Re: Jackson on Jackson

[palmer@sfu.ca (Leigh Palmer)]

> Not all capable students have the interest nor desire to become physics
> majors. I had no interest in becoming a physician, a lawyer, or a
> multitude of other professional people even though I was capable. Why
> should I think in an egocentric way that all capable students should
> enjoy physics just because I enjoy it?

I think there is little, if any, value to a student's sitting through a
course in physics without being reached. It is not important that a
student enjoy his courses; I'm unclear as to why you raise the issue. If
he enjoys them that is good, but in the case of, for example, a student
training for medical school, I feel that the student should assimilate
into his consciousness at least all of the physics that his professional
mentors who prescribed the course meant for him to learn.

> Don't we need capable people in other professions? I tell all of my
> advisees that they should make their professional choice based on
> enjoying the work. They should find a profession where on Sunday they
> look forward going to work on Monday, and being sad that on Friday they
> have to wait until Monday to get back on the job. Obviously, people who
> spend Monday and Tuesday talking about what they did on their past
> weekend and the rest of the week planning for the coming weekend aren't
> working in the appropriate field.

Ah, you are a hedonist! My own personal philosophy (which I will inflict
upon my advisees, but which I clearly label as my own inexpert view) is
that if one can achieve the sort of outcome it is wonderful. I must
confess that I don't feel that way on Sunday night (I have two lectures
to give on Monday), but I find my "job" overall so rewarding that I'd do
it for free now that my financial worries are long past. The word I use
to describe my relationship with what I do is "vocation". I am fortunate
to have a vocation to physics, and even more fortunate in having been
able to make a living at it. Many other people succeed in the same way I
have succeeded, but it is my suspicion that many more have not done so.

> Leigh, you have been teaching for a number of years. Do you find any
> differences in the students now than when you first started teaching?
> You apparently are finding what I find that students aren't comfortable
> with working through problems algebraically. Our freshman want to
> substitute numbers in immediately and then manipulate algebraically
> equations loaded with numbers, many of which are in scientific notation.
> Fortunately, we are able to work with them and are successful in
> converting most of them to solving problems algebraically first, then
> substituting numbers at the very end.

That problem has always been there, but it is more prevalent now than it
formerly was. Ther has been a deterioration in these skills over my 30
years of teaching, and British Columbia high school students are better
prepared in math and science than those of any other state or province
on the continent by some actual measurements. My problem is exacerbated
by the adoption five years ago of a more "inclusive" admissions policy,
targeted hypocritically at increasing our numbers and the formula based
grant from the province. We have lost many excellent high school grads
to the university across town, UBC. Formerly we got the cream because we
had a higher admission standard than UBC (I think). Our Dean was hot to
trade quality for quantity. I'm pleased to report that the pendulum here
is now swinging back, but it will be too late for me. I face compulsory
retirement in September 2000.

> You didn't say if this was E & M in the second semester of the
> introductory physics course or the introductory upper division E & M in
> the major. If the latter, then she missed the boat in the beginning
> course. If this was the beginning course, then you did the correct thing
> to work one-on-one with her. Fortunately, in my case I have only 20-30
> in the beginning physics course so that I can work one-on-one outside of
> class with those that need the help.

It is the second semester of the conventional first year course in which
we try to cover almost all of one of the many Halliday & Resnick clones.
I have 29 students left after the first midterm (the first Friday of
October - they can drop without penalty the next Monday), so I can afford
to pay attention to individuals. The trouble is that they don't seem to
know (or else believe) that they are in trouble; I see very many fewer
students than ought to be coming to see me. This is the slack semester
for this course; often in spring it has enrolments approaching 200. They
have a golden opportunity and they do not avail themselves of it!

> Unfortunately, university administrations will not let us teach this
> way. Our administration is constantly looking and the music department
> here because of their low productivity caused by their one-on-one
> private music instruction.

I'm in a department of 30 faculty. We infrequently graduate more than ten
students per year in our programs. I think the most we ever graduated was
just over twenty. Realistically we could devote the same sort of time to
instruction that your musicians do.

I know my evidence is only anecdotal, but I am convinced that the lecture
mode is only superficially efficient. The students aren't learning from
the lectures. The least I can do for them is to entertain, and that I try
to do. Any learning that occurs *en passant* is gravy. I have a friend
who is an excellent theoretical physicist and a talented lecturer, and
also a prominent physics educationalist. He thinks the lecture mode is
terribly ineffective, an opinion he impressed on me in 1994. I was on the
other side of that argument back then; I'm coming over to his side now,
I'm afraid. As I point out above, I don't think it is unreasonable that
we pay a great deal of individual attention to students who want to
become physicists. I paid a great deal of attention to my own children's
needs, including their considerable intellectual needs, and I think they
benefitted greatly from that attention. My students don't have that kind
of support behind them for the most part; I think we should recognize
that the need exists and do something about filling it. Perhaps private
science lessons for budding scientists are as appropriate as private
music lessons for budding concert artists (and many, many more who don't
go on to the profession take them, too).

In the 94-95 school year I was a visiting scholar in the Cavendish Lab.
in Cambridge. The students there receive weekly "supervisions", hour
long one-on-one or one-on-two encounters, weekly with a faculty member or
grad student. I'm sure it is very expensive, but I'm also sure that it is
money well spent. Their undergrads are excellent! Here in Vancouver some
parents (especially among the ethnic Chinese community) are willing to
pay fees comparable to music instruction fees for their children to
receive tutoring in mathematics. These are the best students, not the
worst, who are taking this instruction.

Just some of my radical ideas.

Leigh