Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[Net-Gold] Physics Demonstrations: *Both* Education and Entertainment

Expand Messages
  • David P. Dillard
    . Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2011 14:16:04 -0700 From: Richard Hake Reply-To: Net-Gold@yahoogroups.com To: AERA-L@listserv.aera.net Cc:
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 31, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      .


      Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2011 14:16:04 -0700
      From: Richard Hake <rrhake@...>
      Reply-To: Net-Gold@yahoogroups.com
      To: AERA-L@...
      Cc: Net-Gold@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [Net-Gold] Physics Demonstrations: *Both* Education and Entertainment

      .

      .

      If you reply to this long (22 kB) post please don't hit the reply
      button unless you prune the copy of this post that may appear in your
      reply down to a few relevant lines, otherwise the entire already
      archived post may be needlessly resent to subscribers.

      .

      ********************************************

      .


      ABSTRACT: PhysLrnR's Noah Podolefsky (2011) wrote (paraphrasing):
      "Perhaps the reason we don't have evidence that demos promote
      interest is that nobody has bothered to look for it because the
      research agenda has been mostly focused on quantifiable measures of
      content learning."

      .

      But Coleman, Holcomb, & Rigden (1998) *did* look for it and reported
      that a survey at Virginia Tech confirmed students' approval of
      demonstrations "clearly and unambiguously," and that many "students
      commented in detail on the educational value of the demonstrations."

      .

      What seems to have eluded the physics education community is that
      both students' enjoyment and learning can be drastically increased by
      transforming lecture demonstrations into Socratic Dialogue Inducing
      (SDI) Labs <http://bit.ly/9tSTdB>. in which the student themselves do
      the demos and discuss the physics behind the demo among themselves,
      with Socratic guidance as needed.

      .


      ********************************************

      .

      John Clement (2011) in his post "Re: Rumor (MIT drops demos)" wrote:

      .

      "American education has focused greatly on 'engagement' which often
      means making it interesting. But from what I can see this hasn't
      been particularly effective. Foreign education does not have this
      paradigm. Indeed foreign students tend to buy into the idea of hard
      work and do not expect things to be interesting. So I tend to take a
      fairly jaundiced view of things like demos which are interesting."

      .

      To which Noah Podolefsky (2011) replied [bracketed by lines "PPPPP. .
      . ."; my inserts at ". . . . .[[insert]]. . . ." ]:

      .

      PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

      .

      Two questions in regard to. . . . . .[[the above statement by
      Clement]]. . . . . .

      .

      1. Do you have any concrete examples or evidence of this? Or maybe I
      should step back and ask, what is "foreign education?" . . . .[[good
      question]]. . . There are a lot of very different countries out
      there. Even within countries (especially the US) there is variance. .
      . . .[[good point]]. . . . . . .

      .

      2. Even if it is true that foreign students don't expect things to be
      interesting, is that really the paradigm we want? . . . .[[good
      point]. . . .

      .

      Perhaps the reason we don't have evidence that demos promote interest
      is that nobody has bothered to look for it . . . . . again, because
      the research agenda has been mostly focused on quantifiable measures
      of content learning. . . . . . [[Mostly but not entirely - see
      below]]. . . . .

      .

      Mazur's page. . . . . [[Demonstrations: Entertainment or Education?
      at <http://bit.ly/neJHv3>, see also Crouch et al. (2004)]]. . . . on
      studying lecture demos states explicitly that the 2 purposes of demos
      are student understanding and enjoyment. His research is focused on
      whether the learning part actually happens. Why no measures of
      whether the enjoyment part actually happens? . . .
      .


      PPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

      .

      There has been at least one attempt to measure student interest in,
      and enjoyment of, lecture demonstrations. Crouch et al. (2004) wrote:

      .

      "Classroom demonstrations, a standard component of science courses in
      schools and universities, are commonly believed to help students
      learn science and to stimulate student interest. There is little
      doubt that well-performed demonstrations achieve the latter
      objective; one study found that demonstrations are among students'
      favorite elements of introductory undergraduate physics courses:
      'Preliminary IUPP results: Student reactions to in-class
      demonstrations and to the presentation of coherent themes' [Di
      Stefano (1996)]."

