Department of Physics

Program and Learning Outcomes

 

Program: B.S. Physics

 

Program Options

Option I:    preparation for graduate study and future research careers in physics.

Option II:  preparation for immediate employment or graduate study in another scientific or technical field.

 

Program Outcomes / Assessments / Use of Assessments / Examples

 

Learning Outcomes / Assessments / Use of Assessments / Examples

 

Program Outcomes

 

1.   Increase the number of physics majors (as determined at the beginning of each Fall Semester) to a 5-year average of over 20. This will be done through continued efforts at recruitment and retention.

 

2.   Contribute to the mission of the proposed Center for Teaching and Learning in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM), by encouraging faculty members to become actively involved in the center.

 

3.   To institute a regular seminar series in the department by asking faculty members to make presentations about their work, and to invite speakers from outside, as financing allows.

 

4.   To improve the performance effectiveness of teaching assistants in introductory labs by assigning a faculty member to oversee their training and meet with them regularly.

 

5.   To encourage faculty to reflect on their own teaching by making them aware of effective pedagogical developments coming from the physics education research community that may be relevant to their own classes.

 

 

Assessment Methods for Program Outcomes

 

a)    Count Physics Majors (Assessment for Program Outcome 1)

At the beginning of each fall semester a count is made of the number of the total number of enrolled students who have Physics declared as a major. Because of the small numbers involved, trends are tracked using an average of the current year plus the previous four years.

 

b)    Examine faculty member involvement in STEM Center projects and Programs (Assessment for Program Outcome 2)

At the end of each academic year, count the number of actual, or proposed, projects and programs in which members of the Physics faculty were jointly involved with the Center for Teaching and Learning in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM). This will include not only projects in which faculty members take a lead role, but also any professional development attended by faculty.

 

 

c)     Count the number of seminars given in the department (Assessment for Program Outcome 3)

At the end of each academic year, count the number of seminars given by faculty members and invited guests.

 

d)    Student Survey of Lab. Assistant Effectiveness (Assessment for Program Outcome 4)

At the end of each semester, students in laboratory courses will be asked to complete a short survey that addresses how effective the teaching assistant (TA) was in facilitating the operation of the lab. and the role the TA played in their learning.

 

e)    Self-reporting of teaching developments by faculty (Assessment for Program Outcome 5)

In their annual reports faculty members will be asked to comment on their awareness of new pedagogical developments and whether they have tried to implement them in their own teaching.

 

f)     Video-taping of classes (Assessment for Program Outcome 5)

Once each academic year, every faculty member is video-taped teaching a class. The chair uses these video-tapes to assess a faculty memberŐs teaching in terms of the implementation of effective pedagogy. The tapes are also made available to the faculty members concerned to facilitate reflection on their own teaching.

 

Using Assessment Results

 

The chair of the department ensures that the relevant assessment instruments are administered, and records kept. Relevant results are reported to the department and considered by the whole faculty at regular meetings. Recommendations for new goals, assessments, and action to be taken to address shortcomings in achieving current goals are discussed at these meetings and voted on before implementation. Progress on Program Outcome #5 is assessed for each faculty member individually by the chair and discussed privately. Progress on this goal is taken into account by the chair in annual faculty evaluations.

 

 

Student Learning Outcomes

 

1.   Students completing introductory physics courses will demonstrate increased understanding of certain basic concepts by achieving an average gain score of at least 40% on a standardized conceptual diagnostic test.

 

2.   Students graduating in physics will demonstrate an understanding of the principles and foundations of physics, by having 75% of graduates score at or above the 75th percentile on the ETS Major Field Test.

 

3.   Students graduating in physics will demonstrate the skills and techniques necessary to engage in experimental investigation, by having at least 75% of students achieve a grade of C or better in the capstone senior lab course (PHYS 4710).

 

4.   Students graduating in physics will demonstrate the ability to communicate their understanding both in writing and orally, as judged by a faculty committee who will report on their written reports and oral presentations in the capstone senior lab course (PHYS 4710).

 

5.   Students graduating in physics will have received an introduction to the technological tools appropriate to physics and related disciplines, as reported by alumni in surveys conducted periodically.

 

6.   Students graduating in physics will have experience in basic or applied research, as determined by their participation in the research programs of departmental faculty, or in summer REUresearch programs at other institutions.

 

7.   Students graduating in physics will agree that the program gave them sufficient preparation to continue to graduate school or obtain suitable employment, as reported by alumni in surveys conducted periodically.

 

 

Assessment Methods for Learning Outcomes

 

1.   Force Concept Inventory (Assessment for Student Learning Outcome 1)

This nationally recognized diagnostic test of basic conceptual understanding is administered to all students at the beginning of both PHYS 2010 and PHYS 2110 courses, and then again after the relevant material has been covered. The gain score, used to judge improvement in understanding, is a measure of the actual improvement in performance after instruction, versus the maximum possible improvement.

 

2.   ETS Major Field Test (Assessment for Student Learning Outcome 2)

      All physics graduates will take the ETS Major Field Test in Physics during their final year at TTU.

