Some subscribers may be interested in David Epstein's (2006) Inside
Higher Ed report "Trading Research for Teaching," concerning the
activities of physics Nobelist Carl Wieman.
Epstein writes [bracketed by lines "EEEEEEEE. . . . ; my CAPS; my
insert at ". . .[....]. . ."]
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
At flagship universities, where RESEARCH IS WORTH ITS CITATIONS IN
GOLD, AND TEACHING IS WORTH A FEW ALTRUISTIC PENNIES, it's not
unusual for faculty members to sacrifice quality instruction for
quality lab time.
So it's more than a bit novel that Carl Wieman, a physics professor
at the University of Colorado at Boulder and a 2001 Nobel Prize
winner, is leaving Colorado, and giving up his physics research for
(gasp) a teaching initiative.
Not only is Wieman leaving his lab, but he's leaving the United
States, where his efforts to get funding for teaching projects have
brought more frustration than dough. Next fall, WIEMAN WILL JOIN THE
UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, WHICH HAS PROMISED HIM $12 MILLION
OVER FIVE YEARS FOR A SCIENCE EDUCATION PROJECT.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Currently, most faculty members who give unique methods like
peer-instruction . . .[Crouch & Mazur (2002)]. . . a try are tenured,
and willing to put in a lot of work, often with no funding, to get
started. Wieman said that the fundamental vision, which will begin as
a collaboration of education science projects between Colorado and
UBC, is to "work with departments" to develop conceptual knowledge
assessment tests for all scientific disciplines; "really good clicker
questions," and a detailed archiving and dissemination system. Wieman
plans to hire and train people to develop concept tests and
implementation schemes.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
"RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T HAVE [GOOD TEACHING EVALUATIONS]," Wieman says.
"The typical person gives students a final exam, and they grade it on
a curve. It really doesn't tell anything whatsoever about any
objective way you can evaluate faculty in terms of what students have
learned." Science teachers, Wieman says, tend to be very unscientific
about their teaching. Teachers shouldn't "decide what's right and
wrong by tradition, or superstition, or anecdotes . . . that 2 out of
100 students told you they liked it. We know how to evaluate these
things better."
IF BETTER ASSESSMENTS EXIST, WIEMAN REASONS, PROFESSORS MIGHT HAVE
MORE INCENTIVE TO TEACH WELL, AND DEPARTMENTS MIGHT TAKE TEACHING
EVALUATION MORE SERIOUSLY.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
For more on Wieman's perspective on physics education see Wieman &
Perkins (2005).
"Education is not rocket science, it's much harder."
George "Pinky" Nelson, astronaut, astrophysicist, and former director
of the AAAS "Project 2061," as quoted by Redish (1999).
REFERENCES
Crouch, C.H. & E. Mazur. 2001. "Peer Instruction: Ten years of
experience and results," Am. J. Phys. 69: 970-977; online at
<http://tinyurl.com/d35z4>.