      .

      In a later report "The Introductory University Physics Project
      1987-1995: What has it accomplished?" Coleman, Holcomb, & Rigden
      (1998) state that:

      .

      "Originally, there was no plan to evaluate the effectiveness of
      lecture demonstrations. However, particularly at Virginia Tech, where
      demonstrations were used extensively in accordance with the
      recommendation of the Development Team for 'A Particles Approach,'
      student comments produced a loud signal. Students have always liked
      lecture demonstrations presumably, they are a welcome respite from
      derivations!_so it was not surprising that the IUPP evaluation
      confirmed that approval clearly and unambiguously. There is a common
      suspicion, however, that student approval really stems from the
      entertainment value of demonstrations. Certainly this superficial
      attitude was reflected in some of the journal entries and student
      comments. But many students commented in detail on the educational
      value of the demonstrations. Going beyond simple enjoyment, they
      explained HOW they learned. . . . . . ."

      .

      What seems to have eluded the physics community is that *both*
      students' enjoyment and learning can be drastically increased by
      transforming lecture demonstrations into Socratic Dialogue Inducing
      (SDI) Labs in which the student themselves do the demos and discuss
      the physics behind the demo among themselves, with Socratic guidance
      as needed.

      .

      In "Can Demonstrations Promote Learning?" [Hake (2001a)] I wrote
      [bracketed by lines "HHHHH. . . . ."; my insert at ". . . .
      .[[insert]]. . . . ."]:

      .

      HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

      .

      That students learn little from traditional demonstrations became
      clear to me some decades ago when I asked conceptual-type questions
      that probed prospective elementary teachers' understanding of my
      brilliant and entertaining demonstrations. [The students were
      ignorant of algebra so standard algorithmic problems were out of the question.]

      .

      I was shocked to discover that the demos had passed through their
      heads leaving no measurable trace. (I latter learned that the same
      was true of pre-meds and physics majors.)

      .

      After discussions with the late Arnold Arons [Hake (1991) . . .
      .[[more recently Hake (2004)]]. . . ., I stopped doing demonstrations
      in the lecture hall and brought them into the laboratory as Socratic
      Dialogue Inducing (SDI) labs. . . . . . [[see e.g., "Socratic
      pedagogy in the introductory physics lab" (Hake, 1992)]]. . . . . .

      .

      Among standard demos given the SDI treatment were:

      .

      1. Dry ice blocks sliding on glass.

      .

      2. Dropping a steel ball, unfolded sheet of paper, and
      crumpled-into-a-ball sheet of paper simultaneously.

      .

      3. Swinging a bucket of water over the head.

      .

      4. Motion of a pendulum bob with a fish scale inserted in the suspending rope.

      .

      5. The tablecloth slip-out trick.

      .

      6. The old R.W. Wood spinning-wheel-in-the-suitcase trick.

      .

      7. The precessing bicycle wheel.

      .

      8. Rotation on a turntable while shifting the radial position of
      hand-held weights.

      .

      9. Playing catch on a merry-go-round.

      .

      Both qualitative and quantitative data (Hake 1987; 1998a,b; 2001;
      Tobias and Hake 1988). . . . .[[more recently Hake (2008, 2011)]]. .
      . . . have indicated the relative superiority of the SDI method.

      .

      And yet SDI labs, despite their free online availability [Hake
      (2001b)] have been almost totally ignored by physics teachers and
      PER's . . . . [[see e.g., "Using interactive lecture demonstrations
      to create an active learning environment" [Sokoloff & Thornton
      (1997)]; "Classroom Tools or Entertainment" [Crouch et al. (2004)];
      "Teaching with the Physics Suite [Redish (2003)]]. . . . .

      .

      Why is this? In footnote 39 of the editor-rejected :-(
      "Interactive-engagement methods in introductory mechanics courses"
      [Hake (1998b)] I wrote:

      .

