Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: Thinking Level of students



Yes, your statement is correct. We are not exactly an elite school. The
evidence is that we have an almost average student body. The main
difference is that we do not have the very lowest students, or students with
severe LD. We can only make accomodations, and do not have any special
programs for LD students. We have students in low level courses such as
algebra 1/2, C, and Chem. Com. I do not have the statistics for the US at
my fingertips, but Shayer&Adey mention that England graduates about 20%
formal thinkers, and I suspect that the US is within the same ballpark. I
have 50% of the seniors in my class so I truly have a wide range of
students. My thinking skill range is similar to that of the entire senior
class with mainly the very lowest students at scores below 2 (out of 12)
removed. Some of the high scoring students take Anatomy and Physiology
rather than physics. Indeed the A&P class last year had as many high
scoring students as I had in physics.

As to how much gain other schools get in thinking skills for students who
take physics, I can not say, as I have not seen any published data. I have
seen some data for the raw score at another HS, but with a slightly
different test (10 question test), instead of the 12 question published
test. Their data looks comparable to ours, but they do not pre and
posttest. They are using Workshop Physics or Real Time Physics depending on
the class. Does anyone else have data on the Lawson test?

Actually I give the evaluation sometime in Jan., so my data is actually only
for 1 semester. My total gain is probably higher, but only somewhat due to
senioritis. I also give the Force & Motion Evaluation (Tufts U, Thornton),
and I have gotten up to 66% normalized gain <g>=0.66. I am firmly convinced
that the maximum gain in thinking skills only happens with reformed pedagogy
where the students are fully engaged, but I have little proof of this
assertion, as I have no control data. Would a devotee of the conventional
lecture method be willing to give the test pre and post and then report the
scores to me???

In England schools that use Thinking Science in the equivalent of middle
school show even greater gains in thinking skills. Some schools which start
with an intake below the national average, have an output of up to 70%
formal thinkers. See "Really Raising Standards" by Shayer&Adey. Also their
evidence is in an Innodata monograph at
http://www.ibe.unesco.org/International/databanks/Innodata/inograph.htm see
Adey, Philip.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX



John Clement writes:

Basically I see evidence for about 15% of the seniors in our
school (a private school) being in the formal category, and 30% being
concrete. By the end of my course I see the number of concrete thinkers
halved, and the number of formal thinkers doubled. There is
some evidence
that shows that students who do not take physics, but do take
the same math
sequence show no rise.


I'm not sure how to interpret this. Does this mean that even at a
(presumably) elite private school only 30% of those who have taken physics
are formal thinkers at graduation? And of those who haven't
taken physics,
only 15% are formal thinkers at graduation??

That doesn't seem to differ a whole lot from our observations,
but maybe
I'm misreading what you're saying?

Wes