...that's exactly the point of the question. You can memorize a good-sounding answer to the question "what causes the phases of the moon?" Even after studying the process and memorizing a shiny answer, most folks are still clueless but think that they understand it. If you don't _really_ understand what causes them, then you can't make the prediction in the new situation. That can (depending on which type of assessment you're doing) alert the student that he/she didn't actually understand so well or allow you to separate those that do and don't understand robustly.
jg
--
Joshua Gates
Physics Faculty
Tatnall School (Wilmington DE)
JHU Center for Talented Youth
_____
From: John Clement [mailto:clement@hal-pc.org]
To: Phys-L@Phys-L.org
Sent: Thu, 10 May 2012 23:51:06 -0400
Subject: Re: [Phys-L] conceptual physics
Actually the big question is what causes the phases of the moon. If you
look at the video "A Private Universe" you find that most people don't have
the foggiest idea, or rather they have very poor models. It is availabe for
viewing on the web if you search for it. I would say that conceptual
physics is designed to build good mental models of physical processes and
build the ability to reason throught to good conclusions given what you
already know.
Alas most conventional physics courses do not even do this, and the usual
approach to conceptual physics doesn't often work any better. The cubic
moon is a good question after the students have the correct mental model.
John M. Clement
Houston, TX
>
> I like the counterfactual analysis questions - "what would
> the moon's phases look like if it were a cube instead of a
> ball?", etc. The memorized observation doesn't help, but
> having a robust mental model of the process does. The most
> difficult part here is coming up with a large enough number
> of these types of questions to get them used to thinking like
> this, and have enough for formative assessments, and have
> enough for summative assessments, and have enough for
> reassessments, etc.
>