      "Possible reasons are: (a) the competing allure of the quick
      high-tech fix (rather than slow
      deep-thought redesign) of science education, (b) the degree of
      understanding and commitment required of instructors, and (c)
      unfamiliarity with and misunderstanding of the method. . . . . [[see
      e.g., "The Socratic Method of the Historical Socrates, Plato's
      Socrates, and the Law School's Socrates" (Hake, 2007)]]. . . . . . .
      . . .

      .

      HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

      .

      .

      .

      Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
      Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
      President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which Recognize the
      Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)
      <rrhake@...>
      <http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake>
      <http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi>
      <http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com>
      <http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake>

      .

      .

      .

      "I am deeply convinced that a statistically significant improvement
      would occur if more of us learned to listen to our students . . . By
      listening to what they say in answer to carefully phrased, leading
      questions, we can begin to understand what does and does not happen
      in their minds, anticipate the hurdles they encounter, and provide
      the kind of help needed to master a concept or line of reasoning
      without simply 'telling them the answer'.. . . .Nothing is more
      ineffectually arrogant than the widely found teacher attitude that
      'all you have to do is say it my way, and no one within hearing can
      fail to understand it.'. . . . Were more of us willing to relearn our
      physics by the dialogue and listening process I have described, we
      would see a discontinuous upward shift in the quality of physics
      teaching. I am satisfied that this is fully within the competence of
      our colleagues; the question is one of humility and desire.
      - Arnold Arons (1974)

      .

      .

      .


      REFERENCES [All URL's accessed on 31 July 2011; most are shortened by
      <http://bit.ly/>.]
      Arons, A.B. 1973. "Toward wider public understanding of science," Am.
      J. Phys. 41(6): 769-782; online to subscribers at
      <http://ajp.aapt.org/resource/1/ajpias/v41/i6>.
      see a

      .

      .

      .


      Arons, A.B. 1974. "Toward wider public understanding of science:
      Addendum," Am. J. Phys. 42(2): 157-158; online to subscribers at
      <http://ajp.aapt.org/resource/1/ajpias/v42/i2>. See also Arons
      (1973, 1993)

      .

      Arons, A.B. 1993. "Guiding Insight and Inquiry in the Introductory
      Physics Laboratory," Phys. Teach. 31(5): 278-282; online to
      subscribers at <http://tpt.aapt.org/resource/1/phteah/v31/i5>.

      .

      Clement, J. 2011. "Re: Rumor (MIT drops demos)," PhysLrnR post of 29
      Jul 2011 18:51:29-0500; online at <http://bit.ly/pYHGXL>. To access
      the archives of PhysLnR one needs to subscribe :-(, but that takes
      only a few minutes by clicking on <http://bit.ly/nG318r> and then
      clicking on "Join or Leave PHYSLRNR-LIST." If you're busy, then
      subscribe using the "NOMAIL" option under "Miscellaneous." Then, as a
      subscriber, you may access the archives and/or post messages at any
      time, while receiving NO MAIL from the list!

      .

      Coleman, L.A., D.F. Holcomb, & J.S. Rigden. 1998. "The Introductory
      University Physics Project 1987-1995: What has it accomplished?" Am.
      J. Phys. 66(2): 124-137, online to subscribers at
      <http://ajp.aapt.org/resource/1/ajpias/v66/i2>.

      .

      Crouch, C.H., A.P. Fagen, J.P. Callen, & E. Mazur. 2004. "Classroom
      Tools or Entertainment," Am. J. Phys. 72(6): 835-838, online at
      <http://bit.ly/n6j1l5>.

      .

      Di Stefano, R. 1996. "Preliminary IUPP results: Student reactions to
      in-class demonstrations and to the presentation of coherent themes,"
      Am. J. Phys. 64(1): 58-68; online to subscribers at
      <http://ajp.aapt.org/resource/1/ajpias/v64/i1>.

      .

