Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

[Phys-l] SET's Are Not Valid Gauges of Students' Higher-Level Learning #2



Some subscribers to Phys-L might be interested in discussion-list post "SET's Are Not Valid Gauges of Students' Higher-Level Learning #2" [Hake (2011)].

The abstract reads:

****************************************
ABSTRACT: In response to "Changing the Culture of Science Education at Research Universities #3" [Hake (2011a) <http://bit.ly/gSNTGi>], problem-based-learning pioneer <http://bit.ly/etekAw> Don Woods (2011a) wrote at <http://bit.ly/h1VrME> [my CAPS; my insert at ". . . . .[[insert]]. . . . .]:

". . . . there are at least 20 valid forms of evidence that can be used for measuring teaching 'productivity.' These include . . . . . well-designed COURSE EVALUATIONS. . . . .[[I shall assume (please correct me if I'm wrong) that Woods uses 'course evaluations' as shorthand for 'Student Evaluations of Teaching (SET's]]. . . . . , exams and assignments, . . . . . More details are given in my forthcoming book 'Motivating and Rewarding University Teachers to Improve Student Learning: A Guide for Faculty and Administrators'. . . . . .[[Woods, 2011b)]]. . . . ."

In "Culture of Science Education - Response to Woods" [Hake (2011b) <http://bit.ly/fetCy6>] I wrote (paraphrasing):

"I disagree that SET's are a valid method of measuring 'teaching productivity' IF 'teaching productivity' means 'student learning' - see e.g., 'Re: Problems with Student Evaluations: Is Assessment the Remedy?' [Hake (2002a)], 'SET's Are Not Valid Gauges of Teaching Performance #4' [Hake (2006e)], and 'Effectiveness of Student Evaluations' [PhysLrnR (2011)]."

In the present post I give 8 EXHIBITS suggesting that "SET's ARE NOT VALID GAUGES OF STUDENTS' HIGHER-LEVEL LEARNING": (1) Halloun & Hestenes (1985a); (2) Crouch & Mazur (2001); (3) Eric Mazur (1997, 2009); (4) John Belcher (2003); (5) Richard Hake (2006f); (6) Richard Hake (2011c); (7) Russ Hunt (2011); and (8) David Gavrin (2003).
****************************************

To access the complete 76 kB post please click on <http://bit.ly/jLZaz5>.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which Recognize the
Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
<rrhake@earthlink.net>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi>
<http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com>
<http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake>

"Physics educators have led the way in developing and using objective tests to compare student learning gains in different types of courses, and chemists, biologists, and others are now developing similar instruments. These tests provide convincing evidence that students assimilate new knowledge more effectively in courses including active, inquiry-based, and collaborative learning, assisted by information technology, than in traditional courses."
Wood & Gentile (2003)
REFERENCES [URL's shortened by <http://bit.ly/> and accessed on 17 May 2011.]

Hake, R.R. 2011. "SET's Are Not Valid Gauges of Students' Higher-Level Learning #2," online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at <http://bit.ly/jLZaz5>. Post of 17 May 2011 09:47:36-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post are also being distributed to various discussion lists and are also on my blog "Hake'sEdStuff" at <http://bit.ly/ixcQxs>.

Wood, W.B., & J.M. Gentile. 2003. "Teaching in a research context," Science 302: 1510; 28 November; online to subscribers at <http://bit.ly/9izfFz>. A summary is online to all at <http://bit.ly/9qGR6m>.