Flexible Instructional Space for Teaching Science Courses with emphasis on Inquiry and Collaborative Active Learning

1. 1a. General Overview

The renovated instructional space will be mostly occupied by the physics and pre engineering programs. However, the use of that space will not be limited to these programs only. The flexibility of the newly created spaces will allow for other functions, including but not limited to teaching of other science courses, hosting of invited speakers with relatively large audiences, hosting various sorts of on-campus meetings as well as teaching science to the 5th grade magnet class.

The physics program is currently occupying the entire east half of the first floor of the Science Building, except for room S118. This includes the large lecture room S104, which is used for all Introductory Physics and Astronomy courses. Two teaching laboratories, S105 and S106, are used for all introductory Physics and Astronomy labs. The smaller lecture/laboratory room, S119, is used for all upper division physics and pre-engineering courses. The research lab, S120, is used for advanced physics lab, senior research projects and faculty research. It also serves as a student lounge for physics/pre–engineering majors. The remaining parts of the physics area include the physics stock room, work shop, suite of three faculty offices, S110C, S110B, and S110D, and the conference lounge, S110. Some of the physics space, in particular room S104, is used by many other university programs and groups for instruction and meetings.

The physics program in its current form serves many aspects of the McMurry 2023 centennial vision. This service will be significantly enhanced by renovating instructional spaces as outlined in this proposal.

The program is actively perusing the goal of building and developing learning communities on McMurry campus. Most of the classes currently offered by the physics department encourage or require the use of peer instruction and peer review process. We have been especially successful in establishing such a community among the physics majors. Due to innovative curriculum used in our introductory physics courses these learning communities are first formed by the freshmen physics students. It is then reinforced into an even wider and stronger group through participation in the Society of Physics Students and group projects in the upper division physics courses. This broader learning community is not restricted to students, but includes physics faculty as experienced colleagues, whose expertise is crucial for the success of research and capstone projects. New spaces to be created according to this proposal are in the support of the instructional model which will include learning communities as an essential part of the instructional method (see “Rationale for Change” and “Renovation Plan” sections for details). Moreover, the

flexibility of the spaces to be created, will allow for better usage by the physics program and other programs. This should stimulate not only the development of the learning community inside the physics department, but open interdisciplinary boundaries between different groups in and outside of The School of Natural and Computational Sciences. The first steps in this direction have already been taken through the MCMOST activities and during the offering of the “Leadership in Science and Math” course. It is expected that among many other functions, the newly created spaces will serve the future offering of those programs. Finally this learning community will become even stronger by including members of the 5 th grade magnet school class into these flexible spaces.

In recent years the physics program has been actively engaged in the design and implication of a curriculum that strongly relies on the use of asynchronous learning modes. For the last 3 years, the University Physics course has been officially designated an ICT (Informational and Computational Technology) enhanced course. This year, for the first time, it has been delivered in the new “module format”, where the use of tablet PCs and other forms of instructional technology has been made an essential part of the teaching model. To support this model Dr. Bykov and Dr. Christensen (former physics faculty) have submitted several grant proposals to the Sam Taylor Foundation and the National Science Foundation (NSF). Two of the grants have been funded by the Sam Taylor Foundation and one proposal is still under consideration by the NSF. The instructional spaces to be created according to the current proposal are in support of this teaching model. However, the flexibility of the spaces to be created will allow for a variety of other applications and teaching modes. At the same time instructional technology hardware to be installed in the improved spaces will allow for various sorts of asynchronous learning modes to be developed. See “Rationale for Change” and “Renovation Plan” sections of this proposal for details.

In its present form the physics program has been able to attract a diverse student population. This includes students of different racial, ethnic, and religious backgrounds. Our students, past and present, include people from rural and urban areas, foreign and domestic, traditional as well as non-traditional. The program has also had a successful record regardless of gender. However, program does not have a very strong record with under prepared math and science students. As a result, we have been losing many promising young people, who otherwise could have been excellent additions to the program. The space renovation plan, which we are proposing, is tailored towards the instructional model, which will allow for a variety of math and science preparedness. The learning communities mentioned earlier will be an excellent source for students to learn from each other regardless of varying levels of student preparedness. Thus, the spaces to be created will stimulate an even higher level of diversity in the physics/pre-engineering program while cascading to the university as a whole.

Currently the McMurry physics/pre-engineering program is involved in several official and unofficial partnerships as well as collaborative programs with other institutions of higher learning. In particular, we have had a very successful record of placing our physics graduates into the physics and engineering graduate programs of Texas Tech University. The McMurry Physics department and Texas Tech Physics department have a formal agreement for the automatic acceptance (subject to student performance) of McMurry physics graduates into their physics and applied physics graduate programs. This has been carried over to the Texas Tech Engineering department as an unofficial agreement due to the reputation of the physics curriculum at McMurry University and McMurry physics graduates. The McMurry Physics department also has a formal 3-2 agreement with Texas A&M Engineering department in which physics students at McMurry can take 3 years of core curriculum in physics then transfer to Texas A&M for 2 years of engineering curriculum. Upon graduation, the student receives a BS in Physics from McMurry University and a BS in Engineering from Texas A&M University. In addition, the physics departments of McMurry and Abilene Christian Universities are collaborating in the teaching of physics and pre-engineering courses. Creation of the new teaching spaces outlined in this proposal will strengthen McMurry’s position and attract even more of the HSU and ACU students to take physics and pre-engineering classes at McMurry. This becomes even more apparent as ACU’s physics program focus has been shifting from pre-engineering towards experimental nuclear and computational physics resulting in ACU students taking pre-engineering classes at McMurry and the practical absence of a physics program at HSU, so that all upper division and sometimes even introductory physics courses have to be taken by HSU students outside of HSU. Since last year Dr. Keith has been actively involved with the teaching of the 5th grade magnet class. Several class periods were held in the physics teaching labs and many of the physics equipment pieces were used by the 5th graders in the course of the semester. After this renovation is completed, it will provide even easier access for the 5th graders.

