Re: 'plug & chug' problems

[Rick Tarara <rtarara@SAINTMARYS.EDU>]

OK, this is a reasonable goal for a course, but is it now more of a math
course than a Physics course?  The argument for the strong conceptual
understanding courses (I think) goes something like:  By confronting
acquired misconceptions and developing a new and _more_ correct
understanding of a selected number of topics, student develop new critical
thinking skills and come to understand and appreciate the methodologies of
science.

Is this more important than proportional reasoning skills?  Can a course do
both?  We used to think YES on the latter, but what I get from the PER work
is that to do the conceptual understanding well requires a lot of time and
different approaches that _might_ not allow for serious problem solving
work--at least at the introductory or 1st course level.

My own prejudice on what's the best use of a single course for the non
science/engineering students runs more to the 'Physics & Society' (in my
case an Energy course) type curricula.  Problem solving (and lots of it), I
would deem appropriate for the others, probably even the pre-meds (here
those are science majors--either Bio or Chemistry.)

Rick

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

FREE PHYSICS INSTRUCTIONAL SOFTWARE
www.saintmarys.edu/~rtarara/software.html
PC and MAC software
NEW! Spring and SHM lab simulator.
******************************************************

----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Haar" <haar@PHYSICS.ARIZONA.EDU>
To: <PHYS-L@lists.nau.edu>
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 10:33 AM
Subject: Re: 'plug & chug' problems


> Hi,
>         I know this may sound strange, but I think one
> big reason that students should take physics ( and
> why many college degree programs require it) is so
> that those students have at least some problem
> solving and some operational algebra skills.  Do I
> care if my doctor understands Maxwell's equations
> or even Gauss's law?  NO.  Do I care if he can do
> a proportionality to determine a dosage?  YES.
>
>         It is not clear to me that our job in teaching
> physics is to teach our beloved "PHYSICS" ( Bold
> Script Italics, flash neon colors suppressed) .
> Certainly, at the college level, we should look at
> the consumers needs.  By consumers, I do not mean
> just the students, but more importantly, the
> programs, like that engineering, that require
> physics, the industries that will employ the
> students.  One important question is what real
> world skills can teach, while also teaching our
> beloved physics.  Very little of the physics that
> we teach is actually needed in the real world.
>
>         I was tempted to say that physics instruction
> needs at some level to be utilitarian, unlike
> philosophy instruction,  BUT in a well taught
> philosophy class critical reading and thinking and
> logic writing are taught.
>
> Thanks
> Roger Haar