Re: Textbook alternatives

["Richard W. Tarara" <rtarara@SAINTMARYS.EDU>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Bellina" <jbellina@saintmarys.edu>

> It seems to me that this conversation ignors completely the current
> discussion about process.  What you would produce would be a 19th
> century encyclopedia which would be fine for those who know, but would
> be useless as a tool for teaching.

I disagree (I could go next door and have this discussion, but the list is
more fun).  You cannot effectively teach in a vacuum.  You need a collection
of history, of facts, of pertinent data with which to work.  While there may
be some advantages in using only students' conceptions (or misconceptions)
that they bring with them to attack a few key ideas, the breadth of what we
call Physics precludes doing that for much of the standard curriculum (and
as Cliff Swartz suggests in his TPT editorial--they aren't going to discover
'String Theory' on their own.)  Therefore there is certainly a place for the
'encyclopedia' in physics teaching.  Clearly what has been suggested by
Laurent and Fred permits (encourages) that the 'process' be included in the
often revised supplements.  This is important since that process is not yet
well defined and does seem to shift with the educational winds.

Rick

*********************************************
Richard W. Tarara
Associate Professor of Physics
Department of Chemistry & Physics
Saint Mary's College
Notre Dame, IN 46556
219-284-4664
rtarara@saintmarys.edu

Free Physics Instructional Software
Win9x, Win3.x, Dos, Mac, PowerMac versions.
Details at  www.saintmarys.edu/~rtarara
*************************************************