This document presents a dissertation proposal that aims to examine how simulations in high school physics classes, along with classroom management strategies, laboratory practices, student engagement techniques, critical thinking approaches, cooperative learning strategies, and teacher self-efficacy, predict student achievement. The researcher intends to survey 300 high school physics teachers who are members of the American Modeling Teachers Association and use simulations in their teaching. The survey will assess these variables and their relationship to student performance as reported by teachers. The proposal provides background research to support each variable and describes the research questions, participants, instrumentation, and data analysis plan.

1. HIGH SCHOOL PHYSICS TEACHERS’ CLASSROOM
MANAGEMENT, LABORATORY PRACTICE, STUDENT
ENGAGEMENT, CRITICAL THINKING, COOPERATIVE
LEARNING AND THEIR EFFECTS ON STUDENT
ACHIVEMENT MEDIATED BY USES OF SIMULATION
AND MODERATED BY TEACHER SELF EFFICACY
Dissertation Proposal
by
Muhammad Riaz
Dowling College
December 15, 2014

2. The purpose of this study is to examine how
simulations in physics class, classroom
management, laboratory practice, student
engagement, critical thinking, cooperative
learning moderated by teacher self-efficacy and
mediated by uses of simulations predict students’
achievement/performance as reported by the
teachers in high school physics classes.
Purpose of the Study

3. How do simulations in physics class, classroom
management, laboratory practice, student
engagement, critical thinking, cooperative
learning moderated by teacher self-efficacy
and mediated by uses of simulations predict
student achievement/performance as
reported by the teachers in high school physics
classes?
Statement of the Problem

4. Conceptual Rationale
Simulations in Physics class
Jimoyiannis and
Komis(2001)
 Computer simulations are effective for teaching and
learning physics because they give students the
opportunity to observe a real world experience and
interactions among teachers and students.
Wieman, Adams,
Loeblein and
Perkins(2010)
 The simulations can be used to improve teaching in
high school physics teaching, especially in classroom
activities, but simulations cannot replace teachers.
Classroom Management
Allen (1986)  Effective classroom management involved clear
behavioral communication, academic expectations
and supportive physical learning environment.
Taylor (2009)  Classroom management is one of the greatest
concerns of teachers and administrators when
addressing the safety and well-being of students.

5. Conceptual Rationale
Laboratory Practice
Bourque and
Carlson (1987)
 The hands-on experiment format followed by the computer
simulation format provides the highest cumulative scores for
the examinations. The use of computer simulations as part
of post laboratory activities to reinforce learning and support
the learning process.
Kelly, Bradley and
Gratch (2008)
 The laboratory experience, both real and simulated, provides
opportunity for the student to experience science through
investigation.
Student Engagement
Wells, Hestenes
and Swackhmer
(1995)
 If teachers use the scientific model to describe, explain,
predict and control physical phenomena, they engage
students actively in understanding the physical world.
Rotgans and
Schmidt (2011)
 Students’ engagement is an important factor to motivate
students in learning experiences and willingness to endeavor
continuous effort.

6. Conceptual Rationale
Critical Thinking
Woodward and Gersten
(1988)
 A combination of effective teaching and strategic
instructional processes in combination with computer
simulations increase factual and higher order thinking
skill of students .
Browne( 2010)  Critical thinking skills to life experiences extending far
beyond the classroom, specifically the habits and
attitudes related to critical thinking, move to
business, medical, legal, aviation and general choices.
Cooperative Learning
Heller, Keith, and
Anderson (1992)
 Problem solutions can be done better in group work
than by individuals working alone. In group , students
can share their ideas and make better understanding
of scientific concepts.
Nembhard (2005)  Cooperative learning could switch some of that
lecture time with approaches structured to get
students actively participating during the class period.

