Re: Intro Physics Sequence

["John M. Clement" <clement@HAL-PC.ORG>]

If the problem is to improve conceptual understanding, you need to stick to a well tested program.  I do not know if Great Ideas will improve gain on conceptual tests than any other conventional program.  If you are looking for a calculus based approach then either Real Time Physics or Workshop Physics can be integrated into such an approach.  McDermott Tutorials have proven to be effective, as have Socratic Dialog Labs.  Just-in-Time is another program that has decent quoted figures on FCI gain.  One good source for curriculum ideas is http://galileo.harvard.edu/

I do not know if Great Ideas will be any more effective than a conventional approach.  Most texbooks have never been tested to see if they have good gain on the Force Concept Inventory or Tufts F&M Evaluation.

Workshop Physics has been attractive to nonphysics majors, and it can be taught either as an algebra based or calculus based course. It is even possible to mix both types of students in the same course.  Remember that the research based curricula have many man years of development and testing behind them.  Few textbooks can make that claim.

You should also question the source of any advice.  Most instructors have never pre and posttested their students, so most do not know exactly what the students understand.  The best advice should come from known physics education researchers.  Anecdotal evidence is only a guide to what might be useful.  Remember medicine did not turn into a scientific enterprise until the necessary studies were done.  Teaching is just starting to produce research based and tested curricula.  Whatever you end up doing, pre and posttest for effectiveness and calculate your Hake gain.

John M. Clement

> In our department we are tossing around the idea of revamping our intro
> sequence and I thought I'd see what all you "experts" out there thought -
> perhaps some of you already have the proposed plan.  (We're a
> 5000 student,
> 5 faculty midwestern state university, graduating ~4/yr in physics and
> transferring ~6/yr in 3/2 or 2/2 pre-engineering.)
>
> Currently we have a fairly traditional Phys I/II freshman year concurrent
> with Calc I/II.  The second year we cover modern physics in a semester and
> then move on to the upper level electives.
>
> The alternative is to delay Phys I until spring semester.  Instead, we
> would have a 2-3 hr course on the "Great Ideas of Physics" using something
> like Alan Lightman's book.  This would be supplemented by a 1-2 hr "Intro
> to Engineering" course (already on the books).
>
> Perceived Advantages:
> *improved calculus skill when entering physics class
> * building a conceptual framework for later courses.
> * broading the intro to engineering course (currently pushed only toward
> define pre-engineers and taught in the evening)
> * students outside physics could take the "Great Ideas" course, where they
> would never take Phys I
>
> Perceived Problems:
> * Tougher to complete 2/2 transfer requirements in just two years.
> * Upper level electives more bunched at the end
> * What to drop to keep the total hours about the same
> * faculty time to redo the schedule/shuffle paper/ etc.
>
> Comments?  Suggestions? Improvements?
>
>
> Tim Folkerts
> Fort Hays State University
> Hays, KS