Copyright (c) 2009 All rights reserved. http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra Recent documents in Dewey I. Dykstra en-us Sun, 30 Aug 2009 14:46:54 PDT 3600 http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/8 http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/8 Mon, 18 May 2009 13:20:37 PDT We have been preparing physics teachers in the same manner for many decades. Yet, physics education research reveals for some observers disturbing evidence of little or no change in understanding the phenomena occurs as a direct result of physics instruction from elementary school through the college years. The apparent compatibility between these learning results and prevailing paradigm enables the construction of a description the paradigm. If it can be demonstrated that there is even just one alternative paradigm from which powerful alternative pedagogical practice is derived, are we not obligated to change how we prepare to teach physics? Dewey I. Dykstra http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/5 http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/5 Fri, 15 May 2009 15:50:33 PDT Methods of physics education research were applied to find what kinds of changes in 4th, 6th, and 8th grade student understanding of motion can occur and at what age. Such findings are necessary for the physics community to effectively discharge its role in advising and assisting pre-college physics education. Prior to and after instruction the students were asked to carefully describe several demonstrated accelerated motions. Most pre-instruction descriptions were of the direction of motion only. After instruction, many more of the students gave descriptions of the motion as continuously changing. Student responses to the diagnostic and to the activity materials revealed the presence of a third "snapshot" view of motion not discussed in the literature. The 4th and 6th grade students gave similar pre-instructional descriptions of the motion, but the 4th grade students did not exhibit the same degree of change in descriptions after instruction. Our findings suggest that students as early as 6th grade can develop changes in ideas about motion needed to construct Newtonian-like ideas about force. Students' conceptions about motion change little under traditional physics instruction from these grade levels through college level. Dewey I. Dykstra http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/7 http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/7 Fri, 15 May 2009 15:49:40 PDT Dewey I. Dykstra http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/2 http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/2 Fri, 08 May 2009 14:41:46 PDT Dewey I. Dykstra http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/4 http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/4 Fri, 08 May 2009 14:41:46 PDT Purpose: This contribution to the Festschrift honoring Ernst von Glasersfeld gives some insight into the perpetual problem of understanding radical constructivism (RC). Parallels with the Middle Way school of Buddhism appear to shed light on this challenge. Conclusions: The hegemony realism has over the thinking of even the most highly educated in our civilization plays a major role in their failure to understand RC. Those still subject to realism in their thinking interpret statements by those in RC in ways incompatible with RC. Until realists disequilibrate over mismatches between realist expectations and experiences, no alternative way of thinking is accessible to them and misinterpretations of RC will continue. Practical implications: While we cannot change someone else's understanding, in our interactions with them we can focus on creating situations in which those who do not understand us might disequilibrate. If we are successful, they are likely to begin to escape the domination of realism in their thinking. Value: This insight may enable eventual success in our assisting others to understand RC. Dewey I. Dykstra http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/1 http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/1 Fri, 08 May 2009 14:41:45 PDT Purpose: Often radical constructivists are confronted with arguments why radical constructivism is wrong. The present work presents a radical constructivist alternative to such arguments: a comparison of the results of two instructional practices, the standard, realistbased instruction and a radical constructivist-based instruction, both in physics courses. Design: Evidence from many studies of student conceptions in standard instruction (Duit 2004) is taken into account. In addition, diagnostic data, pre and post instruction, were collected from over 1,000 students in multiple institutions across the U. S. over a period of about 15 years via an established diagnostic of conceptual understanding of motion and force. Findings: Evidence from many studies of student conceptions in standard instruction (Duit, 2004) is that little or no change in student conceptions happens in standard instruction. About half the students in the particular study reported, all science and engineering majors, experienced standard, realist-based instruction and show an average effect size of 0.6 standard deviations and an average normalized gain of 15%. The other half of the students, none of whom were science and engineering majors, experienced radical constructivist- based instruction and show an average effect size over 2.5 standard deviations and an average normalized gain over 60%. Diagnostic pre scores were nearly the same for both groups. Practical implications: The outcome, that students, neither science nor engineering majors, made changes in understanding foundational topics in physics far greater than science and engineering students, poses (1) an ethical challenge to the continued adherence to standard, realist-based instructional practices and (2) an intellectual challenge to the usefulness and appropriateness of the elitist-realist paradigm on which such standard instruction is based. Conclusions: This radical constructivist argument uses the effect of paradigms to judge their pragmatic value, not their truth-value. Based on pragmatic value, radical constructivism results in superior outcomes when applied to physics instruction. The approach to instruction can be applied generally in education. Dewey I. Dykstra http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/3 http://works.bepress.com/dewey_dykstra/3 Fri, 08 May 2009 14:41:42 PDT Dewey I. Dykstra