7. Conceptual Rationale
Uses of Simulations
Zietsman and Hewson
(1986)
 Science instruction that employs conceptual change
strategies is effective, especially when provided by the
computer simulation.
Gabon and Ozkan (1992)  The computer simulated experiment approach and the
problem solving approach produced significantly greater
achievement science process skills than the conventional
approach did.
Teachers’ Efficacy
McLaughlin and
Marsh(1978)
 A teacher’s level of efficacy influence said teacher’s
behavior which in turn affect the behavior of the students,
which leads to changes in student achievement levels .
Tschannen-Moran et
al., (1998)
 Teachers with personal teacher efficacy have demonstrated an increased
willingness to experiment in the classroom with various strategies and
have students with higher scores achievement tests.

8. Conceptual Rationale
Student achievement/Performance
Weiman (2005)  Computer simulations create images in students'
brains of complex scientific phenomenon and provide
an interactive, engaging and visual environment that
promotes and supports conceptual understandings.
These deeper conceptual understandings enable the
students to form connections and relationships
between ideas and concepts and improve their
performance in real life .
Sherwood and
Hasselbring (1985)
 Student interest and some gender preferences also
influence performance in the simulation and effect
measurement results.
Henson(2001); Gordon(
2001); Muijs and
Reynolds(2002)
 Students whose teachers scored high on efficacy did
better on standardized tests than their peers who
were taught by teachers with lower efficacy scores

9. Significance of the Study
The findings of this study may promote
interactive learning, connecting physical
phenomena with practical training, enhancing
student learning, changing of classroom
environment, providing opportunities to review
conceptual understanding of high school
physics. Specifically, this research study will
contribute to the ongoing changes being made
to the computer simulations and to changes in
science instruction in general.

10. This study will also examine simulation uses and
its relationship with class management, laboratory
practice, student engagement, critical thinking ,
cooperative learning, teacher self-efficacy, and
high students achievement in high school physics
teachers classes, and which techniques they find
more effective in physics class and its relationship
with students’ attitude toward physics, classroom
management, interactive simulations, student
engagement, cooperative learning, critical
thinking, self- efficacy and laboratory practice.
Significance of the Study

11. This study is limited to high school physics teachers in
suburban and city school districts located in the USA
states, specifically in Alabama Arizona, California
Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, ,
Maine, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, Ohio,
Pennsylvania , Tennessee New York and Maryland
who are also members of American Modeling
Teachers Association (AMTA) and use simulations in
their physics teaching practice in 2014.
Limitations

12. This study will be conducted with three
hundred of American Modeling Teachers
Association (AMTA) teachers who use modeling
instruction in their physics teaching practice.
Delimitations

13. Subjects for this study will be chosen from three
hundred male and female high school physics
teachers who are members of the American
Modeling Teachers Association (AMTA ). The
chosen teachers have participated in Science,
Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)
teaching practice workshops and have used
simulations in their teaching practice from 2013 to
2014.
Selection of Subjects

14. This study will be conducted with the High school
physics teachers of American Modeling Teachers
Association (AMTA ), who use simulations in their
physics teaching practices located in these
states: Alabama Arizona, California Florida,
Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Maine, Michigan, New York, North Carolina, Ohio,
Pennsylvania and Tennessee.
Setting

15. The survey was constructed based on the
literature review by the researcher. A six-point
Likert scale will be used to evaluate the response
on simulations in physics class, class management,
laboratory practice, student engagement, critical
thinking, cooperative learning, teacher self-
efficacy, and student achievement.
Instrumentation

