| Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
| [Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
PHYS-L Digest 275
Topics covered in this issue include:
1) RE: elctronic components
by kowalskil@alpha.montclair.edu
2) Quarters to Semesters--BEWARE!
by "Gerald Hart" <HART2@mhdha.moorhead.msus.edu>
3) Phoenix - vale!
by George Spagna <gspagna@rmc.edu>
4) Calculus Text
by "JACK L. URETSKY (C) 1996; HEP DIV., ARGONNE NATIONAL LAB, ARGONNE, IL 60439" <JLU@hep.anl.gov>
5) Ignore my last. I meant to delete instead of send. Sorry
by "JACK L. URETSKY (C) 1996; HEP DIV., ARGONNE NATIONAL LAB, ARGONNE, IL 60439" <JLU@hep.anl.gov>
6) Calculus texts
by "JACK L. URETSKY (C) 1996; HEP DIV., ARGONNE NATIONAL LAB, ARGONNE, IL 60439" <JLU@hep.anl.gov>
7) Re: Quarters to Semesters--Thanks.
by Larry Smith <Larry.Smith@snow.edu>
8) Re: Calculus texts
by "Donald E. Simanek" <dsimanek@eagle.lhup.edu>
9) Re: Calculus texts
by "Edwin R. Schweber" <edschweb@ix.netcom.com>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 96 08:12:27 EDT
From: kowalskil@alpha.montclair.edu
To: phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu
Subject: RE: elctronic components
Message-ID: <199612271315.HAA14257@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu>
1. Yes, there were a typing error in Q=V*C; luckilly dividing by C=1 gives
the same result at multiplying.
2. I agree that "piece-wise exponential" is a poor term. The curve can as
well be called "piece-wise" linear, "piece-wise" hyperbolic, etc. The
impotrant point is that it is not a straight line on the semi-log plot
over the entire region of I.
Ludwik Kowalski
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 12:24:47 CDT
From: "Gerald Hart" <HART2@mhdha.moorhead.msus.edu>
To: phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu
Subject: Quarters to Semesters--BEWARE!
Message-ID: <3F341BE6A93@mhdha.moorhead.msus.edu>
Moorhead State University after over 100 years of quarters made the
change to semesters last year The physics year-long sequence courses
proved to be easy to convert. Other courses underwent more radical changes, although
it was a good opportunity to review the curriculum and our goals.
Most of the faculty were in favor of the transition.
***There were unforeseen consequences though: the overall student
credit- hour enrollment dropped !!!!! Our enrollment dropped
approximately 3%. Most of the quarter courses were previously 4
quarter hours and students typically took a 4 course load. Under
semesters most all courses are 3 semester hours with
the assumption that the students would take a 5 course load more or
less. NOT SO !!!!! Students were used to 4 courses on the average
and were not willing to take 5 courses. In our second year of
semester we thought this might change, but so far there is no
indication. Now students will require more time to complete their degrees - which
is not viewed favorably. This phenomenon is also being observed at a
sister institution which made the switch this fall.
Gerald Hart
Physics/Astronomy Dept.
Moorhead State University
Moorhead, MN
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 13:46:39 -0500
From: George Spagna <gspagna@rmc.edu>
To: phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu
Subject: Phoenix - vale!
Message-ID: <199612271846.NAA26011@rmc.edu>
I hope that you all have a good meeting in Phoenix - I have been forced by
back problems and pending surgery to forego the trip this time.
George Spagna **********************************************
Department of Physics * *
Randolph-Macon College * "Time is just *
P.O. Box 5005 * *
Ashland, VA 23005-5505 * one damn thing after another!" *
* *
phone: (804) 752-7344 * - Anonymous *
FAX: (804) 752-4724 * *
e-mail: gspagna@rmc.edu **********************************************
URL: www.rmc.edu/~gspagna/gspagna.html
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 13:22:34 -0600 (CST)
From: "JACK L. URETSKY (C) 1996; HEP DIV., ARGONNE NATIONAL LAB, ARGONNE, IL 60439" <JLU@hep.anl.gov>
To: phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu
Cc: ZACHOS@hep.anl.gov, JLU@hep.anl.gov
Subject: Calculus Text
Message-ID: <961227132234.20202e89@hep.anl.gov>
Hi all-
I've come to the conclusion that there are no calculus texts that
hew, even approximately, to the pedagogical lines laid down by Arons for
teaching physics. Teachers can get away with texts such Anton's because
the texts are full of examples that can be copied, almost verbatim, by
students
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 13:23:50 -0600 (CST)
From: "JACK L. URETSKY (C) 1996; HEP DIV., ARGONNE NATIONAL LAB, ARGONNE, IL 60439" <JLU@hep.anl.gov>
To: phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu
Cc: ZACHOS@hep.anl.gov, JLU@hep.anl.gov
Subject: Ignore my last. I meant to delete instead of send. Sorry
Message-ID: <961227132350.20202e89@hep.anl.gov>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 14:46:18 -0600 (CST)
From: "JACK L. URETSKY (C) 1996; HEP DIV., ARGONNE NATIONAL LAB, ARGONNE, IL 60439" <JLU@hep.anl.gov>
To: phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu, guyer@chicom.com
Cc: ZACHOS@hep.anl.gov, MRENNA@hep.anl.gov, JLU@hep.anl.gov
Subject: Calculus texts
Message-ID: <961227144619.20202e89@hep.anl.gov>
Hi all-
I've come to the conclusion that there are no calculus texts
the hew, even approximately, to the pedagogical lines laid out by Arons
for the teaching of introductory physics. The apparent reason that
teachers can get away with using the clone texts, such as Anton's (which
I used last semester -as sparingly as possible), is that the texts are
full of worked out examples. Students can follow the examples almost
verbatim in doing many of the exercises at the end of each chapter.
