and (f). Are they
the same?   h)     Check your answers to (b) and
(c) to see if they are consistent with (e) and
(f). If necessary, make changes to the arrows in
(b) and (c).
94
e)     Consider the magnitude of the
gravitational force in (b). Write down an
algebraic expression for the strength of the
force. (Refer to Newtons Universal Law of
Gravitation at the top of the previous page.)
Use Me for the mass of the Earth and Mm for the
mass of the Moon.         f)      Consider the
magnitude of the gravitational force in (c).
Write down an algebraic expression for the
strength of the force. (Again, refer to Newtons
Universal Law of Gravitation at the top of the
previous page.) Use Me for the mass of the Earth
and Mm for the mass of the Moon.         g)    
Look at your answers for (e) and (f). Are they
the same?   h)     Check your answers to (b) and
(c) to see if they are consistent with (e) and
(f). If necessary, make changes to the arrows in
(b) and (c).
95
2) In the following diagrams, draw arrows
representing force vectors, such that the length
of the arrow is proportional to the magnitude of
the force it represents.   Diagram (i) In this
figure, two equal spherical masses (mass M)
are shown. Draw the vectors representing the
gravitational forces the masses exert on each
other. Draw your shortest vector to have a
length equal to one of the grid squares.
Diagram (ii) Now, one of the spheres is
replaced with a sphere of mass 2M. Draw a new
set of vectors representing the mutual
gravitational forces in this case.         Diagra
m (iii) In this case, the spheres have masses
2M and 3M. Again, draw the vectors representing
the mutual gravitational forces.
96
2) In the following diagrams, draw arrows
representing force vectors, such that the length
of the arrow is proportional to the magnitude of
the force it represents.   Diagram (i) In this
figure, two equal spherical masses (mass M)
are shown. Draw the vectors representing the
gravitational forces the masses exert on each
other. Draw your shortest vector to have a
length equal to one of the grid squares.
Diagram (ii) Now, one of the spheres is
replaced with a sphere of mass 2M. Draw a new
set of vectors representing the mutual
gravitational forces in this case.         Diagra
m (iii) In this case, the spheres have masses
2M and 3M. Again, draw the vectors representing
the mutual gravitational forces.
97
2) In the following diagrams, draw arrows
representing force vectors, such that the length
of the arrow is proportional to the magnitude of
the force it represents.   Diagram (i) In this
figure, two equal spherical masses (mass M)
are shown. Draw the vectors representing the
gravitational forces the masses exert on each
other. Draw your shortest vector to have a
length equal to one of the grid squares.
Diagram (ii) Now, one of the spheres is
replaced with a sphere of mass 2M. Draw a new
set of vectors representing the mutual
gravitational forces in this case.         Diagra
m (iii) In this case, the spheres have masses
2M and 3M. Again, draw the vectors representing
the mutual gravitational forces.
98
2) In the following diagrams, draw arrows
representing force vectors, such that the length
of the arrow is proportional to the magnitude of
the force it represents.   Diagram (i) In this
figure, two equal spherical masses (mass M)
are shown. Draw the vectors representing the
gravitational forces the masses exert on each
other. Draw your shortest vector to have a
length equal to one of the grid squares.
Diagram (ii) Now, one of the spheres is
replaced with a sphere of mass 2M. Draw a new
set of vectors representing the mutual
gravitational forces in this case.         Diagra
m (iii) In this case, the spheres have masses
2M and 3M. Again, draw the vectors representing
the mutual gravitational forces.
99
Post-test Question (Newtons third law)
  • The rings of the planet Saturn are composed of
    millions of chunks of icy debris. Consider a
    chunk of ice in one of Saturn's rings. Which of
    the following statements is true?
  • The gravitational force exerted by the chunk of
    ice on Saturn is greater than the gravitational
    force exerted by Saturn on the chunk of ice.
  • The gravitational force exerted by the chunk of
    ice on Saturn is the same magnitude as the
    gravitational force exerted by Saturn on the
    chunk of ice.
  • The gravitational force exerted by the chunk of
    ice on Saturn is nonzero, and less than the
    gravitational force exerted by Saturn on the
    chunk of ice.
  • The gravitational force exerted by the chunk of
    ice on Saturn is zero.
  • Not enough information is given to answer this
    question.

