You are here
Ann S. Bowers Assistant Professor in the College of Arts & Sciences
My lab studies teaching and learning in physics and other science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) courses. We study research questions such as how students acquire skills or content knowledge, how different course environments affect student learning motivation, or persistence in physics (or other STEM fields), or how they develop an understanding of the nature of science and scientific measurement. We spend considerable time worrying about how we know what outcomes are being achieved and what mechanisms are responsible those outcomes. We use both qualitative (e.g. observations, interviews, and focus groups) and quantitative methods (e.g. test scores, instances of pre-defined actions or activities) to explore the many possible variables that affect student learning and their experiences in physics and STEM courses.
- Laboratory of Atomic and Solid State Physics (LASSP)
Our largest research focus is on the efficacy of hands-on laboratory courses. Our research questions in this area focus on: How do we know what labs are achieving (assessment)? What teaching methods improve outcomes (pedagogy)? By probing these two research questions, we also aim to better understand what labs should be aiming to achieve (learning goals).
Assessment: We have developed a closed-response instrument (like a multiple-choice test) to assess students’ critical thinking skills as related to introductory physics lab courses and are developing an analogous instrument for ecology courses. We are currently analyzing large assessment data sets to understand how different students in various courses develop critical thinking skills. There are also several additional ongoing assessment projects aiming to understanding what students are getting out of lab courses.
Pedagogy: We conduct both small and large scale experiments to test the impacts of different teaching methods on student learning, attitudes and motivation, and skills development. Small scale projects include evaluating a single learning activity in an interview or classroom setting. Larger scale projects include redesigning an entire course or course sequence using new or evidence-based teaching methods to achieve different learning outcomes.
Other interests: Our lab also explores student reasoning and understanding more broadly. This includes evaluating learning through technology, how students make sense of statistics, data analysis, and measurement uncertainty. We are also interested in understanding how and why students choose and persist in their major of study. This area focuses especially on underrepresented groups in STEM. Lastly, we are also interested in exploring the relationship between coursework and student research experiences. Given their well-documented benefits, understanding the mechanisms and characteristics of undergraduate research experiences could help inform other classroom teaching (especially labs).
Walsh, C., Quinn, K. N., Wieman, C., & Holmes, N. G. (2019). Quantifying critical thinking: Development and validation of the physics lab inventory of critical thinking. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 15(1), 010135. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010135
Holmes, N. G., & Wieman, C. E. (2018). Introductory physics labs: We can do better. Physics Today, 71(1), 38–45. https://doi.org/10.1063/PT.3.3816
Holmes, N. G., Wieman, C. E., & Bonn, D. A. (2015). Teaching critical thinking. PNAS, 112(36), 11199–11204. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1505329112
Holmes, N. G., & Smith, E. M. (2019). Operationalizing the AAPT Learning Goals for the Lab. The Physics Teacher, 57(5), 296–299. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.5098916
Holmes, N. G., Olsen, J., Thomas, J. L., & Wieman, C. E. (2017). Value added or misattributed? A multi-institution study on the educational benefit of labs for reinforcing physics content. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(1), 010129. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.010129
Salehi, S., Holmes, N. G., & Wieman, C. (2019). Exploring bias in mechanical engineering students’ perceptions of classmates. PLOS ONE, 14(3), e0212477. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0212477
Day, J., Stang, J. B., Holmes, N. G., Khumar, D., & Bonn, D. A. (2016). Gender gaps and gendered action in a first-year physics laboratory. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 12(2), 020104. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.020104