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]

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



I don't for a moment doubt that there is a large component of personal
responsibility. But there is also a large component of difficulty in
understanding because of the way in which the physics education has been
structured. There is also a large component of learned helplessness in the
students.

As to the efficacy of the changes that can be made in pedagogy, is there any
evidence that students in former times, say the 1950s learned the concepts
any better than today? The 50s were certainly an era in which learning was
the student responsibility, and parents hardly ever complained. Richard
Feynman noted that students were not learning the concepts from physics
classes. So he "improved" his lectures and then admitted that what he did
had no effect on student learning.

From the evidence we have there was probably no difference between then and
now in terms of student learning of physics. We no have more students
taking physics than in some eras, primarily because a college degree is seen
as necessary for prosperity.

Now I have some very interesting observations about the importance of effort
vs pedagogy. I have always heard and read many people who claim that
orientals do better. There is certainly a large amount effort that they
exert compared to most US students. European students are also considered
to be more serious. But when I have these students in my classes the
understanding that they gain as measured by the FMCE is not much greater
than American students. They certainly show more effort, but it does not
translate into more understanding. I also have some American students who
put out much less effort and also gain a fairly large understanding.

The recent article in AJP showed a fairly large correlation between the FCI
scores and the scores on a Piagetian test. So it is quite clear that the
basic understanding that the Piagetian evaluation is measuring is vital to
understanding many physics concepts.

I mentioned learned helplessness. This is happening because the school
system is in general removing the responsibility for thinking from the
students. They are spoon fed ideas which they memorize but don't understand
and then regurgitate. They know that the teachers will repeat everything 7
times so they don't listen until the 5th time. When the active engagement
is done correctly the students are made responsible for their own learning.
I have been criticized because students say they have to learn on their own.
Well that is the point.

I do make students responsible, and then they complain. But they do learn
more. But I also use the techniques which have been proven to help the
students. The interactive lectures and lecture demos all require students
to come up with answers to questions on the spot. The labs all require
students to predict what might happen based on previous experience.
Thinking Science by Shayer, Adey & Yates requires the teachers to needle the
students to think farther. Students are also required to come up with their
own conclusions rather than waiting passively to be spoon fed conclusions.

As to learning problems, make no mistake they are real and do have a large
effect. There are undoubtedly some students who take advantage of the
system, but I have diagnosed and interacted with some severely disable
students. Here is a very good example. I had a student who was not
bothering to fill in the answers on a 10 questions multiple choice quiz. So
I read a couple of questions to him. He then selected the answers
perfectly. After I read all of the questions to him he had gotten 100. I
later interviewed him. It seems that he could read, but when he did so he
did not understand what he had read. So if he had to read a book he had
come up with an accommodation. He read the book out loud into a tape
recorder with no comprehension. Then he gained the comprehension by
listening to the tape. This had not been spotted by the counselors. The
counselors when prompted said that his verbal and written scores were 20
points different, so he should have been tested for a problem. This student
had learned that laziness in class was the only way to survive because in
the normal class situation he was helpless. The diagnosis of his problem
goes like this. For him reading is a cognitive task instead of an automatic
task. This means he has to expend all of his thinking on the task and has
nothing left over for understanding. But listening is automatic, so he can
do that and think about the meaning.

I have a friend whose son has a similar problem. For him listening is a
cognitive task, so when he is asked a question there is a significant delay
before he can process the information to generate the answer. This means he
can not take notes and understand at the same time. Teachers would also
ask questions and when he could not answer immediately, they would assume
that he did not know the answer. The better tactic is to ask the question,
count to 5, then call on him. Indeed this is a better tactic for all
students.

My own son was in an advanced math class and was getting very low grades.
He complained that he couldn't finish the tests. What he did finish he made
100%, but enough was undone that he often could not pass. This set off
alarm bells so we had him tested. He is ADD, but not ADHD so it did not
show in his behavior. He can not pass without extended time. Unfortunately
this happened in the latter part of HS. Later on I learned from his 2nd
grade teacher that she had observed that he was bright, but needed extra
time, so she just accommodated the problem. This was going on for years,
and nobody told us that he had a difficulty. As a result he has been
learning not to try because often that was like butting your head against a
wall. BTW ADD has the unfortunate effect of also making students forgetful
of assignments and many other things. When the task is hard and requires
thinking, the ADD has a large effect. But if the task is merely one of
recall, it may have no effect, so recall quizzes will be easy.

Now please notice I am not trying to turn ALL student failures into a
disability. Only about 15% of students probably have real disabilities.
Then there is a large proportion, who have simply not had the opportunity to
raise their thinking to the necessary level. But then there is a number
that are disinterested or lazy for whatever reason, and are only motivated
by grades. There is little I can change to the last class of students, but
the second class can be dramatically helped by good pedagogy. It turns out
that the first class is likewise helped by good pedagogy and can perform as
well as the other students.

And I am very serious about this. I have seen how one math teacher
automatically assumed my son was dumb or lazy because he couldn't finish her
tests. She was amazed that he was getting good grades in his other classes.
I have seen far too many teachers teaching disconnected facts and factoids.
I am aware that all surveys show that interest in science decreases with
each science course. I know from Arons that 85% of the population is
capable of thinking fairly reliably at the formal operational level, but
only 30% actually do this. The crazy ideas that people have in the US are
undoubtedly connected with inability to think clearly. So our society and
possibly the survival of our species may depend on improving education.
Here Hake and I agree.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX



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