UPSIDAISIUM

Led Zeppelin – Bron-Y-Aur Stomp

I went to Buffalo State University with Orlando and a physics teacher from Williamson named Brendan Noon. There is a Western New York Physics Teacher’s Alliance that meets there every month to hold professional developments and share ideas and hold discussions around physics education. At the end of the three hours I received a letter stating that I completed three hours of professional development, AND I got to walk away with a new physics toy that we built as a part of our professional development for use in our classrooms.

The meeting opened up by having us round robin and introduce ourselves and any brief matters of interest or knowledge to be known. Many people were saying their districts were laying off and cutting back positions across the entire district, and a couple said they were looking for jobs so if anyone heard of any they should let them know. One piece of useful information was brought up surrounding professional development hours. They said that after you get professionally certified, which is within 5 years after your initial cert, you need to complete 175 hours of professional development each year. The point is that once you are professional certified (say you are in Sept or Oct) then you wont be able to count any PD you do during that year as your 175. July 1 apparently is of the following year is apparently the first year of required PD. Not sure of the accuracy of this, but thought I would share the knowledge for you to look into to.

We then shifted to building our boxes that showed how a magnetic field acts around a wire. This was the toy we could build and bring home with us! We worked in groups of 5, one group at a time to glue the wood together and drill the holes necessary for assembly. As we did this presenters set up  their demonstrations and presentations. One lady (Anne?) presented on LEP, and LHC. We say how a masters class of students at UB observed real data from the instruments to determine what was happening in the detectors. The detectors are shaped like an onion with each detector layering on top of the other, and a hole is cut out in the middle of all of them where the protons/hadrons are collided and create the particle observations for the investigation. Students were able to identify the particles based on the tracks they made through the detectors and the positions of detector identifications.

We also looked at a the use of a clicker system for use in discussing review questions or holding comfortable environments for students to predict and then discuss in groups as to why they believe a multiple choice question may have one answer or another. I forget the name of the system we used, I believe it was Activone??

Another physics teacher presented a video of him being thrown by a football player onto two different size mats (one thick, one not so thick). This was to demonstrate impulse and momentum. He used logger pro to track both the football players motions as well as his to plot the distance versus time graphs, calculate velocity from the slope, and then find the conservation of momentum using both people’s tracks. I don’t know why it is fun to watch him get hurt, but I’m sure the kids loved this experiment and were really engaged with it, and it uses a great deal of technology.

Lastly, a teacher demonstrated an electrostatic motor using some simple tools you can find around your house, plus the addtion of a van de Graff generator. Rather than describing it I will just say there is a pdf of how to build the setup on archives website for this days presentation.

It was a really worthwhile experience and REALLY got at physics education and the importance to that specific discipline which is something I have been wanting for a long time. I would suggest that if you are interested in physics education join their listserv and attend the next meeting on April 17 (I will most likely go if you want to join me). Also if you arent interested in physics education seek out a group like this for your own discipline, because it is a really helpful resource!

Also, here are two videos we watched today:

Is this real or not?

Sun dog – Where does the sun go?? (Skip ahead to minute 1:49)

Eric Weissberg & Steve Mandell – Dueling Banjos

On Wednesday I started my innovative unit. It is filled with activity and laboratory exercises that allow students to investigate the science hands-on and minds-on. Two of my classes love the material and are deeply interested in the understanding of electricity and how electric circuits work. However, one of my classes expressed disinterest in doing so many laboratory activities.

I am trying to understand this one class and why they are experiencing these activities so differently. I think part of their disinterest and lack of motivation is because of their lack of understanding of the material. If the activities are not intended to clear up understanding, but made to create thinking and questioning of the material and misconceptions the students hold, am I on the right track with them? How do you negotiate patience and keep the motivation high during this process?

My concern then becomes whether I should negotiate my theory for what the students believe will help their understanding and learning process the best. Should I plan a separate lesson for this one period each day? The other two classes are doing fine with the material, so should why should this class be any different? I have been thinking as well about whether what they tell me is best for them is really best for them. How do they know they will understand the material they way they would like me to teach it? Then again, how do I know the way I think they should tackle the material will work for them? The management of this one class has also become difficult as they dislike the approach I am taking and most likely misunderstand the material being presented to them.

