Re: [Phys-l] abstractions (was: Unit Conversions)

["Wes Davis" <wlrdavis@earthlink.net>]

J.D. writes:

> 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.

   Again, at the risk of sounding argumentative, the key word here is 
"bright".  What group are we talking about here?  Those who are bright 
enough to make the kinds of distinctions John is talking about?  Are the 
students John describes here typical of those with whom he interacts?  The 
young people John describes make up the top 5% or so of MY HS.    Are those 
the students who have difficulty abstracting?  My goodness!

  With all due respect, how often do those of you on this list interact 
with *average* HS students?  I know John to be an exceedingly bright man.  I 
would argue that this makes it even more difficult for him to imagine what 
it's like NOT to be able to abstract.  It's not my role to be a cheerleader 
for J.C., but I do know the difference between laziness, lack of exposure, 
lack of interest and inability to abstract.

Shoulda kept my head down :-)