Summer Reflections

I've been meaning to write this for some time, and I finally got the chance during a trip I took recently. I wanted to reflect a bit about the year and start thinking about next year.

Regents: The course went pretty well. I've been giving a lot of thought to how I teach- part of me wants to abandon my lab program (which I love) to spend more time on whiteboard debriefing. However, our 38 minute periods don't lend themselves to this mode. I was pushing for adjacent labs with the same roster as the class, but it doesn't look like it's going to be possible. I love the idea of physics soulmates that Kelly uses!

AP: I erred on my timing. I was pushing to be able to assess each target 3 times on in-class assessments  With ~40 standards and two on each weekly assessment, this simply wasn't possible. I backed off this after the first semester in an effort to make up for lost time, but the damage was done. We also ditched the independent lab program, which I wasn't happy with anyway- it seemed like the students weren't interested and didn't have the time or motivation to finish things that needed a little bit more oomph outside of class. We spent a lot of time on an awesome projectile motion project with tennis balls, but we probably didn't have that much time to spare. I realized it once we were partway through, but didn't want to do it half-assed.

Toward the end of the year the pace was too fast- we were able to cover the material, but it didn't truly sink in. In addition, there was a lot of backlash against SBG. About half the class was dissatisfied with it, others wanted to see it modified in one way or another. They also blamed it for the slow pace of the course, which wasn't the root problem- it was how I implemented it. Some of the students lost faith and were very upset with their experience, saying on their final reflection of the year that they would not recommend the course to future students.

I was disappointed by this, but I understand where they were coming from. As a school/system we're so fixated on the HW/quiz/test system of getting a good grade that something different seems to throw students for a loop. For the majority of them, despite their best intentions, when push came to shove they didn't do the recommended conditioning since it wasn't required. They left it all until the end of the marking period and tried to cram it in, but since they weren't practicing as they went their skills in these areas suffered, and then the new topics that built on these skills were shaky.

My advisor in graduate school always told me that you are what you grade. I have always tried to follow this mantra in determining how I want to assess my students. The last time I taught AP Physics using a traditional grading system I used the following breakdown::

30% Homework
30% Tests
15% Labs
5% Quizzes
20% Class Participation

This year I gave 70% to core standards, 20% to advanced standards, and 10% to experiments and class participation.

Here is what I'm thinking about for next year: go back to a traditional grading system, but with a SBG twist and modified percentages to encourage the behavior I want to see.

15% Homework
40% Tests/Quizzes (in class work)
25% Experiments
30% Class participation

I want to make sure they do homework/practice, but not doing it perfectly shouldn't kill their overall average. So I want to base the bulk of their grade on what they do in class. I really liked the weekly assessments and frequent feedback, so I might try to keep that trend going with bi-weekly test/quizzes and then bigger assessments for each marking period- sort of like the prelim system used at Cornell.

Frank posted a short SBG reflection. I'm not sure how I'll assess by concept- if I use the standards I utilized this year I'll have to pare them down and redesign them- some weren't great. What really caught my attention was the first link in his #2. What I love about this method is how you have tests, but the scores aren't set in stone. You can try that section again on the final exam, and if you do better it erases your previous grade. But if you did well on the original test, you don't have to complete that section on the final exam. I'm trying to figure out how to do this- it's complicated by the need to submit marking period grades that are set in stone every 10 weeks. Hence the leaning toward a quarterly exam with more frequent quizzes on individual topics/concepts. The trick is going to be organizing it from the outset.

Doing this should also help me with my pacing. This has always been something that I struggle with- I am loath to move on until the majority of students have mastered a concept because I know that shaky foundations make for a weak overall structure. Always something to improve, that's for certain!

favorite things

My AP students did a project with tennis balls and projectile motion a while back. It took longer than I wanted, but the results were awesome.

I also wanted to share one of my favorite lab experiments in recent history. Not because of its results (slightly shaky), but rather because of its ingenuity and playfulness. And who wouldn't want to have a pogostick in the classroom?

Actually, it gets old after a bit. Both the squeakiness and the constant "no, that's someone's lab, you can't bounce on it all day long.

Model trains? Yeah, we can do that.

 Ballistic pendulum with a stomp rocket? Sure. The group decided to attach neodymium magnets to the end of the rocket and the back of the bucket to make absolutely sure that the collision was inelastic.

Next week I'm going to be sharing my Fulbright experiences with the Global Physics Department. Can't wait!

the white hole

I gave a test to my Regents Physics students this week. After the test as he left the classroom, a pupil of mine said he thought it was a good test. At first I was struck by this- a student telling me I wrote a good test? Awesome! Maybe it was a good test... Then I started thinking about it. Why did he think it was a good test? Because it was easy? Because he thought it was appropriate? Because it played to his strengths?

