Student understanding of graph slope and area under a graph: A comparison of physics and nonphysics students

作     者：Ana Susac Andreja Bubic Elizabeta Kazotti Maja Planinic Marijan Palmovic 

作者机构：Department of Applied Physics Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing University of Zagreb Unska 3 10000 Zagreb Croatia Department of Physics Faculty of Science University of Zagreb Bijenicka 32 10000 Zagreb Croatia Chair for Psychology Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences University of Split Sinjska 2 21000 Split Croatia Laboratory for Psycholinguistic Research Department of Speech and Language Pathology University of Zagreb Borongajska cesta 83h 10000 Zagreb Croatia 

出 版 物：《Physical Review Physics Education Research》 (Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res.)

年 卷 期：2018年第14卷第2期

页      面：020109-020109页

核心收录：

基　　金：University of Zagreb Development Fund  (198002) 

主　　题：Concepts & principles Student preparation 

摘      要：Previous studies have identified physics students’ difficulties with graph slope and area under a graph in different contexts. In this study we compared physics and nonphysics (psychology) students’ understanding of graphs; i.e., we evaluated the effects of concept (graph slope vs area under graph), type of question (qualitative vs quantitative), and context (physics vs finance) on their scores, strategies, and eye-tracking data. All students solved questions about graph slope better than the questions about area under a graph. Psychology students scored rather low on the questions about area under a graph, and physics students spent more time on questions about area under a graph than on slope questions, indicating that understanding of area under a graph is quite a difficult concept that seems unlikely to develop spontaneously. Generally, physics students had comparable scores on the qualitative and quantitative questions, whereas psychology students solved qualitative questions much better. As expected, students’ scores and eye-tracking measures indicated that problems involving physics context were easier for physics students since they typically had higher scores and shorter total and axes viewing times for physics than finance questions. Some physics students may have transferred the concepts and techniques from physics to finance because they typically scored better than psychology students on the finance questions that were novel for both groups. Analysis of student strategies showed that physics students mostly relied on strategies learned in physics courses, with strong emphasis on the use of formulas, whereas psychology students mostly used common-sense strategies, as they did not know the physics formulas. The implications of the results for teaching and learning about graphs in physics courses are also discussed.