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]

Re: [Phys-l] Unit Conversions (was Mass and Energy)




-----Original Message-----
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
[mailto:phys-l->bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of Michael
Edmiston
Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2006 7:33 PM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] Unit Conversions (was Mass and Energy)

<snip>

In the story I told, the student refused to answer my questions. He
short-circuited the process I was trying to use and kept asking for a
simple answer for how to fix his

<snip>

Okay, here come the assumptions. I think it is clear he did not want to
understand it better, at least not at that time. Since refused to take
the time to work it through with me and he kept asking for the simple
answer, I take that as a pretty good indication he did not want to work
it through, at least not at that time. I assume he wanted to get the
lab report done, hand it in, and go on to something else he would rather
do.

There have been a lot of insightful things stated in this thread, and a lot
of different viewpoints expressed. Not knowing enough to keep my head down
either <g>, I'm willing to chime in with my observations and opinions.

The issue of calculators has been raised. In my experience, they have not
proven to be beneficial to students. Dinosaur that I am, I, too, would
welcome a return to the slide rule.

Rick's post regarding John's posts sent the thread off in a new direction:
Are current students unable to learn as WE learned? In response, the issue
of point of view has raised. We DO need to accept that we all aren't
talking about the same kids. A college professor of physics does not see an
average college student. S/he sees the best of MY hs physics students, who,
in turn, are not average students in my district. My district is probably
90% Irish and Italian American, so they cannot be considered "average"
either. I get about 20% of my school's population in physics, so the
students I have that go on to college level physics represent maybe 5-8% of
the school's population, and if we were talking about the general
population, that figure would drop down to maybe 3-6%. Rick's philosophical
disagreement with John's posts was, correctly I believe, laid at the
doorstep of this difference in student population.

Then, various posters hit on the issues of personal responsibility (or lack
thereof), motivation (ditto), teacher expectations, etc. I think we can
agree that not all students think analytically. I confess that at times I
don't recognize what some of them are doing as "thinking" as I understand
the term <g>! In fact, as someone posted earlier, all of us here have to
remind ourselves that we cannot use ourselves as a benchmark for students in
general.

In my experience, by the time they reach high school, most students lack any
significant interest in "learning" for its own sake. Their motivation, such
as it is, is based upon "getting through". A few are intellectually
curious, a few curious about topics that come up in physics, but most seem
to fall in the category of a chain gang breaking rocks in the sun... I need
to break up THIS rock, then move on to THAT rock. If I take it slowly, I
can maybe get by with breaking ten rocks, so I see no reason to break
fifteen. Either way, I get to move on to bigger and better rocks, and for
the ones with the most imagination, tenacity, etc there is, W-A-A-A-Y out
there, a land of milk and honey where one can live a "good life" if only one
breaks enough rocks. We may rebel at that imagery, but I think it puts
things in perspective.

OUR job as teachers is to try to get them interested in the individual rocks
- See that pattern in the grain? Oh, look, that next rock has a different
pattern! I wonder what that means? When we worked on the rock last Monday,
hitting it just so made it crack more easily; can we use that information to
help us with this next rock? Oh wow, if you hit the rock hard enough, it
breaks into lots of pieces! Who can make the most pieces with one hit?

Most kids don't care to learn how to break rocks more efficiently because
there are just going to be more rocks, but they will more or less willingly
plod along at a moderate pace. Some kids will even take it as a challenge
to break as many rocks as they can as quickly as they can. Some kids will
figure out how to be good at breaking rocks (honors students <g>). There
will be some who, amazingly enough, will LIKE breaking rocks! But an awful
lot of them are just going to sit down and refuse to swing the hammer.

That, Rick, is the reason for the stuff that John posts. They are methods
of producing engagement by the student in the task of learning (getting them
to pick up the hammer and swing it a little). Some kids do not need the
teacher to do anything because THEY will take the steps that are necessary
by themselves (most of us here). YOU get the kids who were willing to break
rocks quite well. Those of us who teach prior to the college level,
however, are supposed to get EVERY kid to break rocks. It may also be true
that, in trying to get every kid to swing the hammer, we actually slow some
of the kids down.

On a personal note, I'm not sure how a small child's desire to learn to
read, or observe bugs, or wonder at the stars, morphs into breaking rocks in
the sun, but I sure wish I knew the answer.