-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
/
Copy pathPhysics.page
152 lines (109 loc) · 10.4 KB
/
Physics.page
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
# Discussions and feedback
## Conversation with Saeta
Neal:
> I just talked with Saeta for a few minutes after colloquium, and he said the department was rather skeptical after the lunch meeting today. They seemed to have two main issues, which we've thought about before but are probably worth thinking through to address directly:
>
> 1). How are we going to prevent students from making false cards and learning the wrong material?
>
> This is admittedly a problem, although ryan, what have you noticed for real analysis? My thought was we could make the "professor approved" cards and answers more distinct, and have a disclaimer that the professors don't endorse the accuracy of student generated cards. We could also make sure to have a feature to "flag" suspect cards or answers, for graders/TA/professors to look through and approve or clarify. Other ideas?
>
> 2). How are we going to keep students from skipping class and just watching the lectures online?
>
> This one is slightly easier-- i think Vaughan's idea was to develop a *highschool* AP Physics course, so it's not a direct replacement for frosh physics. However, we can also say that Prof. Su hasn't seen a decrease in attendance, and students have given feedback that they really like having the lectures online in order to review concepts after lecture and at their own pace!! (this is worth emphasizing... compare Khan's statement that student's don't fail, they are just left behind if they move at a slower pace). Also, it seems there is a lot of evidence to suggest that lecture capture systems do a lot to improve learning outcomes, and Mudd should get on the bandwagon anyways. For large phys. 24/51 style lectures anyways, despite what the professors may think, there isn't much to be gained sitting in galileo vs. sitting in your dorm room (although we shouldn't say it in as many words...)
>
> Thoughts? I told Saeta I would drop by his office tomorrow at 1-1:15, when Joseph Vaughan should be stopping by, to make sure there aren't any lingering misconceptions lost in translation.
>
> Also, I think it'll be worth reiterating the sorts of benefits we can get out of this system, solely as a way to force students to do exercises and check their conceptual understanding. Should we work on doing a physics-specific demo, since some of the topics in mechanics (say) are more amenable to concept check questions and short(er) exercises which the students could do? We could maybe use some of sahakian's podcast material, too, with those problems.
Ryan:
> > I just talked with Saeta for a few minutes after colloquium, and he said the department was rather skeptical after the lunch meeting today. They seemed to have two main issues, which we've thought about before but are probably worth thinking through to address directly:
>
> > 1). How are we going to prevent students from making false cards and learning the wrong material?
> >
> > This is admittedly a problem, although ryan, what have you noticed for real analysis? My thought was we could make the "professor approved" cards and answers more distinct, and have a disclaimer that the professors don't endorse the accuracy of student generated cards. We could also make sure to have a feature to "flag" suspect cards or answers, for graders/TA/professors to look through and approve or clarify. Other ideas?
>
> Not exactly sure how this is different than students studying on their own. Official course cards is something we can think about when we're rebuilding the site from the ground up.
>
>
> > 2). How are we going to keep students from skipping class and just watching the lectures online?
> >
> > This one is slightly easier-- i think Vaughan's idea was to develop a *highschool* AP Physics course, so it's not a direct replacement for frosh physics. However, we can also say that Prof. Su hasn't seen a decrease in attendance, and students have given feedback that they really like having the lectures online in order to review concepts after lecture and at their own pace!! (this is worth emphasizing... compare Khan's statement that student's don't fail, they are just left behind if they move at a slower pace). Also, it seems there is a lot of evidence to suggest that lecture capture systems do a lot to improve learning outcomes, and Mudd should get on the bandwagon anyways. For large phys. 24/51 style lectures anyways, despite what the professors may think, there isn't much to be gained sitting in galileo vs. sitting in your dorm room (although we shouldn't say it in as many words...)
>
> Yeah tell them to suck it up. Or just tell them that it's not supposed to be a Mudd course (I told Saeta this already)
>
>
> > Thoughts? I told Saeta I would drop by his office tomorrow at 1-1:15, when Joseph Vaughan should be stopping by, to make sure there aren't any lingering misconceptions lost in translation.
> >
> > Also, I think it'll be worth reiterating the sorts of benefits we can get out of this system, solely as a way to force students to do exercises and check their conceptual understanding. Should we work on doing a physics-specific demo, since some of the topics in mechanics (say) are more amenable to concept check questions and short(er) exercises which the students could do? We could maybe use some of sahakian's podcast material, too, with those problems.
>
>
> For whom would we be making this demo?
