Raul Armendariz PhD
Assistant Professor of Physics
Queensborough Community College, CUNY
October 26, 2014
QCC Assessment Institute - Spring 2014
Course Assessment Report for Physics Department Laboratories
PH201 General Physics I Laboratory
PH202 General Physics II Laboratory
PH301 College Physics I Laboratory
PH302 College Physics II Laboratory
PH411 Calculus Physics I Laboratory
PH413 Calculus Physics III Laboratory
1) Courses assessed, numbers of sections and students
Six physics lab courses totaling nine sections were assessed including testing 134
students on a written math exam and 87 students in a visual laboratory exam of their
ability to use lab equipment (see Table 1). The tests were conducted at the end of the
Spring 2014 semester within the Physics Department. The courses PH201, PH202,
PH301 and PH302 require students to know some algebra and right-triangle trigonometry
and are taken by technology majors (PH201, PH202) and majors such as optometry and
dentistry (PH301, PH302); the courses PH411 and PH413 require students to know some
calculus and are taken by engineering majors. Each lab course corresponds to a lecture
course, e.g. PH201 lab is typically taken concurrently with PH201 lecture. Artifact 1 the
math, data and plotting exam tested students’ abilities to solve types of problems which
are used in all physics labs being assessed including basic math, and generating and
plotting data from math functions. Artifacts 2 and 3 the hands-on laboratory exams
evaluated students’ abilities to setup and use experimental equipment.
Course
number
Students tested in math,
data and plotting
(Artifact 1)
3 sections 45
Students tested using
Mechanics lab
equipment (Artifact 2)
1 section
10
Students tested using
Electronics lab
equipment (Artifact 3)
PH201
Lab
PH202
1 section
14
1 section
Lab
PH301
2 sections 36
2 sections 36
Lab
PH302
1 section
10
1 section
Lab
PH411
1 section
7
Lab
PH413
1 section
22
1 section
Lab
Total
9
134
3
46
3
Table 1: numbers of sections and students tested for the courses assessed
14
10
17
41
1
2) Expected Student Learning Outcomes and related General Education Outcomes
Three Expected Student Learning Outcomes were assessed here; for these physics
courses the Expected Student Learning Outcomes are the same as the “Course
Objectives.”
The first Expected Student Learning Outcome (which was assessed with Artifact 1
dimensions 1 and 2) is: “Use algebra, geometry and trigonometry to describe physical
situations and to solve physical problems” (an outcome of PH201, 202, 301, 302), and
“Use algebra, geometry, trigonometry and calculus to describe physical situations and to
solve physical problems” (an outcome of PH411 and PH413).
The second Expected Student Learning Outcome (which was assessed with Artifact 1
dimension 3) is: “Describe and analyze physical situations using graphical
representations.” This is an outcome for all six courses.
The third Expected Student Learning Outcome (which was assessed with Artifacts 2 and
3) is: “Perform experiments and draw meaningful conclusions from data and present
them as part of a clear, well-organized lab report.” This is an outcome for all six
courses.
The three Learning Outcomes contribute to the following QCC General Education
Outcomes:
General Educational Outcome #2: Students will use analytical reasoning to identify
issues or problems and evaluate evidence in order to make informed decisions.
General Educational Outcome #3: Students will reason quantitatively and mathematically
as required in their fields of interest and in everyday life.
General Educational Outcome #4: Student will use information management and
technology skills effectively for academic research and lifelong learning
General Educational Outcome #5: Students will integrate knowledge and skills in their
program of study.
General Educational Outcome #9: Students will employ concepts and methods of the
natural and physical sciences to make informed judgments.
Each outcome has a different number associated with it per course (see Table 2). Table 2
shows which learning outcome contributes to which General Education Outcome.
