Re: [Phys-l] laptops banned from class.

["John Clement" <clement@hal-pc.org>]

> > If you want to grade something, have them make a concept map, and grade
> > that.
>
> what is a "concept map", and are there good examples of it?  I have never
> come across
> this, so I would need some hand-holding when trying to consider including
> it in my
> teaching.

I think a previous post has answered this in part.

> > are studio courses such as Workshop Physics.
>
> a studio course?  I will try looking up Workshop Physics to get a better
> idea of this.

For an overview of Workshop Physics from the point of view of evaluation
see:
Saul, J. M. and Redish, E., Evaluation of the Workshop Physics Dissemination
Project: Final Evaluation Report for FIPSE Grant #P116P50026 (1998). Online
at 
http://www.physics.ucf.edu/%7Esaul/articles/index.html

A real studio course incorporates the learning cycle specifically tailored
to the problems of learning the subject.  RPI had a course which
superficially resembled a studio course, but lacked the active learning
strategies.  By making some changes they were able to improve the course
quite a bit.

> learning cycle approach?  again, are there good starting points for those
> of us who
> have only experience with lecture style?

The learning cycle can be used in a lecture, lab, or in a piece of text.
Lawson showed a large gain in understanding can be achieved by rearranging
the order of the text to be a learning cycle.  Essentially it consists of 3
phases.  1. Exploration 2. Concept development. 3. Application.  Lectures
can be used as concrete preparation for exploration, but students are not
given the theory or the answers at that stage.  Concept development is where
one can talk about the results. Robert Karplus is often credited with the
invention of the learning cycle approach.  Anton Lawson has continued to do
research involving it, and has shown large gain on Piagetian tests in a
biology course.  As far as I know nobody has evaluated a learning cycle
lecture vs a learning cycle lab, but because exploration requires active
involvement, it is not clear that it can be as effective in a lecture
format.  Part of the problem of a learning cycle text is that students will
tend to skip the exploration part and cut to the equations.  In the
evaluation of a learning cycle text students were given a single sheet to
read in class, and then were immediately tested for comprehension.  This
plus the fact that there were no equations (it was biology) forced them to
experience the two approaches.  As I recall the increase in comprehension
was over 20% for the learning cycle text, so it was substantial as well as
being statistically significant.

> I've tried to incorporate some peer-teaching, which has seemed to work
> well, but it
> is a bit difficult to measure the effectiveness.  where is a good place to
> start to
> learn some more effective means of teaching?
>
> It also seems as if there are hurdles to get over during the transition
> from lecture
> to a more active teaching style.  are there good resources for advice to
> deal with
> these issues?

The easiest way to transition is by first going to active lectures using
"Peer Instruction" by Eric Mazur.  Also it is easy at this stage to
incorporate "Interactive Lecture Demonstrations" by Thornton & Sokoloff.
This is cheap and is actually the way I started to change.  Some
institutions make a studio course impossible, so that is where some
instructors stop.  To measure effectiveness the previous reference to WP
contains evaluations.

> From what I have seen of various research projects, students will probably
do much better if they experience a learning cycle approach each year.  When
an active approach is introduced there is the problem of resistance.  Once
that is overcome the approach will begin to pay larger benefits.  So a
second year of active learning should pay much larger benefits than the
first one did.  However a return to the traditional approach may actually
depress some of the initial gains.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX