Examining students’ views about validity of experiments: From introductory to Ph.D. students

We investigated physics students’ epistemological views on measurements and validity of experimental results. The roles of experiments in physics have been underemphasized in previous research on students’ personal epistemology, and there is a need for a broader view of personal epistemology that in...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Dehui Hu, Benjamin M. Zwickl
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: American Physical Society 2018-04-01
Series:Physical Review Physics Education Research
Online Access:http://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.010121
_version_ 1818928047684845568
author Dehui Hu
Benjamin M. Zwickl
author_facet Dehui Hu
Benjamin M. Zwickl
author_sort Dehui Hu
collection DOAJ
description We investigated physics students’ epistemological views on measurements and validity of experimental results. The roles of experiments in physics have been underemphasized in previous research on students’ personal epistemology, and there is a need for a broader view of personal epistemology that incorporates experiments. An epistemological framework incorporating the structure, methodology, and validity of scientific knowledge guided the development of an open-ended survey. The survey was administered to students in algebra-based and calculus-based introductory physics courses, upper-division physics labs, and physics Ph.D. students. Within our sample, we identified several differences in students’ ideas about validity and uncertainty in measurement. The majority of introductory students justified the validity of results through agreement with theory or with results from others. Alternatively, Ph.D. students frequently justified the validity of results based on the quality of the experimental process and repeatability of results. When asked about the role of uncertainty analysis, introductory students tended to focus on the representational roles (e.g., describing imperfections, data variability, and human mistakes). However, advanced students focused on the inferential roles of uncertainty analysis (e.g., quantifying reliability, making comparisons, and guiding refinements). The findings suggest that lab courses could emphasize a variety of approaches to establish validity, such as by valuing documentation of the experimental process when evaluating the quality of student work. In order to emphasize the role of uncertainty in an authentic way, labs could provide opportunities to iterate, make repeated comparisons, and make decisions based on those comparisons.
first_indexed 2024-12-20T03:22:42Z
format Article
id doaj.art-c89c6722bf504fe4a865528483275dfa
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2469-9896
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-20T03:22:42Z
publishDate 2018-04-01
publisher American Physical Society
record_format Article
series Physical Review Physics Education Research
spelling doaj.art-c89c6722bf504fe4a865528483275dfa2022-12-21T19:55:11ZengAmerican Physical SocietyPhysical Review Physics Education Research2469-98962018-04-0114101012110.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.010121Examining students’ views about validity of experiments: From introductory to Ph.D. studentsDehui HuBenjamin M. ZwicklWe investigated physics students’ epistemological views on measurements and validity of experimental results. The roles of experiments in physics have been underemphasized in previous research on students’ personal epistemology, and there is a need for a broader view of personal epistemology that incorporates experiments. An epistemological framework incorporating the structure, methodology, and validity of scientific knowledge guided the development of an open-ended survey. The survey was administered to students in algebra-based and calculus-based introductory physics courses, upper-division physics labs, and physics Ph.D. students. Within our sample, we identified several differences in students’ ideas about validity and uncertainty in measurement. The majority of introductory students justified the validity of results through agreement with theory or with results from others. Alternatively, Ph.D. students frequently justified the validity of results based on the quality of the experimental process and repeatability of results. When asked about the role of uncertainty analysis, introductory students tended to focus on the representational roles (e.g., describing imperfections, data variability, and human mistakes). However, advanced students focused on the inferential roles of uncertainty analysis (e.g., quantifying reliability, making comparisons, and guiding refinements). The findings suggest that lab courses could emphasize a variety of approaches to establish validity, such as by valuing documentation of the experimental process when evaluating the quality of student work. In order to emphasize the role of uncertainty in an authentic way, labs could provide opportunities to iterate, make repeated comparisons, and make decisions based on those comparisons.http://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.010121
spellingShingle Dehui Hu
Benjamin M. Zwickl
Examining students’ views about validity of experiments: From introductory to Ph.D. students
Physical Review Physics Education Research
title Examining students’ views about validity of experiments: From introductory to Ph.D. students
title_full Examining students’ views about validity of experiments: From introductory to Ph.D. students
title_fullStr Examining students’ views about validity of experiments: From introductory to Ph.D. students
title_full_unstemmed Examining students’ views about validity of experiments: From introductory to Ph.D. students
title_short Examining students’ views about validity of experiments: From introductory to Ph.D. students
title_sort examining students views about validity of experiments from introductory to ph d students
url http://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.010121
work_keys_str_mv AT dehuihu examiningstudentsviewsaboutvalidityofexperimentsfromintroductorytophdstudents
AT benjaminmzwickl examiningstudentsviewsaboutvalidityofexperimentsfromintroductorytophdstudents