The Mind-Blowing Possibilities of plot.ly

plot.ly

Data visualization for scientists, journalists and the public.

You can search a database of data sets in plotly to begin and generate ideas. This set is from the Python API page. https://plot.ly/python/

We were fortunate enough to have Matt Sunquist of plot.ly come to our campus recently to talk about something that is his passion:

sharing data for the purpose of data literacy

Matt Sundquist, co-founder, of plot.ly

Disclaimer: This is NOT a tutorial.  I’m still learning plotly myself.  I’m just writing down thoughts stemming from a recent talk as part of our Title III curriculum re-design grant.  For an intro/how-to to get you started, check out Rhett Allain’s December 2013 post here.

I’ve never used the words “mind-blowing” in anything I’ve written before, but it is appropriate for a handful of reasons.  There’s so much that was presented and even more that I need to learn . . .  So this post is premature as I’m far from an expert.  I’m going to try to keep this post focussed, but plotly’s utility and function sprawls like a concept map, so bear with me.

First, the basics

• Create a graph from data.  (Duh, right?!)  Using data from excel or manual input, a graph is created.  Plotly does its best to auto-recognize x- and y- variables.  If it gets it wrong, it’s a simple fix, but it’s likely going to get it right, right out of the box.
• Next, fit a function to the data.  This is not much more exciting, you can do this in Excel or LoggerPro pretty easily.
• You can edit any feature of the graph and add comments easily through plotly’s GUI.  The departures from standalone graphing software begins here.  How do you move, modify and embed legends/comment boxes in Excel without skewing the graph, anyway?
• Get creative with how your data are represented.  Switching among graph types is a snap and adding a fourth dimension to your data can be done in different ways (datapoint color or size, for example).
• Share your graph and data with someone else privately.  Or, share it publicly.  The setup is similar to Dropbox, and just as easy.  Those you’ve shared your file with will see the graph and the data.  You’re essentially sharing the graph’s DNA, not just the final output.
• Graphs can be posted directly to social media outlets as fully interactive objects for others to explore.

So far that’s not really super-wonderful, it’s just a graphing utility that’s gone ‘googledocs-like.’  But wait, there’s more.  A whole lot more.  

• Others can save your graph with its embedded data for their own work.  They can’t change your original file in your account (unless you give them permission to), but they can tweak the settings and output and then save as a file of their own.  Then their interpretation can be re-shared.  If you are looking for a collaboration, this is great!
• With the notebook feature, changes can be logged.  A digital record of each collaborator’s modifications, comments and code all populate a journal for review.
• So next, take your graph and embed it in a blog as an object.  Not as a .png or a .jpg, but as a fully interactive object just as it functions in plotly.  This enables further sharing among your blog visitors.  My attempt at this is below.  It’s my first plotly of HS physics teachers in OK per county as a function of county number:

https://plot.ly/~SteveMaier_/3/ok-hs-physics-teachers/  (Unfortunately, embedding plotly graphs is not yet possible in WordPress, but is in github--for for now you'll need to click the link).

But it needs help!  Can you save and then edit a version of your own to better represent the data???

“And now it gets crazy . . .” (This is pretty much a quote of Matt’s)

• Plotly will soon have a live feed for users to publish and share their graphs.  It has the potential to be the data guru’s version of Twitter.  In the future, you may hear someone ask you at a conference “That’s a great representation of the data, have you posted it to your _________ feed yet?  I have some ideas of analyses I’d like to explore with you.”  My candidates for the blank: plotly, Analytics, graphguru . . .
• If you’ve created graphs in Matlab, R, Julie, Node.js or Python, then you can import them into plotly.  Also, use LaTeX for titles, comments or notes on the graph, no worries.  Once in plotly, modify any of the features as you like.  Then output the entire file in any of the above formats!  Plotly is basically the Rosetta Stone of data analysis.
• Plotly now has the capability of converting a static image of a plot into a plotly file.  It essentially deconstructs the image of a graph and reverse engineers the image to create a data file.  Then the data are used to create a plotly file.  This file will have not just the graph, but the data used to create the graph!  So take a graph from a periodical or a newspaper, scan it, apply some plotly magic and your students can run analyses on previously published graphs with data comparable to those collected by the authors!  Aside from “fact checking,” this could be a great tool for working with data sets that mirror those used by experts in the field.

