arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2609.34912

Community agreements pedagogy in physics

Rachel E. Scherr·Jer Steeger·Paige Sechrest
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The idea of engaging critically and creatively with physics theories is a stretch for many physicists and physics educators. Most physicists become enculturated into the belief that physics definitions, laws, and equations are read from the book of nature. However, this belief obscures how theories are collectively negotiated by people in specific socio-political and personal conditions, and how students' particular ideas and intuitions will inevitably shape their own practice of science. To help students build their skills for collective theory-building, we suggest a pedagogy for physics in which students actively negotiate the laws and definitions of theories.

Explore related subjects

physics.ed-ph

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Rachel E. Scherr, Jer Steeger, Paige Sechrest. 2026-09-28. Community agreements pedagogy in physics. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.34912

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

AI-based scoring systematically underestimates conceptual understanding of linguistically weak students' explanations in physics

Students' explanations of scientific phenomena provide important evidence of their conceptual understanding. However, because conceptual understanding can only be inferred through language rather than observed directly, distinguishing conceptual understanding from linguistic quality represents a fundamental challenge for assessment. This challenge can also be expected to arise when artificial intelligence (AI) is used to score students' text-based explanations. We investigated whether AI-based scoring approaches assess students' conceptual understanding independently of the linguistic quality of their explanations about a phenomenon taken from a physics context. Conceptual understanding scores assigned by nine machine learning-based scoring approaches and two large language model-based scoring approaches were compared with expert-assigned scores for 116 explanations produced by secondary-school students in Germany. Multinomial logistic regression analyses examined whether expert-rated linguistic quality was associated with under- or overestimation of conceptual understanding. Across all eleven AI-based scoring approaches, lower linguistic quality was associated with a greater likelihood of underestimation, although the strength and statistical significance of this association varied between approaches. AI-based scoring approaches may thus systematically underestimate the conceptual understanding expressed in linguistically weaker explanations. This pattern resembles language bias previously documented in STEM teachers' assessment practices. The findings highlight the importance of examining not only agreement with expert ratings but also whether AI-based scoring approaches inadvertently rely on construct-irrelevant information. Addressing language bias is therefore essential for the validity and fairness of AI-supported assessment in physics education and STEM education more broadly.

physics.ed-ph↗
arXiv2026

"What If I Had Participated?" A Machine Learning-Based Counterfactual Analysis of Non-Participants' Success Potential in STEM Competitions: The Case of the German Physics Olympiad

STEM student competitions aim to identify capable, science-interested students and further support them in developing their STEM-related abilities and interests. When such students do not participate, they may appear to be missed not only by the competition but by this form of support altogether; unless they are reached through other competitions. The present study therefore investigated to what extent students who would likely have succeeded in the German Physics Olympiad are missed by it. The study sample comprised 282 Olympiad participants and 1,103 non-participants from academic-track secondary schools, all assessed on 31 indicators spanning sociodemographic background, cognitive abilities, self-related beliefs, motivational variables, personality traits, vocational interests, and prior participation across other STEM competitions. Three machine learning models (elastic net, random forest, gradient boosting) were trained on the participant sample to predict first-round success based on those indicators. The elastic net was found to perform best. Although predictive accuracy was modest, the model proved well-calibrated, supporting valid group-level inferences. Only a few variables predicted success: mathematics skills, physics- and engineering-related skills, and having skipped a grade were positive predictors, whereas conventional vocational interests were a negative predictor. When applied to the non-participants, the model identified 43 students (3.9%) as potentially successful. Crucially, 74% of these students had previously entered at least one selective STEM competition, leaving only 11 students (ca. 1% of all non-participants) entirely unreached by the selective STEM competition system. These findings indicate that the majority of potentially successful non-participants are not absent from the selective STEM competition system but are engaged by it through other domains.

physics.ed-ph↗
arXiv2026

Activity Report on the Ninth African School of Fundamental Physics and Applications (ASP2026)

The African School of Fundamental Physics and Applications, also known as the African School of Physics (ASP), was initiated in 2010, as a three-week biennial event, to offer additional training in fundamental and applied physics to African students with a minimum of three-year university education. Since its inception, ASP has grown to be much more than a school. ASP has become a series of activities and events to support academic development of African students, teachers, high school pupils (learners) and faculties. We report on the ninth African School of Physics, ASP2026, organized in Kenya, on July 5--19, 2026. ASP2026 included programs for university students, high school teachers and learners.

physics.ed-ph↗