A Framework for Understanding the Impact of Integrating Conceptual and Quantitative Reasoning in a Quantum Optics Tutorial on Students’ Conceptual Understanding

We investigated the impact of incorporating quantitative reasoning for deeper sense-making in a Quantum Interactive Learning Tutorial (QuILT) on students’ conceptual performance using a framework emphasizing integration of conceptual and quantitative aspects of quantum optics. In this investigation, we compared two versions of the QuILT that were developed and validated to help students learn various aspects of quantum optics using a Mach Zehnder Interferometer with single photons and polarizers. One version of the QuILT is entirely conceptual while the other version integrates quantitative and conceptual reasoning (hybrid version). Performance on conceptual questions of upper-level undergraduate and graduate students who engaged with the hybrid QuILT was compared with that of those who utilized the conceptual QuILT emphasizing the same concepts. Both versions of the QuILT focus on the same concepts, use a scaffolded approach to learning, and take advantage of research on students’ difficulties in learning these challenging concepts as well as a cognitive task analysis from an expert perspective as a guide. The hybrid and conceptual QuILTs were used in courses for upper-level undergraduates or first-year physics graduate students in several consecutive years at the same university. The same conceptual pre-test and post-test were administered after traditional lecture-based instruction in relevant concepts and after student engaged with the QuILT, respectively. We find that the post-test performance of physics graduate students who utilized the hybrid QuILT on conceptual questions, on average, was better than those who utilized the conceptual QuILT. For undergraduates, the results showed differences for different classes. One possible interpretation of these findings that is consistent with our framework is that integrating conceptual and quantitative aspects of physics in research-based tools and pedagogies should be commensurate with students’ prior knowledge of physics and mathematics involved so that students do not experience cognitive overload while engaging with such learning tools and have appropriate opportunities for metacognition, deeper sense-making, and knowledge organization. In the undergraduate course in which many students did not derive added benefit from the integration of conceptual and quantitative aspects, their pre-test performance suggests that the traditional lecture-based instruction may not have sufficiently provided a “first coat” to help students avoid cognitive overload when engaging with the hybrid QuILT. These findings suggest that different groups of students can benefit from a research-based learning tool that integrates conceptual and quantitative aspects if cognitive overload while learning is prevented either due to students’ high mathematical facility or due to their reasonable conceptual facility before engaging with the learning tool.