Some closing thoughts:

To close, I’ll just add some passing thoughts quickly.  I really didn’t want this to become a long post, but there are some really neat possibilities here for the classroom:

• Have students import their lab data directly to plotly and share it among their classmates with a class profile within plotly.  Lab data could then be crowd-sourced and/or groups’ data could be plotted on top of one another for comparison.  This could be informative if each group had a slight variation in apparatus/question.
• If you’re not up to creating a class profile in plotly, just designate a class specific hashtag for quick searches if posts/graphs are in social media.
• Have classes collaborate across institutions!  Think about your students sharing data and graphs with high schools a few states away or an ivy league university across the nation.
• What if Vernier or PASCO sensors were used in line with plotly for streaming data off your student’s lab benches?
• A word of caution: my stats committee member would be quick to point out that unless you have formalized your question prior to data collection, then any analyses are purely exploratory.  I don’t think plotly minds this.  In fact, they want folks exploring, that’s there entire gig.  However, broad sweeping conclusions might not be appropriate from data used and analyses completed.  This is less of an issue for physical systems.

Take away message: plotly is worth a look!

Hustler Zeon All Electric Mower

Update:  While you are welcome to read the post below, make use of the documents shared, and learn from the comments, I have come to a crossroads with this mower.  The deck motor driver has failed twice on me.  I’ve tried to repair them and they are quite difficult to service. A Hustler OEM replacement will cost ~$1,600.  It is available for ~$900 from other vendors (though they are difficult to find).  So I believe I will be purchasing a new unit.  Since the Zeon is discontinued, I will likely go with a 60″ Raptor (gas).

Well, I caved in and took the plunge!

In 2013, I purchased an all electric mower.

It is a zero turn riding mower with a 42″ mowing deck.

This is what it looks like. Other images with the bulky front and accordion control protectors are either a different year or a prototype model.

Before taking the plunge, I searched the web for some intel.  What I found were skeptical posts dating back to when the mower was introduced (2009?) and a few posts of dissatisfied customers:

The skeptical posts of the unit were by people who did not actually own a Zeon, their arguments were based mostly on the predicted pitfalls of battery life and assumed lack of power due to the power source. Most of the customers’ complaints were corrected, others did not follow up with how their complaints were handled.

So, what I found was intel, technically . . . it was just not very good/detailed intel.  Anyway, I decided that if I were to get a Zeon, I’d be sure to make some posts about my experiences.

My Circumstances

My lot is about 1.7 acres.  There are trees and some sloped areas.  The very back of the lot borders a pond with a sandy soil. When I mow, I find that I don’t usually have several hours at a time to mow.  More often than not, I can only work for an hour or two before running kids here/there or tending to something inside.  So having a unit that can only mow for 60 – 90 minutes at a time fits my needs. Having my own mower, I intend to mow often so the lawn doesn’t get out of control.  I doubt my neighbors expect this of me right now due to my mowing history, but I’ve been borrowing a mower from a neighbor and have always tried to limit my use with it.  Long story short, I think cutting the grass more often after only slight growth is a good fit for an electric mower (cutting tall grass takes longer and you won’t be able to mow the same area as shorter grass).

My wife and I really don’t want to store a lot of gas or deal with fumes in the garage.  Some day I may have an outbuilding.  Until then, the mower will need to be in our attached garage. I never like buying 1st generation equipment, especially when very expensive.  Being 2013, my expectations are than most of the bugs in the early units have been hashed out.

UPDATE:  When I first got the mower, I was playing catch up with overgrown grass.  The Zeon does not handle very thick and tall grass as well as a suped up gas mower.  It tends to choke out and give an error code a lot if you progress too quickly.  What I had to do was raise the deck to its maximum height, trim, then go at it again at a lower height.  It was an unfair test for its first use, but I learned its limits pretty early.  Once I got into a rhythm, I went along fine.

First Impressions

• The Zeon runs essentially without noise when the blades are not engaged.  It really is amazingly quiet.  And, it can move pretty fast.  It is more than fast enough for me.  I’m glad there’s a seatbelt!
• It’s size is small for being a 42″ machine–this has implications I’ll talk about later.
• There are 12 different deck heights settings!  These range from 1″ to 4″.  If you are clever with the deck safety lever, you can set the deck for an additional height of 4.5″.
• When the blades are engaged, it is NOT noiseless.  You don’t need ear muffs, per se, but I recommend them anyway.
• I was impressed with it’s first test: mowing an overgrown side lot (grass was 20+ inches in height).  The adjustments for speed were the same as I would’ve had to make with a gas powered mower of equivalent size.
• The Zeon is of welded construction; very solid.
• There’s a tow hole in the back.  And it is secure enough to use to pull the unit out of a sandy mess 🙂

Concessions

• This unit is expensive.  I gave up an offer on a used 52″ Hustler unit that was 3/4 the price.  The reasons: there was a lot of oxidation on the used unit, there was no warranty on a used machine.
• The wheel fenders are plastic–I wish those were metal.
• The fast charger is too expensive.  If you want to charge the mower in 6 hours, it’ll cost you $600.
• There is no throttle adjustment like on a gas mower, so there’s no way to limit the max speed when driving/mowing.  This is not an issue for me right now . . . but when the day comes I teach my children how to mow, there could be some scary moments.

