标题：Physics teaching assistants’ views of different types of introductory problems: Challenge of perceiving the instructional benefits of context-rich and multiple-choice problems
摘要：Physics problems can be posed in different ways. Given a physics scenario, different problem types presenting that scenario in various ways can emphasize different instructional goals. In this investigation, we examined the views of physics graduate teaching assistants (TAs) enrolled in a semester-long TA professional development course about the instructional benefits of different types of introductory problems based upon the same problem scenario to generate discussion and reflection on their use in different instructional situations. The TAs were asked to list the pros and cons of the problem types, rank them in terms of their instructional benefit and the level of challenge they might produce for their students, and describe when and how often they would use different types of problems in their own classes if they had complete control of teaching the class. Here we report on TAs’ views about two of these problem types that were regarded by TAs as the least instructionally beneficial of all problem types—the context-rich and multiple-choice formats. Many TAs listed no pros at all for these problem types, despite being explicitly asked for at least one pro. They viewed multiple-choice questions nearly exclusively as tools for high stakes summative assessment rather than their possible use as formative assessment tools, e.g., as clicker questions even in large classes. Similarly, TAs viewed context-rich problems as overly challenging, unnecessarily wordy, and too time consuming to be instructionally beneficial to their students. It is possible that in the written responses, TAs could have focused on the example problems provided to illustrate each problem type. Therefore, discussion in the TA professional development class and in the follow-up interviews explicitly included a focus on the general instructional benefits of well-designed multiple-choice and context-rich problems in different instructional contexts based upon the goals. It appears that TAs’ sentiments were general views about these types of problems, and not just their views about the specific examples that the TAs were given in order to illustrate a problem type. While TAs’ concerns have obvious validity and value, the benefits of well-designed multiple-choice questions as a formative assessment tool was not readily identified by them, nor did the TAs recognize the learning benefits associated with solving context-rich problems. Given the powerful ways multiple-choice and context-rich problems can be used for active engagement and formative assessment in different instructional contexts to meet diverse instructional goals, the lack of enthusiasm for these types of problems has implications for future TA professional development programs.