As mentioned above in recent years the physics department has been actively engaged in the development of an innovative introductory physics curriculum, which incorporates teaching by inquiry with tablet PC-based technology suite, and aims to create a unique technologically and collaboratively rich learning environment. It is expected that this teaching model will eventually lead to significant gains in student learning and will serve as a pattern for other STEM fields in McMurry and beyond. In addition to many other functions the space renovation proposed here will work in the support of this teaching model. We see this project as a starting point to create the "McMurry Center for Research in Teaching of Math and Science". The renovated spaces will not only serve in the support of our teaching model but may give a home to the center itself. In our opinion, the first task of the center should be

to work on the detailed dissemination plan of our teaching innovations and apply them to teaching of other science courses at McMurry and beyond.

During the last several years undergraduate student research has found its permanent place in the physics program curriculum, since we now require completing a senior research project from all graduating physics majors. As we have progressed through the first several years of trials and errors, we are now at the edge of developing student projects with such a quality that they can be presented beyond the McMurry walls. For instance, several of our students have presented their work during the Texas section meeting of the American Physical Society/American Association of Physics Teachers/Society of Physics Students in the spring of 2009. With greater quality comes greater needs, and we should notice that with the new group of our students starting to work on their senior research, our current research lab combined with the student lounge in one space will not provide the resources sufficient for such quality research. This is why part of this proposal is concerned with creation of a better research space for both faculty and students. We hope that this space will serve not just the interests of physics program, but will allow creating of additional MURI centers which will incorporate interdisciplinary work between several science departments.

1b.Rationale for Change

The new instructional spaces which we are proposing to create will serve in the support of an innovative instructional approach for teaching introductory physics courses. The proposed model will help to address several challenges that instructors of introductory physics courses typically face, such as (1) the need to balance the depth and breadth in material coverage; (2) the need to provide active engagement with the subject matter; (3) the need to integrate laboratory exercises with class content (NRC, 2003). In addition, the newly created spaces will help to integrate modern instructional technology (in particular Tablet PCs) and find the most effective ways of using this technology in a physics classroom.

The proposed model will utilize a module format for inquiry-based units. Extensive research in physics education (McDermott & Redish, 1999; McDermott, 2001) has clearly shown the benefits of inquiry-based instruction. Introductory science curricula have been criticized for excessive breadth and insufficient depth of material coverage (Schmidt, McKnight, & Raizen, 1997), which results in learning that emphasizes the memorization of facts, but not the development of scientific reasoning. Traditional instruction “teaches science by telling about science” and, hence, teaching science appears to be fundamentally different from “doing science”. Based on our current understanding of how students learn (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999), incorporating scientific inquiry into science teaching, especially in introductory courses, is crucial in the development of essential scientific reasoning,

which translates into an enhanced functional understanding (the ability to appropriately transfer one’s knowledge to novel situations) of fundamental science principles. This development is based on three principles. First, inquiry-based instruction makes learning authentic and constructive – just like scientists, students engage in a cyclic process of making observations, posing questions, formulating and testing their hypotheses, interpreting the findings, and presenting results. Second, for the learning to be truly authentic the nature of science as an inherently social enterprise should be taken seriously. Just like “doing science” occurs through scholarly communities, “learning science” should occur through effective learning communities, where peer interactions become a critical element in teaching and learning (Mazur, 1997). Third, inquiry is an intrinsically motivating process which creates excitement about “doing science” and a motivation to become a life-long learner.

In the proposed approach tablet PC-based technology will be used to offer multiple learning contexts through: (1) interactive lecture; (2) interactive problem solving in peer groups; and (3) content-rich laboratory experiments. Several types of technology will be delivered on tablets to maximize students' exposure to the material and to make learning contextual. In order for this approach to be successful, it will not only require the active use of tablets but also imposes certain requirements on the types of instructional spaces where tablets are used. Similar ideas have been implemented by J. W. Belcher to develop the “Technology-enabled active learning” (TEAL) project at MIT (Rimer, 2009). Belcher (2005) showed that TEAL produced almost a factor of two in gains in student learning compared to traditional lecture/recitation format. The typical instructional space, which was created for TEAL is shown in Fig.1.

Fig. 1.a. A schematic plot of TEAL instructional space

Fig. 1.b. A picture of TEAL space in MIT

Fig. 1.c. TEAL space at work.

