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: direct instruction instead of hands-on learning?



And this is going to be a problem in all discussions--just what does each
party really mean by 'direct instruction' versus what ever else is being
discussed. For example some discussions may be about an instructor in the
same class room with students versus distance learning. There is discovery,
inquiry, directed inquiry, modeling, etc. Before we start ranting and
raving about anything on this topic, we need to be clear on the usage of
direct and indirect instruction.

Rick

----- Original Message -----
From: "jbellina" <jbellina@SAINTMARYS.EDU>
To: <PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 2:15 PM
Subject: Re: direct instruction instead of hands-on learning?


This is article about the Klaar experiment at Carnegie Mellon that
misrepresented guided inquiry and direct instruction and then
concluded that what he called direct instruction gave better results
than what he called inquiry. Lots of heat, very little light.

joe

Joseph J. Bellina, Jr. Ph.D.
Professor of Physics
Saint Mary's College
Notre Dame, IN 46556

On Jan 17, 2006, at 6:55 PM, Larry Smith wrote:

Requires a free registration.

At 1:05 AM -0500 11/10/04, edweek.org wrote:
NCLB Could Alter Science Teaching
When it comes to science instruction, do students learn best by
doing, or
by "direct instruction?" The federal No Child Left Behind Act
provides
some powerful incentives for the direct approach, observers say.
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2004/11/10/11science.h24.html
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l