Search

Network analysis has become a well-recognized methodology in physics education research (PER), with study topics including student performance and persistence, faculty change, and the structure of conceptual networks. The social network analysis side of this work has focused on quantitative analysis of whole-network cases, such as the structure of networks in single classrooms. Egocentric or personal network approaches are largely unexplored, and qualitative methods are underdeveloped. In this paper, we outline theoretical and practical differences between two major network paradigms—whole-network and egocentric—and introduce theoretical frameworks and methodological considerations for egocentric studies. We also describe qualitative and mixed-methods approaches that are currently missing from the PER literature. We identify areas where these additional network methods may be of particular interest to physics education researchers and end by discussing example cases and implications for new PER studies.

Despite knowing physics and astronomy doctoral programs are laden with identity-based inequities, they continue to push minoritized students to the margins. This qualitative social network analysis of 100 women and/or lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and more (LGBT+) physics and astronomy Ph.D.’s explores how minoritized physics and astronomy students utilize social networks to navigate departmental exclusion. Our findings indicate that many of the participants’ identities were often unacknowledged or negatively addressed within their graduate education, with only four participants reporting a positive or favorable experience during this period of their career. Direct support from peers, faculty, and identity-based affinity groups was necessary for participants to navigate their educations. This study demonstrated that generic best practices often cannot fully support the diverse range of persons who come to physics and that identity-neutral values in physics further isolate students by insinuating that their own minoritized experiences are not valid.

Likert-style surveys are a widely used research instrument to assess respondents’ preferences, beliefs, or experiences. In this paper, we propose and demonstrate how network analysis (NA) can be employed to model and evaluate the interconnectedness of items in Likert-style surveys. We explore the advantages of this approach by applying the methodology to the aspects of student experience scale datasets and compare the results to the principal component analysis. We successfully create a meaningful network based on survey item response similarity and use modular analysis of the network to identify larger themes built from the connections of particular aspects. The modular NA of the network of survey items identifies important themes that highlight differences in students’ overall experiences. Our network analysis for Likert-style surveys methodology is widely applicable and provides a new way to investigate phenomena assessed by Likert-style surveys.

High attrition rates in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics disciplines are an ongoing problem. Graduate student attrition, in particular, is understudied. Most past studies have focused on students’ attributes, undergraduate preparation, and mentoring relationships. Emerging results from the implementation of the American Physical Society Bridge Program (APSBP) suggest that departmental support structures could lead to increased retention. However, there are no validated instruments to measure students’ experience of the departmental support structures. This paper describes the development and psychometric evaluation of the aspects of student experience scale (ASES). Items were developed based on prior literature and the APSBP recommendations, revised based on APSBP feedback, and subjected to psychometric evaluation. Principal components analysis of data from 397 students at 19 physics graduate programs (2 M.S. and 17 Ph.D.) across the U.S. resulted in four distinct factors: (a) mentoring and research experience, (b) professional development, (c) social and academic integration, and (d) financial support. ASES meets the standard criteria for divergent validity, discriminant validity, and internal consistency. Results of students’ ASES response ratings are discussed, along with comparisons between students enrolled at APSBP and non-APSBP affiliated graduate programs. On average, we find that physics graduate students experience adequate mentoring and financial support; however, they report experiencing limited social and academic integration and a lack of professional development. We also find that students in APSBP affiliated programs report better experiences on all four factors than students in non-APSBP affiliated programs, with higher differences in social and academic integration and financial support. This study is a starting point for the refinement process of this instrument.

