Re: understand understanding, simple explanations, etc.

[Ken Fox <kfox@stega.smoky.org>]

QED? how have you proven anything?

To say that a partial understanding is useless is like telling me that
because I lack the finer details of music thoery I cannot somewhat
understand the subleties of theme and harmony interplay at the symphony. 

I hope I misunderstood your comment! As "conceptual physics" is near
and dear to me! There is a difference between the
practioners, who will argue about the finer points of an issue as we all
do, and those who can only understand a little, at a "conceptual"
level. 30 years ago when I started teaching High school Physics I started
a
conceptual physics course. One parent told me you can not teach physics
without math, to which I replied the "I was doing just that". I still am
to some students who have but a rudimentary idea of math. They do gain a
sense of satisfaction about understanding the princples of driving on
snow, the colors of the rainbow, the value of circuit breakers all with
out detailed mathematics. Take students from where they are and help them
move forward.

I do confess that it easier to teach to students who do understand
mathematics. 

Ken Fox
Smoky Hill High School
16100 Smoky Hill Rd
Aurora,CO 80015
303-693-1700(w)
303-850-7537(H)
kfox@stega.smoky.org

On Tue, 10 Feb 1998, Leigh Palmer wrote:

> > The references to quantum mechanics and displacement currents in a
> > discussion which started with an appeal as to how to explain something to
> > 11 year olds astounds me.
>
> Then your strategy is simple. You don't try to explain a physical
> concept to someone unready to appreciate the explanation. That
> means you cannot explain concepts that require mathematics for
> their explanation to mathematically unprepared people. Now you
> understand the ultimate fulitlity of much of what is misrepresented
> as "conceptual physics".
>
> QED
>
> Leigh