Re: [Phys-l] teaching physics conceptually

[William Robertson <wrobert9@ix.netcom.com>]

I'm glad I'm not the only person with that impression of Hewitt. I  
only used it once, but found that his "conceptual" explanations really  
didn't foster understanding. Rather, they encouraged the student to  
memorize the "conceptual" answer. In later versions since I used the  
book it might have changed its approach to math, but I found that he  
avoided even the simplest math in some cases, math that would have  
made the conceptual image clear. Instead, he went around the math and  
came up with his non-mathematical explanation that gave students the  
impression they should be able to do the same thing. Students became  
frustrated that they couldn't just "look at a situation" and figure  
out what was going on.

Bill



On Feb 12, 2011, at 4:01 PM, John Denker wrote:

> I know Hewitt's book is called "Conceptual" ... but that does not
> make it so.  It rarely calls for more than rote regurgitation.