Here are a couple videos that display electrostatics and magnetism, the two topics I have been covering for the past couple weeks. The reason I posted them is to showcase application of this content to the real world and things students will experience. The first video is around electrostatic and magnetic toys, the second video is about electrostatics around a gas station.

The Grateful Dead - Ripple

When I was in high school I knew I had a strong interest in physics, and was looking forward to my senior year when I could take it. This is when I first noticed that people held fears towards physics. People considered it to be a difficult science that only a few could master the cognitive understanding and mathematical background behind it. However, the one very interesting point I kept reminding myself of was that really they don’t know what physics is. My school system focused little on the physical sciences in elementary and middle school, I can remember doing simple machines and circuits in 5th and 6th grade, and astronomy in 2nd grade, beyond that there really is no memory of these sciences. The traditional high school science track of Earth science, biology, chemistry, physics also extended this missing knowledge by focusing physics as a senior year course.

Holding my interest I continued on to college as a Physics and Astronomy major. What was ridiculous was the reactions I received from people when I told them that. They were either impressed saying things like, “oh wow you must be smart!”, or they changed th subject quick with a disinterested or disgusted face. Why is physics given such high esteem and impression, and why do people fear physics in the sense that they believe not everyone is capable of learning and understanding it?

I strongly feel that physics education needs a new view and procedure. The current system promotes physics last because of the challenge people find in it and the interest established by these misconstrued fears that only a few can understand the subject. Physics is useful for a wide range of fields. When I was trying to decide what to do as a career in college I was told that you can do pretty much anything with a physics major because of the multitude of math, problem solving, and logistical reasoning that the field requires. I know physics majors who are finance consultants, who work on Wall street, who work for engineering companies, who are graduate students in Physics, who are hardware store workers, who are becoming teachers, etc. I’m sure that other subjects offer this as well, but the effectiveness of physics education is important in other senses. “According to the Science and Engineering Indicators 2010, in 2003, 27% of Physics/Astronomy Bachelor’s and 40% of Ph.D. recipients were foreign-born.” There is an increase in the global competition for science and engineering talent and the US cannot continue to rely on the foreign market to fill our skill needs. Physics education would be a perfect way to prepare US students for this global competition since physics is a prerequisite for most of these jobs.

(A note that I understand statistics hold in them a doubt of reliability, validity, and sample fairness that could impact the following statements, but this blog is to promote discussion, thought, and a unseen or unexperienced outlooks on physics education)

The problems in physics education are large and widespread. Since the traditional science hierarchy has been set there has been a tremendous amount of new technology advances that require physics knowledge. What’s the issue? According to the National Task Force on Teacher Education in Physics there are over 23000 high school physics teachers who serve over 20000 public and private high schools. Only a third of these educators have a major in physics or physics education. About 400 new high school physics teachers are hired each year, with about 1200 high school physics teachers retiring or changing field positions each year, and only a third of the new hires have a degree in physics or physics education! Many states hold weak standards for certification and this hides the fact that a lot of these physics teachers lack the knowledge and pedagogy preparation to be excellent physics educators for all students.

As for students, the statistics are still not pretty. Hodapp, Hehn, and Hein (2009) state that “physics majors now represent only about 1.4% of all science and math undergraduates; 40 years ago the number was 4%.” In the 2004-5 academic year, 1.1 million high school students took a physics course in one of the 20000 high schools in the US, which is about one-third of all high school students.  Urban students also increase this gap in extremely alerting statistics. The achievement gaps between Caucasian and African American and Caucasian and Hispanic students were about the same, roughly three years of learning. Although, the percentage of African American and Hispanic students taking physics has increased (23% and 24% respectively), this still is behind the number of Caucasian students (36%). Additionally, many of the schools that these students are at do not offer advanced placement or equivalent physics courses. Women are underrepresented by a factor of 2, while African American and Hispanic students are underrepresented by a factor of 4 in physics classrooms.

