1 / 8

Dr. Eric Mazur Department of Physics Harvard University (1997)

Dr. Eric Mazur Department of Physics Harvard University (1997). PER: A Real Eye Opener. Traditional (teacher-centered) methods of instruction versus “informed” (student-centered) methods of instruction. Many bleak results from traditional methods* Low student interest

darice
Télécharger la présentation

Dr. Eric Mazur Department of Physics Harvard University (1997)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dr. Eric Mazur Department of Physics Harvard University (1997)

  2. PER: A Real Eye Opener • Traditional (teacher-centered) methods of instruction versus “informed” (student-centered) methods of instruction. • Many bleak results from traditional methods* • Low student interest • Students retain preconceptions • Lack of conceptual understanding • More emphasis on memorization than understanding resulting from “surface” learning rather than “deep” learning. *Sheila Tobias (1990) They’re Not Dumb, They’re Different: Stalking the Second Tier. Tucson, AZ: Research Corporation.

  3. Mazur’s “Peer Instruction” • Pre-class reading • Reading quiz • Lecture on selected topics • Individuals work on ConcepTests • Small group discussion • Feedback provided to instructor • Remediation as necessary

  4. P. I. Procedure - 1 • Assign reading & write reading quiz. • Prepare limited lecture outline (3-4 topics) from reading. • Prepare ConcepTest questions: • Single concept per question • Question not soluble using equations • Adequate M.C. foils (based on preconceptions) • Unambiguous wording • Neither too easy nor too hard.

  5. P. I. Procedure - 2 • Lecture (approx. 15 min. per topic) • 7-10 min. for lecturing • 5-8 min. for ConcepTest) • Demonstrations • Not part of lecture • Related to ConcepTest questions • Examinations contain: • Concept questions • Equation-based questions

  6. Conducting ConcepTests • Students view question, reflect on answers. • Students record individual responses on whiteboard responder pads. • Students share responses and gather in small groups to work out detail. • A single group response is given. • Instructor responds to groups.

  7. ?’s about Peer Instruction • Does P.I. really work? • Do traditional problem-solving skills suffer as a result of using P.I.? • How does one deal with the “depth versus breadth” argument using P.I.? • How much effort does P.I. take?

  8. Peer Instruction Resources • Mazur, E. (1997) Peer Instruction: A User’s Manual. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. • JiTT also something worth checking out • World Wide Web: http://galileo.harvard.edu

More Related