Friday, July 25, 2014

Elizabeth Green’s “Why Do Americans Stink at Math?”

Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion-list post “Elizabeth Green’s ‘Why Do Americans Stink at Math?’ ” [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

***************************************************
ABSTRACT: Elizabeth Green, in a NYT Magazine article titled “Why Do Americans Stink at Math?” at http://nyti.ms/1o02vui wrote: “With the Common Core . . . . . .[[ http://www.corestandards.org/, compatible with the reform math education methods]]. . . . teachers are once more being asked to unlearn an old approach and learn an entirely new one, essentially on their own. Training is still weak and infrequent, and principals - who are no more skilled at math than their teachers - remain unprepared to offer support. Textbooks, once again, have received only surface adjustments, despite the shiny Common Core labels that decorate their covers. . . . . Left to their own devices, teachers are once again trying to incorporate new ideas into old scripts, often botching them in the process. . . . . . . No wonder parents and some mathematicians denigrate the reforms as ‘fuzzy math.’ In the warped way untrained teachers interpret them, they are fuzzy.”

Green's article has prompted at least two threads on discussion lists. One initiated by Wayne Bishop on the OPEN! Math-Teach archives at http://bit.ly/eOTrs1. Bishop at http://bit.ly/1Agrtzv wrote: “Other than ‘Americans Stink at Math’, almost everything [Green] says is wrong. Decades-old (century?) math ed mythology.”

Another initiated by John Clement on the CLOSED! July PhysLrnR archives http://bit.ly/WQjkCL. Clement at http://bit.ly/1onL1Nr wrote: (paraphrasing): “Green's very good article is about how the Japanese reformed their math teaching and are now beating us. Their method resembles ‘Interactive Engagement’ methods in Physics Education Research.”
***************************************************

To access the complete 57 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/1lERqiv.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University. LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.

REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 25 July 2014.]
Hake, R.R. “Elizabeth Green’s ‘Why Do Americans Stink at Math?’ ” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/1lERqiv. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.

Wednesday, July 16, 2014

Assessment of Undergraduate Student Learning

Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion-list post “Assessment of Undergraduate Student Learning” [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

********************************************************
ABSTRACT: Norman Stahl (2014) of the LrnAsst list has called attention to the AAC&U (2014) report “68 Institutions in Nine States to Pilot New Approach to 
Learning Outcomes Assessment” at http://bit.ly/1o6Xfsn. The report states (slightly edited):

“ ‘The calls are mounting daily for higher education to be able to show what students can successfully do with their learning,’ said AAC&U President Carol Geary Schneider. ‘The Multi-State Collaborative is a very important step toward focusing assessment on the best evidence of all: the work students produce in the course of their college studies.’. . . . . . . . . . For more information, see ‘VALUE: Valid Assessment of Learning in Undergraduate Education’ (AAC&U, 2014b) at http://bit.ly/1pn6s3u; and ‘MSC: A Multi-State Collaborative to Advance Learning Outcomes Assessment’ (SHEEO, 2014) at http://bit.ly/1mhWSXv. . . . . .”

This response with its over 50 references and over 80 hot links can serve as a window into the literature of undergraduate learning assessment. It consists of two parts:

PART I: An expurgated and annotated version of a letter in support of the AAC&U’s assessment of undergraduate learning titled “It's Time to Get Serious About the Right Kind of Assessment” by Daniel F. Sullivan (2014) at http://bit.ly/1mg77Rn. Sullivan is President Emeritus of St. Lawrence University, Senior Advisor to the AAC&U President; and Chair, AAC&U Presidents’ Trust.

PART II: A review of assessments of undergraduate learning prior to the AAC&U effort. Updated and revised from “The Physics Education Reform Effort: A Possible Model for Higher Education?” (Hake, 2006a) at http://bit.ly/9aicfh.
********************************************************

To access the complete 115 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/1tTx5PF.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University. LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.


“What we assess is what we value. We get what we assess, and if we don’t assess it, we won't get it.” - Lauren Resnick [quoted by Grant Wiggins (1990)]

“Physics educators have led the way in developing and using objective tests to compare student learning gains in different types of courses, and chemists, biologists, and others are now developing similar instruments. These tests provide convincing evidence that students assimilate new knowledge more effectively in courses including active, inquiry-based, and collaborative learning, assisted by information technology, than in traditional courses.” - Wood & Gentile (2003)

REFERENCES [URLs shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 16 July 2014.]
Hake, R.R. 2014. “Assessment of Undergraduate Student Learning,” post of 16 Jul 2014 16:40:53-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. Online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/1tTx5PF. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.

Wiggins, G. 1990. “The Truth May Make You Free, But the Test May Keep You Imprisoned: Toward Assessment Worthy of the Liberal Arts,” AAHE Assessment Forum: 17-31; online as a 61 kB pdf at http://bit.ly/1ySgrzV.

