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: position vs displacement



Also make no mistake about this. 30% of the general population is concrete
operational and only 30% is formal operational. You are getting students
below the formal operationl level coming into colleges and universities,
especially considering that only 20% of HS graduates are at the formal
operational level. (in Great Britain, I do not have stats for the US).
Position relativity can be a big issue. It is not just for elementary ed.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX

John Clement wrote:

Pedagogical remark: The idea of relativity of position is obvious
to us. It's not a big surprise or a burden on students, but it
needs to be discussed explicitly. It gets short shrift in a lot
of texts.



Actually relativity in position is often a big surprise to students, and
when discussed explicitly they often will still not understand it. This
is
true especially of students with thinking skills below the formal
operational level. It requires a lot more than mere talking at them
about
it.


Many years ago, I saw a newspaper article that stated that elementary
school children were being taught
relativity. I think they were referring to Robert Karplus's SCIS program
for elementary science, which was based on Piaget's cognitive theory and
learning cycles. The relativity was most likely relativity of
position. I recall that SCIS utilized a polar coordinate frame to be
made on a plywood platform. It might have disappointed parents expecting
their children to be budding Einsteins, but it might have helped
students with thinking skills below the formal operational level that
John refers to.

Hugh Logan

PS I did not see the previous messages in this thread when I submitted
my most recent message.