## Conversation with Lynn
I talked to Prof. Lynn this afternoon, and here are my notes about what she felt frosh were lacking coming in to Mudd:
Comments from Theresa Lynn, April 22nd
She's happy to answer specific questions when they arise/provide materials... but doesn't have the precise vision
and so wasn't sure she could give helpful general feedback.
As to what freshmen are lacking....
Math skills:
Trigonometry
Algebra
Vectors
taking components in particular; addition, subtraction, dot/cross products, etc.
Generally speaking: a student will come into office hours, you'll put a problem up on the board, and
it will take them a /long/ time to do some simple trig/algebraic or vector manipulation. They simply
aren't fluent, and have a hard time deciding what to do.
Physics Concepts:
Newton's third law -- half of students at end of semester still don't understand this
Centripetal acceleration -- don't understand it is towards the center (problem with vectors..?)
Force concept inventory questions
1d, 2d kinematics are more or less assumed knowledge -- treat them in Phys24 at a theoretical level, but
move very quickly and assume students have seen this in high school and are comfortable with such problems.
Math/Physics:
Centers of Mass
Moments of Inertia
Have a hard time setting up the integrals.
Have a hard time going from word descriptions to a mathematical description.
What variables do we need? What is given? What are we trying to find?
GENERAL:
Being good with vectors
Knowing the "tricks" of the trade -- talk to Prof. Sparks
Example: when to use a sin or a cos? Answer: DONT draw out the triangle and geometer your way to the answer...
Neal:
> Fore example, consider a pendulum, and you want to write the torque exerted by gravity about the pivot. Instead of sitting down and drawing out a triangle, trying to get the angles right based on how you defined them in the problem, etc., you just realize that the torque is maximized at pi/2 and minimized at 0 rad. Thus, you want a sin function.
>
> Another example might be finding the gravitational force perpendicular to the surface of an inclined plane... again, maximized at pi/2 and minimized at 0 rad, so you'd use sin (not cosine).
Marko:
> I don't see why that's necessarily preferable to a geometric solution. I mean, I've certainly seen some kids just start drawing triangles everywhere when they were trying to solve physics questions, and it took them forever. But, I don't see why it's necessarily wrong. It's not as though sin, cos aren't derived from geometry.
Neal:
> It certainly isn't wrong per se, just inefficient and easy to make mistakes. I've seen a lot of freshmen in AE for tutoring who draw triangles and then mistake one of the legs for the hypotenuse, or mislabel the angle, etc. If you're really careful about it, drawing triangles will of course give you the right answer, but if you can get the right answer from quickly thinking about whether the function should be maximized or minimized for theta = 0 (for example), it's worth using the shortcut.
Meta-cognitive questions -- what type of problem is this? what types of principles should I apply?
Setting expectations:
Good study habits and techniques, etc.
Example: student who was shocked (in a non-physics class) when they did poorly on a midterm after studying stuff
in the book -- the exam covered the material emphasized in class.
Department's thoughts about physics SI class:
words --> math (choosing variables, etc.)
Fermi estimation problems
To look into:
Giancoli Textbook: http://wps.prenhall.com/esm_giancoli_physicsppa_6/
Look at physics placement test (talk to townsend/kathy) to see what types of problems it has
Lynn estimated about 11-12 (of 36?) were math-related questionsk
Ryan:
> I feel like the best thing to do mega-cognitive-wise is to have them use a really cool system which gets them to do things in a different way (review old material, track progress, read solutions). That's how I got started (the cool system being Anki).
>
> But there's plenty more we can do, so feel free to speculate.
Neal:
> Another example where over-thinking in terms of the definition can lead you astray is in calculating torques. Trying to calculate the torque by doing
>
> $$ \vec{r} \times \vec{F} = |r| |F| \sin\theta $$
>
> is technically correct, but in this case it is easier to look at the problem geometrically and calculate a perpendicular distance between the line of action (drawn through the force) and the point you are taking the torque about. Otherwise, you've got to think carefully about how the angle theta is really defined in the cross product, and how that relates to the angles you have in your problem. In this case, the geometric approach --> finding r_perpendicular is easier, and then using the idea that cross products "multiply perpendicular components".
> Also:
>
> In terms of choosing a problem solving strategy, Lynn recommended:
>
> -- Conservation problems about beginning and end
> -- Process problems might have something as function of time, involve F = ma, etc.
# Physics Components
* [Physics Components]()
# Physics Resources
* [Physics Resources]()