      Hake, R.R. 1987. "Promoting Student Crossover to the Newtonian
      World," Am. J. Phys. 55(10): 878-884; online as 788 kB pdf at
      <http://bit.ly/a6vc3H>.

      .

      Hake, R.R. 1991. "My Conversion To The Arons-Advocated Method Of
      Science Education," Teaching Education 3(2): 109-111; online as 12 kB
      pdf at <http://bit.ly/h2Ya0l>.

      .

      Hake, R.R. 1992. "Socratic Pedagogy in the Introductory Physics Lab,"
      Phys. Teach. 30(12), 546-552; updated version (4/27/98) online at
      <http://bit.ly/9tSTdB>.

      .

      Hake, R.R. 1997. "Evaluating Conceptual Gains in Mechanics: A
      six-thousand-student survey of test data," AIP Conference Proceeding
      No. 399, "The Changing Role of Physics Departments in Modern
      Universities: Proceedings of the ICUPE," edited by E.F. Redish and
      J.S. Rigden, (AIP, Woodbury), p. 595-603; online to subscribers at
      <http://bit.ly/pNUHjS>.

      .

      Hake, R.R. 1998a. "Interactive-engagement vs traditional methods: A
      six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory
      physics courses," Am. J. Phys. 66: 64-74; online as an 84 kB pdf at
      <http://bit.ly/9484DG> . See also the crucial but AJP suppressed :-(
      (and therefore generally ignored) companion paper Hake (1998b).

      .

      Hake, R.R. 1998b. "Interactive-engagement methods in introductory
      mechanics courses," online as a 108 kB pdf at <http://bit.ly/aH2JQN>
      . A *crucial* companion paper to Hake (1998a). Average pre/post test
      scores, standard deviations, instructional methods, materials used,
      institutions, and instructors for each of the survey courses of are
      tabulated and referenced. In addition the paper includes: (a) case
      histories for the seven Interactive Engagement (IE) courses of Hake
      (1998a) whose effectiveness as gauged by pre-to-post test gains was
      close to those of Traditional (T) courses, (b) advice for
      implementing IE methods, and (c) suggestions for further research.
      Submitted on 6/19/98 to the "Physics Education Research Supplement"
      (PERS) of the American Journal of Physics, but rejected by its
      theorist editor on the grounds that the very transparent, well
      organized, and crystal clear Physical-Review-type data tables were
      "impenetrable"!

      .

      Hake, R.R. 2001a. "Can Demonstrations Promote Learning?" PhysLrnR
      post of 20 Dec 2001 11:07:10-0800; online at <http://bit.ly/nDZpPt>.
      To access the archives of PhysLnR one needs to subscribe :-(, but
      that takes only a few minutes by clicking on <http://bit.ly/nG318r>
      and then clicking on "Join or Leave PHYSLRNR-LIST." If you're busy,
      then subscribe using the "NOMAIL" option under "Miscellaneous." Then,
      as a subscriber, you may access the archives and/or post messages at
      any time, while receiving NO MAIL from the list!

      .

      Hake, R.R. 2001b. SDI Lab Manuals, Two Teachers Guides, and various
      ancillaries are online at <http://bit.ly/9nGd3M>.

      .

      ************************************

      .

      Hake, R.R. 2004. "The Arons Advocated Method," submitted to the
      "American Journal of Physics" on 24 April 2004, but rejected :-( by
      an editor who evidently believed a referee who erroneously claimed
      that ARONS DID NO PHYSICS EDUCATION RESEARCH ! (did ethnographer
      Margaret Mead <http://bit.ly/eSQat5> do no anthropological
      research?); online as a 144 kB pdf at <http://bit.ly/boeQQt>.
      Regarding this manuscript, science education experts:

      .