16. PLC Dimensions: Survey item number Number of items Raw Score Items created by the researchers based onTheorists
Demographics variables:
Physics Major, Number of students taught, class size and gender
Independent Variables
Simulations in Physics class 1, 2, 3, 4,5,6,7 7 7-49 (Zacharia, 2003);(Ferguson, 2003)
Classroom Management 15,16, 17,18,19, 20, 21 7 7-49 (Evertson & Weinstein, 2006)
Laboratory practice 22, 23, 24, 25, 16, 27, 28 7 7-49 Weiman (2005); (Sahin, 2006)
Students Engagement 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 7 7-49 (Mazur E. , 2009)
Critical Thinking 36, 37, 38, 39,40, 41, 42 7 7-49 (Burbach, Matkin & Fritz, 2004; Aretz, Bolen & Debereux, 1997).
Cooperative Learning 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49 7 7-49 (Heller, Keith, & Anderson, 1992)
Medicator Variable
Uses of Simulations 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 7 7-49 (Carl, 2008); (Carpenter, 2009)
Moderate Variable
Teachers' Efficacy
Dependent Variable
Student Achievement/Performance:
50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56,57 8 8-56 (Bandura, 1977); (Blumenfeld, Kempler, & Krajcik, 2006)
Teachers views of students performance 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 7 7-49 (Steinberg, 2000; Stieff & Wilenskey, 2003; Zacharia, 2003)
Survey Instrument

17. Content Validity
• The survey jury process will include five
professionals within the field of physics
education
• The jury will ask to match each survey item to the
corresponding variable definition
• Items that will not receive 60 percent agreement
among the jurors will be either discarded or
reworded to better fit the corresponding variable.

18. How do high school physics teachers describe uses of
simulations in physics class, classroom management,
laboratory practice, students’ engagement, critical
thinking, cooperative learning, teachers’ efficacy by
teacher views of student performance and percent of
students with a GPA of 85 or higher?
Question One will be answered with descriptive
statistics: mean, Standard deviation, and frequencies
.
Research Question One

19. What relationship exist among high school physic teachers
descriptions of their students’ achievement and uses of
simulations in physics class, classroom management,
laboratory practice, student engagement, critical thinking,
cooperative learning, teachers’ efficacy, and their gender,
level of degree in physics and number of students in physics
classes they taught last year, and number of years using
simulations in physics class?
A Spearman correlation will be done for class size, years of
using simulations in physics and number of students taught.
.
Research Question Two

20. What relationships are there among high school Physics
teachers’ descriptions of their uses of simulations in
physics class, class management, laboratory practice,
student engagement, critical thinking, cooperative
learning, and teacher self-efficacy. How are they
moderated by uses of simulation in the class, as well as
their teachers’ view of student performance, and
percentage of students achieving a grade point average of
85 or higher ?
Answered with Pearson Product Moment Correlation
analysis.
Research Question Three

21. How do uses of simulation mediate the effects of simulations in
physics class, class management, laboratory practice, student
engagement, critical thinking, cooperative learning, and teacher self-
efficacy on student achievement/performance? How do uses of
simulation mediate the effects of simulations in physics class, class
management, laboratory practice, student engagement, critical
thinking, cooperative learning, and teacher self-efficacy on teachers’
view of student performance, and percentage of students achieving a
grade point average of 85 or higher ?
For the answering of this question, the research will use the four step
approach of Baron and Kenny. Moderation will be tested using as a
dependent variable teacher’s view of student performance
Research Question Four

22. How does teacher self-efficacy moderates the
effects of simulations in physics class, class
management, laboratory practice, student
engagement, critical thinking, and cooperative
learning on student
achievement/performance?
Moderation effect will be tested using regression
analysis
Research Question Five

23. How do high school Physics teachers’ descriptions of their
uses of simulations in physics class, class management,
laboratory practice, student engagement, critical thinking,
cooperative learning, and teacher self-efficacy predict
teachers’ views of student performance and percentage of
students achieving a grade point average of 85 or higher ?
Question five will be answered using multiple regression
1) Using dependent variable percent of students
achieving a grade point average
2) Using dependent variable teacher’s views of student
performance
Research Questions Six

24. Elsa Sofia Morote Ed.D.
Chair
Robert Manley Ph.D.
Design Specialist
Fernand Brunschwig Ph.D.
External Reader
Stephanie Tatum Ph.D.
Reader
Richard Walter Ph.D.
Reader
Acknowledgements

25. Questions and Comments
Thanks you very much