The role of bridging courses of mathematics and physics on an undergraduate physics program.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21640/ns.v7i15.374Keywords:
bridging courses, bacherlo’s physics program, mathematics courses, physics courses, selection process.Abstract
We present the evaluation of a physics reform that is based in one-year bridging courses of mathematics and physics. This reform was undertook in the Academic Unit of Physics of the Autonomous University of Zacatecas Mexico in 2002 in order to give the physics and mathematics grounds to the freshman students that, for multiple reasons, not acquired them in the high school preparation. We compare the data of four generations of the five-year program (propaedeutic) and the four-year program (traditional) finding practically no difference in the students performance between both programs. Even, in most cases the students performance of the propaedeutic program is slightly better than the traditional one. However, rates like graduation and efficacy are worse in the five-year program. We also asses the 2010 selection process analyzing the pre and post two-week course scores. We obtain that only the top five scores show good accordance between the selection process results and the 2010 official ranking of aspirants in physics (EXANI-II-CENEVAL, spanish acronyms). We also find that a score of 70 % is the reference that determines if the aspirants go to the five-year or to the four-year program.
Downloads
References
Belcher, J. W. 2003. Improving student understading with TEAL. Faculty Newsletters. 16:8.
Brewe, E., V. Sawtelle, L. H. Kramer, G. E. O’Brien, I. Rodriguez and P. Pamelá. 2010. Toward equity through participation in modeling instruction in introductory university physics. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 6:010106.
Centro Nacional de Evaluación para la Eduación Superior, A. C., available at the web site: http://www. ceneval.edu.mx [Consulted in December of 2014].
Cole, M. 2001. Cultural Psychology: A Once and Future Discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Cummings, K., J. Marx, R. Thornton and D. Kuhl. 1999. Evaluating innovation in studio physics. Am. J. Phys. 67:S38.
diSessa, A. A. 1993. Toward an epistemology of physics. Cogn. Instruct. 10:105.
Evaluación Nacional del Logro Académico de Centros Escolares (ENLACE), Secretaría de Eduación Publica, available at the web site: http://www.enlace.sep.gob. mx [Consulted in December of 2014].
Fagen, A. P., C. H. Crouch and E. Mazur. 2002. Peer instruction: Results from a range of classrooms. Phys. Teach. 40:206.
Finkelstein, N. D. and S. J. Pollock. 2005. Replicating and understanding successful innovations: Implementing tutorials in introductory physics. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Ed. Res. 1:010101.
Goertzen, R. M., E. Brewe, L. H. Kramer, L. Wells and D. Jones. 2011. Moving toward change: Institutionalizing reform through implementation of the Learning Assistant model and Open Source Tutorials. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Ed. Res. 7:020105.
Henderson, C. 2005. The challenges of instructional change under the best of circumstances: A case study of one college physics instructor. Am. J. Phys. 73:778.
Kost-Smith, L. E., S. J. Pollock and N. D. Finkelstein. 2010. Gender disparities in second-semester college physics: The incremental effects of a “smog of bias”. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Ed. Res. 6:020112.
Lebedeff, T. C. 2009. Una alianza por la educación, o el reiterado fracaso y fraude de la evaluación. El Cotidiano 154:39.
McDermott, L. C. and P. S. Schaffer. 2002. Tutorials in Introductory Physics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Milner-Bolotin, M., T. Antimirova, A. Noack and A. Petrov. 2011. Attitudes about science and conceptual physics learning in university introductory physics courses. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Ed. Res. 7:020107.
OECD. 2009. PISA 2006 Technical Report.
OECD. 2010. Iberoamerica in PISA 2006: Regional Report, Santillana Educación, S. L.
OECD. 2010. PISA 2009 Results: What students know and can do Students performance in reading, mathematics and science (Volumen 1).
Pollock, S. J. and N. D. Finkelstein. 2008. Sustaining educational reforms in introductory physics. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Ed. Res. 4:010110.
Pollock, S. J., N. D. Finkelstein and L. E. Kost. 2007. Reducing the gender gap in the physics classroom: How sufficient is interactive engagement?. Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Ed. Res. 3:010107.
Riveros, H. G. 2012. Cómo mejorar la enseñanza de las ciencias. Lat. Am. J. Phys. Educ. 6:497.
Rogers, E. M. 2003. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Free Press.
Ruumethart, D. E. 1980. In Theoretical Issues in Preceding Comprehension, edited by R. J. Spono, B. C. Bruce, and W. C. Brewer. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Wittmann, M. C. 1999. Real Time Physics and Interactive Lecture Demonstration Dissemination Project-Evaluation Report, available at the web site: http://perlnet.umephy.maine.edu/research/ RTP-ILD_EvaluationPlan.pdf [Consulted in December of 2014].
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Nova Scientia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Conditions for the freedom of publication: the journal, due to its scientific nature, must not have political or institutional undertones to groups that are foreign to the original objective of the same, or its mission, so that there is no censorship derived from the rigorous ruling process.
Due to this, the contents of the articles will be the responsibility of the authors, and once published, the considerations made to the same will be sent to the authors so that they resolve any possible controversies regarding their work.
The complete or partial reproduction of the work is authorized as long as the source is cited.