So, what are the issues:

1. There is shortage of qualified physics teachers. Physics majors often have the opportunity to find a higher paying job that keeps good physics teachers away from the education profession.

2. Education has been too slow to the shifting physics-based technologies being produced. After World War II there was a large increase in technology that included advancements in physics and continued into today. The education system has not aligned itself with emphasizing the importance of physics to a changing society.

3. The preparation obtained in elementary and middle school does little to aid students for high school classes that will prepare students for more advanced classes in college. This is due in part to a lack of qualified teachers.

4. Since many students do not take physics courses, physics teachers often do not have full schedules and must teach additional classes that take away their efforts and focus for teaching physics.

5. There is little collaboration between university physics departments and schools of education. This limits the amount of qualified physics individuals who can find interest in teaching, and the development of physics-specific pedagogy that physics teachers would need. Schools that hire physics teachers without a major in physics or physics education also offer little in-service and professional development to prepare their pedagogy. Top 10 institutions for physics majors produce 61% of all majors but less than 4% of physics teachers. Top 10 institutions for physics teacher training produce 52% of all certifications but only 16% of physics majors.

6. There is inadequate maintenance of equipment and purchasing of new equipment for modern physics investigations.

There is a new effort to do Physics first, which means physics is taught first in high school as a basic science. Many would think that the students would not have the mathematical skills necessary for this class, and they would be correct for the most part, but these classes shift the focus of teaching physics as a math based to conceptual based physics. The issue is how do you measure the success of this. Increased physics majors? Increased enrollment in advanced physics? Increased student attitudes towards science? It is known that in 2005 73% of students in public schools and 100% of students in private schools that were implementing Physics First took physics at one point in their high school career, compared to 31% of students in public schools and 57% of students in private schools not implementing the program. Across the country in 2005, 8% of private schools implement Physics First and 3% of public schools implement Physics First. Two states, Rhode Island and Missouri, have implemented physics first state wide.

There are several more reasons and places to improve Physics education and it is important to push for and assess reform efforts in these regards.

Radiohead – Faust Arp

Some teachers at Edison have started an initiative to create an alternative science education course for challenging ninth graders. This course is an environmental science course that helps them get credits to move on into tenth grade. From observing this course I began brainstorming ideas for courses that I could think of surrounding different approaches to Physics curriculum.

My first thought is why can’t a Physics class in high school be taught more like Physics in college/University. Split the curriculum up into two years worth of material, Physics I and Physics II. This would allow for more in depth investigations, projects, and authentic science applications and extensions. It would also aid the time crunch we find in “covering” material for the test, and focus more on “uncovering” material for understanding.

A more general course could be taught around Energy. This can focus on alternative sources of energy, how they work, the efficiency of each one, and the cost and benefit of each. Interdisciplinary understandings can be made in many fields, such as economics, political science, mathematics/statistics, a mixture of science (ie. bio-diesel, nuclear fission/fusion), etc. This course has inherent ties to community knowledge and active involvement. Students would be able to be better producers, consumers, and advocates for energy alternatives that produce the best outcomes for power, the environment, and renewable resources.

Another course is Physical Applications of Physics. This includes such things as lasers, simple machines, medicine, toys, and a general understanding of how things works by the laws of physics. Students would be able to not only learn the content of physics but see the reality of its practices through human inventions.

A more modern course could focus on Modern Theories in Physics. This would be a philosophical course that is more advanced than the others but asks students to use knowledge and understandings of physics to investigate current issues and missing links in scientific understandings. Examples can be the existence of gravity, the big bang theory, grand unified theory or theory of everything, dark matter and energy, matter and antimatter, neutrinos and particle physics, the origin of mass, worm holes, etc.

And… of course I would love to see Astronomy break out and be its own science. This would include historical understandings, as well as instructions in galactic, stellar, planetary, observational, theoretical, and cosmological astronomy. It is a shame that it gets clumped with Physics or Earth Science all the time.

