Re: [Phys-l] active learning needs a theory

[Jack Uretsky <jlu@hep.anl.gov>]

Hi all-
	As I pointed out to Hake many ages ago (in less strident terms), 
ascribing the number 6000 to his "survey" is hype.  He gets this number by 
adding up the students in each class that reported.  So although the total 
number of students was around 6000, there are unaccounted-for correlations 
among them.  Also, the data was collected by self reporting by teachers; 
the veracity of such data cannot be independently verified.  To call this 
"overwhelming evidence: is, in my opinion, pure (well, almost pure) hokum.
					Regards,
						Jack


On Fri, 2 Jun 2006, John Clement wrote:

> Unfortunately a theory will not promote it.  We have huge amounts of data
> that show that it gives better results.  Hake's 6000 student survey is
> overwhelming evidence in support of it, and yet this evidence is ignored.
> To make it work, teachers have to be trained in it.  This means they have to
> practice it.  Being told about it does little to change behavior.  Even
> knowing that it works better of that the conventional lectures has very low
> educational value still does not change behavior.
>
> But just active is not adequate for physics and the other sciences.  Because
> of the prevalence of misconceptions and miscommunication the learning has to
> be properly sequenced and the activity has to be monitored.  There are other
> terms such as "guided inquiry" which also apply.
>
> At present teachers are taught theory of education, and it ends up being
> very vaporous.  They have no understanding of how to apply it.  This is sort
> of like teaching mechanical engineers NTNs laws, but never having them
> analyze trusses.
>
> I think the best term is one that implies that all elements are preset, so I
> prefer "research based" education.  The term active is usually used to
> describe activity based education which does not rely heavily on lectures.
> So there is the Activity Based curricula, or the Workshop curricula...  Now
> the term self regulation goes back to Piaget's ideas that organisms self
> regulate.  But this does not bring in the idea the mediation (Feuerstein) is
> necessary.  This is where the teacher fits in.  And finally there is the
> education of the mediator, which is where the research results fit in.
>
> There is really no one term which adequately describes all of the desirable
> elements of excellent education.
>
> John M. Clement
> Houston, TX
>
>
> > In order to have more "active learning" in and out of classroom, both
> > teachers and students need to know more about its theoretical basis. Even
> > the term "active learning" is a little bit problematic. Every learning,
> > even bad one, implies some kind of activity on the side of the learner.
> >
> > It seems to me that a good place to start is to look at "self-regulated
> > learning" and what its main advocates, like Barry Zimmerman and Paul
> > Pinthrich, said about it.
> >
> > Hoping this can help, I send my best wishes
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l

--
"Trust me.  I have a lot of experience at this."
		General Custer's unremembered message to his men,
		just before leading them into the Little Big Horn Valley