I think that the "string and sticky tape" and similar activities are
basically sound, and could be used to build a low-cost lab "substitute" for
institutions that do not have the funds to provide more traditional
laboratory classes. In introductory classes I think the most import role of
the lab is to help students understand first and foremost that physics is an
experimental science, then to help them learn some of techniques of
experimentation. Many of our best high school physics teachers have been
doing this on shoestring budgets for years.
The question about distance learning is much more complicated. I
for one do not feel that computer simulations can replace hands on
experimentation for teaching physics (and that comes from one who's
principal research depends heavily on simulation work).
Unfortunately, most administrators tend to view distance ed as a
"cheap" delivery mode. They are far less concerned about the effectiveness.
See my Irascible Professor commentary on distance ed for more... http://members.home.net/mshapiro2/comments-12-9-99.htm
If "distance learning" methods of teaching replace real
laboratory encounters then activities described by Bob (see
below) will become standard practice. Will this be less or
more useful then real labs? What are physics labs for? How
effective are they in teaching? What are simulations for?
How effective are they in practice? What are lectures for?
How effective are they? What are textbooks for? What are
teachers for?
Somehow nobody is debating these issues while the
"Internet highways" are being built and promoted. The
prevailing idea is that computer technology is good for
learning in all areas. That is why many schools (even
technical colleges) spend the equipment $ on computers
rather than on other learning tools. Where can I find the
official AAPT policy on distabce learning, or on computer
simulations?
Ludwik Kowalski