The questions I have in the application process for these courses are:

1. What will you confront? Who will be reviewing it? What important factors will you need to include in the proposal (safety, curriculum, labs, …)?

2. How do you go about proposing it? How do you go about receiving funding (grants, or school funding)? Do you need to spin things in certain ways?

Contribute any other course ideas or questions/answers you have about the process.

Steve Miller Band – The Joker

I like the idea of adding humor in to the classroom as much as possible. As students work towards understanding they realize that science is a really unique world that often presents confusing explanations. Realizing this and being able to make fun of the world of science may help students both 1. critically think about and doubt scientists and their ideas, and 2. feel more comfortable in the process of understanding. Here is some Physics humor to enjoy:

YOU MIGHT BE A PHYSICS MAJOR…

• if you have no life – and you can PROVE it mathematically.
• if you enjoy pain.
• if you know vector calculus but you can’t remember how to do long division.
• if you chuckle whenever anyone says ‘centrifugal force.’
• if you’ve actually used every single function on your graphing calculator.
• if when you look in a mirror, you see a physics major.
• if it is sunny and 70 degrees outside, and you are working on a computer.
• if you always do homework on Friday and Saturday nights.
• if you know how to integrate a chicken and can take the derivative of water.
• if you think in ‘math.’
• if you’ve calculated that the World Series actually diverges.
• if you hesitate to look at something because you don’t want to break down its wave function.
• if you have a pet named after a scientist.
• if you laugh at jokes about mathematicians.
• if the Humane society has you arrested because you actually performed the Schrodinger’s Cat experiment.
• if you can’t remember what’s behind the door in the science building which says ‘Exit.’
• if you have to bring a jacket with you, in the middle of summer, because there’s a wind-chill factor in the lab.
• if you are completely addicted to PhysLink.com.
• if you avoid doing anything because you don’t want to contribute to the eventual heat-death of the universe.
• if you consider ANY non-science course ‘easy.’
• if when your professor asks you where your homework is, you claim to have accidentally determined its momentum so precisely, that according to Heisenberg it could be anywhere in the universe.
• if the ‘fun’ center of your brain has deteriorated from lack of use.
• if you’ll assume that a ‘horse’ is a ’sphere’ in order to make the math easier.
• if you understood more than five of these indicators.
• if you make a hard copy of this list, and post it on your door.

At the Party with the Physicists

One day, all of the world’s famous physicists decided to get together for a party (ok, there were some non-physicists too who crashed the party). Fortunately, the doorman was a grad student, and able to observe some of the guests…

