CU Modern Physics Curriculum
Developed by: Carl Wieman, Kathy Perkins, and Sam McKagan at the University of Colorado Boulder
Level
middle schoolhigh schoolintro collegeinter-mediateupper levelgrad school other
calc based
alg based
conceptual
middle schoolhigh schoolintro collegeinter-mediateupper levelgrad school other
calc based
alg based
conceptual
Topics
Setting
Overview
What? Curriculum for a large-lecture modern physics class for engineering majors. Focus on reasoning development, model building, and real-world applications. Includes lectures, clicker questions, homework, exam questions, PhET simulations, learning goals, and discussion of common student difficulties.
Student skills developed
Designed for:
- Conceptual understanding
- Problem-solving skills
- Making real-world connections
- Using multiple representations
Can be adapted for:
- Lab skills
- Metacognition
Instructor effort required
- Medium
Resources required
- Projector
- Computers for students
Resources
Developer's website: CU Modern Physics Curriculum
Intro Article: S. McKagan, K. Perkins, and C. Wieman, Reforming a large lecture modern physics course for engineering majors using a PER-based design, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2006, Syracuse, New York, 2006.
Teaching Materials
You can download all course materials for free, including lecture slides, clicker questions, homework, exams, and solutions from the developer's website on PhysPort.
Research
RESEARCH VALIDATION
Silver ValidationThis is the second highest level of research validation, corresponding to:
- at least 1 of the "based on" categories
- at least 2 of the "demonstrated to improve" categories
- at least 4 of the "studied using" categories
Research Validation Summary
This curriculum was studied by the developers in four semesters of the same course, including two semesters taught by another professor who was not one of the developers. In each semester, students took the Quantum Mechanics Conceptual Survey (QMCS), test of conceptual understanding of modern physics, and the Colorado Learning and Attitudes of Science Survey (CLASS). Scores on these surveys were compared to scores in similar classes at the same university taught using more traditional methods. Students in reformed classes scored higher on the QMCS than students in traditional classes. Students in the reformed classes had no declines in expert-like beliefs on the CLASS, compared with students in the traditional classes who had declines of about 10%.
Based on Research Into:
- theories of how students learn
- student ideas about specific topics
Demonstrated to Improve:
- conceptual understanding
- problem-solving skills
- lab skills
- beliefs and attitudes
- attendance
- retention of students
- success of underrepresented groups
- performance in subsequent classes
Studied using:
- cycle of research and redevelopment
- student interviews
- classroom observations
- analysis of written work
- research at multiple institutions
- research by multiple groups
- peer-reviewed publication
References
- C. Baily, Perspectives in Quantum Physics: Epistemological, Ontological and Pedagogical, Ph.D., University of Colorado at Boulder, 2011.
- C. Baily and N. Finkelstein, Student Perspectives in Quantum Physics, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2008, Edmonton, Canada, 2008.
- C. Baily and N. Finkelstein, Development of quantum perspectives in modern physics, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 5 (1), 010106 (2009).
- C. Baily and N. Finkelstein, Quantum Interpretations in Modern Physics Instruction, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2009, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 2009.
- C. Baily and N. Finkelstein, Interpretation in Quantum Physics as Hidden Curriculum, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2010, Portland, Oregon, 2010.
- C. Baily and N. Finkelstein, Refined characterization of student perspectives on quantum physics, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 6 (2), 020113 (2010).
- C. Baily and N. Finkelstein, Teaching and understanding of quantum interpretations in modern physics courses, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 6 (1), 010101 (2010).
- C. Baily and N. Finkelstein, Interpretive Themes in Quantum Physics: Curriculum Development and Outcomes, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2011, Omaha, Nebraska, 2011.
- C. Baily and N. D. Finkelstein, Teaching quantum interpretations: Revisiting the goals and practices of introductory quantum physics courses, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 11 (2) 020124 (2015).
- L. Deslauriers and C. Wieman, Learning and retention of quantum concepts with different teaching methods, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 7 (1), 010101 (2011).
- S. McKagan, W. Handley, K. Perkins, and C. Wieman, A Research-based Curriculum for Teaching the Photoelectric Effect, Am. J. Phys. 77 (1), 87 (2009).
- S. McKagan, K. Perkins, M. Dubson, C. Malley, S. Reid, R. LeMaster, and C. Wieman, Developing and Researching PhET simulations for Teaching Quantum Mechanics, Am. J. Phys. 76 (4), 406 (2007).
- S. McKagan, K. Perkins, and C. Wieman, Reforming a large lecture modern physics course for engineering majors using a PER-based design, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2006, Syracuse, New York, 2006.
- S. McKagan, K. Perkins, and C. Wieman, Why we should teach the Bohr model and how to teach it effectively, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 4 (1), 010103 (2008).
- S. McKagan, K. Perkins, and C. Wieman, Deeper look at student learning of quantum mechanics: The case of tunneling, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 4 (2), 020103 (2008).
- S. McKagan, K. Perkins, and C. Wieman, Design and validation of the Quantum Mechanics Conceptual Survey, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 6 (2), 020121 (2010).
- S. McKagan and C. Wieman, Exploring Student Understanding of Energy through the Quantum Mechanics Conceptual Survey, presented at the Physics Education Research Conference 2005, Salt Lake City, Utah, 2005.
