Council for the Inter American Conferences on Physics Education

Consejo para las Conferencias Interamericanas sobre Educación en la Física

Recommendations

Here are the recommendations reached by the five groups that worked during the VI IACPE in La Falda, Córdoba, Argentina, between June 30th and July 4th, 1997. Although in all cases the name of the group's coordinator appears, in the first four we are still missing a complete list of participants; hopefully it will be added as information comes in.

For the final English translation of most of these recommendations we must thank the patience and endurance of Patsy Ann Johnson of Slippery Rock University, Pennsylvania, and specially the selfless collaboration of a friend from the humanities, Prof. Deborah J. Cohen of the Department of Modern Languages/Cultures at the same university. In the case of Group 5 and Donald Holcomb's filters, included in Group 2's recommendations, we had the authors' original English versions.

The pictures, as always, are by courtesy of Leonard Jossem.

Contents

1. Working Group Nº 1: " New technologies in the classroom, specially computers, television and telematics"

2. Working Group Nº 2: "Criteria for updating the Physics curricula at all levels of instruction"

3. Working Group Nº 3: "Incorporation of Physics education research into teacher preparation "

4. Working Group Nº 4: "Preparation of physicists for future roles, specially in industries and scientific and business administration"

5. Working Group Nº 5: "History and epistemology of Physics in the teaching of Physics"

6. Back to the main menu

Working Group Nº 1: New technologies in the classroom, specially computers, television and telematics

Coordinator: Nieves Baade (Argentina)

1. Considering that new technologies are being incorporated by young people in a natural way, we think that to continue teaching with only traditional methods will increase in our students the apathy and low esteem that many of them show toward the education they receive. Our proposal is then to incorporate new technology into our educational practices.
   
2. The active participation of teachers should be promoted in the elaboration and implementation of methods that use new technology. Considering that not all professionals are trained to take on this task, we recommend that the governing bodies responsible for education at each level create training programs for their teachers. Institutions that already use technology, such as research centers, universities, technical centers, etc., should be the ones responsible for these programs. The programs should contain in equal proportions technological and pedagogical aspects.
   
3. All programs that propose to implement new technology in teaching should "sensitize" and train all teachers so that they can accept such programs. The training should form part of the teacher's normal workload, thus allowing the teacher the necessary autonomy so that this proposed work fits the teacher and his or her region.
   
4. We recommend that programs be created that integrate different countries in order to incorporate, develop and make known new technology.
   
5. All programs that apply new technology should be accompanied by continuous evaluation and adjustment.
   
6. It is fundamental that teaching institutions can count on necessary equipment, which is not always the most expensive. Whenever possible, we advise the establishment of support systems among institutions to facilitate the exchange or loan of equipment.
   
7. Libraries at educational institutions should incorporate new technologies in order to facilitate teachers' and students' access to such materials.
   
8. All materials developed to include new technologies should keep in mind that the objective of their application is to improve teaching (of physics in our case); and that in this field, a new technology is no more than another tool.
   
9. We recommend the creation of a home page with the conclusions or recommendations of the VI CIAEF, where research projects may be included, in order to facilitate the analysis and evaluation of the proposals and of the material eventually developed.

Back to the contents

Working Group Nº 2: Criteria for updating the Physics curricula at all levels of instruction

Coordinator: Marco Antonio Moreira (Brazil).

Considering that the style and the methods with which we teach future physics professors influence what will become their ways of teaching, and that the teaching of physics cannot be divorced from physics, we recommend that:

1. In the curriculum for the preparation of teachers, the content of physics and its pedagogy be integrated from the beginning;

2. In the institutions where future physics teachers are themselves taught, space and institutional conditions needed for the development of research on the teaching of physics be created. This space is where physics educators and physicists, working together, will produce original relevant ties to physics education.

3. Research into physics education be recognized as already constituting a worthy area of study within the field of physics (physics applied to education).

4. The preparation of the teachers of teachers acquire a significant relevance, because they are models of the future physics professors.

5. The criteria presented by Professor Donald Holcomb in his invited presentation on this topic be incorporated into these recommendations.

