arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv 2007.07323physics.ed-ph
收藏

学生评价更多或更好的经典和量子力学实验数据

Student evaluation of more or better experimental data in classical and quantum mechanics

Courtney L. While, Emily M. Stump, N. G. Holmes, Gina Passante

摘要:

先前的研究表明,物理专业的学生对实验程序和数据分析的思考方式与专家非常不同。一个分析学生思维的关键框架发现,学生思维更像点,强调单一实验试验的结果,而集合式思维依赖于许多试验的结果。然而,最近的研究发现,学生很少陷入这两个极端之一,这可能是如何评价学生思维的限制。对学生思维的测量集中在通过询问学生的程序知识,例如,他们在实验中下一步可能采取什么步骤。两种常见的抑制是收集更多的数据,或者改进实验并收集更好的数据。在这两种情况下,学生反应背后的根本原因可能是基于点状或集合式思维。在这项研究中,我们使用个别学生访谈调查如何高等物理学生认为收集更多,更好的数据将影响经典和量子力学实验的结果。这些结果为未来的框架和评估提供了信息,以表征学生在经典和量子体系中的点和集合推理的极端之间的思维。

英文摘要:

Prior research has shown that physics students often think about experimental procedures and data analysis very differently from experts. One key framework for analyzing student thinking has found that student thinking is more point-like, putting emphasis on the results of a single experimental trial, whereas set-like thinking relies on the results of many trials. Recent work, however, has found that students rarely fall into one of these two extremes, which may be a limitation of how student thinking is evaluated. Measurements of student thinking have focused on probing students' procedural knowledge by asking them, for example, what steps they might take next in an experiment. Two common refrains are to collect more data, or to improve the experiment and collect better data. In both of these cases, the underlying reasons behind student responses could be based in point-like or set-like thinking. In this study we use individual student interviews to investigate how advanced physics students believe the collection of more and better data will affect the results of a classical and a quantum mechanical experiment. The results inform future frameworks and assessments for characterizing students thinking between the extremes of point and set reasoning in both classical and quantum regimes.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