In our approach the module sequence will correspond to standard topics of introductory physics courses. Each module will include traditional in-class course components: lectures, discussions, and laboratory. However, the role and weight of each of the components as well as use of technology (and tablets in particular) to connect those components will be innovative. We see each of these components as being neither superior to the other, nor independent of the other. Subject matter will dictate the teaching format and time spent on each of the activities. The use of technology in each module will allow for a variety of formats to introduce new material, a variety of learning modes, multiple assignment types, multiple assessment techniques, and will stimulate group as well as individual student work. Our intention is to maximize the number of contexts in which students will have to actively engage the topic material. Making students reuse their knowledge in different situations, which might each require different kinds of knowledge representation (mathematical, verbal, graphical, diagramatic, etc.), enhances development of scientific reasoning and acquisition of functional understanding of

theoretical concepts (McDermott, 2001). It must be noted that these ideas are not unique for physics teaching and can be easily transformed to teaching of other STEM disciplines. Moreover, this approach can also be used for teaching of the 5 th

grade magnet class.Fig. 2 below represents the structural and functional components of each

module. Primary focus will be made on (1) adjustability of the activities to the specific needs (levels of preparation and learning styles) and interests of students; and (2) easy access to the activities outside of the regular classroom to account for self-paced independent learning. Regardless of whether a module starts with a lecture, or a lab, or a discussion, commencement of each module will involve an authentic observation, one which leads to posing questions. Depending on the topic and students’ preexisting knowledge, the order in which other module components are offered to students may vary. For more complex topics, a historical and/or theoretical context may be necessary, and the cycle could start with an interactive lecture. If students already have sufficient background, the module may start with interactive problem solving and discussion. For some topics, the best choice might be to start with an experiment. After the original question is formulated and the necessary data are collected, the hypotheses are formed to be tested and further explored in the follow-up of the instructional module.

Fig. 2. Structural and functional elements of each module

Lecture, Lab, and Discussion in Fig. 2 represent the in-class parts of instructional modules. However, the in-class activities are connected with reflective at-home work (e.g., writing lab reports, solving problems, reviewing peer work, etc). Collaborative group work adds social context to these activities and tablet-based networking will ensure student connections at home.

As is stated above, implementation of such instructional modeldoes require certain changes to the existing instructional spaces in theMcMurry physics department. The following two sections describe the current conditions of these spaces and the changes which we are proposing to make.

2. Current Conditions

This proposal consists of two parts (A and B) to renovate two different areas currently existing in the McMurry physics department.

Part A

Fig. 3.a. below depicts the floor plan of the Introductory Physics Lecture Room S104 (#125 in the official Science Building floor plan), Introductory Physics Teaching Labs S105, S106 (#133, #136 in the Science Building floor plan) and Physics Demonstration Prep Room (#126 in the Science Building floor plan). In their current conditions the rooms are highly inflexible in use and can only accommodate very few teaching functions.

Room S104 has always been used for traditional lectures. The tables installed in this room almost do not allow for any types of group activities. They are hard to move and not only cannot be rearranged during the class period but even rearranging them prior or after the class period takes a considerable amount of time. In addition to that the tables are so long that they do not allow for active interactions in student groups while all the students in the group are sitting in one row along the table. Room S104 also lacks a sufficient number of electric plugs for all the students to be able to charge their tablets. Finally the large demonstration table at the front of the room completely blocks the instructor from students. Even though this table is necessary in order to be able to perform demonstrations, it does not have to be there during every class period and it is not possible to remove it when it is not in use.

The Physics Demonstration Prep Room is currently oriented perpendicular to the demonstration table in room S104. This always poses the difficulty to move long equipment pieces from the Prep room to S104 and back. On many occasions the demonstrations have to be prepared directly in S104 instead of the Prep room, since it would be almost impossible to move these demonstrations. This makes the Prep room almost useless as it cannot serve its main function and is almost exclusively used for storage but not for the mounting of demo equipment pieces.

Both Introductory Physics Teaching Labs (S105, S106) in their current conditions can only be used for teaching the labs and nothing else. The area of the rooms is disproportionally large for the functions they serve. Since equipment limitations, teaching effectiveness and safety concerns allow only up to 12 students in a given section of the lab, the rear parts of both rooms are hardly ever used at all. In addition to that on the days when only one section of the lab is scheduled the second room is not use at all.

All the spaces described above are very hard to use when it comes to the adoption of modern studio-based, workshop-based or module-based approaches for teaching science courses. Every effort has been made this semester to use the spaces for the modular structure of the University Physics course. It has been especially challenging on the occasions when the class does a laboratory experiment and participates in interactive lecture during the same class period. When this happens the students and the instructor have to move back and forth between rooms S104 and one of the lab rooms. That puts additional pressure on all of the participants and takes certain amount of valuable class time.

Fig 3.a. The current floor plan of the first floor north-east corner of the Science Building

To summarize, the absence of flexibility is the key issue which prohibits the efficient use of all of the aforementioned rooms.

Part B

Fig 3.b. below depicts the current floor plan for the Physics Research Lab S120 (#141 in the official floor plan of the Science Building), Physics Dark Room (#139 in the official floor plan of the Science Building), Physics Storage/Refrigerator Room (#138 in the official floor plan of the Science Building), Physics Secure Storage/”Cage” Room (# 140 in the official floor plan of the Science Building). In their current form some of these spaces are overloaded with different functions, while other spaces are essentially not used at all due to their inconvenient configuration and position in the floor plan.

Fig 3.b. The current floor plan of the first floor south-east corner of the Science Building

The Physics Research Lab (S120) is currently serving as a research space for both Dr. Bykov as well as Dr. Renfro. During the spring semester it is used to set up experiments for advanced physics lab. Many of these experiments are optics and nuclear based. They require special conditions such as complete darkness and absence of vibrations (in the case of optics) and radiation safety measures (in the case of nuclear physics experiments). In addition to those functions, room S120 is also used for senior research projects and finally as upper-classmen physics student lounge. Since it has always been a physics department priority to establish and develop effectively working learning communities among the physics majors, at least one room in the department had to be designated for students working on homework problems and group projects. At the same time, room S120 contains many expensive and delicate and even dangerous equipment pieces which should not be left without proper care. The only solution to this problem so far has been designating certain areas in the room for different functions as well as trying to set up and remove the experiments conducted in the room in the fastest possible manner, so that they will not interfere with the room’s other functions.