Notable Points: Experiences So Far

Regarding safety, I know that the roller bar is important.  But wow . . . it can be really annoying!  I like that it can be folded down, but even that can get in the way.  I popped a wheelie a couple times on trees with low branches or others growing at an angle.  Lesson learned: a little situational awareness is in order!

When mowing heavy grass, if the motors get choked out, expect error messages on the LCD display.  It’s a little disconcerting at first, but Keep Calm and Power Down.  Make sure the hand controls are in the parking position and the blades are disengaged before powering back up.  If that doesn’t work, while the mower is “on”, move the controls to the drive position, then out to the parking position.  Then you’ll likely get the “ready” read-out.

The size of the mower is great!  For a 42″ mower, you can get into very tight spaces and do circles around trees like no one’s business.  However, what I’ve noticed so far is that my comfort level in dealing with slopes is not as great as the larger framed 42″ gas mower I borrowed up to this point.

Charging takes a while.  21 – 22 hours between uses can be too much to wait for some.  I use the down time for trimming and other chores, so it works for me– But this could be a real issue for those with different schedules/mowing cycles.

Motor effectiveness does not decrease as the battery charge goes down.  This is crucial!  It’s not like a battery operated drill that begins to lose torque or rpm’s due to low battery charge.  The motors in the Zeon continue at full pace even when the LCD display indicates only one bar.

To Wrap Up . . .

I’m happy with the machine so far.  The lot I’ve been working on was originally 24″ in some spots and very thick.  I first mowed at 4.5″.  It left a clipping heap with each pass and a line of grass that had to be mowed again.  But honestly, at 24″, that’s likely with most any mower.  I’ve since gone over some of the lot with the deck set at 2.5″.  It handled it just fine; choking out a couple times on the clipping heaps from the day before.  My bagger is on order and I’m looking forward to putting it to use!

Resources (links open a new tab)

Helpful Documents:

• Zeon operators manual
• Zeon parts manual
• Smartec guide to error codes: smartec-ts-guide
• Hydro-Gear manual for drive system: smartec-zt
• OEM Batteries: http://www.trojanbattery.com/product/31xhs/
• OEM Batteries Spec sheet

Other Posts/Blogs

• Hustler Turf Zeon A post about charging and testing batteries.  Last active was 2011.
• Inaccurate Display blog post
• Sensor Location and Available Reference Voltage Technical post about troubleshooting sources of performance issues.
• Zeon light kit A blog post about an owner’s experience installing a light kit
• GE-ElecTrak forum Very informative discussion on batteries and chargers for the Zeon (make sure you advance through all of the pages of the discussion)

Advice

Batteries:  The Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) batteries are Trojan 31XHS (~$200 a piece), not to be confused with ordinary Group 31 batteries you might find locally.  As Christopher points out, there is a significant difference.  Something to consider . . . if you are buying a Zeon “new” now, recognize that the batteries may be old.  Even if they weren’t ever really used, they’ve been sitting (likely without a healthy charge or water levels maintained).  I would recommend getting some assurances from the dealer the batteries are current or have been replaced with factory OEM batteries or an equivalent (compare the specs).  Otherwise the life of the batteries may be significantly reduced.

Chargers:  Related to batteries, there’ve been some comments about chargers.  I still use an OEM charger, simply because my first one failed and I got a replacement for free because it was still under warranty.  However, I am really tempted to upgrade to an onboard charger as commented on by Brandon Friesen and Bob Hutchinson.  These chargers have four separate leads that can remain attached to the batteries, charging them individually rather than in series like the OEM charger does.  This permits the charger to manage each battery independently which cannot be done with an in-line series hookup as in the OEM charger.  (The advantage of this is some chargers are capable of reconditioning/prolonging the life of batteries if charging only one at a time).  Those mentioned below in the comments include:

• NOCO Genius 4 charger ~$375 on manufacturer’s website
• Minn Kota 440D ~$430 on manufacturer’s website

Another advantage is that some of these kinds of chargers can typically be kept outdoors; even permanently fixed to the mower for convenience.  This is not the case with the Hustler OEM charger (see next paragraph).

