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: Formal explanations vs. pathways of understanding (was: momentum before force




In passing one also cannot chalk up success in teaching up to enthusiasm
either. There is ample data from things like the FCI to demonstrate that
at least one other 'variable' is significant. Hake will have a paper in
AJP shortly which illustrates this with data from 8000 or more students.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dewey I. Dykstra, Jr. Phone: (208)385-3105

I don't know what other variable you might be alluding to, but when one
suggests enthusiasm as a most significant variable, I assume the
enthusiasm is knowledge based in as wide a sense as possible. The more a
teacher can relate various concepts to examples, the better the message
is conveyed. From my experience, an expertise of the subject, a deep
love in conveying this information, and the involvement of the students
in working with the concepts in lab spell success.


----------
Tom K. McCarthy, PhD Email:mcca6300@spacelink.msfc.nasa.gov

Tom:
Look at Hestenes' first article on what was to become the FCI in AJP about
1987 or so and then at the FCI article in TPT in about 93 or 94, then when
it comes out at Hake's article in AJP. (You might be able to get a copy of
Hake's article in advance if you contact him.) While none (well maybe,
few) would argue against "enthusiasm" and "deep love" for the subject on
the part of teachers, there are some who are looking in a much more
detailed and more principled way at the nature of teaching and learning.
The thread of investigations surrounding the FCI are but one of these
efforts. Another significant set of data has been collected in the Tools
for Scientific Thinking and Real-Time Physics Projects. Ron Thornton at
Tufts would be a person to contact on this set of data. I understand an
AJP article is in the works on this data.

I think that one could reasonably say that there is evidence that
"enthusiasm" and "deep love" for the subject on the part of teachers is not
in fact sufficient to "spell success." This evidence comes from the two
sources of data mentioned above and others, as well.

One variable which I know that Hake would say the data supports and, in
some way or another, others would say that the rest of the data supports is
engagement or interaction of the students over their ideas and the
phenomena. It appears that "enthusiasm" and "deep love" for the subject by
a teacher can lead the teacher to have the students spending all their time
waiting while the instructor and textbook present 'explanations', watching
demonstrations and 'doing' labs which again are supposed to contain
self-evident truth of the explanations while never engaging students in
actually making sense of any of it. Even the first Hestenes data
illustrates that quality of the instructor as marked by traditional opinion
does not make the requisite difference in results. In fact it can make no
difference at all, as appears to be the case even in that early data.

Dewey

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dewey I. Dykstra, Jr. Phone: (208)385-3105
Professor of Physics Dept: (208)385-3775
Department of Physics/SN318 Fax: (208)385-4330
Boise State University dykstrad@varney.idbsu.edu
1910 University Drive Boise Highlanders
Boise, ID 83725-1570 novice piper
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++