Can the Cognitive Impact of Calculus Courses Be Enhanced: Response to Dubinsky

Some blog followers might be interested in a post "Can the Cognitive Impact of Calculus Courses Be Enhanced: Response to Dubinsky." The abstract reads:

**************************************************
ABSTRACT: In response to my post "Can the Cognitive Impact of Calculus Courses be Enhanced?" [Hake (2013)] at http://bit.ly/1loHgC4 (2.7 MB), Ed Dubinsky (2013) at http://bit.ly/JRB9Km of the RUME (Research in Undergraduate Math Education) list made t6 points that I have abbreviated below and to which I respond in this post:

1. "I agree with most of what you wrote."

2. "As far as I know, 'UME Trends' has not been archived. . . . the articles are historically important because they represent a major turning point in the mathematical community towards undergraduate education."

3. "I think more has gone on in MER during the last 20 years than is indicated in your piece. There is a special interest group SIGMAA ON RUME, which stands for Special Interest Group of the MAA on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education."

4. "I think we who work in RUME must acknowledge our debt to Physics Education Research."

5. "I am not quite as enthusiastic about CCI as you are. . . . . How are you going to keep the educational community from using CCI to 'teach to the test' and even to cheat?"

6. "I wonder what you have to say about the C4L calculus reform project that we developed at Purdue and was funded by the NSF Calculus Reform movement?"
**************************************************

To access the complete 152 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/1iHGJOL.

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.

Counterproductive Targets

Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “Counterproductive Targets” [Hake (2013)]. The abstract reads:

************************************************
ABSTRACT: The recent Atlanta cheating scandal [(Gumbrecht 2013) at http://bit.ly/YRAVax and (Strauss 2013a) at http://wapo.st/Z2ebBB], is a byproduct of the draconian consequences of failure to meet “Adequate Yearly Progress” http://bit.ly/Z0iq0o TARGETS of the “No Child Left Behind Act” http://bit.ly/XWtRGp. Such corruption is consistent with six empirical “laws” related to Counterproductive Targets, five of which were listed by EvalTalk’s Bill Fear (2013). They are epitomized by “Campbell's Law”: “The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision-making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.”
************************************************

To access the complete 20 kB post please click on http://yhoo.it/YTuvYB.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Links to Articles: http://bit.ly/a6M5y0
Links to Socratic Dialogue Inducing (SDI) Labs: http://bit.ly/9nGd3M
Academia: http://bit.ly/a8ixxm
Blog: http://bit.ly/9yGsXh
GooglePlus: http://bit.ly/KwZ6mE
Google Scholar: http://bit.ly/Wz2FP3
Twitter: http://bit.ly/juvd52
Facebook: http://on.fb.me/XI7EKm


REFERENCES [URL shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 03 April 2013.]
Hake, R.R. 2013. “Counterproductive Targets” online on the OPEN Net-Gold archives at http://yhoo.it/YTuvYB. Post of 03 April 14:00-0700 to Net-Gold and AERA-L. The abstract and link to the complete post are being transmitted to several discussion lists.

Changing the Culture of Science Education at Research Universities #3

Some blog followers might be interested in a recent post “Changing the Culture of Science Education at Research Universities #3” [Hake (2011c)]. The abstract reads:

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

ABSTRACT: In response to “Changing the Culture of Science Education at Research Universities” [Hake (2011a)], PhysLrnR's Bill Goffe wrote (paraphrasing): “I agree that teaching should be more valued, but economists Martin & Gillen (M&G) (2011) do a nice job in explaining why this seems unlikely in the near future.”

M&G observe that there's a thriving market for senior scholars in higher education but not for world-class teachers. The reason for this imbalance, they suggest, is that “potential employers of professors have sufficient information to judge scholarly productivity, but virtually no information that would allow them to judge teaching productivity.”

In commenting on M&G's article, “teaching postdoc” wrote: (paraphrasing): “How do we know when a teacher is ‘good’? Students know if they like or dislike a teacher; if they enjoyed or did not enjoy a course. But accurately assessment one's own progress is a very difficult task, and there's no evidence that course evaluations are meaningful. Really, one needs pre- and post-testing to quantitatively compare student abilities at the beginning vs end of the course. Almost no one actually does that. . . . . Scholarship is measured in papers and citations. Teaching is not measured at all.”