6. Complying with the proposal of Group 2, approved in the final meeting of the participants of the VI CIAEF, we transcribe said criteria, recommending them:

7. Pedagogical filters
   
   * A topic should be CONNECTIBLE: The topic should build on models or
   techniques previously introduced in the course.
   * It should have a GOOD STICKING COEFFICIENT: Students should carry away
   some long term retention from study of the topic in question. A test: Can
   one write appropriate questions or problems for students whose answers
   require thinking, not just memory?
   * It should have OBSERVABLE examples: Observation of phenomena which lie
   behind introduction of the topic should be accessible to students -- either
   in the everyday world, through demonstrations or in lab experiments.
   * Necessary development material for the topic should be COMPACT:
   Extensive special development will probably use too much of the valuable
   fixed reservoir of time available to instructor and student.
   
   Thematic filters
   
   * The topic should have SIGNIFICANCE. It should open doors to important
   knowledge or capabilities.
   * It should have PERVASIVENESS: The student should expect to meet the
   topic again, either in courses or in the outside world.
   * Its motivation should be TRANSPARENT: The main theme or reason for
   introducing it should be apparent.
   * It should be a GOOD MATCH to the overall story line or emphasis of the
   particular course.
   
   Commentary: A coherent treatment based on a phenomenological model is
   typically more accessible to the students than a complete and highly
   detailed description.
   
   Mental habits and other desirable habits to be transmitted to students:
   1. The meaning of the functional relationships and the graphic representations.
   2. The estimation of orders of magnitude and the recognizing of the reasonableness of a result.
   3. Elaboration and application of models.
   4. The use of dimensional analysis.
   5. The use of arguments of symmetry.
   6. The treatment of uncertainty of measurements.
   7. Inquisitive attitude: Does "this" make sense? What is the problem we are trying to resolve?
   8. Exposition of a topic in a form that is rational and connected to other topics.
   9. In general, ability to communicate effectively.

Back to the contents

Working Group Nº 3: Incorporation of Physics education research into teacher preparation

Coordinator: Leonor C. de Cudmani (Argentina)

In view of the legal demands and the requirements of a rapidly changing society, it is fundamental that policies for teacher preparation institutions be created and developed that heed the following recommendations:

1. All teacher preparation institutions should count on faculty to do research in science education in addition to their regular teaching load. In addition, teacher preparation institutions should be formally connected with other university level institutions where groups researching pure science as well as science education exist in order to facilitate joint projects, faculty exchanges, etc.

2. Given that a coherent body of results of science education research exists, all science classes from all curricula at all levels should be influenced by the conclusions of that research.

3. The titles of the faculty that teach teachers and of teachers at all levels should be based on job performed rather than the hours taught. Some part of teachers’ hours should be devoted to activities outside the classroom which could be evaluated with pre-established indicators.

4. The incorporation of the science education results into the regular educational activities and the retraining of teachers should be fundamental and should respond to a general plan.

5. The feasibility should be studied of establishing criteria that consider educational research for regulating certification of teachers.

6. Incentives should be given to teachers for participating in diverse scientific activities (symposia, conferences, seminars, etc.) so that they may complete their training with direct interaction with researchers.

7. Into all science classes, activities should be incorporated that refer to science education research, that require the consultation and analysis of books and other publications (specialized journals, proceedings of scientific meetings, etc.) and the use of computer resources, and that assure the continuous availability of the means with which to use these services.

8. Researchers should make an effort to have their work be accessible to teachers, and these efforts should be rewarded significantly by evaluation committees.

9. In the curricular design of the initial course work of physics professors, some optional material referring to science education research should be included.

Back to the contents

Working Group Nº 4: Preparation of physicists for future roles, specially in industries and scientific and business administration.

Coordinator: Benito Szapiro (USA)

Preamble:

Many graduate students tend to be clones of their professors. They are well prepared to examine and research problems with intellectual motivation. If they do not find opportunities to work in "important" physics and instead they find work in other areas of "the real world," they usually consider their job a consolation prize.

The "Golden Age" of physics lived by many physicists in the 1960s has waned. In order to survive in today’s world (which includes business, industry, government, and politics), the education of a physicist must prepare them for jobs that, in many cases, we can not foresee now.

One of the biggest challenges for the physics professor is to dispel the belief, common among many students, that physics is a difficult subject, only for "little Einsteins." This erroneous belief about physics is due in part to the success physicists have achieved in extending knowledge of the everyday world to deep space as well as to the microscopic level of nanometers. It is necessary to demystify physics to reach the entire community. We should generate interest in science and technology in the schools and offer a focus on the scientific method as a "polyfunctional tool" with which to examine problems. To do so with the general student population is crucial in order to increase the scientific knowledge of administrators, politicians, managers, etc. and to increase the appreciation of scientific knowledge by future generations.