• Everyone gravitated toward Newton, but he just kept moving around at a constant velocity and showed no reaction.
• Einstein thought it was a relatively good time.
• Coulomb got a real charge out of the whole thing.
• Cauchy, being the mathematician, still managed to integrate well with everyone.
• Thompson enjoyed the plum pudding.
• Pauli came late, but was mostly excluded from things, so he split.
• Pascal was under too much pressure to enjoy himself.
• Ohm spent most of the time resisting Ampere’s opinions on current events.
• Hamilton went to the buffet tables exactly once.
• Volta thought the social had a lot of potential.
• Hilbert was pretty spaced out for most of it.
• Heisenberg may or may not have been there.
• Feynman got from the door to the buffet table by taking every possible path
• The Curies were there and just glowed the whole time.
• van der Waals forced himeself to mingle.
• Wien radiated a colourful personality.
• Millikan dropped his Italian oil dressing.
• de Broglie mostly just stood in the corner and waved.
• Hollerith liked the hole idea.
• Stefan and Boltzman got into some hot debates.
• Everyone was attracted to Tesla’s magnetic personality.
• Compton was a little scatter-brained at times.
• Bohr ate too much and got atomic ache.
• Watt turned out to be a powerful speaker.
• Hertz went back to the buffet table several times a minute.
• Faraday had quite a capacity for food.
• Oppenheimer got bombed.
• The microwave started radiating in the background when Penzias and Wilson showed up.
• After one bite Chandrasekhar reached his limit.
• Gamow left the party early with a big bang while Hoyle stayed late in a steady state.
• For Schrodinger this was more a wave function rather than a social function.
• Skorucak wanted to put everybody on his web site.
• Erdos was sad no epsilons were invited.
• Born thought the probability of enjoying himself was pretty high.
• Instead of coming through the front door Josephson tunnelled through.
• Groucho refused to attend any party that would invite him in the first place.
• Niccolò Tartaglia kept stammering throughout the evening.
• Pauling wanted to bond with everyone.
• Keynes was keen to question the marginal utility of this party.
• Shakespeare could not decide whether to be or not to be at the party.
• John Forbes Nash wanted to play a n-person zero sum game.
• Pavlov brought his dog; which promptly chased after Schrodinger’s cat.
• Zeno of Elea came with two friends – Achilles and the tortoise.
• Bill Gates came to install windows.
• Bertrand Russell kept wondering if the cook only cooks for the guests, who cooks for the cook?
• Witten bought a present all tied up with superstrings.
• The food was beautifully laid out by Mendeleyev on the periodic table.
• Riemann hypothesised about who would arrive next; to which Newton retorted, ‘ hypotheses non fingo.’
• Chadwick was handing out neutrons free of charge.
• Everyone was amazed at Bell’s inequality.
• Watson and Crick danced the Double Helix.
• While Fermat sang, ‘Save the Last Theorem for me.’
• Maxwell’s demon argued with Dawkin’s friend, the selfish Gene.
• Russell and Whitehead insisted on checking the bill for completeness and consistency. Godel said it was incomplete and it can never be proved otherwise.
• Epimenides the Cretan announced that only non-Cretans spoke the truth.
• Rontgen saw through everybody.
• Descartes cogitated, ‘I think I am drunk. Therefore I am at the party.’

Red Hot Chili Peppers – Hard To Concentrate

One week down and the exhaustion is rolling up over me. It has been such a great week though educationally. I have been able to compare the patterns of planning between my two cooperating teachers, experience a new type of programming, experience a different school environment and staff team, and learn about the delicate control and purposefulness behind planning for different course levels. The only downside is that I have been working straight since Monday. I wake up in the morning, head in to school, have one period off (2nd period) and have classes straight through the rest of the day. Then I either spend time planning and creating activities or I have class and classwork to do. The days are long and the hours of sleep are short. It makes it hard to concentrate in my long days at school.

So, what’s the solution? How do you manage all these things, and even manage additional things that do not relate to Warner or teaching? With the schedule that Orlando and I have, there really is no time during the day to work on planning, as our free period(s) are set to work on any important preparation for the days lessons or the next days lessons. As a result, all our planning is done outside of school and as we are trying to keep our planning a week or two in advance we have a lot to talk about and think over. Plus I have a tremendous amount of work to get done, both Warner and non-Warner related. There isn’t much time to take any breaks in this schedule.

The Beatles – I’ve Got A Feeling

In the spirit of being a critical thinker I was reading this week’s articles for EDU 448 and couldn’t help but question the practice of questioning. The big idea of the articles seemed to convey science as a way of thinking about and acting in accordance with the world. In this sense a person who is really tackling an understanding of the world will be asking big questions that try to provoke thought that facilitates this understanding. I’ve been thinking about the subject of questioning for awhile as it is a technique I am trying to improve on in my teaching instruction. There are many types of questions we can ask, and for me I found most of my questions possessed answers that required facts and knowledge that did not provoke much thought or connection between the material. I presented a linear direction of thinking. This lead me to think about two things: 1. What is learning? and 2. What does questioning do?

First, when thinking about what is learning I asked myself why do we learn and how do we learn. The main reason I figured we learn is to survive and provide a chance of survival for other generations. In how we learn I thought of many things, including relating things, describing things, observing interactions of things, and finally questioning things.  This is a good transition into my next question, what does questioning do? I am questioning the purpose of questioning and the consequences of questioning. Is questioning conditioning a way of thinking??

