Standard 7: Research and Investigation in Science
This assessment demonstrates the candidate’s ability to design and conduct open-ended investigations in a science discipline, requiring data processing and analysis, and reporting the results. This requirement can be met by completing an undergraduate or graduate course that requires original scientific research. The requirement may also be met with internships or work experiences that involve original scientific research.
Evidence:
Virginia Tech Physics Department Spark Chamber Conceptual Design Report - Spring 2012
Presentation and Report
Reflection:
Virginia Tech physics majors typically spend a portion of their final semester working on an independent research project under the supervision of a faculty member. However during my graduate year the department offered for the first time an option to partake in a collaborative research effort, in an attempt to simulate the large research projects typical of real world physics academia and industry. The effort was also to serve the practical purpose of educating the public at large and attracting attention to the department and the study of physics in general. The decision was made to construct a spark chamber, capable of detecting naturally created atmospheric muons. The spark chamber had a historical purpose of particle physics research, but modern versions are largely built for the same demonstration purposes the Virginia Tech had in mind. The specific goal of our group, which consisted of 10 undergraduate students and one faculty advisor, was to write a conceptual design report. The conceptual design report would include extensive research on previous spark chamber models synthesized into a detailed outline on the how to construct a detector uniquely suited to the limitations and requirements of its proposed home at Virginia Tech. The report serves as a guide for undergraduates in the following year who are set to actually build the detector. I volunteered as the project coordinator
The project addressed many of the NSTA standards 1d and 1e directly. The collaborative effort required the understanding and application of a wide range of physics including nuclear particle physics, ionization, circuit construction, and statics. It also requires the acceptance of real world limitations. An imposed rough budget consequently led to the consideration of costs versus benefits. Software was used to draw difficult to make parts so that industrial machinists could provide cost estimates.Limitations and requirements of the display area dictated the physical design of the detector. Visibility, accessibility, ease of maintenance, and safety, all had to be considered. It was impractical to buy and test individual electrical components. Instead computer software was used to model and adjust electrical components.
The collaborative effort offered a better window into real world projects. Though parts of physics are left to theorists at their desks, the remaining portion is the realm of experimentalists that have to work in the real world to construct experiments and test predictions. The spark chamber project simulated aspects of science that are often overlooked in the classroom, and therefore it offers insight on how to improve curriculum. I think project based learning can be extended by introducing specific limitation such as a budget. Such constraints can act to facilitate deeper problem solving. The producing of ‘conceptual design report’ requires an extensive amount of learning and understanding of real world problems with the need to spend any money. Such hypothetical, but extensive projects ‘built’ through a report can serve as an alternative to physical, but more limited projects. Finally building circuits to fit a purpose rather than simply extracting information from a provided circuit seems like a much more intuitive and engaging way to teach the subject to students.
Virginia Tech physics majors typically spend a portion of their final semester working on an independent research project under the supervision of a faculty member. However during my graduate year the department offered for the first time an option to partake in a collaborative research effort, in an attempt to simulate the large research projects typical of real world physics academia and industry. The effort was also to serve the practical purpose of educating the public at large and attracting attention to the department and the study of physics in general. The decision was made to construct a spark chamber, capable of detecting naturally created atmospheric muons. The spark chamber had a historical purpose of particle physics research, but modern versions are largely built for the same demonstration purposes the Virginia Tech had in mind. The specific goal of our group, which consisted of 10 undergraduate students and one faculty advisor, was to write a conceptual design report. The conceptual design report would include extensive research on previous spark chamber models synthesized into a detailed outline on the how to construct a detector uniquely suited to the limitations and requirements of its proposed home at Virginia Tech. The report serves as a guide for undergraduates in the following year who are set to actually build the detector. I volunteered as the project coordinator
The project addressed many of the NSTA standards 1d and 1e directly. The collaborative effort required the understanding and application of a wide range of physics including nuclear particle physics, ionization, circuit construction, and statics. It also requires the acceptance of real world limitations. An imposed rough budget consequently led to the consideration of costs versus benefits. Software was used to draw difficult to make parts so that industrial machinists could provide cost estimates.Limitations and requirements of the display area dictated the physical design of the detector. Visibility, accessibility, ease of maintenance, and safety, all had to be considered. It was impractical to buy and test individual electrical components. Instead computer software was used to model and adjust electrical components.
The collaborative effort offered a better window into real world projects. Though parts of physics are left to theorists at their desks, the remaining portion is the realm of experimentalists that have to work in the real world to construct experiments and test predictions. The spark chamber project simulated aspects of science that are often overlooked in the classroom, and therefore it offers insight on how to improve curriculum. I think project based learning can be extended by introducing specific limitation such as a budget. Such constraints can act to facilitate deeper problem solving. The producing of ‘conceptual design report’ requires an extensive amount of learning and understanding of real world problems with the need to spend any money. Such hypothetical, but extensive projects ‘built’ through a report can serve as an alternative to physical, but more limited projects. Finally building circuits to fit a purpose rather than simply extracting information from a provided circuit seems like a much more intuitive and engaging way to teach the subject to students.