English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Developing critical thinking skills is a common goal of an undergraduatephysics curriculum. How do students make sense of evidence and what do they dowith it? In this study, we evaluated students' critical thinking behaviorsthrough their written notebooks in an introductory physics laboratory course.We compared student behaviors in the Structured Quantitative Inquiry Labs(SQILabs) curriculum to a control group and evaluated the fragility of thesebehaviors through procedural cueing. We found that the SQILabs were generallyeffective at improving the quality of students' reasoning about data and makingdecisions from data. These improvements in reasoning and sensemaking werethwarted, however, by a procedural cue. We describe these changes in behaviorthrough the lens of epistemological frames and task orientation, invoked by theinstructional moves.

Toolboxes and handing students a hammer: The effects of cueing and instruction on getting students to think critically