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] |
Mark Shapiro's column is essentially an endorsement of the conservative
approach to math education. However that approach has serious deficits.
While it may make students better at rote calculation, it still does not
solve the problems of poor thinking skills. The connection between memorized
math facts ie. Arithmetic and higher level math competence is fairly
tenuous. The agreement at the cited conference may actually be a perception
bred by some columnists, because the math partisans do not agree to it.
Actually the thinking ability of students has not changed appreciably over
the last 30 years. Anton Lawson did a study in a conservative suburb of
Phoenix over 30 years ago and redid it recently. He found that the ability
of students to do proportional reasoning has not changed. It remains
abysmally low. And all evidence points to the fact that conventional
educational techniques do not appreciably raise this ability in the majority
of students.
The evidence for or against all of the existing math programs has been cited
as being inadequate. Unlike the evidence in physics where the conventional
approach has been shown to have extreme shortcomings in comparison with the
active engagement programs.
John M. Clement
Houston, TX
-----Original Message-----
From: Forum for Physics Educators [mailto:PHYS-L@list1.ucc.nau.edu] On
Behalf Of Jack Uretsky
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 11:49 PM
To: PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU
Subject: Re: California standards test in physics
Hear! Hear!
Feynman warned us against the physicist's greatest hazard - self
deception. I suggest that it is also the teacher's greatest hazard, aided
by the typical student's expertise in conning teachers. Testing, properly
done, confronts the teacher with the reality of what the student is
actually getting from the teacher. The spirit of testing must, however,
be to determine the likelihood of the null hypothesis, that the student
got nothing from the course.
Regards,
Jack
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Rick Tarara wrote:
I would disagree that we rarely are tested after school. People aretested
everyday to recall knowledge, to solve problems, to write essays, etc.school
These are practical tests, those that drive our jobs and our lives. It
would be wonderful if school could somehow provide the same kind of
practical applications for all testing, but it is the very nature of
that severely limits those opportunities. Schooling is much too compactin
time and content to design into it constant 'real world' tests.(of
Now unless we can change human nature, I seriously doubt that education
the masses) without considerable testing can be successful. How manyhere
have tried a 'graduate-style' course on an introductory class? That is,some
only one knowledge/skill test a the end of the course. Yes there are
pedagogical techniques being used that de-emphasize testing, butultimately
how is the success of such judged? The hallowed (or infamous) FCI(Force
Concept Inventory) is a benchmark for many PER (Physics Educationalchoice
Research) practitioners, but of course it IS a test, and a multiple-
test at that!keep
In my experience (26 years), the weekly quiz is an important tool to
students ON TASK. Graded homeworks are key to getting students topractice
problem solving. I don't know how to assess the success (or failure) ofa
course without some kind of 'exam'. The best (for conceptualassessment)
would involve essay questions where students must actually explainthings,
but reading 60 of these (which I do in the Spring Semester) in the twodays
or so allowed, is a daunting task.the
While there seems to be a history of dissatisfaction with the methods of
education (dating over centuries if not millennia), somehow after all
attempts to 'fix' things, we keep returning to the 'tried and true'.<rtarara@SAINTMARYS.EDU>
I recommend Mark Shapiro's most recent column:
http://irascibleprofessor.com/comments-01-07-05.htm
Rick
*********************************************************
Richard W. Tarara
Professor of Physics
Saint Mary's College
Notre Dame, Indiana
rtarara@saintmarys.edu
********************************************************
Free Physics Educational Software (Win & Mac)
www.saintmarys.edu/~rtarara/software.html
********************************************************
----- Original Message -----
From: "Herbert H Gottlieb" <herbgottlieb@JUNO.COM>
To: <PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2005 8:16 AM
Subject: Re: California standards test in physics
Despite the smiley face below, I'm sure that all agree with your
statement. The question now is... Who should write all these tests?
Outside of Civil Service tests, those given in the doctors' office,
and a very few others, once we get out of the school environmnet
it is very rare that we ever have to take a test. Are tests really
necessary??? Can schools run efficiently without all those quizzes,
weekly tests, midterm tests, final tests, other tests, and exams?
Herb Gottlieb
On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 07:02:38 -0500 Rick Tarara
writes:
This discussion now has degenerated to the point where we can clearlysee why a committee should NEVER write a test! ;-)
--
"Trust me. I have a lot of experience at this."
General Custer's unremembered message to his men,
just before leading them into the Little Big Horn Valley