Timeline for How to teach modeling physical systems?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2019 at 12:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhysics/status/1108337513318498305 | ||
| Jun 22, 2018 at 18:34 | comment | added | sammy gerbil | Identifying what is relevant in a problem requires insight, which is a product of experience and knowledge. It is a skill which cannot be obtained by rote learning of a modelling technique. Students in all subjects learn and improve by watching an expert and getting feedback on their own performance. | |
| Jun 22, 2018 at 18:27 | comment | added | sammy gerbil | Ex 1 (circular motion requires tangential force) is a misconception - you cannot address this by teaching modelling technique. Ex 2 could be mis-communication / custom : contact forces between table and floor are ignored because the student assumes the question is asking about the interaction between ball and table, as in classroom problems he/she has encountered. In Ex 3 there are gravitational as well as magnetic forces. If the students are taught topics of physics separately, it is not surprising that they assume the problem is either gravity or electromagnetism but not both. | |
| Jun 22, 2018 at 8:20 | comment | added | Emil | I remember not understanding things because it was not clear where the force came from and where it was acting, and what parameters it depended on, and with respect to which reference frame and orientation angles were, and between what things the angles were, et cetera. In example 3, is the whole universe tilted 30 degrees, or the magnetic field, or the things inside the magnetic field, etc.... | |
| Jun 22, 2018 at 8:01 | answer | added | Mick | timeline score: -1 | |
| Jun 22, 2018 at 7:29 | comment | added | rob♦ | A meta discussion taking this question as a starting point. | |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 22:46 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jul 8, 2018 at 3:02 | |||||
| Jun 21, 2018 at 22:29 | comment | added | Kyle Kanos | Afaik, pedagogical questions are generally considered off-topic due to being broad and/or primarily opinion based. | |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 16:56 | comment | added | dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten | "because there should be general techniques and approaches to teaching modeling, shouldn't it?" The wide variety of techniques suggested under the moniker Physics Education Research, and the variation in results both between instructors using the "same" technique and between different techniques in the hands of individual instructors suggests that it may not be that simple. | |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 16:52 | comment | added | dmckee --- ex-moderator kitten | I have roughly six years experience teaching intro courses, and I would agree with @Chester that being able to express their thinking verbally is a mark of students who will do well. But I don't have any really good suggestions for how to teach the skills. I use some group problem solving ala Heller to get the students to talk to each other, plus scaffolded sequences of related exercises, and as much personal attention as I can afford. And then I just kinds hope the students muddle through. Overall results on learning gains are only modestly better than "sage on a stage". | |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 14:15 | comment | added | Petroglyph | I framed the question in this general way to prevent opinioated answers, because there should be general techniques and approaches to teaching modeling, shouldn't it? Maybe there is no single technique, but a collection that proved effective (hopefully even through education research) is all I ask for. If there has not been any such research, I wonder why, because this is a very fundamental issue. A huge part of physics is modeling of the systems we measure. | |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 14:08 | comment | added | sammy gerbil | Although there is a tag for education, the answers to this question will be primarily based on opinion (personal experience as a teacher or learner) rather than the results of scientific educational research. There is probably no single definitive answer. The underlying issues about how we think and learn are probably better addressed through psychology than physics. So I think the question might be off topic here. | |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 12:08 | comment | added | Chet Miller | My professional career centered around math modeling of physics systems. The first requirement is that the students have a firm understanding of the physical fundaments. Secondly, for a given problem, they need to be able to articulate (in words) the physical mechanisms involved. The ability to do this all-important step evolves from practice in solving many many problems. Thirdly, they need to be taught good modeling practices, such as always using free body diagrams. | |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 11:52 | comment | added | Petroglyph | @Steeven We already do that, we discuss them extensively in class. I also brought this issue to the other (older) TAs and their response was 'they don't learn anything in school, nothing we can do about it'. I don't feel qualified to say something about the education system, but feel, that we just can't throw our hands up in the air. If the prerequisites changed, we need to adapt to them. | |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 11:41 | comment | added | Steeven | I would suggest you to always require of them to make a sketch, a drawing. Every single time. For every single question they ever encounter. Regardless of how simple. Draw it and look at that drawing, and they will with much more confidence see anything missing or misunderstood. | |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 8:34 | comment | added | Petroglyph | @Mick Yes, I think that is the key issue here. They have problems relating the real, physical phenomena to a mathematical construct they can work with. Once this is established, they can usually move forward. A side effect of this is, that they have an easier time in theoretical physics, because modeling the situation mathematically is often not required. | |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 8:33 | history | edited | Petroglyph | CC BY-SA 4.0 | added 1346 characters in body |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 8:28 | comment | added | Mick | Is it that the students are presented with a real-world problem and struggle to make the connection to theory? For example (over-simplified), they struggle to connect, "A car starts from rest and reaches a speed of 60 km/h in 15 s. Calculate the acceleration."? | |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 7:53 | comment | added | Petroglyph | @Steeven Yes, we start with distance/time-diagrams and then move towards forces acting on point masses. The problems really start once we talk about pistons sliding on a surface and rotating systems. | |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 7:48 | comment | added | Steeven | Could you give an example or two of what the students may be struggling with? It is in the category of conceptual questions, I can see, where the student must learn to "think physics". | |
| Jun 21, 2018 at 6:54 | history | asked | Petroglyph | CC BY-SA 4.0 |