Lee Shulman in "Carnegie Perspectives"<http://tinyurl.com/cxnx8> of
23 January 2006 writes [bracketed by lines "SSSSSSSSS. . . ."; my
CAPS and inserts at
[. . .]] :
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
Tom Ehrlich has strong ties to Harvard, his alma mater. In this
month's Perspectives, Tom expresses his embarrassment and regret that
this university is on the brink of abandoning the reform of Harvard's
undergraduate curriculum, a reform that Tom feels is long overdue.
Tom's commentary does more than merely address his concern with his
alma mater; it also speaks to a larger and more endemic issue: THE
FACT THAT WE TEND TO TAKE UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION FOR GRANTED IN THIS
COUNTRY. This neglect has created a lack of coherence that would be
much improved by addressing the need for a strong core curriculum. .
.[and by moving towards a "Learning Paradigm" - see below].
Carnegie has created a forum "Carnegie Conversations" where you can
engage publicly with the author and read and respond to what others
have to say. Join this month's online conversation at
<http://tinyurl.com/9ls3u>.
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
In his commentary Ehrlich writes [bracketed by lines "EEEEEEEE. . .
."; my CAPS]:
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
The Harvard Faculty of Arts and Sciences is poised to approve an
embarrassing retreat in general education. The committee charged with
reforming the current Core Curriculum has instead abandoned the whole
idea. In its place, the committee recommends only a minimum
distribution requirement for undergraduates-three courses in each of
three fields. Since undergraduates will major in one of these fields,
this means a distribution requirement of six courses chosen from
hundreds offered by faculty in their various disciplines. . . . . .
Why did the committee sink to the lowest common denominator? The sad
reality is that the new plan looks like it was crafted to serve the
faculty and not the students. IT WILL ENSURE THAT FACULTY NEED TEACH
ONLY WHAT THEY WANT TO TEACH, leaving it up to the students to make
whatever connections they can among their courses. . . . . Harvard
undergraduates will always do well because Harvard takes only the
pick of the litter. What a shame that Harvard could not do more for
such able students to further their general education. My face is
crimson.
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Fritz Mosher, in a comment at <http://tinyurl.com/d8cqw> on Ehrlich's
essay wrote:
"If [Ehrlich needs] support, it looks like it is coming from a former
Harvard President - Derek Bok, whose new book "Our Underachieving
Colleges". . .[Bok (2005a)]. . . I've seen in page print. It is a
really thoughtful, and quite thorough, treatment of the evidence
about the effects of undergraduate education - including the many
variants of general education requirements, of which the new Harvard
proposals seem to be a retrograde example -- taking, as you say, the
easy and faculty friendly way out."
In my opinion, a deficiency of undergraduate education that is more
serious than the lack of a solid core curriculum, is the prevalence
of passive student lectures. At least in physics it has been
demonstrated that higher-level learning gains due to "interactive
engagement" methods are about two standard deviations greater that
those produced by traditional pedagogy.
Consistent with the above, Bok (2005b) wrote:
". . . studies indicate that problem-based discussion, group study,
and other forms of active learning produce greater gains in critical
thinking . . .[he might have added "and in conceptual
understanding"]. . . than lectures, yet the lecture format is still
the standard in most college classes, especially in large
universities."
Unfortunately, few universities have moved very far from the
"Teaching Paradigm" to the "Learning Paradigm" [Barr & Tagg (1995)].
A model for Harvard in pursuing the "Learning Paradigm" is provided
in house by the exemplary work of Harvard's Eric Mazur and his
colleagues [e.g., Crouch & Mazur (2001); Lorenzo et al. (2006)]; and
by the physics education reform effort generally [Hake (2005)].
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
24245 Hatteras Street, Woodland Hills, CA 91367
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi>
REFERENCES
Barr, R.B. & J. Tagg. 1995. "From Teaching to Learning: A New
Paradigm for Undergraduate Education," Change 27(6); 13-25,
November/December. Reprinted in D. Dezure, Learning from Change:
Landmarks in Teaching and Learning in Higher Education from Change
1969-1999. American Association for Higher Education, pp. 198-200.
Also online at <http://tinyurl.com/8g6r4>.
Bok, D. 2005a. "Our Underachieving Colleges: A Candid Look at How
Much Students Learn and Why They Should Be Learning More." Princeton
University Press. Amazon.com information is at
<http://tinyurl.com/bnn8c>.
Bok, D. 2005b. "Are colleges failing? Higher ed needs new lesson
plans" Boston Globe, 18 December, freely online (probably only for a
short time) at <http://tinyurl.com/da5v2>, and to educators at
<http://tinyurl.com/aj95w> (scroll to the APPENDIX). See also Bok
(2005c).
Bok, D. 2005c. "The Critical Role of Trustees in Enhancing Student
Learning," Chronicle of Higher Education, 13 December, online to
subscribers at
<http://chronicle.com/chronicle/v52/5217guide.htm>. Scroll way down
to "Learning Their Role."
Crouch, C.H. & E. Mazur. 2001. "Peer Instruction: Ten years of
experience and results," Am. J. Phys. 69: 970-977; online at
<http://tinyurl.com/d35z4>.
Hake, R.R. 2005. "The Physics Education Reform Effort: A Possible
Model for Higher Education?" National Teaching and Learning Forum
(NTLF) 15(1), December, online to subscribers at
<http://www.ntlf.com/> and to non-subscribers who sign up for a FREE
60-Day online subscription at
<http://ntlf.com/forms/signup/signup.htm>.
Lorenzo, M., C.H. Crouch, & E. Mazur. 2006. "Reducing the gender gap
in the physics classroom," Am. J. Phys. 74(2): 118-122; online at
<http://tinyurl.com/dvanu>.
---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