      (a) Uri Ganiel <http://bit.ly/diSCGX>/ Professors Emeriti / Uri
      Ganiel (where "/" means "click on") wrote to me on 6 Feb 2005:"I have
      by now read your paper: 'The Arons-Advocated Method' and found it
      very instructive. I fully agree with your assessment that Arons was
      "... along with Robert Karplus one of the founding fathers of U.S.
      Physics Education Research...". I cannot understand the referee's
      objection. . . . . The argument of the referee that you quote: '
      ...his activities did not constitute systematic investigations...'
      make me suspect it is someone from the 'educational' community, with
      their typical insistence on 'methodologies' taken from psychology or
      the social sciences, rather than on a good understanding of subject
      matter, identification of foci of difficulty, combined with sensible
      pedagogy - that was what Arons was so good at."

      .

      (b) Anton Lawson <http://bit.ly/hBRhjb> wrote to me on 29 June 2009:
      "I liked it. . . . .great job!!"

      .

      But what do Ganiel and Lawson know compared with the profound
      understanding of the AJP referee??

      .

      ************************************

      .

      Hake, R.R. 2007. "The Socratic Method of the Historical Socrates,
      Plato's Socrates, and the Law School's Socrates"; online on the OPEN!
      AERA-L archives at <http://bit.ly/b5v58m>. Post of 21 Jun 2007
      13:43:05 -0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the
      complete post were transmitted to various discussion lists and are
      also on my blog "Hake'sEdStuff" at <http://bit.ly/hb8kKD> with a
      provision for comments.

      .

      Hake, R.R. 2008. "Design-Based Research in Physics Education
      Research: A Review," in Kelly et al. (2008). A pre-publication
      version is online as a 1.1 MB pdf at <http://bit.ly/9kORMZ>.

      .

      Hake, R.R. 2010. "Helping Students to Think Like Scientists in
      Socratic Dialogue Inducing Labs" online as a 446 kB pdf at
      <http://bit.ly/99yb7p>. Rejected :-(by the sub-peer reviewers of
      PERC 2010 but accepted for publication in the Physics Teacher.

      .

      Kelly, A.E., R.A. Lesh, J.Y. Baek. 2008. "Handbook of Design Research
      Methods in Education: Innovations in Science, Technology,
      Engineering, and Mathematics Learning and Teaching." Routledge,
      publisher's information at <http://bit.ly/dkLabI>. Amazon.com
      information at <http://amzn.to/flJaQ9>.

      .

      Podolefsky, N. 2011. "Re: Rumor (MIT drops demos)," PhysLrnR post of
      29 Jul 2011 19:49:57-0600; online at <http://bit.ly/pqp6ed>. To
      access the archives of PhysLnR one needs to subscribe :-(, but that
      takes only a few minutes by clicking on <http://bit.ly/nG318r> and
      then clicking on "Join or Leave PHYSLRNR-LIST." If you're busy, then
      subscribe using the "NOMAIL" option under "Miscellaneous." Then, as a
      subscriber, you may access the archives and/or post messages at any
      time, while receiving NO MAIL from the list!

      .

      Redish, E.F. 2003 "Teaching Physics With the Physics Suite" (TPWPS),
      John Wiley, TPWPS is online at <http://bit.ly/gdE3Tu>. Note the
      important (but seldom seen) corrections on p. 100 of the online
      version regarding Fig. 5.2 and its caption: (a) Fig. 5.2 is from
      "Evaluating Conceptual Gains in Mechanics: A six-thousand-student
      survey of test data" [Hake (1997)], NOT "Socratic Pedagogy in the
      Introductory Physics Lab" [Hake (1992)], (b) Fig. 5.2 was superseded
      in 1998 by Fig. 1 of Hake (1998a).

      .

      Sokoloff, D.R. & R. K. Thornton. 1997. "Using interactive lecture
      demonstrations to create an active learning environment," Phys.
      Teach. 35(6): 340-347; online to subscribers at
      <http://tpt.aapt.org/resource/1/phteah/v35/i6>.

      .

      Tobias S. & R.R. Hake. 1988. "Professors as physics students: What
      can they teach us?" Am. J. Phys. 56(9): 786-794, online as a 1.1 MB
      pdf at <http://bit.ly/eaqFzU> .

      .

      .
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.