Student interpretations of the terms in first-order ordinary differential equations in modelling contexts

A study of first-year undergraduate students′ interpretational difficulties with first-order ordinary differential equations (ODEs) in modelling contexts was conducted using a diagnostic quiz, exam questions and follow-up interviews. These investigations indicate that when thinking about such ODEs, many students muddle thinking about the function that gives the quantity to be determined and the equation for the quantity's rate of change, and at least some seem unaware of the need for unit consistency in the terms of an ODE. It appears that shifting from amount-type thinking to rates-of-change-type thinking is difficult for many students. Suggestions for pedagogical change based on our results are made.

[1]  James J. Kaput,et al.  Research issues in undergraduate mathematics learning : preliminary analyses and results , 1994 .

[2]  L. McDermott,et al.  Resource Letter: PER-1: Physics Education Research , 1999 .

[3]  Patrick W Thompson,et al.  Talking about Rates Conceptually, Part I: A Teacher's Struggle. , 1994 .

[4]  Edward F. Redish,et al.  Millikan Lecture 1998: Building a Science of Teaching Physics , 1999 .

[5]  Paul J. Feltovich,et al.  Categorization and Representation of Physics Problems by Experts and Novices , 1981, Cogn. Sci..

[6]  Jan Bezuidenhout,et al.  First‐year university students’ understanding of rate of change , 1998 .

[7]  Jere Confrey,et al.  Chapter 1: A Review of the Research on Student Conceptions in Mathematics, Science, and Programming , 1990 .

[8]  Frederick Reif,et al.  Cognition for Interpreting Scientific Concepts: A Study of Acceleration , 1992 .

[9]  John J. Clement,et al.  Translation Difficulties in Learning Mathematics , 1981 .

[10]  Robert J. Beichner,et al.  Testing student interpretation of kinematics graphs , 1994 .

[11]  Robert B. Davis.  Learning Mathematics: The Cognitive Science Approach to Mathematics Education , 1984 .

[12]  L. McDermott,et al.  Investigation of student understanding of the concept of acceleration in one dimension , 1981 .

[13]  Eric Mazur,et al.  Peer Instruction: A User's Manual , 1996 .

[14]  David Hammer,et al.  More than misconceptions: Multiple perspectives on student knowledge and reasoning, and an appropriate role for education research , 1996 .

[15]  David N. Perkins,et al.  Outsmarting IQ: The Emerging Science of Learnable Intelligence , 1995 .

[16]  Chris Rasmussen,et al.  New directions in differential equations: A framework for interpreting students' understandings and difficulties , 2001 .

[17]  Andrew Elby,et al.  What students' learning of representations tells us about constructivism , 2000 .

[18]  Robert J. Dufresne,et al.  Marking sense of students' answers to multiple-choice questions , 2002 .

[19]  A. V. Heuvelen,et al.  Learning to think like a physicist: A review of research‐based instructional strategies , 1991 .

[20]  Lei Bao,et al.  Concentration analysis: A quantitative assessment of student states , 2001 .

[21]  W. E. Boyce.  New Directions in Elementary Differential Equations , 1994 .

[22]  R. Hake.  Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses , 1998 .

[23]  Samer Habre,et al.  Exploring Students' Strategies to Solve Ordinary Differential Equations in a Reformed Setting , 2000 .

[24]  Tami S. Martin,et al.  Calculus students’ ability to solve geometric related-rates problems , 2000 .

[25]  L. McDermott,et al.  Investigation of student understanding of the concept of velocity in one dimension , 1980 .

[26]  Richard N. Steinberg,et al.  Performance on multiple-choice diagnostics and complementary exam problems , 1997 .