Wood, W.B., & J.M. Gentile. 2003. “Teaching in a research context,” Science 302: 1510; 28 November; online as a 209 kB pdf http://bit.ly/1spTOkx, thanks to Bioquest.



Friday, June 20, 2014

Re: James Hansen’s ‘Too Little, Too Late? Oops?’

Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion list post “Re: James Hansen’s ‘Too Little, Too Late? Oops?’ ” [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

**************************************
ABSTRACT: Climate scientist James Hansen (2014) http://bit.ly/omiMY3, in his report “Too Little, Too Late? Oops??” at http://bit.ly/1m15lmz wrote (paraphrasing):

“Many queries received: is Obama's climate effort ‘too little, too late?’ Closely related query: are we at an ‘oops’ moment, a realization that we have pushed the climate system too far, so consequences such as ice sheet disintegration and large sea level rise are now out of our control? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The answer re ‘too little?’ is obvious from the fact that governments, ours included, are allowing and encouraging industry to go after every fossil fuel that can be found. Rather than dwelling on that fact, let's consider the action needed to avoid ‘too late’.

Citizens Climate Lobby http://citizensclimatelobby.org/ just released a study ‘The Economic, Climate, Fiscal, Power, and Demographic Impact of a National Fee-and-Dividend Carbon Tax.’ A 3-page summary by Danny Richter is at http://bit.ly/1ypEENy.

According to their comprehensive analysis of the impacts of a carbon fee-and-dividend (CF&D) in the United States, with 100% revenue distribution of the money to the public in equal shares as direct payments: the fee would start at $10/ton of CO2 and increase $10/ton each year; 100% of the revenue is returned to households, equal amounts to all legal residents. This approach spurs the economy, increasing the number of jobs by 2.1 million in 10 years. Emissions decrease 33% in 10 years, 52% in 20 years.

Contrary to the wails of fossil-fuel-industry kingpins, the fossil fuel CF&D stimulates the economy, modernizes infrastructure and saves 13,000 lives per year via improved air quality. GDP increases, with fee-and-dividend causing a cumulative GDP increase of $1.375 trillion.

Why do these results differ from previous studies concluding that a carbon tax would be costly? The main reason is that other studies do not have 100% recycling of funds to the public; instead part of the money is taken as a tax, to increase the size of government.”
**************************************

To access the complete 37 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/1w3Arx1.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University; LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.

REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 20 June 2014.]
Hake, R.R. 2014. “Re: James Hansen’s ‘Too Little, Too Late? Oops?’ ” Post of 20 Jun 2014 09:08:40 -0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. Online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/1w3Arx1. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.

Saturday, May 31, 2014

Threats to At-Risk Students: Stereotype & The Belief in Fixed Intelligence

Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion list post “Threats to At-Risk Students: Stereotype & The Belief in Fixed Intelligence” [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

*********************************************
On 30 May 2014, there were:

(1) three threads containing 33 posts on the POD archives at http://bit.ly/SjUBE9 concerning Leonard Geddes’ Learnwell Projects piece “Why Good Students Do ‘Bad’ in College” http://wp.me/p3GGxn-t; and

(2) one thread containing 15 posts on the PhysLrnR archives at http://bit.ly/SkeKKo concerning Paul Tough’s NYT piece “Who Gets to Graduate” http://nyti.ms/1nD3Z1E.

The above posts primarily concern two threats to at-risk students: (a) the “Stereotype Threat” – see Whistling Vivaldi: How Stereotypes Affect Us and What We Can Do [Steele (2011)] http://amzn.to/1hhk1yc; and (b) what might be called “The Belief in Fixed Intelligence Threat” – see Mindset: The New Psychology of Success [Dweck (2007)] at http://amzn.to/1wzVqZA.

These two threats have been recently discussed in a Physics Today article “Psychological insights for improved physics teaching” [Aguilar, Walton, & Wieman (2014)] at http://stanford.io/1tXfxPc.
*********************************************

To access the complete 49 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/1pFKkO6.

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); LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.

REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 31 May 2014.]
Hake, R.R. 2014. “Threats to At-Risk Students: Stereotype & The Belief in Fixed Intelligence.” Post of 30 May 2014 20:13:16-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. Online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/1pFKkO6. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.




Monday, May 26, 2014

Re: The Karlsruhe Physics Course and The German Physical Society

Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion-list post “Re: The Karlsruhe Physics Course and The German Physical Society” [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

*******************************************
ABSTRACT: Corrado Agnes, in his PhysLrnR post "The Karlsruhe Physics Course and The German Physical Society" http://bit.ly/S6AKbt, wrote (paraphrasing): “Bad News for Physics Education Research and Teaching. I want to inform you of an amazing and almost unbelievable attack made by the German Physical Society (GPS) against a group of teachers and researchers in physics education, whose only guilt is to teach physics according to the approach of the Karlsruhe Physics Course (KPC). . . . . The basic ideas of the course were explained in 'An up-to-date approach to physics' [Schmid (1984)] http://bit.ly/1w5fGSG and 'The Karlsruhe Physics Course' [Herrmann (2000)] at http://bit.ly/RpLeSz .”

