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] |
On 2015, Dec 05, , at 12:33, Bernard Cleyet <bernard@cleyet.org> wrote:
then several % of the total, no? But engender such “vociferous”
p.s. This is just an estimate, but surely these “rogue” posts are less
complaint. Not BTW, that conversation (Imagine a world …) was much longer
than the average; surely indicative that some “rogue” posts are of general
interest.
Wrong!
It was long on another list, and migrated to phys-l.
And my suggestion:
"My final thought(s): I agree some of the posts are rather distant from
physics teaching. However, by posting controversials (sorry for the
neologism) that may engender thought which increases crit. thinking.”
Had been made much earlier: Aaaa, maybe.
On 2015, Jan 17, , at 17:48, kirby urner <kirby.urner@GMAIL.COM> wrote:
I think "cognitive dissonance" hampers learning and students saddled withmore
belief systems seemingly at odds with the physics under study would be
likely to find these beliefs hinder rather than help, given "cognitiveNewtonian
friction" and all that.
Cognitive friction happens within physics itself e.g. if you're a
trying to figure out about why all this fuss about dead-or-alive cats orthe
whatever.
That's an argument for not dismissing "R-word" posts out of hand, given
learning research theme. Statistical studies might be done, about which
religious backgrounds seem least conducive to physics learning. The
literature must be vast already. :-D
bc
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@www.phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l