tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29868932.post6719834310538964654..comments2024-02-14T22:50:48.749+10:30Comments on Bill Kerr: a physics teacher begs for his subject backBill Kerrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00206808014093631762noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29868932.post-60515292176053456362007-07-22T11:41:00.000+09:302007-07-22T11:41:00.000+09:30d holten,Your blog is thought provokingI agree th...d holten,<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://edtechdev.blogspot.com/" REL="nofollow">Your blog </A> is thought provoking<BR/><BR/>I agree that discovery learning *can* be well done and that it is a desirable reform to make science more interesting. So, I did try to draw a distinction between Grey's solutions (as distinct from his elaboration of a real problem) and what I see as the solution to students perceiving science as dry and irrelevant. What I'm trying to say is that discovery learning poorly done (sociological, trivialised science as described by Grey) will fuel the flames of the back to basics movement. Discovery learning has to be well designed (what I describe as a third path) and often it is not.<BR/><BR/>Happy to continue this conversation with more detail, if you want that.Bill Kerrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00206808014093631762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29868932.post-74788925390422359042007-07-22T02:00:00.000+09:302007-07-22T02:00:00.000+09:30You wrote:"often ineffectual "discovery learning"....You wrote:<BR/>"often ineffectual "discovery learning"."<BR/><BR/>and 2 sentences later you wrote:<BR/>"Student designed computer simulations using software such as Etoys / Squeak could play an important role here."<BR/><BR/>Student-designed computer simulations - that IS discovery learning. Constructivism, constructionism, etc. You can't be both for constructivist approaches (such as learning with games, learning in microworlds and simulations...) and against it, like this Grey person is.Doug Holtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02740763550543657462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29868932.post-60525905418962942532007-06-11T10:30:00.000+09:302007-06-11T10:30:00.000+09:30check out the satirical new physics exam on welli...check out the satirical <A HREF="http://www.wellingtongrey.net/miscellanea/archive/2007-06-10--the-new-physics.html" REL="nofollow">new physics exam </A> on wellington grey's site <BR/><BR/>oops, but one of the questions was on a real physics exam!!Bill Kerrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00206808014093631762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29868932.post-44912394156180354882007-06-11T10:12:00.000+09:302007-06-11T10:12:00.000+09:30thanks for comments; Grey, Sylvia, ArtiThere are n...thanks for comments; Grey, Sylvia, Arti<BR/><BR/>There are now 102 excellent and alarming comments at Grey's site which I would urge others to read. <BR/><BR/>Summarising some of the issues:<BR/>- watering down, diluting, trivializing science and maths curriculum<BR/>- converting science / maths content into sociological content<BR/>- using discovery or inquiry based learning as a substitute for hard facts<BR/><BR/>This is occurring systematically in western education systems. (Not in developing countries who are serious about catching up to the west and actively promote the importance of maths, science and computing science). <BR/><BR/>Why?<BR/><BR/>A science teacher at school has identified the global problem as "Outcomes Based Education" and has been supplying me with critiques for some time.<BR/><BR/>Still busy on other stuff and cannot do this justice. But here is one of the critiques:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://www.aare.edu.au/04pap/ber04768.pdf" REL="nofollow">Outcomes Based Education and the Death of Knowledge </A> by Richard Berlach<BR/><BR/>I have been handballed other papers on OBE too but still unsure about how much time I can devote to this issue.Bill Kerrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00206808014093631762noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29868932.post-1417022680364412612007-06-10T18:06:00.000+09:302007-06-10T18:06:00.000+09:30This post captures my attention Bill, is classic ...This post captures my attention Bill, is classic SOLO taxonomy- to discuss something with any rigour you need to have had opportunity to bring in ideas (unistructural and multistructural learning outcomes) and to have linked these ideas to the whole (relational learning outcomes) - without these learning experiences the extended abstract thinking involved in discussion will always disappoint - you cannot take the linked ideas and look at them in another context if you never got to bring them in, understand and link them in the first place. <BR/><BR/>I have too much evidence of what you describe from my day job - a shallow understanding of science is one of the drivers of my concerns about student learning outcomes from our fervent use of "inquiry learning". <BR/><BR/>Another concern is the level of understanding of biological, physical and chemical concepts shown by teachers in our schools. And I suspect that this is also a concern given the loosening of curriculum expectations in New Zealand in the new Draft curriculum. <BR/><BR/>Many teachers charged with scaffolding kids understanding about forces, particles, electricity, velocity, magnetism, energy, etc need scaffolding themselves. When they are given too much choice in determining just what their kids need they will avoid concepts that they do not understand well themselves and scientific literacy will take another diveAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29868932.post-60101534128078089362007-06-09T01:18:00.000+09:302007-06-09T01:18:00.000+09:30Thanks for posting this, Bill.It seems like a vici...Thanks for posting this, Bill.<BR/><BR/>It seems like a vicious circle. We teach math and science as a bunch of vocabulary words and algorithms, which convinces kids that it's hard and irrelevant. The kids grow up and worry that a new generation won't like math and science because it's hard and irrelevant, so they try to tie it in to things that seem more relevant (like global warming or other social political issues) and teach with debate and creative writing so kids who "don't connect" with math and science can relate.<BR/><BR/>Anyone with any aptitude for real math or science is left out in the cold as the precision and "hard fun" is diluted.<BR/><BR/>As a former math/science nerd kid, I remember looking on any attempt to get me to write or speak in class as a teacher trick, best ignored. Math and science classes were a haven for me.<BR/><BR/>All I can say is, "arrghh!"Sylviahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07197716318141984888noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29868932.post-51208916018619695052007-06-09T00:57:00.000+09:302007-06-09T00:57:00.000+09:30Thank you for linking to my site.-GreyThank you for linking to my site.<BR/><BR/>-GreyGreyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10883176163382572419noreply@blogger.com