The Physics Dark Room, on the other hand, has not been used for anything in years except the occasional placement of a senior research experiment due to the lack of better space. The room has lost its original purpose in the age of digital photography, but can hardly be used for anything else because of its small size and inconvenient location.

The Physics Storage/Refrigerator Room has the same issues as the dark room. Most of the shelves in this room are empty and the glassware stored here can be perfectly placed in some other location in the Physics Stock Room. The Refrigerator would have been much more useful if was located in the student lounge or closer to one of the labs. After all this room is almost wasted space, but it cannot be used in any other capacity due to its size and location.

The Physics Secure Storage is mostly used for the storing of radioactive substances. However, these substances only occupy one drawer in the file cabinet of this room. The rest of this pretty large space is essentially wasted and has been partly taken over by the IT Department to place the Science Building Network/Communication equipment. This equipment is not in the secured part of the room, which makes it accessible to almost anybody who my wander around the physics department. In addition, the room has no special air conditioning system, which will eventually lead to failure of the expensive IT equipment.

To summarize, the uneven distribution of the space functions prohibits the efficient use of all the rooms in this area of the Science Building.

3. Renovation Plan

Guided by the vision and the basic principles outlined in the first section of this proposal we would like to introduce the following renovation plan. This plan consists of two parts, which can be adopted simultaneous or as two independent projects.

Part A

The new flexible instructional spaces to be created in the north-east first floor corner of the Science Building in the location of the current rooms S104, S105, and S106.

Fig 4.a illustrates the remodeled floor plan of this area of the building. The renovation will consist of removing permanent walls between rooms S105-S106 and between rooms S104-S105. Each of these walls is to be replaced with the three movable partitions (see the picture). At the same time the space at the rear ends of current rooms S105, S106 is to be separated by the permanent walls and turned into preparation areas. The new space will be highly flexible to accommodate different teaching functions, teaching modes and instructional models.

Fig. 4.a. The new instructional space set up for teaching of lecture accompanied by the 2 laboratory sections

The following has to be noticed about the space.

The partitions have to be sound-proved for the 3 parts of the space to be used at the same time by different classes. Our consultation with the architect (during new science building meetings last year) confirmed that such sound-proved partitions do exist. The partitions are to be covered with the white-board material on both sides, so they can be used as white board and/or screens to project slides and to write on during the group discussions. In their closed positions partitions are to be stored at the side edges of the prep rooms (see Fig. 4.b.).

The central part of the space (current room S105) is to be mainly used for lectures and discussions. The front (hallway) wall of that space is to be completely covered by the whiteboard, which can be used as a screen too. The additional door is to be added in this wall. The other two screens are to be located at the sides of the back wall. The major part of the back central wall (separating the space from the prep area) will consists of the large blackboard/door. The two halves of the blackboard can be pushed to two different sides allowing the large demonstration table to be either moved into the room or back to the prep area, where it can be set up before the lecture. Fig. 4.a. depicts the situation when the table in the room, while Fig 4.b shows the case where the table is in the prep area. The central prep area is to be mainly used for setting up and keeping (notice the closet at the back wall) lecture demonstrations. The sink, which is currently located in S105 is to be kept in place and will be very handy for preparing demonstrations.

The side spaces (current rooms S104 and S106) can now be used for labs as well as for regular classes. The side walls in these rooms will be equipped with 4 docking stations for the tables as they set in Fig 4.a. Each docking station is to have DC and AC power outlets, gas outlets and compressed air outlets (similar to what currently exists in room S106). Above the docking stations the walls to be covered with two projector screens on each wall. The back walls separating from the prep areas are to be covered with blackboards. The front (hallway) walls are to be covered with whiteboards/screens. The prep area behind the current room S106 is to be used for lab set up. The sink, which is currently there is to be kept, wall closets and the prep table are to be added. The current demonstration room which will become another preparation area does not have a sink, but can serve a perfect place for the student-worker/assistant’s office, who will be responsible for setting up labs and demos. The current door of room S104 is to be moved to a different location.

All the desks in the newly created space are the desks of the same type. They should have electric outlets and electric lines running through them, so that tablet PCs can be plugged as needed. The desks are also to have wheels so that they can be moved easy and quickly for different configurations. However, wheels are to be blocked during the class activities for safety reasons. Desks are also to have hooks to be connected together (including electric wiring) for different configurations

depicted in Figures 4. Good examples of desks with similar designs from Earl Walls Associates architect firm are presented in Fig.5.

Fig.5. Possible desk design for renovated space

The electric power lines are to be installed under the floor along the central axis in each part of the space, so that the movable desks could be plugged there. Fig. 6 shows how electric outlet may look like.

Fig.6. Electric outlet for the new space

In order to be able to support small group discussions the space should have multiple screens and projectors installed around the rooms, similar to MIT space shown in Fig.1.The locations of the screens have been mentioned above. Fig. 7

gives further clarifications on projector’s positions. The projectors are to be controlled either from instructor’s desks (wireless control will be the best possible solution) or by individual student groups during small group activities. The docking stations on the sides of lab space may also have projector hookups.

Fig.7. The projection cones for the projectors to be installed in the renovated space

Flexibility is the key feature of the space renovation proposed. As it is mentioned above this space may serve various different functions.