Many physics faculty are aware of and interested in using research-based instructional strategies. However, knowledge and motivation are not sufficient to support successful and sustained adoption. To address this problem, we present a faculty online learning community (FOLC) model for educational change and describe its application (the New Faculty Workshop FOLC, NFW-FOLC) to provide a year of support to new faculty following attendance at the Physics and Astronomy New Faculty Workshop. FOLCs are an extension of the faculty learning community model. Here we present the theoretical underpinnings of the general FOLC model, the design principles of our particular NFW-FOLCs, and the learning objectives for NFW-FOLC participants. We demonstrate the efficacy of our NFW-FOLCs by analyzing postexperience interviews with participants from the first four NFW-FOLC cohorts. The primary motivation given by faculty for joining our FOLCs is to improve their teaching as they learn more about teaching strategies, get implementation help, and connect to a broader community. These motivations align with our NFW-FOLC design principles. Participants overwhelmingly report the experience was valuable and impacted them positively with the most commonly reported impacts of NFW-FOLC membership being changes in their implementation of teaching strategies, increased reflection about teaching, increased confidence as teachers, increased knowledge about teaching, benefits to their students, time saved, and gaining a resource. The reported impacts provide evidence that the NFW-FOLC is successfully meeting its goals. We argue that the reported impacts are uniquely supported by the FOLC model of professional development. We advance FOLCs as a generalizable model of professional development offering a number of advantages over traditional reform efforts as well as traditional Faculty Learning Communities.

At large research universities, physics graduate teaching assistants (TAs) are often responsible for grading in courses at all levels. However, few studies have focused on TAs’ grading practices in introductory and advanced physics courses. This study was designed to investigate whether physics graduate TAs grade students in introductory physics and quantum mechanics using different criteria and if so, why they may be inclined to do so. To investigate possible discrepancies in TAs’ grading approaches in courses at different levels, we implemented a sequence of instructional activities in a TA professional development course that asked TAs to grade student solutions of introductory physics and upper-level quantum mechanics problems and explain why, if at all, their grading approaches were different or similar in the two contexts. We analyzed the differences in TAs’ grading approaches in the two contexts and discuss the reasons they provided for the differences in their grading approaches in introductory physics and quantum mechanics in individual interviews, class discussions, and written responses. We find that a majority of the TAs graded solutions to quantum mechanics problems differently than solutions to introductory physics problems. In quantum mechanics, the TAs focused more on physics concepts and reasoning and penalized students for not showing evidence of understanding. The findings of the study have implications for TA professional development programs, e.g., the importance of helping TAs think about the difficulty of a problem from an introductory students’ perspective and reflecting on the benefits of formative assessment.

[This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Gender in Physics.] Sexism occurs when men are believed to be superior to women, and is thought to be one of the reasons for women’s underrepresentation in physics and astronomy. The issue of sexism in physics and astronomy has not been thoroughly explored in the physics education literature and there is currently no clear language for discussing sexism in the field. This article seeks to begin a conversation on sexism in physics and astronomy and offer a starting point for language to discuss sexism in research groups and departments. Interviews with 21 women in graduate physics and astronomy programs are analyzed for their individual experiences of sexism. Although a subset of women did not report experiencing sexual discrimination, the majority experienced subtle insults and slights known as microaggressions. Other participants also experienced more traditional hostile sexism in the form of sexual harassment, gender role stereotypes, and overt discouragement. These results indicate the existence of sexism in the current culture of physics and astronomy, as well as the importance departments must put on eliminating it and educating students about sexism and microaggressions.

[This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Preparing and Supporting University Physics Educators.] The physics education research community has produced a wealth of knowledge about effective teaching and learning of college level physics. Based on this knowledge, many research-proven instructional strategies and teaching materials have been developed and are currently available to instructors. Unfortunately, these intensive research and development activities have failed to influence the teaching practices of many physics instructors. This paper describes interim results of a larger study to develop a model of designing materials for successful propagation. The larger study includes three phases, the first two of which are reported here. The goal of the first phase was to characterize typical propagation practices of education developers, using data from a survey of 1284 National Science Foundation (NSF) principal investigators and focus group data from eight disciplinary groups of NSF program directors. The goal of the second phase was to develop an understanding of successful practice by studying three instructional strategies that have been well propagated. The result of the first two phases is a tentative model of designing for successful propagation, which will be further validated in the third phase through purposeful sampling of additional well-propagated instructional strategies along with typical education development projects. We found that interaction with potential adopters was one of the key missing ingredients in typical education development activities. Education developers often develop a polished product before getting feedback, rely on mass-market communication channels for dissemination, and do not plan for supporting adopters during implementation. The tentative model resulting from this study identifies three key propagation activities: interactive development, interactive dissemination, and support of adopters. Interactive development uses significant feedback from potential adopters to develop a strong product suitable for use in many settings. Interactive dissemination uses personal interactions to reach and motivate potential users. Support of adopters is missing from typical propagation practice and is important to reduce the burden of implementation and increases the likelihood of successful adoption.

