Pathways to proposing causes for unexpected experimental results

TL;DR

This paper explores how students troubleshoot unexpected experimental results in physics, highlighting a pathway where they iteratively measure and revise to identify causes, which expands existing modeling frameworks.

Contribution

It introduces and analyzes a new troubleshooting pathway in the Modeling Framework for Experimental Physics, focusing on iterative measurement and revision processes.

Findings

Students often use iterative measurements to identify causes of discrepancies.

This troubleshooting pathway was previously unrecognized in the Modeling Framework.

Implications for assessing students' modeling skills in experimental physics.

Abstract

Models of physical systems are used to explain and predict experimental results and observations. When students encounter discrepancies between the actual and expected behavior of a system, they revise their models to include the newly acquired observations, or change their apparatus to better represent their models. The Modeling Framework for Experimental Physics describes the process of matching measurements and observations to models by making revisions to resolve discrepancies. As part of a larger effort to create assessments of students' modeling abilities in the context of upper-division electronics courses, we used the Modeling Framework to develop and code think-aloud problem-solving activities centered on troubleshooting an inverting amplifier circuit. We observed that some participants iteratively and continuously made measurements and revisions if they could not immediately propose a cause for an observed discrepancy. This pathway has not been previously discussed in the Modeling Framework. In this paper, we discuss two episodes where students undergo this process to converge on a proposed cause post hoc. We conclude by discussing implications for a modeling assessment based on the observed modeling behavior.