2
1st Expected Student Learning Outcome
assessed using dimensions 1 and 2 of
Artifact 1
PH201 Learning Outcome 2
PH202 Learning Outcome 1
PH302 Learning Outcome 1
PH301 Learning Outcome 3
PH411 Learning Outcome 3
PH413 Learning Outcome 1
Contributes to:
2nd Expected Student Learning Outcome
assessed using dimensions 3 of Artifact 1
PH202 Learning Outcome 2
PH301 Learning Outcome 5
PH302 Learning Outcome 2
PH411 Learning Outcome 5
PH413 Learning Outcome 2
Contributes to:
General Education Outcomes 2, 3, 5
General Education Outcomes 2, 3, 5
General Education Outcomes 2, 3, 5
General Education Outcomes 2, 3, 5
General Education Outcomes 2, 3, 5
General Education Outcomes 2, 3, 5
General Education Outcomes 2, 3, 4, 5
General Education Outcomes 2, 3, 4, 5
General Education Outcomes 2, 3, 4, 5
General Education Outcomes 2, 3, 4, 5
General Education Outcomes 2, 3, 4, 5
3rd Expected Student Learning Outcome Contributes to:
assessed using Artifacts 3 and 4
PH201 Learning Outcome 10
General Education Outcomes 2, 4, 5, 9
PH202 Learning Outcome 10
General Education Outcomes 2, 4, 5, 9
PH301 Learning Outcome 17
General Education Outcomes 2, 4, 5, 9
PH302 Learning Outcome 12
General Education Outcomes 2, 4, 5, 9
PH411 Learning Outcome 17
General Education Outcomes 2, 4, 5, 9
PH413 Learning Outcome 10
General Education Outcomes 2, 4, 5, 9
Table 2: three Learning Outcomes being assessed and their contributions to QCC General
Education Outcomes
3) Student assignment artifacts used to assess courses and evidence gathering
Two different types of assignments were given to students and used to assess the courses,
a 3-part written exam (for math, data and plotting) and a hands-on laboratory practical
exam to visually evaluate student ability to work with equipment. All students were
given the math exam but not all students were given the hands-on lab exam; as the
courses fall into two different categories (Mechanics and Electrostatics) two different lab
exams were utilized but only one lab exam was given per section. The lab hands-on
exam was proctored by Assistant Professor R. Armendariz, the written math exam was
proctored by Asst. Prof. R. Armendariz and/or the respective Lab Course instructor.
3.1) Artifact 1: Basic Math, Generating, Tabulating and Plotting Data
The first Artifact was a 20 minute math, data and plotting exam having three dimensions.
The first and second dimensions assessed the first Expected Student Learning Outcome.
The third dimension assessed the second Expected Student Learning Outcome. The first
dimension tested the students’ ability with basic math commonly used in the physics
3
courses being assessed, without using a calculator, including: fractions, 3-variable
algebraic equations (e.g. f = m∙a), powers of 10, recognition of geometrical formulae (e.g.
c = 2πr, Atriangle = ½bh, Vsphere = 4/3πr3), Pythagorean theorem, converting units of
measure, and adding vectors. The second dimension of the exam tested students’ ability
to generate data using common physics formulae (e.g. x(t) = ½a∙t2, x(t) = xmaxcos(ωt)).
The third dimension tested students’ ability to plot data.
3.2) Artifacts 2 and 3: Laboratory Practical hands-on Exam
Artifacts 2 and 3 assessed the third Expected Student Learning Outcome. The hands-on
10 minute lab exam tests students’ ability with equipment they have already used in their
lab courses. For mechanics courses PH201, PH301 and PH411 the students were asked
to demonstrate their ability with mechanical equipment (this equipment was already setup
for the students) from the experiment The Measurement of Gravity using the Air Track,
glider, photo-gates and timer. For the courses involving electronics PH202, PH302 and
PH413 the students were asked to both setup and demonstrate their ability with electrical
equipment from the experiment The Electric Field Plot Lab, using the sensitized paper
with parallel lines electrodes and sensitized paper with dipole electrodes, voltage supply,
voltmeter and probes. The exam was graded at levels of Excellent, Good, Fair, and
Needs Improvement, and the grading system is shown for each dimension in Appendix 1,
Rubrics 2 and 3. Each course is designed to teach students how to use this particular lab
equipment (see Table 3).
