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]

[Phys-L] Re: Research on Student Response Systems



The problem is actually on the journal side. As I understand, ERIC
has only the information submitted by the journals. The physics
journals have neglected to submit the education papers that they
publish. So you will find precious little by Hestenes, Hake,
McDermott, Thornton ... in ERIC. Now if the PER people had published
in JRST they would be in ERIC. This has contributed to the almost
invisibility of PER to the rest of the education community, despite
the very large effect sizes that have been achieved.

Now another respondent pointed out that almost all education studies
show positive effects. This is true for most studies, as no effect is
usually not publishable. OTOH very few studies show large effect
sizes, and often the effects are just barely positive. By contrast
the work of Shayer&Adey, Anton Lawson, and PER have shown substantial
effect sizes. For example Lawson shows a gain of about 1.0 STD in
student reasoning skills in his biology classes. PER often shows
effect sizes up to 3.0 or a gain of 3.0 STD. Shayer&Adey have
demonstrated that below average students coming in, can by the end of
HS have up to 70% formal operational reasoning capability. as compared
to the British average of 20%.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX


On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 08:07:10 -0600
Joseph Bellina <jbellina@SAINTMARYS.EDU> wrote:
I had thought the problem with Eric was that it dealt with
education,
not physics, so somehow research by physical science folks didnt'
fit
their mission....or am I mistaken.

cheers,

joe