It does seem that as teachers when we question students we are prescribing an outcome, and this outcome is a way of thinking. In a sense then we are changing a mind! I don’t know how others react to this, but when I think about this I get a feeling of uneasiness. How do I know that what I am “conditioning” in regards to a way of thinking is the right way of thinking?? I have goals of course for each students education, but how do I know those goals are the best ones? I could just as easily be conditioning a pattern of thought in another way. My point is that as teachers we all have a tremendous amount of influence, both on the minds of our students and their futures. Questioning shouldn’t be about content, but should be more focused on building something useful for each student in their future. What is useful? Is critical thinking the thing that will be useful? Having a deep understanding of the world and how things connect within it? Having the ability to accomplish inductive, deductive, logical, and inferential reasoning? It would be pretty interesting if the greatest understanding you can have is that you do not really understand anything, because when I think like this I get that feeling.

In case anyone is interested, or knows of anyone who is an undergraduate Physics major and might be interested here is a link to internship programs at FermiLab. FermiLab involves a particle accelerator that collides high energy particles (ie. protons, neutrons, etc.) into each other to try and discover smaller particles that are produced due to the collision. These smaller particles can teach us a lot about energy and mass, and can help to explain the origin of the universe, create a link between the four fundamental forces (gravity, em, strong, weak), and build new models of atomic physics. I find it pretty cool because it can help explain Dark Energy and Dark Matter, which is a Cosmic mystery. Check it out if you are interested.

Everything we have been doing in Warner has been repeating over itself again and again. Reflections upon reflections of the same issues. Educational theory seems to be deeply rooted in philosophy, psychology, cognition, and many other disciplines and it is continuously seeking to improve its practice, which I am a big fan of and will be a strong advocate for. However, I’m at a stage now where I feel progress has slowed. We have hit the peak of the curve and it is evening out. I don’t know if this is because I have learned most of what there is to learn, or if it is because there is nothing around to push it that step further. Most things are stuck on trying to understand the purpose and theory of practice, but the practice seems to be secondary. Being a Physics major, I definitely love theory and can usually understand it fairly well, but the one thing about Physics that is missing from all this pedagogical theory is reality. The reality I guess will come in our teaching placements, but why couldn’t it have come along with the theory? Yes, you can count camp and STARS as real practice, we did teach, but they were also outside the context of real schooling. The scaffolding of our teaching education has been good, I just am curious whether this is the only way to do it? Is it the best way to teach teacher’s? I don’t mean to say it is bad in anyway, but I like to reflect on other possibilities. Just as there are probably a million ways to teach a classroom on one topic, there are probably several ways to train teacher’s. I think there has been a lot of focus on reflecting on theory to try and ground a conceptually strong argument in us for succeeding, but we won’t succeed without the practice. You only become a better teacher through experience, making “mistakes” and changing them (our arrows).

This leads me into two more points that I have been struggling with. First, the whole concept of master/mentor teachers. I do understand that they have experience and an extensive amount of time teaching these subjects, but how can you actually define someone as such? My thought is that one teacher may experience a lot of things in their teaching career, but how are they continuing their original practices and how are they adapting to the new generations. Every teacher we have had talk to us seems to have opinions on what is most important to them. Each enjoys discussing these topics. However, I’m sure there is disagreement across these teachers and I’m almost certain their classrooms would be different. So, I just don’t like the idea of labeling someone a master teacher. They can give me advice and criticism and support to help me become a great teacher, but they also have to realize I need to develop into the teacher I am going to be, which may not be them. Also, allowing us to make some of those “mistakes” every now and then can be a good thing for us. At least let us learn through experience as you have.

Finally, it is great that we are learning from each other and educating each other about science education. However, it would be great to focus us at some point along our disciplines. By this I mean, let the Earth Science teachers, the Biology teachers, etc. sit down and talk out things with focus on their discipline. I love the idea of integrating science and talking about it globally across all aspects and interrelations, but I also think there are different dynamics in these disciplinary classrooms that we need to learn about and struggle through with each other.