Lab Course
PH201
Name of lab exercise in lab book
Incline Plane and g (lab #5)
Dynamics (lab #6)
Energy (lab #8)
Equipment utilized
Air Track, Photogates, timer
Air Track, Photogates, timer
Air Track, Photogates, timer
PH301
Acceleration, Measurement of g (lab #5)
Incline Plane (lab #5b)
Dynamics (lab #6)
Energy (lab #8)
Air Track, Photogates, timer
Air Track
Air Track, Photogates, timer
Air Track, Photogates, timer
PH411
Incline Plane and g (lab #3)
Dynamics (lab #4)
Energy (lab #7)
Air Track, Photogates, timer
Air Track, Photogates, timer
Air Track, Photogates, timer
PH202
Electric Field Plot (lab #9)
Parallel lines electrodes,
Dipole electrodes, voltage
supply, voltmeter, probes
PH302
Electric Field Plot (lab #9)
Parallel lines electrodes,
Dipole electrodes, voltage
supply, voltmeter, probes
PH413
Electric Field Plot (lab #3)
Parallel lines electrodes,
Dipole electrodes, voltage
supply, voltmeter, probes
4
Table 3: presented here are the names of the lab book exercises used to teach students
how to use the laboratory equipment they were tested on in artifacts 2 and 3
4) Evidence used to determine how well students achieved outcomes, including
instruments used to collect data
The first dimension of artifact 1 which tested basic math assessed the first Expected
Student Learning Outcome: 12 points were deducted if an answer was completely
incorrect, 9 point if ¾ incorrect, 6 points if ½ incorrect, 3 points if ¼ incorrect. The
second dimension of artifact 1 which tested ability to generate data from functions
assessed the first Expected Student Learning Outcome: 33 points were deducted if an
answer was completely incorrect, 24 point if ¾ incorrect, 16 points if ½ incorrect, 8
points if ¼ incorrect. The third dimension of artifact 1 which tested ability to plot data
from functions assessed the second Expected Student Learning Outcome: 33 points were
deducted if an answer was completely incorrect, 24 point if ¾ incorrect, 16 points if ½
incorrect, 8 points if ¼ incorrect. Artifacts 2 and 3 which tested ability to use laboratory
equipment assessed the third Expected Student Learning Outcome. The exam was
graded at levels of Excellent 90-100%, Good 80-89%, Fair 70-79%, and Needs
Improvement less than 70%. The rubrics in Appendix 1 include explanation of how
artifacts 2 and 3 were graded.
5) Results analysis and summary
Tables 4 through 14 and Plots 1 through 6 show the results for how students scored on
the three artifacts which test math, data and plotting skills (artifact 1), the ability to use
the equipment of one particular mechanics laboratory (artifact 2), and ability to use the
equipment of one particular electronics laboratory (artifact 3).
Course
Students
Excellent
Good
tested
201
45
0
7
202
14
0
1
301
36
3
7
302
10
1
5
411
7
0
2
413
22
10
7
Total
134
14
29
Table 4: number of students that scored in each grading
artifact 1 which tests basic math
Fair
Needs
Improvement
16
22
9
4
13
13
4
0
3
2
5
0
50
41
category in dimension 1 of
Course
Students tested
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs Improvement
201
301
413
45 (3 sections)
36 (2 sections)
22 (1 section)
0%
8.33%
45.45%
15.56%
19.44%
31.82%
35.56%
36.11%
22.72%
48.89%
36.11%
0%
5
Table 5: percent of students that scored in each grading category in dimension 1 of
artifact 1 which tests basic math (normalized data from Table 4)
50%
PH201
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs
Improvement
Plot 1: percent of PH201 students that scored in each grading category for dimension 1 of
artifact 1 which tests basic math. Three sections of PH201 are included (data from Table
5)
50.00%
PH301
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs
Improvement
Plot 2: percent of PH301 students that scored in each grading category for dimension 1 of
artifact 1 which tests basic math. Two sections of PH301 are included (data from Table
5)
6
50.00%
PH413
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs
Improvement
Plot 3: percent of PH413 students that scored in each grading category for dimension 1 of
artifact 1 which tests basic math. One section of PH413 is included (data from Table 5)
Course
Students
Excellent
Good
Fair
tested
201
45
10
1
10
202
14
2
1
9
301
36
8
0
9
302
10
3
1
5
411
7
2
0
2
413
22
10
1
10
Total
134
35
4
45
Table 6: number of students that scored in each grading category for
artifact 1 which tests ability to generate data using math functions
Course
Students tested
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs
Improvement
24
2
19
1
3
1
50
dimension 2 of
Needs Improvement
201
45 (3 sections)
22.22%
2.22%
22.22% 53.33%
301
36 (2 sections)
22.22%
0%
25.0%
52.78%
413
22 (1 section)
45.45%
4.54%
45.45% 4.54%
Table 7: percent of students that scored in each grading category in dimension 2 of
artifact 1 which tests ability to generate data using math functions (normalized data from
Table 6)
7
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
PH201
30.00%
PH301
20.00%
PH413
10.00%
0.00%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs
Improvement
Plot 4: comparison of the percentages of students that scored in each grading category for
dimension 2 of artifact 1 which tests ability to generate data using math functions.
