(description from amazon.de:)

We have reformed a large lecture modern physics course for engineering majors by radically changing both the content and the learning techniques implemented in lecture and homework. Traditionally this course has been taught in a manner similar to the equivalent course for physics majors, focusing on mathematical solutions of abstract problems. Based on interviews with physics and engineering professors, we developed a syllabus and learning goals focused on content that was more useful to our actual student population: engineering majors.

Physics faculty consider the photoelectric effect important, but many erroneously believe it is easy for students to understand. We have developed curriculum on this topic including an interactive computer simulation, interactive lectures with peer instruction, and conceptual and mathematical homework problems. Our curriculum addresses established student difficulties and is designed to achieve two learning goals, for students to be able to (1) correctly predict the results of photoelectric effect experiments, and (2) describe how these results lead to the photon model of light.

Some education researchers have claimed that we should not teach the Bohr model of the atom because it inhibits students' ability to learn the true quantum nature of electrons in atoms. Although the evidence for this claim is weak, many have accepted it. This claim has implications for how to present atoms in classes ranging from elementary school to graduate school. We present results from a study designed to test this claim by developing a curriculum on models of the atom, including the Bohr and Schrodinger models.

We believe that physics education has to meet today's requirement for a qualitative approach to Quantum Mechanics (QM) worldview. An effective answer to the corresponding instructional problem might allow the basic ideas of QM to be accessed at an early stage of physics education.

In this paper, the AA. try to show initially that modern physics is usually introduced in high school curricula without reference to the difficulties of classical physics, simply juxtaposing the two paradigms or even mixing them up. As a result, serious misconceptions arise. We then present another way of introducing modern physics, based on a constructivist view of science learning, and give some results obtained with the new materials.

The learning of modern physics is made more difficult for students because teaching often uses semi-classical models (e.g. Bohr) and concepts (e.g. dualism). An introduction to quantum physics was designed which omits all analogies to classical physics.
In the evaluation of the teaching unit, students' conceptions were recorded both at the beginning and the end of the teaching. Students in the test groups dispensed with visualized conceptions and reached an understanding which is more suitable to modern physics.

In Learning quantum mechanics, Fischler and Lichtfeldt report on a learning study, which combines an empirical study with a large student population from eleven courses with case studies of single students. In this paper they present an analysis of the development of 'dynamic networks of ideas' of two students, who are each given a different treatment during the course. The authors discuss the networks of ideas of

For many students, learning quantum atomic models raises difficulties that result from the major differences between quantum-mechanical perspectives and the classical physics view. After being taught the probability atomic model, which is traditionally introduced in Germany in upper secondary school (age 18--19), the understandings of the overwhelming majority of students differ significantly from the intended learning outcomes.

This is the second of two papers focusing on the quantum atomic model ‘Electronium’. The ‘Bremen teaching approach’, in which this model is used, is outlined and an analysis of the learning of two students as they progress through the teaching unit is presented. Finally an argument is presented to support the assertion that the Electronium model can be considered to be a successful teaching tool.