Herrmann pointed out that KPC mechanics is based on the interpretation of forces as momentum currents as made by Max Planck (1908) http://bit.ly/1ihA2yy and Andrea diSessa (1980) http://bit.ly/1oj8MqY . KPC documents are at KPC (2014) http://bit.ly/1kfI5AA .
*******************************************

To access the complete 45 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/1lMjeRu .

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); LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.

REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 26 May 2014.]
Hake, R.R. 2014. “Re: The Karlsruhe Physics Course and The German Physical Society,” post of 25 May 2014 19:58:29-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. Online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/1lMjeRu . The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.





Saturday, May 17, 2014

Active Learning Increases Student Performance in STEM

Some blog followers might be interested in an article "Active Learning Increases Student Performance in STEM" [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

*********************************************
ABSTRACT: In a recent widely acclaimed report “Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics,” Freeman et al. (2014) at http://bit.ly/1v4JVbW wrote (my CAPS):

“To test the hypothesis that lecturing maximizes learning and course performance, we metaanalyzed 225 studies that reported data on examination scores or failure rates when comparing student performance in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses under TRADITIONAL LECTURING versus ACTIVE LEARNING. The effect sizes indicate that on average, student performance on examinations and concept inventories increased by 0.47 SDs under active learning (n = 158 studies). . . . . . students in classes with traditional lecturing were 1.5 times more likely to fail than were students in classes with active learning. . . . . . This is the largest and most comprehensive metaanalysis of undergraduate STEM education published to date. THE RESULTS raise questions about the continued use of traditional lecturing as a control in research studies, and SUPPORT ACTIVE LEARNING AS THE PREFERRED, EMPIRICALLY VALIDATED TEACHING PRACTICE IN REGULAR CLASSROOMS."

That the results of the meta-analysis of Freeman et al. (2014) “support active learning as the preferred practice in regular classrooms” is consistent with e.g.: (a) meta-analyses by Springer et al. (1999) http://bit.ly/1lbJPZo, Hake (1998a) http://bit.ly/d16ne6, Minner et al. (2010) http://bit.ly/wdJq4R, and Ruiz-Primo et al. (2011) http://bit.ly/1ouNzdm; and (b) literature reviews by Handelsman et al. (2004) http://bit.ly/ILrHBK, Prince (2004) http://bit.ly/rkiBjq, Froyd (2007) http://bit.ly/1lerTBS, and NRC (2013) http://bit.ly/126os6j.

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


To access the complete 66 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/1j3YdV4.

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); LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.

“Physicists are out in front in measuring how well students learn the basics, as science educators incorporate hands-on activities in hopes of making the introductory course a beginning rather than a finale.” – Erik Stockstad (2001) in “Science” at http://bit.ly/1k4Yp6O.

“Physics educators have led the way in developing and using objective tests to compare student learning gains in different types of courses, and chemists, biologists, and others are now developing similar instruments. These tests provide convincing evidence that students assimilate new knowledge more effectively in courses including active, inquiry-based, and collaborative learning, assisted by information technology, than in traditional courses.” - William Wood & James Gentile (2003) in “Science” at http://bit.ly/SyhOvL.


REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 17 May 2014.]
Hake, R.R. 2014. “Active Learning Increases Student Performance in STEM,” post of 16 May 2014 14:36:07-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. Online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/1j3YdV4. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.





Wednesday, April 30, 2014

A Cure For Exploding Heads and Mailboxes #2

Some Blog followers might be interested in a discussion list post “A Cure For Exploding Heads and Mailboxes #2” [Hake (2014)]. The abstract reads:

*****************************************************
ABSTRACT: POD’s Vicky Meretsky (2014) wrote at http://bit.ly/1fKI1TL: “If your head and your mailbox are both exploding, consider taking POD in Digest format – you get one email per day with all the day’s messages in it. You can pick and choose which to read or just hit delete and kill anything from 1 to 50 messages all at once.”

On page 25 of “A Guide to the ADLsphere” [Hake (2010)] at http://bit.ly/970OZr (3.9 MB) I suggested another way to cure exploding heads and mailboxes: “For LISTSERV archives it’s [easy] to 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, thereby conserving time, hard-drive space, and sanity.”

In the complete post I give the URLs for over 40 popular LISTSERVs.

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


To access the complete 70 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/1fytFv5.


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); LINKS TO: Academia http://bit.ly/a8ixxm; Articles http://bit.ly/a6M5y0; Blog http://bit.ly/9yGsXh; Facebook http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm; GooglePlus http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE; Google Scholar http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3; Linked In http://linkd.in/14uycpW; Research Gate http://bit.ly/1fJiSwB; Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs http://bit.ly/9nGd3M; Twitter http://bit.ly/juvd52.



REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 30 April 2014.]
Hake, R.R. 2014. “A Cure For Exploding Heads and Mailboxes #2,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/1fytFv5. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.