Re: 'plug & chug' problems

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

The dismal evidence is that proportional reasoning does not increase
significantly in conventional physics or math courses.  It is possible to
increase it, but it requires a concerted attack using active learning
methods.  I understand that Modeling Methods can be applied to the task, and
the "Thinking Science" by Shayer and Adey in England has done it.  Anton
Lawson has done it in his reformed biology courses.

I have not seen any evidence that the "reformed" physics courses have had
similar success.  The difficulty is that one probably needs to specifically
target this type of reasoning with researched materials.  Does anyone have
any evidence from pre and posttests of proportional reasoning to cite????
Incidentally formal logic courses also have the same problem.  They tend not
to improve student's ability to actually do formal logic.  The student can
tell you about it, but has difficulty actually doing it in real world cases.

Fortunately for health care the physics course acts as a filter to remove
students who are not capable of formal operational reasoning.  Unfortunately
it generally does not raise the reasoning level much.  This is just fine by
the doctors.  The supply is limited which means the demand and prices they
can command stays high.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX


> Hi,
>         I know this may sound strange, but I think one
> big reason that students should take physics ( and
> why many college degree programs require it) is so
> that those students have at least some problem
> solving and some operational algebra skills.  Do I
> care if my doctor understands Maxwell's equations
> or even Gauss's law?  NO.  Do I care if he can do
> a proportionality to determine a dosage?  YES.
>
>         It is not clear to me that our job in teaching
> physics is to teach our beloved "PHYSICS" ( Bold
> Script Italics, flash neon colors suppressed) .
> Certainly, at the college level, we should look at
> the consumers needs.  By consumers, I do not mean
> just the students, but more importantly, the
> programs, like that engineering, that require
> physics, the industries that will employ the
> students.  One important question is what real
> world skills can teach, while also teaching our
> beloved physics.  Very little of the physics that
> we teach is actually needed in the real world.
>
>         I was tempted to say that physics instruction
> needs at some level to be utilitarian, unlike
> philosophy instruction,  BUT in a well taught
> philosophy class critical reading and thinking and
> logic writing are taught.
>
> Thanks
> Roger Haar
>
>
> **********************************************************
> Rick Tarara wrote:
> > While there is an almost universal distaste for 'plug & chug'
> problems the
> > reality of the situation is more complex than a simple sneer conveys.
> >
> > 1)  We probably include problem solving in too many courses.
> Most (non AP)
> > high school courses would probably better serve the students
> with  'active
> >
>
> SNIP
>
> > Rick
> >
> > *************************************************
> > Richard W. Tarara
> > Professor of Physics
> > Saint Mary's College
> > Notre Dame, IN 46556
> > 219-284-4664
> > rtarara@saintmarys.edu