Fig 4.a above depicts the space’s configuration suitable for the module instructional model (described in section 1 of this proposal). The central part of the instructional space is set up for the lecture with 24 students, while the other two parts of the space are set up for the lab activities with up to 16 students in each section. The partitions may be kept closed or open for that set up. If they are partly open, it will allow the quick move from the lecture space to the lab space if needed in the course of the class period. At the same time this set up can be used for a traditional lecture-lab sequence, where separate lab sections could be run independently from the lecture.

Fig. 4.b below depicts the same space set up for a very large traditional lecture course of 56 students. This configuration can also be used for the Science Colloquia or other lecture series with invited speakers.

Fig. 4.b. The new instructional space set up for teaching of the large lecture course

Fig 4.c. shows how the same space can be used for the in class discussions or small group projects, where all the desks are placed in such a way that they form group areas for 4 people in each group. In this mode either space or just parts of the space separated by partitions can be used. The white boards (partitions) can be used for writing during those discussions.

Finally, Fig.4.d. shows the situation where the space is set for simultaneous teaching of the 16 student lab and intermediate size lecture course of 40 students.

One can imagine that these are just a few examples of how the space can be used. There are still infinite numbers of possibilities to combine the above elements in any desirable way.

In addition to redesigning the space itself, certain equipment pieces are necessary to accommodate the module instructional approach described in the “Rationale for change” section of this proposal. Most of the equipment has already been purchased by the Physics Department in the course of several years from the regular department budget. However, in order to have complete sets of the equipment for two 16-student sections (as mentioned above), additional purchases will be necessary. A detailed list of the required equipment is available from the Physics Department upon request.

Fig. 4.c. The new instructional space set up for teaching of the discussion session

Fig 4.d. The new instructional space set up for teaching of the lab and intermediate size lecture course.

Part B

The south-east corner of the first floor of the Science Building is to be redesigned to achieve the most efficient distribution of the functions to which this space serves.

As mentioned before in the previous part of the proposal, this area services the upper level physics students as well as research that is being carried out by the physics department.

Fig 8.a. Proposed changes to upper level lab and machine shop section

To improve on the current design, a new layout of rooms has been chosen to increase lab space and offer a comfortable learning environment, close to physics faculty, while physics majors are not in classes. This plan accomplishes this by removing space wasted by walls and obsolete needs.

The physics student community space will be added at the present location of room S120. This room will be intended for physics students to have a communal learning environment. It will serve as a meeting and planning area for the Society of Physics Students in their effort to provide leadership and service to the rest of the McMurry student body and the fifth grade magnet class. A small kitchen area will be present in this area so students can maximize their study time past normal hours as well as having a jumping off point for camps and demonstrations that require food, drinks, and ice, as seen during the summer of 2009 Webvanna produced by Jeanette Schofield.

The upper level physics lab will be moved to the north of its present location and will absorb the dark room in 139 and two storage closets, 140 and 138. In addition, it will feature a (5.4x5.4 meter) isolation pad which will support an optics table. This isolation pad will allow student to make high precession measurements that are currently impossible due to building vibration. It is also hoped that this area can serve as a demonstration area for the fifth grade science class as it will house most of the advanced physics experiments. Double doors will also be available to the

Student Community

Space

Upper Level Lab with

Isolation Pad

Machine Shop

Storage

machine shop which will allow for easy access to large experimental equipment. This area will be the center point for senior capstone projects and upper level physics experiments.

The machine shop for now will remain in its current shape and location. The only change from its current structure is the addition of double doors to the stock room to allow better access to the primary storage area for the physics department. In doing this, a couple of electrical components for the building will need to be moved to another location along the wall.

A secure storage closet will be added that is not currently in place. This storage area would house the network access for the science building and radioactive materials that are currently in room 140. This will be an improved situation as room 140 is not well ventilated and access to the room is not well restricted because of its use as a general storage room.

Fig 8.b. Dimensions of proposed room changes.

None of the existing activities will be moved to radically different areas as a result of this proposal. However, some of the activities will be significantly enhanced and will make much better use of the space compared to what they currently do. So, no additional space has to be found outside of the area currently occupied by the Physics Department to place these activities after the complete realization of this proposal. On the other hand no space will be vacated by the Physics Department either. Even though the proposed renovation in Part A will allow for the space to be used by many other programs, it is assumed that the Physics Program will always have a priority on the first use of this space, since it is adjacent to the Physics Stock

Room and as such will be the only space where physics courses can be delivered completely.

While renovation is underway it may affect the delivery of certain physics courses. If renovation is done during the summer then nothing will be affected at all. If renovations are done during the regular semesters then the following actions have to be taken.

For renovations according to Part A of this proposal: During the semester when renovation is to take place, neither “Introduction to Physics” (Phys 1400), nor “Introduction to Astronomy” (Phys 1401) will be delivered. These classes only serve General Education requirements and assuming that other science programs deliver their General Education course, the absence of these two courses for a semester should not affect General Education significantly. During that semester General Physics course (Phys 1410/ Phys 1420) can be delivered in room S108 (subject to coordination on the space use with Biology Department). University Physics course (Phys 2510/Phys 2520) can be delivered in room S119, assuming that its enrollment for that semester is limited to 10 students. The most challenging task will be to accommodate both General and University Physics labs for that semester. This can only be done by limiting the number of the lab sections offered. It may become possible to deliver this reduced number of sections in rooms S119 and S120, but the schedule has to be coordinated with upper division physics classes and some laboratory experiments will have to be dropped from the curriculum for that semester only due to the impossibility of installing equipment in rooms S119 and S120. It is also assumed that the renovation according to Part B of this proposal is done at different time than Part A (unless during the summer). If both renovations are performed at the same time then delivery of introductory physics labs will become almost impossible and would have to be moved to one of lecture classrooms at the first or second floor of the Science Building. In this case the Science Building Lab manager will be required to assist in equipment installation for every lab experiment and many of the experiments would have to be dropped or simplified for that semester.

