Speaker
Description
In physics, it is well understood that many theoretical terms like force, field and spin have an everyday meaning that differs from the physics disciplinary meaning. Many studies in Physics Education Research have explored how this difference can affect students’ ability to learn physics. This talk argues that there exists a similar shift in meaning in the experimental physics context. In particular, key terms like uncertainty, error and true value have separate everyday and disciplinary specific meanings. To investigate this, the study draws on several sources of data. These include a document analysis of key technical documents in metrology (VIM, GUM and NIST) which establishes the community standard; a case study of what is being taught in the introductory physics lab by a practicing experimental physicist; an overview of what language researchers are using in their published work and questionnaire responses to introductory and postgraduate students. Across these contexts, the analysis shows that there are systematic differences between everyday, instructional and research-level uses of measurement terms. This work shows that the differences arise from the underlying statistical frameworks that underpin the mathematical constructs that are needed to interpret and evaluate measurement data. In an increasingly data-driven and digital landscape, these findings show the value in clearly specifying definitions in the experimental context. We see that measurement language appears as a hidden curriculum in labs. This work shows that by making meanings explicit it can support broader participation and equity in experimental physics, which is particularly relevant in the South African context.
| Apply for student award at which level: | PhD |
|---|---|
| Consent on use of personal information: Abstract Submission | Yes, I ACCEPT |