Christy+Miller

I can definitely see how the modeling method would be a much more effective way for students to learn physics than the traditional “transmission method” discussed in Mestre’s article. So after seeing this method in action for the past week my questions and anxiety about the upcoming school year deal with how to go from never having taught physics to leading these well-constructed dialogues with my students. - These are my thoughts on the teacher’s contribution to an effective “modeling” classroom:
 * In order to facilitate an effective discussion with our students, the teacher has to be very comfortable with the material. When teachers are not comfortable with what they are teaching, I think they tend to cling tightly to their notes, put the material on the board, and cross their fingers that no student asks for further explanation (flashbacks to my 1st year of teaching). While I am excited to take on a new subject area and have spent the last semester and summer taking classes and workshops to help refresh and refine my physics skills, I know that it will take a couple years before I am as comfortable with the physics material as I am with the biology material I am used to teaching.
 * A discussion will be most effective when the teacher can predict the misconceptions that students will have so that they can successfully use those misconceptions to lead the discussion in the right direction. The only basis I have to predict common misconceptions at this point is to look at the material as a student and see what points I personally find confusion. I’m sure that after the 1st year, this will become easier.
 * In response to Ashley’s comments about stopping her student’s misconceptions before they express them: I think that it is a skill to know which “wrong” ideas are valuable to the conversation and which ones will lead the discussion in a direction that is not productive. Unfortunately, I think that it takes several tries at running these discussions before a teacher is truly comfortable with it and can get their students from point A to point B using their misconceptions. In reality, all teachers are under some kind of time line with regards to covering material. In order to stick with the timeline, a teacher has to know when to let the discussion go and when to move on, a skill that only comes with experience.
 * I also think that it is important that the teacher keep the discussion moving so that the students stay engaged. I think of the “Is this going to be on the test?” question. I think that it is important that the discussions are structured in a way that the students can see the value in participating and staying focused because while the material being discussed is not a list of definitions and equations the material is in fact “on the test” and the more they can take from the discussion, the more they will understand the list of vocabulary words and equations. The Mestre article discussed how valuable it is to develop the vocabulary in a discussion rather than just present the terms. While I have no prior physics teaching to fall back on, I can think of several times in my biology class where I struggled with the direction to take the class. I wanted to “show” them what the terms meant, but felt like I simply had to give them the definitions first. I can see from the first week of this class that letting my students do a lab and see the definition before “naming” what they saw is just as valuable and wouldn’t take any more class time. As teachers we are eager to share correct terminology with our students. This past week has made me see the importance in letting the terms define themselves based on the student’s experience.
 * What the students get out of these discussions depends on the atmosphere set from day 1. I think that it is important to hold the students accountable for being an active participant.

My thoughts on modeling:

Mestre talked about how it was important to give our students the tools to be “skilled problem solvers.” I believe that this is what the modeling method does. It forces the students to develop ideas qualitatively before developing them quantitatively. I have never taken a physics class taught in this order, and as a result, never truly understood what I was calculating by using the equations. This also helps to reinforce the idea that science is a process of inquiry rather than a list of facts and equations. I think that when students understand this concept they will have a much more positive attitude towards the discussions. Unfortunately in my experience as a teacher, my students tend to be overly concerned with “being right” so that they know exactly what they need to MEMORIZE for the test. As Mestre pointed out, when science classes are taught traditionally with the teacher passing on information to their students, a high grade in the course does not indicate a student’s understanding, simply their ability to memorize terms or solve equations. The modeling method of teaching uses a student’s previous knowledge, builds on it, and then creates a picture of physics for the student, not just an equation. Hopefully this will give students a greater appreciation for UNDERSTANDING the process of science and not just MEMORIZING science facts.