Included are 3 sections PH201, 2 sections PH301, 1 section PH413 (data from Table 7)
Course
Students
Excellent
Good
Fair
tested
201
45
0
1
13
202
14
2
0
4
301
36
3
0
16
302
10
0
0
8
411
7
1
0
3
413
22
8
1
11
Total
134
14
2
55
Table 8: number of students that scored in each grading category in
artifact 1 which tests ability to plot data from functions
Course
Students tested
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs
Improvement
31
8
17
2
3
2
63
dimension 3 of
Needs Improvement
201
45 (3 sections)
0%
2.22%
28.89% 68.89%
301
36 (2 sections)
8.33%
0%
44.44% 47.22%
413
22 (1 section)
36.36%
4.54%
50.0%
9.09%
Table 9: percent of students that scored in each grading category in dimension 3 of
artifact 1 which tests ability to plot data from functions (normalized data from Table 8)
8
80%
70%
60%
50%
PH201
40%
PH301
30%
PH413
20%
10%
0%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs
Improvement
Plot 5: comparison of the percentages of students that scored in each grading category for
dimension 3 of artifact 1 which tests ability to plot data from functions. Included are 3
sections PH201, 2 sections PH301, 1 section PH413 (data from Table 9)
Courses
Needs
Improvement
201,301
Understands
7
16
10
13
measurement
(15.2%)
(35.6%)
(21.7%)
(28.3%)
201, 301 Ability using 46
12
12
14
8
equipment
(26.1%)
(26.1%)
(30.4%)
(17.4%)
Table 10: number of students and percent of students that scored in each grading category
on the 2nd artifact which tests ability to use the mechanics Air Track Lab
Courses
Dimension
Dimension
Students
tested
46
Students
tested
41
Excellent
Good
Excellent Good
Fair
Fair
Needs
Improvement
6
(14.6%)
18
(43.9%)
202,302,413 Understands
8
11
16
measurement
(19.5%) (26.8%) (39%)
202,302,413 Ability
to 41
6
5
12
setup
(14.6%) (12.2%) (29.3%)
equipment
202,302,413 Ability using 41
7
11
12
11
equipment
(17.1%) (26.8%) (29.3%) (26.8%)
Table 11: number of students and percent of students that scored in each grading category
on the 3rd artifact which tests ability to use the electronics E-Field Plot Lab
9
Courses
Artifact
201,202,
301,302,
411, 413
201, 301
Students
tested
on
artifact
Students
Excellent Good Fair
tested on
artifact
multiplied
by the
number of
dimensions
402
63
35
150
Needs
Improvement
Math,
134
154
data,
plotting
Mechanics 46
92
19
28
24
21
Lab
202,
Electronics 41
123
21
27
40
35
302, 413 Lab
Table 12: number of students that scored in each grading category on the three artifacts
Courses
201,202,
301,302,
411, 413
201, 301
Artifact
Students
Excellent
tested on
artifact
multiplied
by the
number of
dimensions
402
15.67%
Good
Fair
Math,
8.71%
37.31%
data,
plotting
Mechanics 92
20.65%
30.43%
26.09%
Lab
202, 302, Electronics 123
17.07%
21.95%
32.52%
413
Lab
Table 13: percent of students that scored in each grading category on the
(normalized data from Table 12)
Needs
Improvement
38.31%
22.83%
28.45%
three artifacts
10
Artifact 1: Math - 201,202,301,302,411,413
Artifact 2: Mechanis lab - 201,301
Artifact 3: Electronics lab - 202,302,413
45.00%
40.00%
35.00%
30.00%
25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
Excellent
Good
Fair
Needs
Improvement
Plot 6: percent of students that scored in each grading category on the three artifacts (the
artifact 1 results “Math” shown here include the results for all three dimensions of artifact
1 which are basic math, data and plotting). Data is from Table 13.
