In physics-based courses for non-science majors taught with active-engagement pedagogy, normalized gains were 0.38–0.42 on content tests but 0.06 on a scientific-reasoning test¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Average normalized gains of 0.38 (DIRECT), 0.42 (TUG-K), and 0.39 (SPCI) were achieved under reformed pedagogy, while LCTSR gains were 0.06, essentially equivalent to zero. → Moore 2011

Evidence¶

Moore 2011¶

Moore, J. C., & Rubbo, L. J. (2011). Scientific reasoning abilities of non-science majors in physics-based courses. https://arxiv.org/abs/1110.2764 doi:10.48550/arxiv.1110.2764

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Table II reports average normalized gains for students in the authors' courses over three years: DIRECT g=0.38 (N=40), TUG-K g=0.42 (N=38), SPCI g=0.39 (N=36), and LCTSR g=0.06 (N=62, matched data from both courses). Content gains were significant though lower than some active-engagement algebra/calculus-based courses. These g values are normalized gains (the share of possible pre-to-post improvement achieved), not standardized effect sizes, and there is no comparison group, so no impact code is given (was i2).

"Even though we have been relatively successful with content, we have failed to improve reasoning ability. Average normalized gains on the LCTSR for both physics and astronomy students are essentially equivalent to zero."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• HOCS clicker questions during learning improve performance on LOCS exam questions more than LOCS clicker questions do — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• Discussion promotes more active thinking than lecture, though lecture is no worse for transmitting information — the general claim this finding bears on, with the studies behind it

• CLASP students achieved an average normalized FCI gain of 0.39, above the traditional-course range and in the middle of the interactive-engagement range, despite only about a third of one quarter on mechanics — related
• Preliminary explicit instruction in scientific reasoning patterns (e.g., IAT statement construction) produced much larger LCTSR gains (g = 0.68) than courses without such intervention (g = 0.11) — related
• The authors of one physics-course study attribute its technology-supported gains to the student-centred, active-engagement pedagogy the technology was used within — related
• Pre-instruction LCTSR scores correlate with normalized learning gains, most strongly for theoretical content (TUG-K r=0.59) and more weakly for descriptive content (DIRECT r=0.50) — related
• A majority (56%) of non-STEM students are classified as transitional reasoners, while formal operational reasoners predominate among STEM majors — related
• Non-STEM students show the poorest performance on proportional reasoning (25%) and score 30% on hypothetico-deductive reasoning items — related
• Non-STEM majors in conceptual physics and astronomy courses score significantly lower pre-instruction on the LCTSR than STEM majors — related
• In Harvard's introductory physics course, average FCI posttest scores and normalized gain rose sharply in the year it switched from traditional lectures to Peer Instruction — related
• Hake's survey found interactive-engagement courses achieved average normalized gains about two standard deviations greater than traditional courses, with overall gain–pretest correlation of +0.02 — related
• Active Learning Improves Exam Performance — a broader claim this one bears on