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]

Re: physics enrollments



ALAN VAN HEUVELEN'S COLLOQUIUM AT ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY (ASU) (on 3/19/96)

Since Pang-Chieh Chou mentioned Alan Van Heuvelen's ALPS kits and Overview
Case Studies as examples of good teaching materials at the introductory
college level, here are some notes on Alan's recent colloquium at ASU. Alan
also told how he got most of the faculty who teach the calculus based
introductory course to start using his methods. Hope this helps, Brad Shue!


The purpose of this colloquium was to FIND OUT HOW STUDENTS LEARN SO
EFFECTIVELY WHEN ALAN VAN HEUVELEN'S METHODS ARE USED. I tape recorded the
colloquium and
transcribed this summary, then sent it to Alan for his approval.
(I've used his ALPS kits at SCC and like them very much. They are
easy to implement.)

Cheers,
Jane Jackson


I. Background and summary (by David Hestenes)
..
* Before Alan Van Heuvelen went to Ohio State University
(about 3 years ago), students in the Ohio State Univ.
calculus-based physics course did WORSE than ASU on the Force
Concept Inventory (FCI) and Mechanics Baseline Test (MBT), i.e.,
they scored less than 60% posttest. NOW THEY ARE
LEARNING MUCH BETTER: scoring at 70% on the FCI and
scoring slightly better than Harvard students on the MBT.
Furthermore, THE RETENTION RATE HAS IMPROVED
DRASTICALLY: 95% in the first quarter; and THE CLASS
ATTENDANCE IS MUCH HIGHER NOW. (Three professors are
using the methods discussed here, in 4 large sections with 500
students. The FCI and MBT scores are averages from all sections.)

* Alan and David Hestenes did a pedagogical experiment
during Alan's sabbatical at ASU in 1989 and 1990. Alan taught
PHY 105, a precursor course to the calculus based course, intended
for poorly prepared students. When PHY 105 was taught by
traditional instruction, PHY 105 was found to have no effect on the
learning of students who later took the calculus-based course. But
when Alan taught PHY 105, his students did better on the FCI than
students who were taking the calculus based course that year, and
their grade when they later took the calculus-based course was 1/2
of a letter grade higher than students in that course who had come
from the traditionally taught PHY 105.

* (A personal note: Alan is a modest person, quick to point out
that he's not a dynamic lecturer, and readily pointing to the
achievements of others in inspiring his work. He has decades of
experience in teaching physics at the college introductory level.
Recently he published the ALPS kits, active learning problem
sheets for a complete year of calculus level physics; and
Experiment Problems - Mechanics. These are available from
Hayden-McNeil Publishing, Inc.; they are inexpensive.
313-729-5550 for desk copy.)

II. An overview of Alan's calculus based physics course.

* His model of teaching (from Fred Reif): we start with an
initial knowledge state of students, apply an educational
transformer operator, and end up with a final student knowledge
state (in analogy to a quantum mechanical operation).
Unfortunately, in traditional instruction the educational transformer
is the identity operator! Studies, including his own, show that the
number of Newtonian thinkers after one semester of instruction in
the calculus-based physics course changes from about only 20 to
fewer than 30 (23 in the study reported by Alan)! This is an
invitation to experiment with the learning system, for one can't do
much worse!

* What is the desired final state of the student? A recent survey
of 800 former physics majors revealed that the most important
skills needed in the workplace are
-- complex problem solving (keep in mind that scientists solve
problems qualitatively first), and
-- interpersonal skills (working cooperatively as a group, etc.
By the way, 54 high quality studies show that students learn better
in cooperative groups than in a competitive environment.)

* Alan has soft data collected since the early '80's which show
that the less he lectures, the better his students do! Also, Richard
Hake, of Indiana University has data from 5500 students, showing
that active involvement works well (when it is structured).

