Re: Measure of student understanding (was Test writing)

[Rick Tarara <rbtarara@SPRYNET.COM>]

It keeps coming back to--'Good Gain'.  The PER folks seem to measure
everything against a couple diagnostic tests such as the FCI.  What has yet
to be shown (at least to me) is that the performance on such tests
correlates to success as a physicist, a scientist, or a member of society.
Until that can be done, then the teaching community has every right to be
skeptical of any and all of the 50 or more major theories of learning.  I
would prefer that those PER folk whose rhetoric tends to constantly be 'If
you are not teaching the way we say, your courses are useless, you are
useless, your students are learning nothing, ......." keep that rhetoric on
the PER lists and off Phys-L and PhysShare.

Rick

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

FREE PHYSICS INSTRUCTIONAL SOFTWARE
www.saintmarys.edu/~rtarara/software.html
NEW:  Photo Realistic Laboratory Simulations
XP compatible updates now available.
**********************************************************
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Clement" <clement@HAL-PC.ORG>


> Since teachers have been grading homework in conventional classes and have
> not gotten much higher gain, this is probably not true.  Homework
certainly
> can have some effect, but it is small compared to the PER labs.  Lawson's
> and other research has shown clearly that the learning cycle with hands on
> experience is vital for students who are at the concrete operational
level.
> Work done in class is the most important aspect of achieveing good gain.
> This has also been shown by the Heller's research.
>
> John M. Clement