________________________
Joel Rauber
Department of Physics - SDSU
Joel.Rauber@sdstate.edu
605-688-4293
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Forum for Physics Educators
| [mailto:PHYS-L@list1.ucc.nau.edu] On Behalf Of Brian Whatcott
| Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 7:34 AM
| To: PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU
| Subject: Re: Whither Introductory Physics Labs? (was Lab
| Reports - was Human Error)
|
| At 11:44 PM 5/9/2005, James McLean, you wrote:
| >John Clement wrote:
| > > Generally students who do well can discuss and tell you what they
| > > understand. So I do see a correlation between high evaluation
| > > scores and other indicators. But more to the point, these tests
| > > were developed using other written and verbal evaluations. They
| > > were developed using interview protocols, so they are
| certainly fairly accurate.
| >///
| >Does this strike anyone else as internally inconsistent?
| >* The basis for the validity of "these tests" is detailed
| interviews, etc.
| ///
| >Dr. James McLean
|
|
|
| Hmmm.... I see a certain resistance to a scientific, experiment based
| approach to physics education testing. And where it would
| be impolitic
| to attack a scientific approach directly, one can always attack
| the validity of the objective test instruments advocated.
I see no resistance to a "scientific, experiment based approach" in
McLeans comment. Au contraire, his comment, (important aspects of which
were snipped) was a comment regarding logic and inference, which are
fundamental to any "scientific" approach to anything.