Re: Jackson on Jackson

[palmer@sfu.ca (Leigh Palmer)]

> All other factors aside, physics instruction is still failing to reach an
> unacceptably large number of capable students.

I agree with this assessment. I don't know why it is true, but I can't
do other than expect that our traditional methods are seriously flawed.
Acknowleging that, what do I think can be done to improve effectiveness?

I just finished grading an exam in introductory E&M. The performance of
my students was mostly awful. I assigned simple problems which could be
readily answered using only first principles. All problems were to be
answered algebraically; no numbers were given.

I have just spent a half hour with one of the students who absolutely
knew nothing about Gauss's Law, judging by what she wrote down on the
exam (which she flunked). She has evident physics and math anxiety,
yet after a half hour of one-on-one I think she went away with some
appreciation of what Gauss's Law is. I've asked her to write up the
solution to the problem she blew and bring it back (no extra credit).
Since I also covered exactly the same material in lecture this may
permit some insight into the relative efficacy of the two methods.

How many Jascha Heifetz would we expect to produce if we lectured to
violin students instead of giving them individual instruction? Maybe
physics is more like violin playing than it is like history.

Leigh