Our point of view is that the study of physics should form part of the curricula, not only of professional careers such as engineering, chemistry, or medicine, but also of law, business, social sciences, and education. This education in physics would help to develop the ability to analyze and deal with data and complex concepts as well as to elaborate models and theories.

Similarly, the education of a physicist should include activities to appreciate other disciplines and group work.

Recommendations:

How should we prepare a physicist for future roles in corporations or other non-traditional environments where situations may be different from academic ones?

1. If physicists are to contribute with their specific abilities and points of view to areas outside traditional career paths, the value and validity of such contributions should be recognized by those both within and outside the physics community. Physicists from all levels should explicitly express a strong conviction that growth and intellectual challenge may also occur in jobs outside of academia, especially when physicists serve as role models for students. The nonphysics community should be persuaded with concrete examples that physicists have much to offer in many fields and activities.

2. Concrete and up-to-date information is vital. The Council of the IACPE should obtain information regarding new roles for physicists, and make it available. That information should include case studies, surveys (of employers as well as employees), statistics and other details about contacts with the world of production. The Council should create an instrument, perhaps a form, in order to disseminate this information, possibly on the Internet. We call on physicists and physics educators throughout the Americas to contribute to this task. (Editor's note: Daniel Lottis'site is a beginning in this direction.)

3. In order to correctly fill roles outside of physics, a physicist needs certain knowledge and training that include the ability to work on a team, the ability to communicate well, the disposition to complete a task by a given deadline and with a given budget, some ideas about business management, marketing, and the science and technology of administration.

Back to the contents

Working Group Nº 5: "Epistemology and history of science as a tool in physics teaching"

Coordinator: Víctor Rodríguez (Argentina)

Members: Irene Arriassecq (Argentina); Adriana Brunetto (Argentina); Laura Buteler (Argentina); Elizabeth Chesick (USA); James Conrad (USA); Guy Emery (USA); Zulma Gangoso (Argentina); José Pablo Gircoreano (Brazil); César Gutiérrez Ortiz (Mexico); Harry Manos(USA); Roberto Luiz Montenegro (Brazil); María Teresita Moyano (Argentina); Anna María Pessoa (Brazil) and Silvia Stipcich (Argentina).

Discussion
Before making any recommendations, it appears essential that we take into account the following diagnosis: Apparently, there is an outstanding consensus among the community about the need to incorporate topics on Epistemology and History of Physics in Physics curricula at all levels. However, the discussion has shown a lack of a clear, or at least settled idea about what Epistemology is. This variance deters the discussion from converging in order to arrive at any implementation proposals. Participants, and the communities they pertain to, are found to have approached such topics somehow, based on reading or courses undertaken because of individual interests or needs. This causes a remarkable diversion as regards topics, thus blocking an integrated vision and a fine comparative analysis. Many reasons can be found in several publications and proceedings of the latter decade, to regard as consequential the inclusion of Epistemology and History of Physics in curricula, so we believe it is not necessary to restate them, and we just hint at them: We roughly mention the following:

• Science learning models currently discussed do incorporate important contributions from epistemological trends.
• Research on education rescues the value of reflection about Physics structures, for which epistemology confers indispensable tools.
• Including issues on Epistemology and History of Physics enlightens teaching, giving continuance to the development of concepts, and it motivates students. In order that teachers are able to incorporate them to their classroom, they should be aware of the basic historical experiments and, whenever possible, propitiate students' making them.

According to the above mentioned reasons, we recommend the following:

1. To bear in mind the different regional levels, modalities and needs when implementing the inclusion of topics on Epistemology and History of Physics in the curricula.
2. As regards teachers' training, there should be a distinction between professional training and initial training. In the fist case, teachers should be encouraged to attend courses; should this not be possible, it is recommended (at least in an incidental way) the reading of texts and the discussion of articles on Physics, Epistemology and/or History of Physics. It is further recommended the incorporation of a subject to the curriculum, explicitly mentioning the epistemological positions within Physics classes. It is warned that courses and texts on Physics hold an implicit epistemological stand, which is not often noticed by the uninformed.
3. Every community should discuss about what should be the most appropriate way to implement Epistemology and History of Physics in their own environment, endeavoring to include aspects on: Logic, General Philosophy of Science, Philosophy of Physics and History of Physics.
4. Physics Teaching publications editors should promote the presentation of articles on Epistemology and History of Physics; whilst referees should consider how important they are to improve teaching.
5. These recommendations should be on a web page.

Return to the main IACPE page.

Return to the AAPT webpage.