Re: Homework (Was Measure of student understanding)

[Robert Cohen <Robert.Cohen@PO-BOX.ESU.EDU>]

At 21:42 -0500 4/30/02, Jack Uretsky wrote:
> But Hugh's answer avoids the question asked by both Rich and
> myself.  What
> is the predictive value of the conceptual tests?

I'm a bit confused: is there a way to identify the predictive value of any
instructional methodology?

Let's assume that personal motivation (and willingness to work hard) plays a
big part.  How do we separate that from the instructional methodology?

Is it reasonable to say that the benefit of "traditional" methodology has
been reflected in the "success" of its graduates, as indicated by those who
get Ph.D.'s?  Would it be valid to say that those with better grades get
into better graduate schools and so grades are correlated with "success"?
If so, suppose "reform" methods result in better grades for more students.
Would this satisfy those who ask for predictive measures of success related
to "reform" methodology?  If not, what will?

IMO, it seems there are three types of students*:
I. Those that grapple with weaknesses in their understanding until they
figure it out, not being satisfied until they do.
II. Those that are willing to grapple with weaknesses in their understanding
but they need help.
III. Those that don't grapple with weaknesses in their understanding because
they don't know what it means to be weak in understanding - these students
have "survived" by memorization and regurgitation.

The faculty in my department are all type I's.  Type I's seem correlated
with "success".

My students are mainly type II's and III's.  I am an idealist.  I think it
is possible to move people from II to I and from III to II and I think
"reform" methods have been successful at this.

*I'm ignoring the factor that some students just don't care.  I have seen
some type I's and II's that just don't care.  They are just not ready for
college.  They'll drop out and in a few years come back and be stellar
students.  Some people may think that all type III's just aren't willing to
do the work.  Their courses aren't designed to improve success, but rather
just identify those students who are type I's, i.e., those that are "willing
to do the work" (which is predictive of success).

____________________________________________
Robert Cohen; rcohen@po-box.esu.edu; http://www.esu.edu/~bbq
Physics, East Stroudsburg Univ., E. Stroudsburg, PA 18301