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] abstractions (was: Unit Conversions)



Wes Davis wrote:

... the notion that most (?)
high school students have absolutely no idea about their spatial
relationship to the planet they live on. I find that, despite our using a
spherical globe as a model of the earth, most students cannot make the
connection between that model and the earth they live on. Many believe we
live inside the earth. (Otherwise we would fall off.) This is a very
simple example of the inability of HS seniors to grasp even the simplest
abstract concepts.

I was astounded when I came to HS teaching as a second career (some 18 years
ago) to learn - really learn - what an inability to abstract means. Modern
educational philosophy completely ignores these limitations.

As always, we must be careful to distinguish
*) the data, versus
*) the interpretation placed upon the data.

I agree that there is a problem, but I don't think the passage above
is the optimal analysis or description of the problem.

In particular: I agree that there is a problem, but I don't think
abstraction (or lack thereof) is the problem. What do these kids do
in their spare time? I'm talking about the kids who can't reliably
tell whether a gigavolt is bigger than a nanovolt. Some of them go
home and play RPGs (role-playing games) that involve tremendously
intricate abstractions.

Yes, I do find it hard to believe sweeping generalizations about the
kids' inability to form abstractions ... but my disbelief is not based
on arrogant ignorance; it is based on observation. What I observe
is that kids can't -- or won't -- form abstractions about topics they
aren't interested in.

Yesterday I observed a 12-year-old (bright, home-schooled) explaining
to a 16-year-old (bright, public-schooled) how to solve a problem in
a game the latter was writing. It involved the distinction between
an object-class and an _instance_ of that object-class. I didn't hear
the details, but it sounded about right. (I didn't want to hear the
details; I wanted them to figure it out on their own.) This is deeply
abstract stuff. I reckon that when they are fluently talking about
objects and instances, I don't need to worry about their ability to
form abstractions.