 

3.   PHYS 4710 Capstone Course (Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes 3 & 4)

      Students in both Option I and Option II take this senior lab course. To be successful in this course students must synthesize many skills learned in their academic careers to date. They must engage in scientific investigation by planning and carrying out experiments, and they must use their physics knowledge to guide them and to interpret their results. They must also submit written reports of all their investigations and make a public oral presentation of one project at the end of the semester. Faculty present at these presentations will submit a report on them. A written summary of these reports, together with an assessment as to whether a particular student has met this outcome, will be compiled by the faculty member teaching the course, and placed in the studentŐs file.

 

4.   Alumni surveys (Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes 5 & 7)

      Surveys are administered to department alumni on a periodic basis. Among the questions asked are how well graduates felt the TTU physics program prepared them for their chosen career path, and how effectively they were introduced to appropriate technological tools.

 

5.   Participation in Research Programs (Assessment of Student Learning Outcome 6)

      The department will keep a record of student participation in the research of department faculty members and in specialized summer research programs for undergraduates at other institutions. (Note: since almost all such experiences must necessarily take place during the summer it is impossible to ensure that all students will take advantage of such opportunities. However, the department will encourage such participation as actively as possible.)

 

Using Assessment Results

 

The chair of the department and the academic advisor ensure that the relevant assessment instruments are administered, and records kept. Results are reported to the department and considered by the whole faculty at regular meetings. Recommendations for new goals, assessments, and action to be taken to address shortcomings in achieving current goals are discussed at these meetings and voted on before implementation. These procedures and results are discussed with the dean at the annual chair evaluation meeting.

 

Examples of how assessment informs the program

 

Program Outcome 1

 


With the low numbers of students declaring physics as a major there are large statistical fluctuations in the year-to-year totals. However, the five-year average revealed a downward trend, from a high of almost 20 in the year 2000 to a low of under 15 in 2003. In response to the start of this trend the department implemented a more proactive recruiting strategy that has reversed this trend, with the number of majors rising to almost 23 in 2006.

Thus, this outcome has been met and the department is currently deciding at what number to set a revised version.

 

Student Learning Outcome 1

 

a)   Over the last 5period 2000-2004 years the average gain score in the conceptual diagnostic test has been 22% in PHYS 2010, and 29% in PHYS 2110. Such scores are typical nationwide for traditional lecture-based courses. However, research in physics education shows that significant improvements in conceptual understanding can be achieved by employing interactive engagement techniques in the classroom. Classes in which TTU physics faculty have adopted such techniques have shown gain scores that approach, or even exceed, the adopted target of 40%. These methods have been shared with the rest of the faculty, some of who are expected to testimplementing them in their own classes. Efforts in this direction will be considered as part of the annual faculty evaluation.

 

b) In December 2004, an item-by-item analysis of the diagnostic test results revealed that there are certain basic misconceptions that students have entering PHYS 2010 and PHYS 2110 that do not get changed by instruction in these classes. Having identified these, faculty teaching these classes will now be expected to place more emphasis on these ideas in their instruction.

 

c)   In Spring 2005 the department undertook a review of textbooks for use in its introductory course sequences. As a result of this review new education research based texts, and associated online homework systems were adopted for both the algebra-based and calculus-based sequences, starting in Fall 2005.

 


Possibly as a cumulative result of all these actions the average diagnostic test gain score in PHYS 2110 showed a dramatic leap to over 50% in the Fall 2005 semester. However, the average gain score in PHYS 2010 remained at around 20%.

 


Though it may seem this outcome has been met for PHYS 2110, these gain scores have shown large fluctuations between semesters in the past, as can be seen from the graph above. Therefore the department will continue with this goal until average gain scores greater than 40% are achieved consistently over a period of several semesters.

 

Student Learning Outcome 5

 

a)    The department faculty is aware that as technology advances new tools continuously become available. Prior to 2002 it was left to individual faculty to introduce such tools to students in their courses as they felt appropriate. In 2002, aware that some other physics programs were adding specific Computational Physics courses to their curricula, the department considered adding such a course to the physics program at TTU. However, due to limited resources, it was realized that such an addition would have to be at the expense of reducing hours elsewhere in the program.

 

To help determine if such a course was indeed needed, recent alumni were surveyed in 2002 to see if they felt they had received an adequate introduction to the appropriate technological tools. The overwhelming feeling of those who responded was that the approach taken by the department up to that point had been sufficient for their needs. Further, though they felt such a course may be useful, it should not be implemented at the cost of decreasing physics content coverage elsewhere.

 

Taking this into account the department decided not to implement a dedicated Computational Physics course. Instead, the previous approach has been formalized so that faculty members are now expected to introduce students to appropriate technological tools in their courses and have students utilize them.

 

b)    In Fall 2005 it was noted by faculty that some students seem to lack the programming skills necessary for them to carry out expected tasks when engaged in research projects. The department then explored various options to give students more exposure to programming beyond that they receive in the ENGR 1120 course (Programming for Engineers). Finally it was decided to add the ENGR 2121 course (Engineering Applications in C) to the physics curriculum, starting in Fall 2006.