100
Results on Newtons Third Law Question(All
students)
N Post-test Correct
Non-Worksheet 384 61
Worksheet 116 87
(Physics 221 Fall 1999 calculus-based course,
first semester)
101
Results on Newtons Third Law Question(Students
who gave incorrect answer on pretest question)
N Post-test Correct
Non-Worksheet 289 58
Worksheet 82 84
(Physics 221 Fall 1999 calculus-based course,
first semester)
102
Outline
  • Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
  • Investigation of Students Reasoning
  • Students reasoning in calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Diverse representational modes in student
    learning
  • Curriculum Development
  • Curricular materials for calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Instructional methods and curricular materials
    for large-enrollment physics classes
  • Assessment of Instruction
  • Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
    Education majors
  • Measurement of learning gain

103
Outline
  • Primary Trends in Physics Education Research
  • Investigation of Students Reasoning
  • Students reasoning in calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Diverse representational modes in student
    learning
  • Curriculum Development
  • Curricular materials for calorimetry and
    thermodynamics
  • Instructional methods and curricular materials
    for large-enrollment physics classes
  • Assessment of Instruction
  • Teacher Preparation Course for Elementary
    Education majors
  • Measurement of learning gain

104
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
  • Joint project with Tom Greenbowe, ISU Chemistry
    Department
  • Initial support from ISU Center for Teaching
    Excellence
  • Additional support from NSF, Course, Curriculum,
    and Laboratory Improvement Educational
    Materials Development program

105
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
  • Joint project with Tom Greenbowe, ISU Chemistry
    Department
  • Initial support from ISU Center for Teaching
    Excellence
  • Additional support from NSF, Course, Curriculum,
    and Laboratory Improvement Educational
    Materials Development program

106
(No Transcript)
107
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
  • Joint project with Tom Greenbowe, ISU Chemistry
    Department
  • Initial support from ISU Center for Teaching
    Excellence
  • Additional support from NSF, Course, Curriculum,
    and Laboratory Improvement Educational
    Materials Development program

108
Research-Based Curriculum Development Example
Thermodynamics Project
  • Joint project with Tom Greenbowe, ISU Chemistry
    Department
  • Initial support from ISU Center for Teaching
    Excellence
  • Additional support from NSF, Course, Curriculum,
    and Laboratory Improvement Educational
    Materials Development program

109
Investigation of Physics Students Reasoning in
ThermodynamicsDEM, Proc. of PER Conference
(2002)
DEM, submitted to PER Section, Am. J. Phys.
(2003)
  • Investigation of second-semester calculus-based
    physics course (mostly engineering students).
  • Written diagnostic questions administered last
    week of class in 1999, 2000, and 2001 (Ntotal
    653).
  • Detailed interviews (avg. duration ? one hour)
    carried out with 32 volunteers during 2002 (total
    class enrollment 424).

110
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
111
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
?U1 ?U2
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
112
Students seem to have adequate grasp of
state-function concept
  • Consistently high percentage (70-90) of correct
    responses on relevant questions.
  • Large proportion of correct explanations.
  • Students major conceptual difficulties stemmed
    from overgeneralization of state-function
    concept.

113
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
114
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
115
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
W1 gt W2
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
116
Explanations Given by Interview Subjects to
Justify W1 W2
  • Work is a state function.
  • No matter what route you take to get to state B
    from A, its still the same amount of work.
  • For work done take state A minus state B the
    process to get there doesnt matter.
  • Many students come to associate work with
    properties (and descriptive phrases) only used by
    instructors in connection with state functions.

117
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
118
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce the largest change in the
total energy of all the atoms in the system
Process 1, Process 2, or both processes produce
the same change?
119
This P-V diagram represents a system consisting
of a fixed amount of ideal gas that undergoes two
different processes in going from state A to
state B
Algebraic Method ?U1 ?U2 Q1 W1 Q2
W2 W1 W2 Q1 Q2
W1 gt W2 ? Q1 gt Q2
In these questions, W represents the work done
by the system during a process Q represents the
heat absorbed by the system during a process.
  1. Is W for Process 1 greater than, less
than, or equal to that for Process 2?
Explain.   2. Is Q for Process 1 greater than,
less than, or equal to that for Process 2?   3.
Which would produce
About PowerShow.com