Three independent research studies undertaken while the LAB-Physics tutorials were in alpha or beta stages of development [1] demonstrate the effectiveness of the LAB-Physics software in terms of promoting student learning.

• Study 1
• Study 2
• Study 3

Part A. The first study (Turner [2], unpublished doctoral dissertation) measured how the use of LAB-Physics online kinematics tutorials affected student cognition of physics concepts in kinematics. Subjects were college and AP high school students most of whom had not taken a high school physics course nor were currently enrolled in a physics course. Subjects were paid an hourly rate of six dollars to participate in the study, and were promised an additional $25 if their work consistently displayed thoughtful consideration of the questions asked in the tutorials. Subjects completed three LAB-Physics kinematics tutorials: Underpinnings (Experimental Foundations), Constant Velocity, and Constant Acceleration. The normalized gains between pre-instruction and post-instruction scores on the Test of Understanding Graphs in Kinematics (TUG-K) for the treatment group were calculated. This normalized gain was compared to normalized gains typically found for students taking face-to-face physics courses. Normalized gain scores for LAB-Physics subjects were found to be no consistent with gain scores typically found in face-to-face courses!

Additionally, the comparison in this study was limited by the fact that the LAB-Physics subjects were not enrolled in a for-credit course! If 'kids off the street' taking only three tutorials with no fear factor of grades and possibly very limited math background (unlike many students taking physics), have a normalized gain about the same as regular physics students, then we can posit that learning physics using LAB-Physics tutorials is: 1) equivalent to face to face lecture classes, and 2) possibly better since the test subjects in this study did not bring to the tasks the same skill sets as do 'regular' physics students!

Part B. In a second part of the same study, Turner compared normalized gain scores for LAB-Physics subjects with time on task variables as measured by connectivity to the online software. He found that the number of student connections to the software and total time students worked in the software, were significantly related to normalized gain on the TUG-K. These results are consistent with the research on academic learning time and suggest that the LAB-Physics tutorials are effective when students are sufficiently motivated to spend time on the tutorials, motivation that is likely to be substantially higher in course situations where grades are at stake than in the testing context of this study.

Part C. Finally, the author conducted a content analysis of student responses, which were recorded in the LAB-Physics database as students progressed through the tutorials. This analysis revealed variation in initial understanding of physics concepts in kinematics as well as variation in change in understanding across students, leading the author to conclude that the LAB-Physics interactive tutorials: 1) are a valuable tool for analyzing conceptual change over time; 2) can reveal specific difficulties that students have with kinematics concepts; and 3) can lead to observable changes in student understanding! Furthermore, all of this information is readily available to the instructor at any time!

A research study at Mississippi State (Mzoughi [3]), reported at the summer 2005 meeting of the American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT), compared two groups of physics students taking a required 'orientation' class as part of their algebra-based introductory physics class. One group took the traditional in-class orientation lab and the other substituted the LAB-Physics Underpinnings module. Both the orientation lab and the LAB-Physics Underpinnings module covered the same topics (experimental design, dependent/independent variables, and graphing) and used the same experimental task - a pendulum experiment. An end of session evaluation found no performance differences between the two groups.

From a cost analysis perspective, this study points up the value of LAB-Physics for use in teaching/learning situations that otherwise are highly resource intensive and therefore may be omitted from the curriculum, no matter how valuable.

In a third study (Meisner, paper in progress [4]), 22 students in Meisner's lab-based course (Workshop/Modeling Physics) for fall semester 2005 used the LAB-Physics tutorials in place of attending class. Course requirements, including homework, tests, and class projects, were the same for the LAB-Physics 'mixed mode' group as for the in-class group. Both groups had 24/7 access to the laboratory except for the class meeting time (MWF 10:00 - 12:00) from which the LAB-Physics students were excluded. Both had the same out of class access to the instructor. All 44 in-class students worked in collaborative groups, as did all but four of the LAB-Physics mixed mode group (3 males, 1 female). Although statistical analysis of the data is incomplete at the time of this writing, initial results point up the following: 1) no overall difference existed in performance (grades) between the two groups; 2) mixed mode students who failed to complete their tutorials but who did complete their online homework assignments (WebAssign), performed more poorly on the conceptual tests (compared with those who did both); 3) the Hake g factor was noticeably higher for the mixed mode students, although further analysis is needed to determine if this difference is statistically significant; 4) the two top performing students in the class were mixed mode students (who worked individually), and 5) the top student group and the third highest group were mixed mode students.

It is highly unlikely that these results can be explained by self-selection (e.g., that highly motivated students may prefer the self-paced individualized learning method that LAB-Physics offers), since the mixed mode students received the LAB-Physics option in chronological order only because the course was over-enrolled. Students who failed to register early were confronted with the following options: taking the lecture course at a later time, waiting one year to take Meisner's course, or taking LAB-Physics in lieu of attending class. Only one student from this group failed to choose the LAB-Physics option.

Meisner's study is particularly significant for two reasons:

1. the treatments differed in terms of only one variable: LAB-Physics versus in-class instruction;
2. The non-LAB-Physics treatment was a Physics Education Research-based instructional laboratory setting as opposed to a traditional lecture setting, thus affording one of the strongest possible tests of the relative efficacy of the LAB-Physics tutorial system.

¹ Learn Anytime Anywhere Physics Project, UNC Greensboro, Greensboro, NC

² Turner, M. L. The Effect of Applying Principles of Reformed Teaching and Learning to an Asynchronous Online Environment on Student Cognition of Physics Concepts in Kinematics, Unpublished Dissertation, UNCGreensboro, May 2005.

³ Mzoughi, T. Can LAAPhysics be Used to Teach Introductory Physics Laboratory? AAPT Announcer, 35, 2, p.77, 2005.

⁴ Meisner, G. W. Can a Highly Interactive Laboratory-based Online Software Program Promote Effective Learning in Physics? [paper in progress, Spring 2006]