Carl Wieman apie švietimą

Posted on 2009-09-20

Daugiau kaip prieš metus nuėjau į 2001 m. fizikos Nobelio premijos laureato Carl Wieman paskaitą apie tai, kaip reikia mokyti. Metams prabėgus matau, jog jo idėjos mane giliai paveikė. (Tik nereikia suabsoliutinti mokslinio švietimo. Švietimo tikslas yra auginimas būti žmogumi; mokslas tėra dalis šio augimo.)

Švietimo tikslas

New graduate students would come to work in my laboratory after 17 years of extraordinary success in classes, but when they were given research projects to work on, they were clueless about how to proceed. Or worse—often it seemed that they didn’t even really understand what physics was.

But then an amazing thing happened: After just a few years of working in my research lab, interacting with me and the other students, they were transformed. I’d suddenly realize they were now expert physicists, genuine colleagues.


What do we mean by a “novice” in this context? Adapting the characterization developed by David Hammer, novices see the content of physics instruction as isolated pieces of information—handed down by an authority and disconnected from the world around them—that they can only learn by memorization. To the novice, scientific problem-solving is just matching the pattern of the problem to certain memorized recipes.

Experts—i.e., physicists—see physics as a coherent structure of concepts that describe nature and that have been established by experiment. Expert problem-solving involves employing systematic, concept-based, and widely applicable strategies. Since this includes being applicable in completely new situations, this strategy is much more useful than the novice problem-solving approach. (…) The first [component] is that experts have lots of factual knowledge about their subject, which is hardly a surprise. But in addition, experts have a mental organizational structure that facilitates the retrieval and effective application of their knowledge. Third, experts have an ability to monitor their own thinking (“metacognition”), at least in their discipline of expertise. They are able to ask themselves, “Do I understand this? How can I check my understanding?”

iš Carl Wieman: Why Not Try a Scientific Approach to Science Education? | Change Magazine


People learn by creating their own understanding.

[What helps:]

1. (…) having a clear, logical, explicit organization to the class (including making connections between different ideas presented and connections to things the students already know)

2. (…) recognizing the importance of student beliefs about science (…) by explicitly discussing, for each topic covered, why this topic is worth learning, how it operates in the real world, why it makes sense, and how it connects to things the student already knows.

3. (…) implementing the principle that effective teaching consists of engaging students, monitoring their thinking, and providing feedback (…) [which] requires carefully designed homework assignments, grading policies, and feedback. As a practical matter, in a university environment with large classes the most effective way (…) is through peer collaboration.

4. [Peer Instruction technique.] I assign students to groups the first day of class (typically three to four students in adjacent seats) and design each lecture around a series of seven to 10 clicker [personal response system] questions that cover the key learning goals for that day. The groups are told they must come to a consensus answer (entered with their clickers) and be prepared to offer reasons for their choice. It is in these peer discussions that most students do the primary processing of the new ideas and problem-solving approaches. The process of critiquing each other’s ideas in order to arrive at a consensus also enormously improves both their ability to carry on scientific discourse and to test their own understanding.

iš Carl Wieman: Why Not Try a Scientific Approach to Science Education? | Change Magazine

Posted in: citatos, gReader