Regarding pre/post testing, Bill Goffe asked: “. . . . do any physicists use their students’ Force Concept Inventory (FCI) results when on the job market?” As far as I know, the answer is (thankfully) "NO." If pre/post testing were to be used for high-stakes summative purposes, then Campbell’s and Dunkenfeld’s Laws (see signature quotes) would probably rear their ugly heads so as to distort and corrupt the testing.

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

To access the complete 17 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/gSNTGi.

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@earthlink.net

http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake

http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi

http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com

http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake

Dukenfield's Law http://bit.ly/bsRokM: If a thing is worth winning, it's worth cheating for.

Campbell's Law http://bit.ly/hMsyUr: The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.

REFERENCES [URL's shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 13 March 2011.]

Hake, R.R. 2011a. “Changing the Culture of Science Education at Research Universities,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/eqw6ow. Post of 4 Mar 2011 08:04:14-0800 to AERA-L, Net-Gold, and PhysLrnR. The abstract and link to the complete post were transmitted to various discussion lists and are also online on my blog “Hake'sEdStuff” at http://bit.ly/hnkAuJ with a provision for comments.

Hake, R.R. 2011b. “Changing the Culture of Science Education at Research Universities #2,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/gZSf8W. Post of 6 Mar 2011 15:16:50 -0800 to AERA-L & Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post were transmitted to various discussion lists and are also online on my blog “Hake'sEdStuff” at http://bit.ly/dYSgww with a provision for comments.

Hake, R.R. 2011c. “Changing the Culture of Science Education at Research Universities #3,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/gSNTGi. Post of 12 Mar 2011 16:53:33-0800 to AERA-L & Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post were transmitted to various discussion lists.

Dukenfield's Law & Campbell's Law #2

Some blog followers might be interested in a post of August 2010 “Dukenfield's Law & Campbell's Law #2” [Hake (2010b)]. The abstract reads:

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

ABSTRACT: An earlier post “Dukenfield's Law & Campbell's Law” [Hake (2010a)] initiated a 49-post thread on EvalTalk which may be accessed at http://bit.ly/cqINPz and http://bit.ly/anwfoY.

The first response was by Art Burke who wrote: “Campbell said that corruption of quantitative indicators was a problem to be solved - he did not argue for abandoning quantitative indicators in the evaluation of social policies.”

And three years earlier Burke had written (slightly edited): “Nichols & Berliner (N&B) (2007) http://bit.ly/hwHtNY propose a hodge-podge of alternatives that they claim are more ‘reasonable and fair’ than the present testing and accountability rules [such as] ‘formative assessments,’ . . . . . I will certainly support alternatives that both reduce unwarranted stress on school staffs and preserve the protections for parents and children built into NCLB, but I don't see how this could happen with N&B's proposals. "

I wonder if Burke would support “formative assessments” as they have been utilized in science education?

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

To access the complete 13 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/d3FrI8.

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@earthlink.net

http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake

http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi

http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com

http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake

Dukenfield's Law http://bit.ly/bsRokM : If a thing is worth winning, it's worth cheating for.

Campbell's Law http://bit.ly/hMsyUr : The more any quantitative social indicator is used for social decision making, the more subject it will be to corruption pressures and the more apt it will be to distort and corrupt the social processes it is intended to monitor.

REFERENCES [URL's shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 12 March 2011.]

Hake, R.R. 2010a. “Dukenfield's Law & Campbell's Law,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/9FWI9n. Post of 14 Aug 2010 20:52:11-0700 to AERA-L, EvalTalk, NetGold, & PhysLrnR.

Hake, R.R. 2010b. “Dukenfield's Law & Campbell's Law #2,” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/d3FrI8. Post of 22 Aug 2010 15:31:31-0700 to AERA-L and Net-Gold. The abstract and link to the complete post were transmitted to various discussion lists.