I wasn't sure. The student in question is bright, but not the most focused. He also has trouble with details- writing down starting equations, units, etc. The other day we were practicing and I mentioned that he had neglected some units. He asked me why they're needed, I explained, and then he decided it wasn't worth his time, even if the Regents exam will penalize him heavily for their omission. The test opened with difficult multiple choice, a short essay, and then some problems to solve. Nothing terrible, but many students made it harder than it needed to be. To illustrate this, let's consider two problems. First:

They said that the horizontal throw of the rock wouldn't make any sort of difference. Most mentioned a demo I had done in class with two pennies and a ruler, and the majority got full credit. I was pleased- it seemed like they understood.

Later in the test, the following problem appeared: 

The results were much worse than I had expected. 60% of the students used the horizontal velocity as the initial velocity in the vertical direction, and then got bogged down solving the resulting quadratic. It was painful to see. Was it a bad question? I don't know- what do you think? I thought it was good until the results came back.

On a bigger scale, this got me wondering it the test I administered was a good one. Is any test good? Would a more conceptual test be better? Would such a test prepare them for the state exam at the end of the year?

I've been using Standards-Based Grading with my AP students, but not with my Regents Physics class. Testing the waters, so to speak. I love SBG, but the workload is tremendous. Would it be better? Undoubtedly. Would it do me in? Perhaps. I hope to redesign my Regents class for next year from the ground up, and I'd love to incorporate SBG. We'll see how that plays out- lots of it depends on the school administration.

By the way, the student who complimented me on the test passed with a 70. I see three possibilities:

1) he thought it was a fair test but didn't know the material as well as he should have and complimented the test despite this
2) he was over-confident and thought he'd done better than he actually did
3) he was just messing with me.

I don't think it was the third one. I'm a reasonable judge of character and he was being sincere.

On a final note, in class yesterday we were talking about energy, and a student asked about black holes and what would happen when you fell through one. We talked about how it would rip you apart, and then he said "but when you come out on the other side through the white hole, it would put you back together again, right? It basically made my day, I laughed so hard I was almost crying. Apparently there is a vein in my forehead that starts to pulse when I'm either laughing or angry, and the kids all noticed it today. Sweet- there goes my poker game, and now I've just told the world about my tell!

back in the saddle

It's been a while since I've posted. Mostly because I've been super busy, but perhaps I was also putting too much effort into my posts to make them perfect. No time for that now, so you'll be getting the raw versions.

Updates:

Regents Physics: moving forward, but slower than I would like. Still working on projectile motion. Some neat experiments in progress (does adding flavoring to water affect how it freezes... Build your own air-zooka... piezo-electric film canister poppers, etc.). I did something different with Unit 4 this year. Started with the 3rd law. I liked it, but made a mess of the introduction itself. I made a new worksheet and added it to the mix. Decided to set it in space to put off dealing with Fg for a while. I decided to use two rockets, but that was a bad idea, because the students had to consider thrust. I'll use the same sequence if I teach the course this way next year (see note below), but rather than rockets and engines I'll use something like two objects that an astronaut is batting around. Ball in a cup game perhaps? Not sure why you would take that into space, but hopefully you get the idea.

AP Physics is going well. Again, slower than I would like, but I'm ok with it. Our foundation is rock-solid, now the pace will increase. I am confident that we'll get through all the topics, but we'll have to keep the pressure on. Still doing SBG and the weekly assessments. Two minor changes: they can apply for re-assessments using a paper form now (in addition to the google docs form), and no guarantee of seeing each target 3x on in-class assessments. I found that this was taking too long, and also made the students reluctant to apply for re-assessments because they knew they'd see the material again. Right now we're doing a museum-style installation of tennis ball arcs in the room (a la Helaina/Shawn). I'm psyched with how it's going. Lots of trial and error with the actual hanging methods (who knew that a fishing line wouldn't hold a clove-hitch without a keeper knot?), but the kids are troubleshooting really well. We'll have lots of arcs, some bouncing, etc. Probably some inverted gravity as well to keep things close to the ceiling and out of our way.

Writing all my AP units in LaTex because I promised myself never to use Word for anything bigger than a unit test. It's good, but slow. I'm getting better, much better, but it still takes a while. Hopefully this will be the only time I have to do it and the future years will just make tweaks.

Next year:
I'd really like to teach AP Physics again. The year-on, year-off cycle isn't much fun- I feel like there are all of these things that I want to do and then forget about. One of the best things about having Regents Physics every year is that I get the chance to consistently tweak things.

Next year I'm hoping to have lab and class back-to-back for my Regents students with the same rosters. Maybe even labs 3x every 6-day cycle rather than the current 2. I might abandon my current Modeling materials in class and independent labs in small groups during lab method and do bigger stuff with smaller independent experiments mixed in. SBG? Maybe. I spend a lot of time on it and I'm only using it with my AP class right now. We'll see if the change comes to fruition. It would be a great change, but lots of work.

New things:
I stumbled across desmos (courtesy of mathalicious) and love it. I would tweak a few things (like why can't theta be  variable?), but overall it's really powerful. My AP kids are using it a lot for their arcs.

Hope to write more soon and make this updating thing a more regular occurrence.