OEM Charger Must be Indoors:  If you think you can get away with putting the charger under the mower tarp while it’s outside charging, you are mistaken.  This is a bad idea.  The charger needs ventilation and a low humidity environment.  It will fail over time if used outside, subjected to daily humidity.  I speak on this from experience . . .

Loose Nuts: Check the nuts that hold the deck in place from time to time!  I’ve started replacing nuts that have loosened with locking nuts (the dome shaped ones with the plastic inserts).

Battery Update:  After 110 hours logged with the original batteries, I am finding that they are not performing well. I’m not sure if this is due to their age, use, or the chargers. The first OEM charger failed due to moisture getting in its housing. That was replaced with a new OEM charger by Hustler. That unit was kept dry but also failed (there was a loud “PoP,” and it was done). So I’m now using a NOCO Gen4 charger. I’m not certain if the OEM chargers caused damage to the batteries, but the Gen4 charger is giving me error codes after a couple cycles.

 

What’s the Mileage?

The best kind of profession permits you to carry out extra curricular activities you enjoy without acting as a diversion.

While at a conference recently (AAPT), I was presenting material over an astronomy workshop I’d held with a colleague during the summer of 2012 (at the SLL Observatory). The poster had the usual stuff on it: pictures of the facility, demographics of participants, bulleted lists of what we did, etc. And, even though it was located off the beaten path from the bulk of the posters, it got a lot of traffic — no complaints here.

Those who stopped by to visit had great comments and questions. And then it happened, on more than one occasion… I felt like I was out of the loop; like I’d missed some memo on current buzzwords. I was asked by several individuals

“So what mileage did you get out of doing this?”

To be honest, I didn’t know how to respond at the time. The truth is, working with an NWOSU adjunct who is also a member of a local astronomy organization (Starcreek Astronomical Society), we simply came up with the idea while stargazing as something that would be fun to do: apply for a small grant to host an astronomy workshop in rural Oklahoma. (It was a great success, by the way!)

Anyway–since then, I’ve had time to reflect on the question and its broader meaning. Turns out, it’s an incredibly valid question! and we should all consider answering it before taking on a new project or saying ‘yes’ to the next extra curricular activity around the bend.

When it comes to deciding what to do and why, here are two basic factors to consider:

1. Your professional activities ultimately play a role in things like job security, promotion and tenure.
2. Extra curricular activities require additional time and will draw from your resources.

While fun and interesting, item 2 above can mean time away from family and hinder fulfilling what’s wrapped up in item 1. Plus, saying “yes” to too many things means you may not be able to complete any of them to the quality you’d like. Not to mention more involvement in things means less “power down” time for you (we all need a little separation from work!).

The best situation one can find oneself in is one where items 1 and 2 above are aligned. Extra curricular activities don’t have to be an added drain/strain. They can be framed in ways that augment the experiences of more than those they were designed to benefit directly.

For example, I help host a local robotics competition (BEST) and and am often asked to launch rockets or do a science demonstration day for area schools. With a little bit of lead time, I get my students involved as much as I can. They help run demonstrations on science safety, judge at the robotics competition and play a role in getting the rocket fleet up and running. And I’m not just pawning off my work to students! Many of them are pre-professional students or future teachers: they need community-based volunteer experiences and public school field experience hours to round out their undergraduate programs of study. In fact, our science majors must complete Science Fair Judging: a service-learning course designed to help majors see the merits of professionals promoting/supporting STEM initiatives among youth. The science fair “extra-curricular” activity has turned into a benchmark experience for all of our majors (biology, chemistry and science education).

The mileage I gain from activities like these is not just in helping students complete their degrees or resume building. One of their most critical values is maintaining relationships and continuity with area HS teachers/schools. This has been a tremendous asset in feeding grant-funded professional development opportunities (see ToPPS, for example).

Long story short, the odometer may not be easy to read in all that we do, but if we keep our wits about us and heed our colleagues’ advice (like backseat drivers!), we’re likely to stay on the right path. And those extra curricular activities? They aren’t always exits away from your final destination. . .

The Physics Roundabout

The Physics Round-A-Bout

If you’ve ever been in a physics class, at some point you know it’s going to happen. Sometimes it’s once a week– in other classes it’s every single day.

