Comparing Conceptual Learning in Zoom and In-Class Sections of College Physics
Saved in:
| Title: | Comparing Conceptual Learning in Zoom and In-Class Sections of College Physics |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Ramesh Dhungana (ORCID |
| Source: | Physical Review Physics Education Research. 2025 21(2). |
| Availability: | American Physical Society. One Physics Ellipse 4th Floor, College Park, MD 20740-3844. Tel: 301-209-3200; Fax: 301-209-0865; e-mail: assocpub@aps.org; Web site: https://journals.aps.org/prper/ |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 6 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Technology Uses in Education, In Person Learning, Electronic Learning, College Students, Scientific Concepts, Concept Formation, Distance Education, Videoconferencing, Mechanics (Physics), Program Effectiveness, Science Instruction |
| DOI: | 10.1103/j4st-rj18 |
| ISSN: | 2469-9896 |
| Abstract: | The rapid shift to remote instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic required widespread adoption of synchronous virtual modalities such as Zoom in higher education. This study directly compares student conceptual learning outcomes in two parallel sections of an introductory physics course--one taught face-to-face (F2F) and the other synchronously via Zoom--delivered concurrently by the same instructor. Conceptual understanding of Newtonian mechanics was measured using the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, administered presemester and postsemester. Normalized gain analysis showed average improvements of 30.49% for the F2F group and 25.01% for the Zoom group, a difference that was not statistically significant. Effect size analysis revealed a large gain for the F2F cohort (d =1.27) and a moderate gain for the Zoom cohort (d =0.72), with only a small, nonsignificant difference in post-test means (d =0.19). Analysis of covariance confirmed that presemester scores were the strongest predictor of postsemester performance (p <0.001), while modality itself was not significant (p =0.333). A significant interaction (p =0.010) indicated that prior preparation translated more effectively into learning gains for F2F students. Overall, both instructional modalities fostered meaningful learning; however, face-to-face instruction produced more consistent outcomes, whereas Zoom-based instruction revealed greater variability tied to students' initial levels of preparation. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2025 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1489867 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | The rapid shift to remote instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic required widespread adoption of synchronous virtual modalities such as Zoom in higher education. This study directly compares student conceptual learning outcomes in two parallel sections of an introductory physics course--one taught face-to-face (F2F) and the other synchronously via Zoom--delivered concurrently by the same instructor. Conceptual understanding of Newtonian mechanics was measured using the Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation, administered presemester and postsemester. Normalized gain analysis showed average improvements of 30.49% for the F2F group and 25.01% for the Zoom group, a difference that was not statistically significant. Effect size analysis revealed a large gain for the F2F cohort (d =1.27) and a moderate gain for the Zoom cohort (d =0.72), with only a small, nonsignificant difference in post-test means (d =0.19). Analysis of covariance confirmed that presemester scores were the strongest predictor of postsemester performance (p <0.001), while modality itself was not significant (p =0.333). A significant interaction (p =0.010) indicated that prior preparation translated more effectively into learning gains for F2F students. Overall, both instructional modalities fostered meaningful learning; however, face-to-face instruction produced more consistent outcomes, whereas Zoom-based instruction revealed greater variability tied to students' initial levels of preparation. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2469-9896 |
| DOI: | 10.1103/j4st-rj18 |
