A Study of the Development of the Paradigms in Physics Program

Designing survey questions.

Members of the Paradigms 2.0 committee collaborated in designing the survey with a mix of open-ended questions and requests for rating the importance of various issues. The open-ended questions elicited input about topics such as preferred learning goals for majors, knowledge and skills students need to start doing research, aspects of the current program that should be preserved, and ways to enhance faculty knowledge of the curriculum and use of interactive engagement strategies. Such open-ended questions provided opportunities for negative feedback as well. The requests for ratings helped gauge the respondents' views on the importance of various subject matter themes and issues needing attention. Before sending the survey, the committee clarified the consent process, gained Institutional Review Board approval of the questions, and created and tested online versions.

The survey consisted of ten questions:

The first question asked the respondents to identify themselves as tenured faculty, tenure-line faculty, instructor, TA for paradigm courses, TA for other non-paradigm courses, graduate student who has not TA'd, and/or a graduate of the Paradigms in Physics program. The student version asked the respondents to identify themselves as juniors or seniors.

The second question asked the respondents to identify in which upper-division courses they had taught, served as a TA, and/or completed as a student.

The third and fourth questions were open-ended to seek information about respondents' perceptions of what the goals of the upper-division courses should be and what goals were not being addressed adequately:

• What do you think should be the primary goals of the upper division physics courses?
• What goals are not being adequately addressed?

The fifth question asked respondents to indicate the importance of the six common themes that had been emphasized during development of the original paradigms in physics courses. Three levels were suggested:

• This theme does not need to be considered;
• This theme is valuable, but need not be emphasized;
• This theme is an essential part of our physics major.

The six themes were:

• Expectation and probability
• Resonance
• Energy
• Symmetry
• Normal modes and complete sets of states
• Discrete and continuous representations

The survey also invited respondents to add other themes they would like to see addressed.

The sixth and seventh questions were open-ended, seeking input about what was needed for students to do research and what aspects of the current program should be preserved:

• What content and other knowledge/skills are necessary to prepare students to do research in your field? Are these addressed adequately in the current curriculum?
• What aspects of the current junior and senior year program do you think should be preserved?

The eighth question provided a long list of 27 issues/needs of which the committee was aware and asked respondents to rate these as:

• Not very important
• Somewhat important
• Most important

The survey also invited respondents to add issues and to rate their importance.

The ninth question provided the URL for a wiki providing resources about the Paradigms in Physics program and requested input from faculty about other support needed:

• A wiki at http://physics.oregonstate.edu/portfolioswiki provides a wide variety of resources for faculty interested in learning more about the Paradigms in Physics program. What other support, if any, would you like for enhancing your understanding of the curriculum and of active engagement teaching strategies?

The student version of the end of this question was “What other support, if any, would you like for enhancing your understanding of the curriculum?”

The tenth question was an open-ended request for additional comments:

• Additional comments about the program for physics majors as a whole:

The committee received 23 responses to the faculty survey (9 tenured, 4 tenure-line, 4 instructors, 3 paradigms TAs, and 3 non-paradigms TAs) and 16 responses to the student survey (13 juniors, 3 seniors). The Paradigms 2.0 committee members received a detailed analysis of the survey within two weeks and used these findings to inform their priorities and actions.

Identifying primary goals for the upper-division courses.

Goals mentioned by both faculty and students included to build deep knowledge of physics, learn how to solve complex problems, prepare for future physics-related careers, learn how to learn physics, and build deep knowledge of mathematics in the context of physics. Goals mentioned on the faculty survey but not on the student survey included learning how to communicate well, being able to perform experiments, and building life skills.

Some faculty and student responses indicated that the current goals were being well met. However there were a variety of suggestions for goals that were not being adequately addressed. There was little overlap between faculty and student responses. Suggestions from respondents to the faculty survey included experimental skills, electronics, computer interfacing, data analysis, interdisciplinary courses, specialty courses, preparation for thesis research, learning to connect things, making connections among content taught and relevant research, offering advanced labs, recognizing a variety of physics futures, developing writing skills, and developing professional maturity. Suggestions from students included needing to see the bigger picture, connecting content taught with relevant research, having enough time to learn, and enhancing professors' communication skills.

Rating the importance of essential and valued themes.

Suggestions for additional essential themes included physics conceptual knowledge such as the Standard Model of Particle Physics, techniques such as experimental design, Fourier analysis, statistical analysis of data, use of eigenvalues and eigenvectors, Hamiltonian and LaGrangian formalisms, attention to boundary conditions as well as fluent use of multiple representations, and metacognitive aspects such as knowing when something is solvable with information on hand and when more information is needed. Suggestions for additional valuable themes included conceptualization of physical phenomena, perturbations, dimensional analysis, computational skills, laboratory skills, and research experience. Students did not suggest any new themes. A tenured faculty member suggested renaming normal modes and quantum states as “Hilbert spaces”.

Suggesting knowledge and skills students need to do research.

Respondents on both the faculty and student surveys noted a wide variety of subject matter knowledge undergraduates needed to do research in a field as well as mathematical and computer expertise, experimental skills, and writing skills. Faculty also mentioned logical reasoning. A student noted a meta-cognitive aspect, being “used to seeing unknown situations and pulling on your previous physics knowledge to help you understand the thing you're working with.”

Commenting upon aspects that should be preserved.

In suggesting aspects of the Paradigms in Physics program that should be preserved, respondents to both the faculty and student surveys recommended retaining the junior paradigm courses and senior capstone structure, coherence across the courses, and teaching approach. Respondents to the faculty survey also recommended preserving the collaborative spirit and computer interfacing. Respondents to the student survey also recommended preserving connecting math to physics, the wide range of topics, having class every day, the pace, paradigm specific textbooks, and communication of knowledge. Respondents to both the faculty and student surveys recommended making some changes: rearrange content, cut back on electronics courses, add new courses to reflect emerging research directions in department, replace relativity with solid state (students can study relativity in another department), make optics a year long senior-level lab, take care with professional writing, reduce homework to once a week, and reduce the ‘weeder’ effect of the program.

Suggesting ways to increase support for faculty and students.

Respondents to the faculty survey suggested a variety of ways to increase support for understanding the curriculum and adopting interactive engagement strategies. These included providing a better orientation to the curriculum, making videos of class available, continuing curriculum meetings, using DropBox to archive materials, including an introduction to the Paradigms in Physics program in new faculty orientation, making curriculum open for others to use, and improving the navigation of the wiki. Students recommended having more copies of required texts available, putting homework problems on the web for those who cannot afford textbooks, and praised the website.

Offering additional comments.

Additional comments by respondents to the faculty survey included noting the need to make changes to requirements to recognize research for the thesis, to consider the impact of increased class size, to reduce the pace of the junior year, to be aware of national norms for upper-division curricula, to develop lower division courses for majors, and to become more aware of cultural issues. Respondents to the student survey included several positive comments such as that the program was “helpful, engaging, and enjoyable.” Other comments noted that these courses are more stressful than lower-division courses, that lower-division courses need to prepare students better, and that some courses should be open to juniors.