For renovations according to Part B of this proposal. If renovation is to take place during the regular semester, it may indirectly affect the delivery of upper division courses in room S119, since it is located very close to the construction area. These courses can then be delivered in any other lecture class-room in the Science Building (subject to careful scheduling). If renovations are done during the spring semester they will directly affect delivery of the Advanced Physics Lab. The class can be relocated to either room S105 or room S106, assuming that renovations of those rooms are not done at the same time. In the course of renovations, the Workshop, the Student Lounge (S120) and some areas of the Stock Room will become inaccessible. This means that Senior Research projects will not be scheduled for that semester.

This proposal does not directly affect other programs, except for the cases when room S104 is used for lectures by different classes. Classes should not be scheduled there during the renovation period.

Both parts of this proposal suggest renovations of the rooms adjacent to each other and redoing an entire area of the building at the same time. On the other hand, the plan will use most of the existing infrastructure. In particular the existing sinks and water lines are to be kept in rooms S105, S106. The gas and air lines can be kept in S106, even though they have to be redone in S105 and S104. The structure of the current Physics Demonstration Room is almost kept preserved. The main electric power lines, gas and air lines in the Physics Workshop will not be affected either. In this respect the plan makes the “most of the money”.

4. Planned Impact

McMurry Students

As it is outlined in the first section of this proposal the Physics/Pre-engineering program already serves many of the aspects of 2023 McMurry Centennial Vision. Almost every one of these aspects is going to be enhanced by the adoption of this plan.

The existence and development of learning communities will be enhanced in two ways. First, integrating these communities into an inquiry/active learning-based instructional model, supported by renovations proposed in Part A. Second, creating the new “Student Community Space” described in Part B.

Various asynchronous learning modes will be supported by means of instructional technology available in the newly created spaces, as described in Part A of the proposal.

In particular, the space will support the following technology delivered through the tablets (The examples here mostly refer to introductory physics courses, however if the space is used by other programs, numerous other possibilities are open).

1) Personal Response Systems (PRS). Various applications of PRS have been shown to improve lecture effectiveness by making lecture more interactive (Mazur, 1997; Crouch & Mazur, 2001; Duncan, 2005). In this instructional space, wireless Tablet PCs will be used as the PRS devices during lectures and discussions. They will serve as multipurpose on-line assessment tools that inform the instructor of student comprehension as well as to deliver immediate feedback to students on their own progress. This will assist in making learning flexible and engaging for students. Any of Moodle, DyKnow, MS-OneNote, or “BQ, the ePolling Program” open source

software (http://mazur-www.deas.harvard.edu/lt3/user/BQManual.pdf) can be used for PRS activities.

2) Physlets (computerized Java-based simulations of physical processes with adjustable parameters). The application of Physlets has been shown to enhance student learning in a number of ways (Christian and Belloni, 2001). In our model, Physlets will be incorporated into lecture and discussion, allowing instructors and students to “do physics” together and make this process flexible. They will also be used for pre-lab activities to allow students visualize experiments before coming to the lab. This will maximize the portion of inquiry-based instruction and provide possibilities for active learning. To run Physlets on tablets, students will only have to have Java-enabled internet browsers.

3) Just in Time Teaching (JITT). The introduction of short pre-lecture online assignments (JITT) has been shown to maximize lecture efficiency by actively engaging students in deeper processing of the material before the lecture begins (Novak at al., 1999). Once again this will assist in making learning flexible and engaging for students. Students can access their pre-lecture or pre-lab assignments on Moodle using their tablets.

4). Digital Data Acquisition Systems. Using these systems in the lab provides advantages similar to using Physlets for solving problems. It facilitates the translation among various representations of measured data. Moreover, it allows real-time dynamic representation of data. Using data acquisition system will assist in reaching of our goal to better integrate laboratory experiments with other course components. In our introductory courses PASCO data acquisition systems will be used in the lab for data collection. Redesigning of upper division space according to Part B of this proposal, should allow incorporation of professional data acquisition software, known as LabView.

The extensive use of peer instruction, supported by the learning communities and use of various asynchronous learning modes, described above should in turn help the students with low levels of math and science preparation. Thus, indirectly, the space renovation will increase the diversity of the students in the physics program.

Having newly renovated instructional space will make the McMurry physics courses more attractive to outside students from other institutions of higher learning in Abilene, which will strengthen McMurry’s position its educational collaborations.

The flexible structure of the space created will lead to adoption of a variety of teaching models. One of them was described here, but other innovative teaching approaches can be developed in this instructional space without too much difficulty. The models for teaching introductory science courses built as a result of this project

can then be generalized to other educational institutions. The gains in student learning attained as a result of application of a variety of curriculum components and technology types, supported by the new space will illustrate benefits generalizable to all STEM domains. This renovation will serve as a starting point to create the "McMurry Center for Research in Teaching of Math and Science". It may also lead to eventual creation of the MS program in Science Education.

The renovations proposed in Part B will lead to improved quality of student research and will make the graduates of the McMurry Physics Program even more competitive as they enter graduate school or the job market.

