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] |
Wow! there isn't a Wikipedia entry on 'gain' in this context
yet. Can anyone provide a reasonably reputable reference so
that we can ensure we are on the same page? That said, the
electronics definition of gain is reasonable: "a measure of
the increase in signal amplitude produced by an amplifier,
expressed as the ratio of output to input."
So my current definition of academic gain is: "a measure of
the increase in student knowledge obtained in a measured
learning environment, such as an academic course, expressed
as the ratio of output to input."
Electronic gain is frequency dependent, and academic gain can
be measured for every student. However, since students
control their destiny, it is more appropriate to talk about
the collective gain of the entire cohort of students.
I am currently contemplating how to *measure* academic gain
objectively. Pre & post-testing is in vogue, but the pre-test
is different than the post-test. The latter being
significantly more challenging than the pre-test. Maybe a few
questions from the pre-test on the post-test? Your thoughts?
The surrounding neighborhoods are filled with thesebusinesses, many of which move to larger quarters or are
bought out by larger companies for the patents they acquire.
Many professors start their own business when they retire or
during their tenure or consult for others. They can pull in
the most promising students to work for them. Other
universities have the same type of things going on. I am
just a bit more familiar with this particular one.
is anothers mediocrity. I am very proud of a student who
I'm very leery of this word... "gain". One person's gain
might struggle with a D for the first two quarters and then
progress to a C+ for the final grade. Is his gain less than
the student who started with a "B" and ended up the top
student? I would say the first student gained more even
though the grades may not show it.
Suppose the best student lazed his way through the firsthalf of the year with low B's then started working and got
the A which comes naturally for him. Contrast with the first
student I described above with D's and then worked his butt
off to get a high C. There are a lot of intangibles that
tests cannot consider, but in real life we cannot use them to
"measure" gain.
didn't need no stinkin' degree -- why do you? But consider
On Jun 21, 2013, at 5:12 PM, Philip Keller wrote:
BC said:
Plenty of successful start ups from drop outs, also.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The media glamorizes the successful drop-outs. Steve Jobs
the odds. What % of MIT grads develop successful businesses
(and not just "start-ups", a phrase which seems to give
credit for winning just by starting the race)? And what % of
drop-outs do the same? And how many orders of magnitude
separate those two figures?
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l