[This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Preparing and Supporting University Physics Educators.] The lack of knowledge about how to effectively spread and sustain the use of research-based instructional strategies is currently a significant barrier to the improvement of undergraduate physics education. In this paper we address this lack of knowledge by reporting on an interview study of 35 physics faculty, of varying institution types, who were self-reported users of, former users of, or knowledgeable nonusers of the research-based instructional strategy Peer Instruction. Interview questions included in this analysis focused on the faculty’s experiences, knowledge, and use of Peer Instruction, along with general questions about current and past teaching methods used by the interviewee. The primary findings include the following: (i) Faculty self-reported user status is an unreliable measure of their actual practice. (ii) Faculty generally modify specific instructional strategies and may modify out essential components. (iii) Faculty are often unaware of the essential features of an instructional strategy they claim to know about or use. (iv) Informal social interactions provide a significant communication channel in the dissemination process, in contrast to the formal avenues of workshops, papers, websites, etc., often promoted by change agents, and (v) experience with research-based strategies as a graduate student or through curriculum development work may be highly impactful. These findings indicate that educational transformation can be better facilitated by improving communication with faculty, supporting effective modification by faculty during implementation, and acknowledging and understanding the large impact of informal social interactions as a mode of dissemination.

While many innovative teaching strategies exist, integration into undergraduate science teaching has been frustratingly slow. This study aims to understand the low uptake of research-based instructional innovations by studying 21 successful implementations of the Student Centered Active Learning with Upside-down Pedagogies (SCALE-UP) instructional reform. SCALE-UP significantly restructures the classroom environment and pedagogy to promote highly active and interactive instruction. Although originally designed for university introductory physics courses, SCALE-UP has spread to many other disciplines at hundreds of departments around the world. This study reports findings from in-depth, open-ended interviews with 21 key contact people involved with successful secondary implementations of SCALE-UP throughout the United States. We defined successful implementations as those who restructured their pedagogy and classroom and sustained and/or spread the change. Interviews were coded to identify the most common enabling and challenging factors during reform implementation and compared to the theoretical framework of Kotter’s 8-step Change Model. The most common enabling influences that emerged are documenting and leveraging evidence of local success, administrative support, interaction with outside SCALE-UP user(s), and funding. Many challenges are linked to the lack of these enabling factors including difficulty finding funding, space, and administrative and/or faculty support for reform. Our focus on successful secondary implementations meant that most interviewees were able to overcome challenges. Presentation of results is illuminated with case studies, quotes, and examples that can help secondary implementers with SCALE-UP reform efforts specifically. We also discuss the implications for policy makers, researchers, and the higher education community concerned with initiating structural change.

[This paper is part of the Focused Collection on Preparing and Supporting University Physics Educators.] In order to promote sustained and impactful educational transformation, it is essential for change agents to understand more about faculty perceptions associated with either adopting or not adopting a research-based instructional strategy (RBIS). In this paper, we use interviews with 35 physics faculty to examine barriers and affordances to the use of the research-based instructional strategy of Peer Instruction. We found that the most common reasons faculty give for aligning their instruction with Peer Instruction is that it is not lecture and they have had positive experiences with Peer Instruction. The most common reasons faculty give for not using Peer Instruction are concerns about the time it will take, the loss of content coverage, and having had bad experiences with it. Additionally, we found the perceived barriers to be very different depending on whether the interviewee was a user of Peer Instruction or not, with nonusers being more concerned with time and users being more concerned with implementation difficulties. It is important for change agents to understand and address concerns faculty have about implementing research-based instructional strategies. Based on these results we offer four recommendations for those interested in promoting educational transformation toward research-based instructional strategies: (1) do not waste a lot of time criticizing lecture-based instruction and convincing faculty of the value of research-based strategies (they are already dissatisfied with lecture), (2) understand and address concerns faculty have about implementing active learning techniques, (3) focus on supporting and encouraging faculty experiences with RBIS, (4) address concerns faculty new to RBIS have about the time and energy needed to change.