Full implementation of this proposal should significantly affect the education of students in the following courses:

Part A. General Physics (Phys1410/Phys1420). Phys 1410 enrollment is about 50 students, Phys 1420 enrolment is about 30 students. University Physics (Phys 2510/Phys2520), Phys 2510 enrollment is about 15 students. Phys 2520 enrollment is about 10 students. The University Physics enrollments are expected to grow with implementation of this proposal. Introductory Astronomy (Phys 1401), approximate enrollment 24 students. Introduction to Physics (Phys 1400), approximate enrollment 15 students. Any other introductory science courses which will use this space in future will also benefit.

Part B. All physics majors will be affected.

5 th grade magnet school students

The space renovated according to Part A of this proposal can be used for teaching the 5th grade magnet class, using the same teaching strategies as for teaching of any introductory physics course. Everything which was said in the “Rationale for Change” section of this proposal is even more important for 5 th

graders than it is for college students. Indeed, since this may be the very first science course those 5th grade students are taking they are free from all of the fears and misconceptions, which college students usually have about learning science. This is why it is essential to teach the 5 th graders the way science is meant to be taught through discovery, team work and active engagement with the material rather than through a dry memorization of boring facts.

Natural science (mostly physics) comprises a very significant part of the 5 th grade curriculum. Most of the content of that curriculum is equivalent to what otherwise would be taught in “Introduction to Physics” course. The renovated instructional space and extended supply of the physics equipment will allow for 5 th graders to work with many laboratory experiments, which were originally designed for the “Introduction to Physics” course.

As of now, the students of the on-campus 5th grade magnet school frequently use spaces in the Physics department during the fall semester as they are learning various aspects of physical science and astronomy. These students are most often in the S105 lab room, with all of the inefficiencies previously noted such as wasted space at the back, lack of preparation space, and inflexible table arrangements. The renovations of Part A would benefit these students since they would have access to the improved learning space whenever they attend a laboratory experiment or demonstration in the Physics Department.

The advantages of asynchronous learning modes, as described in the previous section, can be used with the magnet class as well. All of the technological applications listed above, will be supported by the new space and can be incorporated into 5th grade teaching. The fact that the new space will have several screens and white boards will facilitate work in small peer groups in a same way as it will for other courses taught there.

The 5th grade students would also benefit from the Part B renovations in the sense that they would have a chance to see a working physics research space and perhaps be inspired to later pursue more lab sciences in school as a result. Several tours of this lab may be arranged when physics majors are working in the lab on their projects and/or during the Advanced Physics Lab class session. Not only will the 5th graders be able to observe the real research, but they will also be able to see that there is nothing mysterious or scary about science, since it can be done by usual college students, who are not that different from a 5 th grader, and who in contrast to their teacher or the science professor can almost be treated as peers.

5. Expected outcomes and evidence of success

If this proposal is selected and implemented, it will affect McMurry students at several levels.

First of all the renovations described in Part A of this proposal will have a significant impact on the delivery of introductory physics courses. These courses are taken by physics, science and non-science majors. Thus, the impact will not be limited to the physics program only. Significant gains to student learning are expected due to improved pedagogy and innovative teaching approaches supported by a renovated space. Since all of these courses serve McMurry’s General Education Program, we expect to see improvements regarding many of the General Education outcomes. In particular, students will become able to formulate rational approaches to problem-solving both as conceptual situations and in hands-on experiments, to manipulate lab equipment and to express appropriate physical relationships in mathematical terms and logical arguments. These students will also be able to apply fundamental physical principles to specific physical relationships in

order to predict related behavior. These outcomes will be assessed according to the standard procedures, which are now in place for assessment of the General Education program.

In addition to that, we plan on specific assessment steps directed towards evaluating the instructional model, supported by the newly created spaces. Such an assessment can be done on five dimensions. First, students will evaluate the quality of work of their peers through the peer review process (special peer review rubrics will be created). Second, instructors will internally evaluate student learning through a variety of formal and informal assessments. (See Table 1 for student learning assessment parameters.) Third, the external assessment of student learning will be performed by means of standardized tests accepted in the area. These tests will include, but will not be limited to the following. “The Force Concept Inventory” (FCI) test (Hestenes, Wells & Swackhamer, 1992), which will be used as pre and post test for the “Classical Mechanics” block of the material. Student learning gains will be compared to national data. “The Heat and Temperature Concept Evaluation” (HTCE) (Thornton & Sokoloff, 1987) will be used for “Thermodynamics” block of material and the “Electric Circuit Concept Evaluation” (ECCE) by D. Sokoloff will be used as the assessment tool for “Electricity and Magnetism” block of the material. Fourth, students will evaluate the instructor’s effectiveness through course evaluations at the end of the semester. Fifth, students will evaluate the usefulness of various course components, specific activities, and use of technology, and the role of instructional space through questionnaires (in the spirit of SALG survey http://www.salgsite.org ), and focus group interviews.

Hence, assessment procedures will be rich in feedback and will in themselves contribute to the enhancement of student learning.

Assessment within each instructional module will concentrate on the following: (1) student’s understanding and interpretation of a particular concept, (2) student’s ability to recognize and apply a particular concept, (3) the effect that the structure of the module, use of technology, and instructional space had on student learning. The long-term benefits will be reflected in the students’ improved functional understanding of fundamental physics principles. To assess long-term benefits, we will address the following questions: (1) Are the students able to integrate material from previous modules with subsequent module material? (2) To what extent did students’ performance on a variety of assignments improve in the course of the semester?

Instructors will be asked to keep journals to reflect on the project’s progress and the role which newly renovated space played in this process. Journals will be used as supplemental data in a project effectiveness evaluation.

