Re: [Phys-l] Physics job opening in Texas (2d response to Clement)

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

On Mon, 12 May 2008, Jack Uretsky wrote:
1.	Further, there is nothing in my posting that can properly be 
categorized as an "appeal to authority".  That is a plain misreading of 
what I wrote.
2.  One of the problems with many so-called "traditional" teachers is that 
they do not appreciate the imprtance of, or do not have the talent for, 
showmanship as part of lecturing.  That was certainly clear in an e-mail 
exchange some time ago with, as I recall, one of those you name in your 
posting.  Teaching, I think we can agree, is the art of inspiring students 
to learn.  There is a long history, going back at least to ancient Greece, 
of the use of speech to inspire action in people.  That history may not be 
irrelevant to the topic of our dicussion

 3.  One problem with this dialogue is that it purports to apply to all 
teaching in all circumstances.  Research, if it is to be worthy of the 
name, must define the limits of its applicability.
					Regards,
						Jack
> On Mon, 12 May 2008, John Clement wrote:
>
> > Feynman saw the problem, but never the solution.  He admitted that students
> > were not learning well.  His paradigm was to improve the lectures, which did
> > not work.  Redish also tried it, and failed, but then found that some PER
> > remedies did the trick.  His research has been published.
> >
> > The lifeblood of PER is RESEARCH, the same thing that fuels physics.  The
> > religion metaphor is totally inappropriate, it is the last refuge of people
> > who can not bring up evidence to bolster their views.  Everyone has things
> > that they believe, but PER is based on evidence and research.  So one can be
> > convinced or can believe that PER works better based on the evidence.
> >
> > I have taught students who have gone through traditional courses, and they
> > still come in with very low understanding.  There are many ways to teach
> > more effectively, but the traditional method is NOT one of them.  I have
> > never seen any evidence that the traditional method can achieve the same
> > gain as PER based methods.  Perhaps someone can provide evidence from a
> > traditional course that achieves high gain?????
> >
> > Citing authority is very faith based, or perhaps one can treat them as
> > celebrity endorsements, sort of like cigarette ads.  So please bring up
> > evidence and not received enlightenment from past "authorities".
> >
> > John M. Clement
> > Houston, TX
> >
> > > > The big problem is that they have paradigms that may prevent them from
> > > > becoming better.
> > >  		Every Ph D has such a paradigm?  Maybe there are a couple
> > >  	who sneak off on the side and get washed in the blood of the PER
> > >  	lamb?
> > >
> > >    But traditional HS teachers also have paradigms that
> > > > prevent them from becoming better.  Traditionally trained teachers tend
> > > to
> > > > use traditional methods no matter the level of education.
> > >
> > >  		And traditional methods are per se wrong?  Sommerfeld,
> > > Pauli, and Feynman never saw the light of PER?  There is only 1
> > > effective way to teach?  How could anyone possibly know this?  It sounds
> > > to me like faith-based educational theory.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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