[net-gold] Physics Demonstrations: *Both* Education and Entertainment
- From: "David P. Dillard" <jwne@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Other Net-Gold Lists -- Educator Gold <Educator-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Educator Gold <Educator-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, NetGold <netgold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Gold <net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, K-12ADMINLIFE <K12ADMIN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, K12AdminLIFE <K12AdminLIFE@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, NetGold <netgold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Platinum <net-platinum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Net-Gold <NetGold_general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Temple Gold Discussion Group <TEMPLE-GOLD@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Temple University Net-Gold Archive <net-gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Health Lists -- Health Diet Fitness Recreation Sports Tourism <healthrecsport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Health Diet Fitness Recreation Sports <healthrecsport@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, HEALTH-RECREATION-SPORTS-TOURISM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 02:59:37 -0400 (EDT)
.
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2011 14:16:04 -0700
From: Richard Hake <rrhake@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: Net-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To: AERA-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: Net-Gold@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<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> .
.
.
Other related posts:
- » [net-gold] Physics Demonstrations: *Both* Education and Entertainment - David P. Dillard