Table 1. Performance-based assessment dimensions

Performance dimensions

Lab

Lect

ure

Pre

/Pos

t A

ctiv

ities

Pro

ject

s

Exa

ms

Hom

e

1. Observation + + + + + +2. Measurement and error analysis + +3. Experimental design + + +4. Formulation of hypotheses + + + + + +5. Identification and application of relevant theory + + + + + + +6. Data analysis + + +7. Quality of written reflection on the process + + + + + +8. Findings presentation (oral) +9. Peer evaluations + + +

10.Different problem representations – graphs, diagrams, etc.

+ + + + + + +11. Mathematical manipulations with theory + + + + + + +

Since parts of this model have already been implemented for teaching during the last 3 years, we have already seen improvements in many of the outcomes suggested here. For instance, the FCI test has shown significant gains in students’ understanding of classical mechanics. The average gain factor in the University Physics course was 0.59 in the fall of 2007 and 0.43 in the fall of 2008. This corresponds to highly effective instruction, since traditional methods of teaching of science courses usually produce a gain factor of about 0.25. We hope that this factor will become even higher when the courses are taught in the instructional space which is meant to support this teaching model.

Both renovations described in Part A and Part B of this proposal will have a strong impact on physics/pre-engineering majors.

We are going to see significant improvements in the following physics majors’ learning outcomes.1) Physics majors will become proficient in the use of laboratory equipment. 80% of

the students will receive a grade of B or better on the "equipment use" sections of their laboratory reports and all students will exhibit an overall upwards trendline in their proficiency. This will become possible due to an improved laboratory experience in both introductory (Part A) and upper division physics courses (Part B).

2) Physics majors will be able to express themselves coherently and clearly in a written and oral format to technical and lay audiences. This will become possible through enhancement of possibilities for oral presentations and peer review in

introductory physics courses (Part A) and indirectly through enhancement of senior research and learning communities (Part B).

3) Physics majors will significantly improve their Project Design and Implementation skills. This includes the ability to translate a hypothesis into an experiment, carry out that experiment, and verify the hypothesis based on the results. This also includes the ability to work together as a team on a collaborative project whereby subsets of the team work on aspects of the project and analyze the data. This will become possible due to the active use of group work in introductory physics courses (Part A) and enhanced laboratory and learning community experience (Part B).

4) Physics majors will improve their competency level that enables them to enter successfully either into graduate study in Physics, Engineering, or a related field or into scientific, technical, or educational employment. This will be especially important for experiment-related fields, due to improved research space (Part B).

5) Finally, the program will enhance the education of physics majors and other interested students through such out-of-classroom activities as the Society of Physics Students (SPS), opportunities for field trips and facility tours in disciplines of interest. These opportunities will grow as SPS will attract more students to its newly built home/Physics student lounge (Part B).

Overall, the improvements described above and the presence of the newly renovated space itself will attract more McMurry students to become physics majors. It will also attract additional students to join McMurry and become a physics or science major here. Thus, this renovation will lead to quality improvements in the Physics Program as well as growing the number of Physics majors.

References:

1. Belcher, J.W. (2001). Studio Physics at MIT. MIT Physics Newsletter, Fall 2001, online at http://web.mit.edu/jbelcher/www/TEALref/PhysicsNewsLetter.pdf

2. Belcher, J.W. (2003). Improving student understanding with TEAL, The MIT Faculty Newsletter, XVI No.2, p. 1.

3. Belcher, J.W. (2005). The TEAL project, online at http://web.mit.edu/jbelcher/www/TEALref/TEAL.pdf

4. Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., & Cocking, R.R. (Eds.) (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

5. Christian, W., & Belloni, M. (2001). Physlets, Teaching physics with interactive curricular material. Prentice Hall.

6. Crouch, C.H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer Instruction: Ten years of experience and results, Am. J. Phys. 69, pp.970-977

7. Committee on Recognizing, Evaluating, Rewarding, and Developing Excellence in Teaching of Undergraduate Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology, Fox, M.A., & Hackerman, N, (Eds), National Research Council. (2003). Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics, online at http://darwin.nap.edu/books/0309072778/html/.

8. Duncan, D. (2005). Clickers in the Classroom. Pearson.9. Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force Concept Inventory,

Phys. Teach. 30(3), pp. 141-151.10.Mazur, E. (1997). Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual. Prentice Hall.11.McDermott, L.C. (2001). Oersted Medal Lecture 2001: “Physics Education

Research-the Key to Student Learning”, Am. J. Phys. 69 (11), Pp.1127-1137.12.McDermott, L.C., & Redish E.F., (1999). Resource Letter: PER-1: Physics

Education Research, Am. J. Phys. 67 (9), p.755-767.13.Novak, G.M., Patterson, E.T., Gavrin, A.D., & Christian W., (1999). Just-in-time

teaching: Blending active learning with web technology. Prentice Hall.14.Rimer, S. (2009) M.I.T., Large Lectures Are Going the Way of the Blackboard,

The New York Times, January 13, 200915.Schmidt, W.H., McKnight, C.C., & Raizen, S.A. (1997). A splintered vision: An

investigation of US science and mathematics education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer academic publishers.

16.Sokoloff, D.S. The Electric Circuit Concept Evaluation, online at http://physics.dickinson.edu/~wp_web/wp_resources/wp_assessment.html

17.Thornton, R.K., & Sokoloff, D.S. (1987). Heat and Temperature Conceptual Evaluation, online at http://physics.dickinson.edu/~wp_web/wp_resources/wp_assessment.html