5.1) Analysis of results
5.1a) Artifact 1 Dimension 1
Plots 1 through 3 show that PH413 students scored significantly higher than both PH201
and PH301 students on the first dimensions of artifact 1 which tests basic math skills.
There are multiple factors which contribute to this result. The first and most notable
factor is that PH413 is the third physics course taken in sequence by engineering majors
(PH413 follows PH412 which follows PH411), and thus typical PH413 students had
already been exposed to math in physics courses for 3 academic semesters, whereas
typical PH201 and PH301 students had only had one physics course before this
assessment. The second factor is that PH413 is calculus based for engineering majors
thus requiring a higher level of prerequisite math.
The PH201 and PH301 results suggest a significant number of students need
improvement with basic math. The math problems posed in this dimension include
elementary fractions, powers of 10, unit conversions, right triangle trigonometry, and
vector addition, all of which appear frequently in multiple chapters of the current PH201
and PH301 course textbook (Serway and Vuille 9th edition). Proficiency with these types
of problems could better enable a student to solve physics problems and understand
11
physics concepts. It should be noted that only one section of PH413 was tested which
included 22 students.
5.1b) Artifact 1 Dimension 2
Plot 4 shows that PH413 students scored significantly higher than both PH201 and
PH301 students on the second dimensions of artifact 1 which tested ability to generate
tables of data from three math functions. The same factors contributing to this result are
those discussed above in section 5.1a. In each course a small percentage of students
scored “Good,” and almost equal percentages of students scored “Excellent,” and “Fair.”
A factor which contributed to this is that the test design was low resolution: students were
only asked to work with three math functions and thus if a student did not know how to
work with just one of the three functions their score dropped from excellent to fair. This
dimension should be retested using a larger number of math functions and thus a higher
resolution test.
The PH201 and PH301 results suggest a significant number of students need
improvement in working with math functions; two of the three math functions which
1
appeared on the test [𝑥(𝑡) = 2 𝑎 ∙ 𝑡 2 and 𝑣(𝑡) = 𝑎 ∙ 𝑡] are frequently used in the courses.
5.1c) Artifact 1 Dimension 3
Plot 5 shows how students scored on dimension 3 of artifact 1 which tests ability to plot
data from functions. For the 3rd dimension of artifact 1 the students were asked to plot
the data they obtained in the 2nd dimension of artifact 1 and therefore the test results for
the two dimensions are correlated. To de-correlate these results the 3rd dimension should
be retested asking students to draw plots from provided tables of data, and/or to plot the
general shapes of functions.
The PH201 and PH301 results suggest a significant number of students need
improvement in plotting math functions; two of the three math functions which appeared
1
on the test [𝑥(𝑡) = 2 𝑎 ∙ 𝑡 2 and 𝑣(𝑡) = 𝑎 ∙ 𝑡] are frequently used in the courses. Results
show that PH301 students scored higher than PH201 students in this dimension.
5.1d) Artifacts 2 and 3
Tables 10 and 11 are the results from Artifacts 2 and 3 which test the use of laboratory
equipment. Only one section of each PH201, 202, 302 and 413 was tested, and two
sections of PH301 (see Table 1); to get a better understanding of student performance
more sections per course should be tested. The results shown are not broken down per
course but rather for all six courses combined.
Plot 6 includes the results for Artifacts 2 and 3 which shows the performance
distributions are somewhat bell shaped; the Mechanics Air Track Lab grade distribution
peaks about “Good” whereas the Electronics Lab grade distribution peaks about “Fair;” a
probable reason is the Air Track lab is taught 3 to 4 times during the semester whereas
12
the E-Field map lab is only taught once during the semester (see Table 2) – thus the more
students work with technology the better they know how to use it.
5.1e) Conclusions
The PH201 and PH301 Artifact 1 results suggest a significant number of students need
improvement with basic math (Plots 1 and 2), generating data from math functions (Plot
4) and plotting data (Plot 5). A comparison of the results in Plot 6 for Artifacts 2
(Mechanics Lab) and 3 (Electronics Lab) suggest that the more frequently students work
with technology the more able they are to use it. The course outcomes having the highest
need for improvement are in Table 14.
A relatively high number of students of those tested need improvement with the
following:
1) Evaluating and plotting a cosine function.
2) Identifying the equations for volume and surface area of a sphere.
3) Using the inverse tangent function to determine an angle on a right triangle.
