Importance of math prerequisites for performance in introductory physics

Previous work has looked at the relationship between high school preparation and student performance in calculus-based introductory mechanics (physics 1) courses. Here, we extend that work to look at performance in introductory calculus-based electricity and magnetism (physics 2), and we look at the...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Eric W. Burkholder, Gabriel Murillo-Gonzalez, Carl Wieman
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: American Physical Society 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/03e6c71fa42a43aeb47d5e9d81f15a82
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:03e6c71fa42a43aeb47d5e9d81f15a82
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:03e6c71fa42a43aeb47d5e9d81f15a822021-12-02T14:17:07ZImportance of math prerequisites for performance in introductory physics10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.0101082469-9896https://doaj.org/article/03e6c71fa42a43aeb47d5e9d81f15a822021-02-01T00:00:00Zhttp://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010108http://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.010108https://doaj.org/toc/2469-9896Previous work has looked at the relationship between high school preparation and student performance in calculus-based introductory mechanics (physics 1) courses. Here, we extend that work to look at performance in introductory calculus-based electricity and magnetism (physics 2), and we look at the significance of what college math courses have been completed in addition to high school preparation. Using multiple linear regression including these measures of prior preparation, we examine the correlation between taking various math courses in college and final exam scores in introductory physics courses at a highly selective west coast university. In physics 1, we find that prior college math coursework is not a predictor of physics 1 final exam score. In physics 2, we find that having taken a course in vector calculus is a strong predictor of physics 2 exam performance (effect size=0.58 standard deviations, p<0.001), even when controlling for students’ physics 1 final exam scores (effect size=0.27 standard deviations, p<0.01). These effect sizes are similar in magnitude to other measures of students’ incoming physics and math preparation. Qualitative analysis of student exams from physics 2 reveal that this “vector calculus gap” is due to differences in reasoning about vectors and geometry and some differences in conceptual understanding of circuits, as vector calculus itself is not required to perform well on the final exam. That is, basic reasoning related to vector calculus appears to be important, but the formalisms of vector calculus do not.Eric W. BurkholderGabriel Murillo-GonzalezCarl WiemanAmerican Physical SocietyarticleSpecial aspects of educationLC8-6691PhysicsQC1-999ENPhysical Review Physics Education Research, Vol 17, Iss 1, p 010108 (2021)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic Special aspects of education
LC8-6691
Physics
QC1-999
spellingShingle Special aspects of education
LC8-6691
Physics
QC1-999
Eric W. Burkholder
Gabriel Murillo-Gonzalez
Carl Wieman
Importance of math prerequisites for performance in introductory physics
description Previous work has looked at the relationship between high school preparation and student performance in calculus-based introductory mechanics (physics 1) courses. Here, we extend that work to look at performance in introductory calculus-based electricity and magnetism (physics 2), and we look at the significance of what college math courses have been completed in addition to high school preparation. Using multiple linear regression including these measures of prior preparation, we examine the correlation between taking various math courses in college and final exam scores in introductory physics courses at a highly selective west coast university. In physics 1, we find that prior college math coursework is not a predictor of physics 1 final exam score. In physics 2, we find that having taken a course in vector calculus is a strong predictor of physics 2 exam performance (effect size=0.58 standard deviations, p<0.001), even when controlling for students’ physics 1 final exam scores (effect size=0.27 standard deviations, p<0.01). These effect sizes are similar in magnitude to other measures of students’ incoming physics and math preparation. Qualitative analysis of student exams from physics 2 reveal that this “vector calculus gap” is due to differences in reasoning about vectors and geometry and some differences in conceptual understanding of circuits, as vector calculus itself is not required to perform well on the final exam. That is, basic reasoning related to vector calculus appears to be important, but the formalisms of vector calculus do not.
format article
author Eric W. Burkholder
Gabriel Murillo-Gonzalez
Carl Wieman
author_facet Eric W. Burkholder
Gabriel Murillo-Gonzalez
Carl Wieman
author_sort Eric W. Burkholder
title Importance of math prerequisites for performance in introductory physics
title_short Importance of math prerequisites for performance in introductory physics
title_full Importance of math prerequisites for performance in introductory physics
title_fullStr Importance of math prerequisites for performance in introductory physics
title_full_unstemmed Importance of math prerequisites for performance in introductory physics
title_sort importance of math prerequisites for performance in introductory physics
publisher American Physical Society
publishDate 2021
url https://doaj.org/article/03e6c71fa42a43aeb47d5e9d81f15a82
work_keys_str_mv AT ericwburkholder importanceofmathprerequisitesforperformanceinintroductoryphysics
AT gabrielmurillogonzalez importanceofmathprerequisitesforperformanceinintroductoryphysics
AT carlwieman importanceofmathprerequisitesforperformanceinintroductoryphysics
_version_ 1718391586823340032