Re: [Phys-L] Indicators of quality teaching(Was:MOOC:EdxOffers Mechanics course by Prof.Walter Lewin)

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

Yes, some extra time is used.  But just devoting extra time is very unlikely
by itself to produce higher gains.  If the course is taught conventionally
the increase in gain due to extra time will, I predict, will be very small.
The higher gain is mainly due to the method and not just the extra time.  So
if anyone who teaches using conventional methods wants to test this
prediction, go for it.  See if it is possible to change 13% gain to 50%
gain.  You might change 13% to 15%, but I doubt that extra time by itself
will do much more.  I could be wrong and it might produce 20%.  The truism
that extra time produces much higher gain is just that, a truism.  But it
has not been well tested and quantified.

Now this being said, it is true that the Chinese get higher FCI scores.
This is because students get physics every year in HS.  In other words the
extra time is much much greater and spread out so as to give time for
accomodation.  Also all Chinese students take physics so looking at FCI
scores for all students shows depressed American scores.  Accomodation may
require at least 2 weeks after the introduction of a new concept.  This is
based on comments by Laws and the experience of Shayer & Adey.

Some things are easily learned if you just devote extra time, but when
accomodation is needed I submit that extra time is not the important factor.
Extra time alone is brute force, when what you need is intelligent learning.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX

> ?? Rick has just told you that he both gets good gains and 
> spends more time - and you give a knee-jerk response of "It 
> doesn't work very well". Is no one's experience valid but yours?