4) Adding vectors.
6) Description of how assessment results affect or did not affect student learning
outcomes identified. Plan to address areas where students need to improve.
As stated in Section 2 of this report the three Expected Student Learning Outcomes
assessed are expected for each of the six courses, and contribute to the General Education
Outcomes appearing in Table 2. Table 14 is a summary of the results including the
course outcomes having the highest need for improvement. The plan to address areas
where students need to improve includes the following:
1) In the beginning of the semester during the first physics course taken include more
instruction on basic math, unit conversion, vector addition, recognizing and plotting
functions.
2) Determine the possibility of requiring students to pass an exam on math-for-physics
before enrolling in any 2nd semester or higher level physics course.
2) Include visual lab hands-on exams as part of the laboratory courses.
3) Determine the benefit of reducing the different types of lab equipment used during a
given semester but increasing the frequency of use of lab equipment most likely to be
used in industry.
13
Expected Student
Learning Outcome
What the Artifact
tested
“Use algebra,
geometry and
trigonometry to
describe physical
situations and to
solve physical
problems”
“Describe and
analyze physical
situations using
graphical
representations.”
“Perform
experiments and
draw meaningful
conclusions from
data and present
them as part of a
clear, well-organized
lab report.”
Use [basic
math], algebra,
geometry and
trigonometry to
solve physical
problems
Describe
physical
situations using
graphical
representations
Perform
experiments
General
Education
Outcomes
Associated
2, 3, 5
2, 3, 4, 5
2, 4, 5, 9
Artifact used
Percent of
to test outcome students that
Need
Improvement
1st dimension
PH201 49%
st
of 1 artifact
PH301 36%
(basic math)
(from Table 5)
2nd dimensions
1st artifact
PH201 53%
PH301 53%
(generating data)
(from Table 7)
3rd dimension
1st artifact
PH201 69%
PH301 47%
(plotting data)
(from Table 9)
1st dimension
2nd artifact
PH201, 301
combined:
(understands
measurement of
mechanics lab)
(from Table 10)
2nd dimension
2nd artifact
PH201, 301
combined:
(ability to use
equipment of
mechanics lab)
(from Table 10)
2nd dimension
3rd artifact
PH202, 302,
413 combined:
(ability to setup
equipment of
electronics Lab)
(from Table 11)
28%
17%
44%
Table 14: the course outcomes having the highest need for improvement.
14
Appendix 1: Rubrics
Rubric used to evaluate written exam (artifact 1): Basic Math, Generating, Tabulating
and Plotting Data, for PH201, PH301, PH411, PH202, PH302, PH413
Dimension
Needs
Improvement
Fair
Good
Excellent
Basic Math
Scores < 70%
Scores 70-79%
Scores 80-89%
Scores 90-100%
Generation of
Data
Incorrectly
generates data
such that it
cannot be used
to generate
plots
Generates a
minimal
amount of the
data correctly
Generates most
but not all data
correctly
Generates all
the data
correctly
Plotting Data
Does not plot
the data
correctly
Plots a minimal
amount of the
data correctly
Plots most of
the data
correctly
Plots all of the
data correctly
15
Rubric used to evaluate Mechanics Lab practical exam (artifact 2): Measurement of
Gravity lab (utilizing air track and photogates), for PH201, PH301, PH411
Dimension
Understanding
of what is
being measured
Ability using
equipment
Needs
Improvement
Insufficient
understanding
of what is to be
measured to
conduct an
experiment
Fair
Good
Excellent
Partially
understands,
but not clearly,
what is to be
measured
Excellent
understanding of
what is being
measured
Does not
understand how
to use
equipment to
make
measurements
Understands
how to use
some of the
equipment
Has a good
enough
understanding
of what is to be
measured to
carry out an
experiment
Has a good
understanding
on how to use
most, but not
all, of the
equipment
Clearly
understands how
to use all of the
equipment
16
Rubric used to evaluate Electronics Lab practical exam (artifact 3): Electric Field Plot
lab, for PH202, PH302, PH413
Dimension
Understanding
of what is
being measured
Ability to setup
equipment to
conduct
experiment
Ability to use
equipment
Needs
Improvement
Insufficient
understanding
of what is to be
measured to
conduct an
experiment
Fair
Good
Excellent
Partially
understands,
but not clearly,
what is to be
measured
Excellent
understanding of
what is being
measured
Does not setup
enough of the