The end result is that the students, many of them deficient in algebra
skills, can "satisfactorily" complete a calculus course without understanding,
or even reading, any of the textual material. As for understanding any of
the underlying concepts - forget it!
Students with such calculus preparation find themselves almost
totally lost when they enter our calculus-based physics classes. The
frustration with the math preparation of our students has been expressed
frequently on the physics-l net.
My solution to this problem is to write a "decent" introductory
calculus text. The text would adhere to the principles of:
a unifying theme
less is more
write at the level of the students' understanding
concept first, names later
avoid concepts that are unnecessary to the main theme
introduce concepts only as needed in the development of
main theme
continuous "circling back" and revisiting earlier concepts
including those learned in algebra and arithmetic
short, literate chapters, each dealing with a single principle
idea; each followed by relatively few exercises and problems.
The expectation is that a student will do all of the exercises
(and problems).
At the end of a two semester course the student who completes the
text should be able to apply the first and second fundamental theorems of
the calculus to elementary (separable) problems in one and two dimensions.
The student should also be able to derive the rules of calculus and to
work out complicated, unfamiliar integrals. (Maybe less).
I am looking for one or two people to collaborate on such a text.
An ideal team, I think, would be two physicists (to keep it simple) and
one mathematician (to keep it honest).
Any suggestions?
Regards,
Jack
***********************************************************************
It's 4 A.M. Nazruddin leaves the tavern and walks the town
aimlessly. A policeman stops him. "Why are you out wandering the streets
in the middle of the night?" "Sir", replies Nazruddin, "if I knew the
answer to that question, I would have been home hours ago!"
from "The Essential Rumi"
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 15:06:29 -0700
From: Larry Smith <Larry.Smith@snow.edu>
To: phys-l@atlantis.cc.UWF.EDU
Subject: Re: Quarters to Semesters--Thanks.
Message-ID: <l03010d06aee9f8a39fea@[144.17.10.101]>
Thank you all for your imput on the quarters to semesters. It has been
enlightening, and I have passed your ideas on to my state committee. If
you still have more to say about it I'd be happy to read it.
Again, thanks.
Larry
Larry K. Smith | Not everything that counts
Dept. of Physics mailto:Larry.Smith@snow.edu | can be counted; and not
Snow College fax: (801) 283-6879 | everything that can be
150 College Ave. phone: (801) 283-4021 x232 | counted counts.
Ephraim, UT 84627 USA | Albert Einstein
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 27 Dec 1996 22:44:42 -0500 (EST)
From: "Donald E. Simanek" <dsimanek@eagle.lhup.edu>
To: phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu
Cc: phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu, guyer@chicom.com, ZACHOS@hep.anl.gov,
MRENNA@hep.anl.gov, JLU@hep.anl.gov
Subject: Re: Calculus texts
Message-ID: <Pine.A41.3.95.961227221544.36982A-100000@eagle.lhup.edu>
On Fri, 27 Dec 1996, JACK L. URETSKY (C) 1996; HEP DIV., ARGONNE NATIONAL LAB, ARGONNE, IL 60439 wrote:
Hi all-
I've come to the conclusion that there are no calculus texts
the hew, even approximately, to the pedagogical lines laid out by Arons
for the teaching of introductory physics. The apparent reason that
teachers can get away with using the clone texts, such as Anton's (which
I used last semester -as sparingly as possible), is that the texts are
full of worked out examples. Students can follow the examples almost
verbatim in doing many of the exercises at the end of each chapter.
And not only are students seduced into the illusion that they've learned
calculus, the teachers are suckered into thinking their course is a
success.
The end result is that the students, many of them deficient in algebra
skills, can "satisfactorily" complete a calculus course without understanding,
or even reading, any of the textual material. As for understanding any of
the underlying concepts - forget it!
The same criticism is applicable to most physics texts I've seen.
Students with such calculus preparation find themselves almost
totally lost when they enter our calculus-based physics classes. The
frustration with the math preparation of our students has been expressed
frequently on the physics-l net.
My solution to this problem is to write a "decent" introductory
calculus text. The text would adhere to the principles of:
a unifying theme
less is more
write at the level of the students' understanding
concept first, names later
avoid concepts that are unnecessary to the main theme
introduce concepts only as needed in the development of
main theme
continuous "circling back" and revisiting earlier concepts
including those learned in algebra and arithmetic
short, literate chapters, each dealing with a single principle
idea; each followed by relatively few exercises and problems.
