TY - GEN
T1 - Towards understanding and characterizing expert covariational reasoning in physics
AU - Zimmerman, Charlotte
AU - Olsho, Alexis
AU - Brahmia, Suzanne White
AU - Loverude, Michael
AU - Boudreaux, Andrew
AU - Smith, Trevor
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019, American Association of Physics Teachers. All rights reserved.
PY - 2019
Y1 - 2019
N2 - Relating two quantities to describe a physical system or process is at the heart of “doing physics” for novices and experts alike. In this paper, we explore the ways in which experts use covariational reasoning when solving introductory physics graphing problems. Here, graduate students are considered experts for the introductory level material, as they often take the role of instructor at large research universities. Drawing on work from Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (RUME), we replicated a study of mathematics experts’ covariational reasoning done by Hobson and Moore with physics experts [N. L. F. Hobson and K. C. Moore, in RUME Conference Proceedings, pp. 664-672 (2017)]. We conducted think-aloud interviews with 10 physics graduate students using tasks minimally adapted from the mathematics study. Adaptations were made solely for the purpose of participant understanding of the question, and validated by preliminary interviews. Preliminary findings suggest physics experts approach covariational reasoning problems significantly differently than mathematics experts. In particular, two behaviors are identified in the reasoning of expert physicists that were not seen in the mathematics study. We introduce these two behaviors, which we call Using Compiled Relationships and Neighborhood Analysis, and articulate their differences from the behaviors articulated by Hobson and Moore. Finally, we share implications for instruction and questions for further research.
AB - Relating two quantities to describe a physical system or process is at the heart of “doing physics” for novices and experts alike. In this paper, we explore the ways in which experts use covariational reasoning when solving introductory physics graphing problems. Here, graduate students are considered experts for the introductory level material, as they often take the role of instructor at large research universities. Drawing on work from Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (RUME), we replicated a study of mathematics experts’ covariational reasoning done by Hobson and Moore with physics experts [N. L. F. Hobson and K. C. Moore, in RUME Conference Proceedings, pp. 664-672 (2017)]. We conducted think-aloud interviews with 10 physics graduate students using tasks minimally adapted from the mathematics study. Adaptations were made solely for the purpose of participant understanding of the question, and validated by preliminary interviews. Preliminary findings suggest physics experts approach covariational reasoning problems significantly differently than mathematics experts. In particular, two behaviors are identified in the reasoning of expert physicists that were not seen in the mathematics study. We introduce these two behaviors, which we call Using Compiled Relationships and Neighborhood Analysis, and articulate their differences from the behaviors articulated by Hobson and Moore. Finally, we share implications for instruction and questions for further research.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85095327899&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85095327899&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1119/perc.2019.pr.Zimmerman
DO - 10.1119/perc.2019.pr.Zimmerman
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85095327899
SN - 9781931024365
T3 - Physics Education Research Conference Proceedings
SP - 693
EP - 698
BT - Physics Education Research Conference, PERC 2019
A2 - Cao, Ying
A2 - Wolf, Steven
A2 - Bennett, Michael
PB - American Association of Physics Teachers
T2 - Physics Education Research Conference, PERC 2019
Y2 - 24 July 2019 through 25 July 2019
ER -