If you reply to this long (14 kB) post please don't pull a uretsky
and hit the reply button without pruning the copy of the post that
appears in your reply down to a few relevant lines. A uretsky will
result in needlessly (a) resending this already archived post to all
subscribers, (b) befouling the archive record. .
Jack Uretsky (2006) in his Phys-L post of 3 Jun 2006 titled "Re:
active learning needs a theory," wrote [bracketed by lines "UUUUUUU.
. . . .""; my insert at ". ". . .[.....] . . ."]:
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
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" . . .
[as did John Clement (2006)]. . . is, in my opinion, pure (well,
almost pure) hokum.
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
Some questions:
1. Why does Jack think that ascribing the number 6000 to my survey is
"hype"? It indicates immediately that the total number of students
surveyed was relatively large, just as was the number of courses 62.
2. What does Jack mean by "unaccounted-for correlations among [the
6000 students]"? It sounds sinister, but without explication it's
completely meaningless.
3. What justifies Jack's bold statement that the veracity of
self-reported data cannot be independently verified? Most of the data
in Physical Review (PR) is self reported by research scientists who,
on average, are probably less veracious than teachers. But their PR
data is independently verified by the eventual building of a
consistent community map [Hake (2000), Redish (1999), Ziman (2000)].
Paraphrasing an opening that I employed in my response [Hake (2006)]
to the [quoting Tarara's (2006b) latest purile blast at me]
"arrogant, egocentric, and downright nasty" Rick Tarara's (2006a)
shallow Phys-L post of 2 June 2006:
"Uretsky thus continues shoveling out his naive opinions on physics
education research generally and my articles [Hake (1998a,b)] in
particular."
Examples of previous naive opinions from Uretsky are e.g., "Re:
Should Randomized Control Trials Be the Gold Standard of Educational
Research?" [Uretsky (2005a)], countered by Hake (2005a); and "Re:
Piaget & Dewey: Down for the Count? - FORWARD from Kieran Egan"
[Uretsky (2005b)], countered by Hake (2005b,c).
As with Tarara (2006), Uretsky's posts (2005a,b; 2006) seem to betray
a severe reading disability.
Surely Uretsky cannot have read and understood the abstract of Hake (1998a):
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
A survey of pre/post test data using the Halloun-Hestenes Mechanics
Diagnostic test or more recent Force Concept Inventory is reported
for 62 introductory physics courses enrolling a total number of
students N = 6542. A consistent analysis over diverse student
populations in high schools, colleges, and universities is obtained
if a rough measure of the average effectiveness of a course in
promoting conceptual understanding is taken to be the average
normalized gain <g>. The latter is defined as the ratio of the actual
average gain (%<post> - %<pre>) to the maximum possible average gain
(100 - %<pre>). Fourteen "traditional" (T) courses (N = 2084) which
made little or no use of interactive-engagement (IE) methods achieved
an average gain <g>T-ave = 0.23 ± 0.04 (std dev). In sharp contrast,
forty-eight courses (N = 4458) which made substantial use of IE
methods achieved an average gain <g>IE-ave = 0.48 ± 0.14 (std dev),
almost two standard deviations of <g>IE-ave above that of the
traditional courses. Results for 30 (N = 3259) of the above 62
courses on the problem-solving Mechanics Baseline test of
Hestenes-Wells imply that IE strategies enhance problem-solving
ability. The conceptual and problem-solving test results strongly
suggest that the classroom use of IE methods can increase
mechanics-course effectiveness well beyond that obtained in
traditional practice.
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Nor does Uretsky seem to have comprehended Section II, "Survey Method
And Objective" of Hake (1998a):
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Starting in 1992, I requested that pre/post FCI test data and
posttest MB data be sent to me in talks at numerous colloquia and
meetings and in e-mail postings on the PHYS-L and PhysLrnR nets. This
mode of data solicitation tends to pre-select results which are
biased in favor of outstanding courses which show relatively high
gains on the FCI. . . . . As in any scientific investigation, bias in
the detector can be put to good advantage if appropriate research
objectives are established. We do NOT attempt to access the AVERAGE
effectiveness of introductory mechanics courses. Instead we seek to
answer a question of considerable practical interest to physics
teachers: "CAN THE CLASSROOM USE OF IE METHODS INCREASE THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF INTRODUCTORY MECHANICS COURSES WELL BEYOND THAT
ATTAINED BY TRADITIONAL METHODS?
HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
Of course, one isolated survey may be suspect, but when the nearly
two-standard deviation superiority in normalized gains of IE over T
courses is independently confirmed by many other physics education
research groups [for references see Hake (2002a,b; 2005d)], Doubter's
Club members such as Uretsky and Tarara should (but doubtless will
not) reconsider their positions.
It's unfortunate that Nobelist Carl Wieman [see Wieman & Perkins
(2005)] doesn't have the profound insight of Tarara and Uretsky that
would have allowed him to see through the fake evidence provided by
the hyped-up Hake (1998a).
"An important scientific innovation. . .[IMO, "unorthodox idea" could
be substituted for "scientific innovation] . . . rarely makes its way
by gradually winning over and converting its opponents: it rarely
happens that Saul becomes Paul. What does happen is that its
opponents gradually die out and that the growing generation is
familiarized with the idea from the beginning: another instance of
the fact that the future lies with the young."
-- Max Planck, The Philosophy of Physics [1936]
Hake, R.R. 2002a. "Lessons from the physics education reform effort,"
Ecology and Society 5(2): 28; online at
<http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol5/iss2/art28/>. Ecology and Society
(formerly Conservation Ecology) is a free online "peer-reviewed
journal of integrative science and fundamental policy research" with
about 11,000 subscribers in about 108 countries.