The expectation is that a student will do all of the exercises
(and problems).
A very good list of qualities a text should have. With only slight
modification it could apply to physics texts as well. Having just
completed a review of one of these bloated encyclopedias masquerading as
textbooks, I heartily second your suggestion that 'less is more'. But try
to tell that to publishers. They come back with the observation that the
ideal text I'd like simply would not sell. They tell me that the books
which sell are those with lots of color, lots of worked examples,
instructor's solutions manuals, overhead transparencies, exam banks, and
coverage of all topics which are in anyone's syllabus, and on any
standardized exam the students might have to take. One editor told me in a
moment of candor that most teachers choose the book which will be the
least work for the teacher. Those of us who really want students to
*understand* are, she said, in the minority.
At the end of a two semester course the student who completes the
text should be able to apply the first and second fundamental theorems of
the calculus to elementary (separable) problems in one and two dimensions.
The student should also be able to derive the rules of calculus and to
work out complicated, unfamiliar integrals. (Maybe less).
I've asked my college students to clearly state three of the fundamental
theorems of calculus, or as many as they can remember. Not one can
remember even one! And some of these folks got A grades in calculus. When
they are given broad hints, they still can't reconstruct a statement of
even one of the theorems. But, how many high school physics teachers
could? Just as in physics courses, students get no sense of what is
fundamental and what is derived, what is empirical and what arises from
theory.
It points out that what's lacking in so many courses, both physics and
math, is any sense of the logical progression of ideas, and a clear
understanding of the difference between axioms and theorems, and the
logical steps to get from one to another. In physics there's a lack of
understanding the difference between definitions, empirical laws, theory,
hypothesis, and the logical connections between them.
Students in math courses are no longer expected to understand or to
independently construct proofs of theorems.
Look at the exams. Look at your exams. Suppose you had a student with
perfect eidetic imagery, who could look at a book and remember every word
in it, every diagram, right down to the punctuation. This is what some
call "photographic memory"--the ideal memorization. Assume that person
could also copy patterns and follow recipes and procedures faultlessly,
but didn't really understand anything. What score could this person get on
one of your exams? If your answer is any score larger than zero, then
something is wrong with your exams. Many exams reward mere memorization,
cramming of definitions and slogans, slavishly carrying out procedures and
recipes and pattern-following. These do not measure understanding, and do
not promote or encourage understanding.
The only exams which test understanding are those which ask the student to
apply physics and math to *new* situations, never seen before.
I am looking for one or two people to collaborate on such a text.
An ideal team, I think, would be two physicists (to keep it simple) and
one mathematician (to keep it honest).
Since when have physics textbook authors been noted for keeping things
simple?
-- Donald
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dr. Donald E. Simanek Office: 717-893-2079
Prof. of Physics Internet: dsimanek@eagle.lhup.edu
Lock Haven University, Lock Haven, PA. 17745 CIS: 73147,2166
Home page: http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek FAX: 717-893-2047
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 1996 02:47:05 -0500
From: "Edwin R. Schweber" <edschweb@ix.netcom.com>
To: phys-l@atlantis.cc.uwf.edu
Subject: Re: Calculus texts
Message-ID: <32C4D072.A17@ix.netcom.com>
JACK L. URETSKY (C) 1996; HEP DIV., ARGONNE NATIONAL LAB, ARGONNE, IL
60439 wrote:
Jack and all:
Hi all-
I've come to the conclusion that there are no calculus texts
the hew, even approximately, to the pedagogical lines laid out by Arons
for the teaching of introductory physics.
I think the problem applies to all H.S. math texts. There seems to
be a
tendency to assume that using pseudo-mathematical language is a
substitute
for explaining a concept. This semester, besides physics, I am teaching
trig to some of our lowest level seniors. The text introduces the
concept
of radian measure without any attempt at explaining why it is a more
natural measure than degreees or without explaining why taking the
ratio of arc length to the radius of a circle inscribed around the
angle is independent of the circle's radius.
In past years I have used books that start off with "circular
functions" rather than with the right triangle trig that would
seem (to me anyway) to form the proper motivation for generalizing
the definition of the trig functions to non-accute angles.
When I was in grad school one of the math professors was
expressing admiration for a colleague who had a solid reputation
in algebraic topology; much of which stemmed for his Ph.D
thesis. However, the proof given in the thesis had errors which had
to be corrected by others. Why then was this work the basis of
a solid reputation. According to the professor I was talking to
it was because this other mathematician was the first one to
intuit that the result should be true.
That the construction of a rigorous logical proof is the last
step in the elucidation of a mathematical concept, which comes
only aftera good deal of intuition is precisely what seems to
elude many writers of math textbooks.
Ed Schweber (edschweb@ix.netcom.com)
Physics Teacher
Solomon Schechter Day School
West Orange, NJ
------------------------------
End of PHYS-L Digest 275
************************