[Phys-l] BYU Virtual labs

[frank cange <cangefrank@hotmail.com>]

Dear Colleagues:  Our school has purchased the BYU virtual labs. Have any of you had experience with these? ANy good or bad pts that you could share would be appreciated. Frank Cange

> From: cangefrank@hotmail.com
> To: phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 08:01:37 -0500
> Subject: [Phys-l] ap review sessions
>
>
> Dear Colleagues:  IF any of you have review session set up for the AP Physics exams in the spring. please share some ideas with me. I know that teachers in Texas have review sessions on Saturdays at different schools in the spring where they invite students from the surroundng area to come to a HS or university to review for the ap exam.  If any of you are from Texas or if you part of the country does this kind of thing please let me know how you organize and advertise it for students(and or teachers) who would want to come and review for the test. Thanks in advance!Frank CangeAP Physics TeacherSt.Louis,MO
> > Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 06:40:22 -0500
> > From: betwys1@sbcglobal.net
> > To: phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> > Subject: Re: [Phys-l] case study: how to detect bogus data
> >
> > John Denker wrote:
> > > I quote from the summary at
> > >   http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/6/29/15117/8738
> > >
> > >   
> > > > I have just published a report by three statistics wizards showing,
> > > > quite convincingly, that the weekly Research 2000 State of the Nation
> > > > poll we ran the past year and a half was likely bunk.
> > > >     
> > >
> > >  ... [a couple of pages] ...
> > >
> > > The longer report is at
> > >   http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/6/29/880179/-Research-2000:-Problems-in-plain-sight
> > >
> > > =============
> > >
> > > I mention it in this forum because we all deal with data for
> > > a living.
> > >
> > > Scientific fraud is very rare, but it is also hard to catch.
> > > It is instructive to see what spurious data looks like, and
> > > to see the techniques used to detect it.
> > >
> > >   
> > Classifying a weekly political poll as an embodiment of scientific fraud
> >  is stretching it in my view.  Reviewing its basis after the poll is 
> > rejected for
> > poor match to reality was disappointing. Give me more prospective warnings
> > of poll reliability by all means.    Still, seeing far too many odd/even 
> > matches
> > in matched pair tabulations represents a worthy observation which needs
> > no great statistical depth to confirm. And seeing too few zero deltas
> >  brings to mind another point that John was recently mentioning -
> >  reminding me of Sherlock Holmes and (was it?)
> > the  Hound of the Baskervilles which did not bark in the night.
> >
> > The comparison to the noted science fraud concerning IQ
> > determinations in an English psychologist's opus
> > comes immediately to mind. THIS was unexpected, and affected many
> >  childrens' lives.
> >
> > Brian W
> > _______________________________________________
> > Forum for Physics Educators
> > Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> > https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
>  		 	   		  
> _________________________________________________________________
> The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
> http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
The New Busy is not the old busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_3