Re: [Phys-L] Physics prof strips down to underwear to teach QM

["John Clement" <clement@hal-pc.org>]

I was a graduate student who was a TA in the RPI physics department during
the heyday of their carefully crafted lectures, labs, and demos.  There is
no doubt that these were state of the art at the time.  But further research
has shown how little students actually learn from even the best crafted
demos.  Of course at that time there was no way of comparing the RPI
experience with other schools.  So I contend that the these very fine demos
did not have the effect that everyone assumes they did.

A very recent study, which I have already referenced, showed that the
understanding of physics is purely a matter of whether IE or standard
conventional methods are used.  The IE classes uniformly showed about 5
times the gain as the conventional classes.  This was completely independent
of the instructor.

We all like to think that experienced dedicated instructors will do better
than inexperienced instructors.  But the seminal study done at ASU showed
that this was not so.  Indeed there are other older studies in JRST which
have shown the same thing.

Demonstrations when used as verification to reinforce the point, actually do
no such thing.  Again, go back to the Mazur talks and the video on YouTube.
Demonstrations need to have prediction and peer interaction.  They need to
be used as learning experiences rather than reiforcers.  The ILDs by
Thornton and Sokolff do work very well, but the demos are NOT reinforcers.
RPI had basically the conventional passive lectures which all give the same
low results.  This also applies to labs.  When they are used a
verifications, they are not very effective.

It is a misconception that standard passive lectures, even spiced with good
demos, are very effective.  All the research shows this.  RPI was one of the
best at crafting standard lectures with demos.  This may have improved
learning slightly, but you can not get large effect sizes this way.  IE can
get large effect sizes.  This can be done without any physical demos.
Indeed the ILDs show fairly good effectiveness even when the students are
told the results rather than seeing them, according to Thornton and
Sokoloff.  It is the sequencing of the ideas and student interaction that is
important, not the beauty of the demos.  So the real tragedy of stripping
down is that the stripper did not understand how ineffective this is.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX
 
> As the person who, three decades ago, put together and staged 
> the demonstrations at Rensselaer for the likes of my good 
> colleagues Walter Eppenstein, Harry Meiners and Fred Leitner 
> (including the previously mention wire-guided rocket) ...
>
> In the hands of someone who was actively teaching the physics 
> and not just doing a "magic show" a good demonstration can 
> reinforce the point.  But, I agree that if the intent is 
> simply to be remembered, there's little learning.  For 
> example, the rocket previously mentioned in this thread was 
> only the final piece of an extended discussion of momentum 
> conservation, usually followed by more interaction to 
> understand what they'd actually seen.
>
> **********************************************************
>                            "I am not a crackpot!"
>                                                           - 
> Grandpa Simpson
> **********************************************************
>
> Dr. George Spagna
> Physics Department
> Randolph-Macon College
> P.O. Box 5005
> Ashland, VA 23005-5505
>
> phone: (804) 752-7344
> fax: (804) 752-4724
> e-mail: gspagna@rmc.edu
> http://faculty.rmc.edu/gspagna/public_html/index.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@phys-l.org
> http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l