Re: ...yeah, its better to get the students "prepped" for a test they

["Daniel L. MacIsaac" <Dan.MacIsaac@NAU.EDU>]

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Daniel L. MacIsaac" <Dan.MacIsaac@NAU.EDU>
>
> > And
> > the FCI shows something important -- it reveals that 'standard'
> instruction
> > is woefully inadequate in some ways.
>
> The only thing that it unequivocally shows is the 'standard' instruction
> (whatever that means) is inadequate to attain high scores on the FCI.
> Everything beyond that is interpretation by the researchers (perhaps valid,
> perhaps not).   ;-)
>
> Rick
...ok then, I'll modify my stance.  The FCI has been successful in challenging
the beliefs of many instructors who have used it. I have spoken to many such
instructors and have read of others (Eric Mazur of Harvard being a prime
example) who have been led to question the status quo for introductory
mechanics teaching.  The FCI has cast strong doubt on whether many students
are conceptually understanding Newton's Laws in their mechanics class.
Given the centrality of Newton's Laws in standard treatments of mechanics,
it is problematic whether students are understanding mechanics beyond
Newton's Laws.

Off to apply for Law School,
Dan M

Dan MacIsaac, Assistant Professor of Physics and Astronomy, Northern AZ Univ
danmac@nau.edu          http://purcell.phy.nau.edu         PHYS-L list owner