Re: [Phys-l] Unit Conversions (was Mass and Energy)

["Richard Tarara" <rbtarara@sprynet.com>]

> [Original Message]
> From: Jack Uretsky <jlu@hep.anl.gov>
>
> Hi all-
>  	As I understand the discussion so far, Rick is expressing a 
> discomfort with many of John C.'s postings, a discomfort that I happen to 
> share.  John essentially finesses the issue by arguing that Rick is too 
> smart to understand it.  I would be delighted if Rick could restate his 
> discomfort - if discomfort it is - in a way that prompts John to address 
> the source of discomfort.
>  	On the other hand, I may be misunderstanding the discussion.  Am 
> I/
>  				Regards,
>  					Jack
To keep it short (hah):

My main discomfort is in the attempt to turn all student failure into some
kind of learning disability, stage of development excuse.  JC seems to (my
impression) minimize the personal responsibility of students for their own
education.  I fully recognize the various misconceptions that students have
coming into physics, but I am less likely to blame all failures to progress
out of those misconceptions on some 'formalized' level of development, etc.
If I were seeing more intellectual curiosity, more genuine effort from the
students--and then still seeing failure to grasp the basic ideas, I would
be more sympathetic.  Jack previously didn't like my use of 'intellectual
honesty--or dishonesty' but by that I only really mean making a honest
effort to use one's mind to understand.  To be fair, our society almost
ingrains intellectual dishonesty--organized religion being a prime culprit,
IMO.  ;-(

I will admit to NOT having read all the materials that John C suggests (too
little time, too much to do), but I have followed the PER work through
lists like this PHYSLRNR  and attending many PER talks at summer AAPT
meetings--all without being very impressed with the work--oh, identifying
problem areas has been well done, but the work that tries to provide
'excuses' and even remedies has impressed me as weak.  [My favorite talk
from several years back was one that spent considerable effort to show that
students don't use Newton's Third law to explain phenomenon if they have
not been explicitly exposed to the Third law--duhh!]  So, while I don't
doubt that some students truly are 'handicapped' in the educational process
by the factors John C. cites, I also think that higher expectations by
teachers, and more honest effort from the students would prove to mollify
much.

OK--too long already, but one more personal observation.  Every year in my
Gen-Ed class I get notes for 5-10% of the students stating that they have
been diagnosed as learning disabled and that I need to accommodate them
with----(usually extra time on tests and quizzes).  Well in my class I give
a quiz every Friday.  I come into class and for the first 10 minutes,
students can ask questions.  I will answer (or have others answer) these
questions--even if they are questions on the quiz (and still many will miss
the question--listening skills being what they are).  I then hand out the
quiz, they take it, I collect it, I go over the questions, and then we go
on with new material.  For the LD students, they must make a choice.  They
can have extra time by starting the quiz (in another room) at the start of
the period, then turn it in and join the class, or they can sit through the
Q&A session and take the quiz in the normal time frame.  Maybe one in ten
will choose the extra time and I see no pattern that those taking the quiz
under 'normal' conditions fare any worse than the rest of the population.  

Last note:  My original post was not really to be taken all this seriously
(see emoticons).  It is just that John C. seems to have the same message
for us (probably important) with each of his posts while I'm more inclined
to look towards student responsibility, and student effort (and my own
efforts with helping the interested and diligent students--yes also to
interest them).  ;-)

Rick