Re: [Phys-l] Physics First Revisited

["Anthony Lapinski" <Anthony_Lapinski@pds.org>]

I agree. I will argue that physics is really the only course that
(potentially) makes you think because many of the everyday ideas/concepts
are counterintuitive. I have revamped my courses with peer instruction.
This took countless hours of preparation on my own personal time. With
this technique students preconceptions about the world are immediately
challenged, and they find physics difficult. During a peer instruction
session, one student said, "You are breaking me!" It's so true.

So I can see why both teachers and students resist this sort of new
pedagogy. But there is really no better way for students to truly
appreciate/understand the universe. And that should be our goal -- to make
the general public more scientifically literate. Students generally can do
well with math problems, but the concepts are a whole other story. In my
view, how you think is more important than what you know. The ultimate
benefit is that students taking a physics course with good critical
thinking activities can solve problems they've never seen before. These
skills are useful well beyond their college years...

Forum for Physics Educators <phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu> writes:
> But from the research it is quite clear that most science and math courses
> are not "teaching" critical thinking.  This includes physics.  The
> evidence
> is that scores on the Lawson Test of Scientific Reasoning do not go up as
> the result of a conventional science or math course.  But the evidence
> that
> scores do go up after a course based on the learning cycle.  This evidence
> has been around for a looooong time.  Look at the old papers by Renner,
> Lawson, Karplus...
>
> Actually in England the evidence is that the scores have gone down over
> the
> past 30 years.  This was published by Michael Shayer fairly recently.  He
> originated the paper an pencil Piagetian test which formed the basis for
> the
> Lawson test.
>
> So it is sad that they are neither coming in with the thinking skills nor
> are they developing them during conventional science and math courses.
>
> So rather than physics first, why not good interactive engagement
> "science"
> first.  This would raise the thinking level.  But also this needs to be
> applied to math.  At the recent joint math conference there was some good
> evidence presented that an IE course dramatically improves understanding
> of
> calculus.  So maybe the best would be THINKING FIRST!
>
> John M. Clement
> Houston, TX
>
>
> > > I try to cover less material
> > > and teach kids more how to think (conceptual questions, peer
> > instruction,
> > > etc.).
> >
> > In my mind, this is actually a symptom of our educational problems.
> > Science
> > (Physics) should be where students are exercising their thinking skills
> > rather than learning them for the first time.  That a college physics
> > course
> > often takes on the primary curricular responsibility for introducing
> > critical thinking skills is the sad commentary.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l