equipment
properly to
make the
measurements
Does not
understand how
to use
equipment to
make
measurements
Setup a
minimal
amount of the
equipment
properly
Has a good
enough
understanding
of what is to be
measured to
carry out an
experiment
Setup most of
the equipment
properly
Clearly
understands
how to use
most, but not
all, of the
equipment
Clearly
understands how
to use all of the
equipment
Understands
how to use a
minimal
amount of the
equipment
Quickly and
properly setup
all equipment
17
Appendix 2: Artifacts
Artifact 1: Basic math (dimension 1), generating data (dimension 2) and plotting
data (dimension 3)
Physics Department Labs Course Assessment: PH201, 202, 301, 302, 411, 413
QCC Assessment Institute 2014, Prof. Armendariz, Spring 2014
Survey quiz rules:
Do not put your name on this quiz
20 minutes allowed time
Only write on this sheet and show all your work
No calculator, book, notes, cell phones or internet allowed
See both sides of page
Basic Math Exam
Solve the following:
1) 1/2 + 4/5 =
2) 1/2 x 4/5 =
3)𝑓 = 𝑚 ∙ 𝑎, 𝑓 = 5, 𝑚 = 2, 𝑎 = ?
4) simplify this expression:
103 107
10−11 102
=?
5) The following formulae are to calculate what properties for which shapes?
y = mx + b
c = 2πr
A = πr2
A = ½ bh
A = 4 πr2
V = 4/3 πr3
6) How long is the hypotenuse and what is the angle of a right triangle having
opposite side O = 5 and adjacent side A = 3?
18
7) How many yards are in 6 meters? Use 1m = 100cm, 2.5cm = 1 inch, 36 inches = 1
yard
8) vector C = A + B where A = -15x - 12y and B = -3x + 9y, what are the two
components, magnitude and angle of C?
Generating, Tabulating and Plotting Data: For each of the following functions
create two columns of data over the period t = 0 seconds to t = 4 seconds, and draw
a plot:
1) 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑣(𝑡) = 𝑎 ∙ 𝑡, where a = 5 m/s2
Data:
Plot:
1
2) 𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑥(𝑡) = 2 𝑎 ∙ 𝑡 2 , where a = 5 m/s2
Data:
Plot:
3) 𝑥(𝑡) = 𝐴 ∙ 𝑐𝑜𝑠(𝜔 ∙ 𝑡), where A = 3 and 𝜔 = 2 radians per sec
Data:
Plot:
19
Checklists used for artifacts 2 and 3 which were visual exams assessing student
performance using lab equipment
QCC Assessment of labs: Measurement of Gravity (Air Track) and E-Field Plot
Prof. Armendariz
Spring 2014
Lab Course and section: ______________
Student number: ____
Understands what is being measured:
Understands Equipment:
Setup of Equipment:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Fair:
Fair:
Fair:
Good:
Good:
Good:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Student number: ____
Understands what is being measured:
Understands Equipment:
Setup of Equipment:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Fair:
Fair:
Fair:
Good:
Good:
Good:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Student number: ____
Understands what is being measured:
Understands Equipment:
Setup of Equipment:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Fair:
Fair:
Fair:
Good:
Good:
Good:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Student number: ____
Understands what is being measured:
Understands Equipment:
Setup of Equipment:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Fair:
Fair:
Fair:
Good:
Good:
Good:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Student number: ____
Understands what is being measured:
Understands Equipment:
Setup of Equipment:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Fair:
Fair:
Fair:
Good:
Good:
Good:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Student number: ____
Understands what is being measured:
Understands Equipment:
Setup of Equipment:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Fair:
Fair:
Fair:
Good:
Good:
Good:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Student number: ____
Understands what is being measured:
Understands Equipment:
Setup of Equipment:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Fair:
Fair:
Fair:
Good:
Good:
Good:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Student number: ____
Understands what is being measured:
Understands Equipment:
Setup of Equipment:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Fair:
Fair:
Fair:
Good:
Good:
Good:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Student number: ____
Understands what is being measured:
Understands Equipment:
Setup of Equipment:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Needs improvement:
Fair:
Fair:
Fair:
Good:
Good:
Good:
Excellent:
Excellent:
Excellent:
20