III. How does Alan build this learning system?

* First, students construct and develop conceptual models
qualitatively.
-- They represent processes qualitatively, using motion
diagrams, bar charts, etc.
-- From these representations, they can invent conceptual
models.
-- Advantage: if they do this before they are introduced to the
math, they can make better sense of the world (because they rely
too much on equations, otherwise).
-- These activities can be done in challenging ways.

* Second, students are taught to read and write equations, i.e.,
to use the symbolic language of physics. They continually link the
symbolic language back to the qualitative representations so that
the symbols in the equations make sense.

* Finally, students solve complex problems. They use concepts
in integrated ways; they break a problem into small pieces and
solve the pieces, then put the pieces together.

IV. What is Alan's instructional strategy, in detail?
(Background info:
-- In all phases of the learning, students are active participants.
Having interactive questions and problems makes the lecture much
more fun, and they learn much more.
-- The weekly course structure is 3 lecture periods, 2
recitation periods, and 1 lab.
-- Students have a manual (the ALPS kit) of worksheets
which they bring to all classes, recitations and labs.)

A. To make qualitative representations:
He teaches about 200 students in a large lecture room. He
poses a qualitative problem on an overhead (and/or begins an
Interactive Physics simulation), then walks around the room as
students solve it individually. Then he asks them to check with 2
neighbors and resolve discrepancies.
(Sometimes he has students vote with Classtalk (TM).) Then he
explains the answer and/or shows the correct way to do it using the
simulation. Then he poses another problem. (Students ask many
questions.)

B. To build a symbolic language, i.e., to read and write in math
language:
-- Students make multiple representations (e.g., motion maps,
force diagrams) of a process, which eventually lead to a symbolic
representation of the process.
-- He gives them a representation (e.g., a particular force
diagram) and asks them to interpret it; to tell the story that it
represents.
--The idea is that students are learning to interpret this
symbolic language and relate it back to the qualitative
representations that they've worked with earlier, to give it meaning.

C. To solve complex problems:
--Students have a manual with a large collection of problems.
They bring this to all classes and solve in groups.
-- Some are experiment problems, which they solve in lecture
and in lab. Students are asked to plan a solution ahead of time.
Often they must divide the problem into parts. Sometimes the
problem is poorly defined: students mustt decide what they need to
measure in order to complete the prediction, and whether
approximations are justified, etc. They practice accessing
knowledge from some sort of a knowledge structure such as a
hierarchical chart.(He has 30 experiment problems on mechanics.)
-- They also do many complex problems in recitation sections;
each problem takes up the entire recitation period.

-- The recitations consist entirely of group problem-solving; 3
to 4 students in a group. Each group gets a grade. Half of the time
is spent developing conceptual models and the other half doing
complex problems. 20% of the midterm is a group problem, for
which a group grade is given. The TA's meet for 2 hours each
week, and the professors go through the problem and point out
student questions and preconceptions.
-- Half of the labs are devoted to simple experiments where
students develop conceptual models, and half are complex
experiment problems.

V. How did Ohio State University implement this instructional
strategy department-wide?
--8 professors, 5 graduate students, and some former students
worked together for a year in 1993-4 developing the system. They
chose a minimal content for each course that everyone agreed to
include; it takes 70% of the quarter. Most professors prefer to do
that reduced content in more depth.

VI. Alan's Interactive Physics simulations and other simulations
will be available on CD-ROM in August 1996 (first half) and early
in 1997 (second half) through Addison Wesley Interactive. Alan
says that his INTERACTIVE PHYSICS SIMULATIONS HAVE LED TO A BIG
IMPROVEMENT in student understanding! (They provide immediate feedback.)

Jane Jackson (Prof. of Physics, Scottsdale Comm. College--on leave)
Dept.of Physics, Box 871504, Arizona State Univ.,Tempe AZ 85287-1504.
jane.jackson@asu.edu (602)965-8438 FAX:965-7331
Modeling Workshop Project: http://modeling.la.asu.edu/modeling.html