Teacher: “So we see here, there’s a system that looks like this . . .”

Students: Nodding, acknowledging they see what she/he is referring to.

Teacher: “Ok. Now what will happen if I do this?” (Motions like she/he is going to do something to the system but freezes for drama and to prompt some student reactions).  

A multiple choice question pops up on the screen, asking for students to make a prediction of what happens next.

Students: Wrestling with what to say/choose, begin working through a mental flowchart; a newly established norm for physics class that defines how they approach answering “simple” conceptual questions:

1. “Nope, it can’t be that one, because that’s the obvious answer–that’s too easy to be right.”
2. “It could be that answer because it’s the opposite of the obvious answer.”
3. “It’s best to choose one of the other choices because by default, the other two are what the teacher expects me to choose based on what we know (or don’t yet know).”

For the sake of the physics education road sign theme lately and keeping things simple, I’m going to call the above logic/graphic the Physics Round-A-Bout (though I know it happens a lot in other disciplines, too). It’s based on every teacher’s desire to surprise or impress upon students something that is unexpected.  Let’s face it, for the most part teachers like sharing what they know, and teachers are intrigued by counter-intuitive explanations.  This in large part is what is responsible for the physics round-a-bout.  But the round-a-bout is also partly derivative of learning theory: by creating a discrepant event, disequilibrium or cognitive dissonance among students, students begin to assimilate the new information until it is accommodated within their world view or mental content. Wait, what? Yeah, sorry about the jargon . . . Those familiar with Piaget’s work, the work of Karplus or Strike and Posner’s conceptual change research may be giving a fist pump right now. For the rest of us, here’s the short of it:

You see something that doesn’t make sense. You are perplexed. So naturally, you try to figure it out. You work at it until you arrive at some kind of explanation that makes sense to you (whether accurate/complete or not)– fitting it in with other related stuff tucked away in the back of your mind (sometimes done consciously, sometimes not). Then you feel at ease, ready to move on to other things.

This works, and it works well.  Humans engage in this practice since birth and it plays a significant role in how “science” is carried out everyday. In fact, science education research and practitioners have formalized the process and put it to use.  The 3-phase learning cycle, for example, is designed around it (the 5- and 7-phase LCs include assessment and “engaging” elements).

The problem is, when we teachers repeatedly set up lessons or demonstrations to spark interest and get students perplexed or to make predictions, we often do so without first giving them the opportunity to build a knowledge base to adequately tackle the question. So students frequently are not well-equipped to address what’s presented.  And they fall victim to this teachers’ traps time after time.

Short version: We teachers routinely set students up to fail in making predictions, and it gets old.

At an AAPT meeting, I recall a presentation on this by Eugenia Etkina.  It was some time ago, but it left an impression on me since I’d already begun questioning the “sage on the stage” teaching mode.  For further reading on this, this article by Eugenia Etkina on ISLE provides a good background, though the document covers much more than what this post is about.  Fast-forwarding to page 26 of the document gets right to the point: repeated conflict, confront and resolve teaching strategies may actually hinder learning.  Instead, there is evidence that students may stand a greater chance at remaining tuned in to the content for long term understanding if they are provided with experiences/data to make successful predictions.

When you think about it, it’s pretty obvious: Do you like being accurate or well-informed about what you’re talking about, or do you prefer to always be corrected on your talking points in front of your peers?

So for me, this doesn’t mean “out with all the demonstrations.”  It means letting students ask questions and guiding them toward looking in to key factors that will help them make informed predictions.  Still show them cool stuff; everyone likes a surprise/change of pace every once in a while.  But try giving students the opportunity to see the connections and applications to the material before an eye-catching demo.  Engage them with content they can wrestle with and avoid routine magician shows that always have an unexpected result for unsuspecting physics students.  Because in the end, it may not end up getting them anywhere but further removed from the discipline.

FCI Gain Limit?

What kinds of factors limit student conceptual gains in introductory physics?

Take-home message: Secondary trends observed in a study suggest that the average HS senior/beginning college student will face a limit to conceptual gains possible in standard lecture-based instruction of introductory physics. Very high conceptual gains among students in a lecture-based course are only attainable by students with the most developed scientific reasoning abilities (which is a small subset of the HS/beginning college student population).

As part of my PhD research at the University of Oklahoma, I investigated the interdependencies of

• changes in everyday usage of technical terminology (in particular, the word “force”),
• conceptual gains in first semester algebra-based physics classes and
• scientific reasoning ability.

The working hypothesis was that those who demonstrated greater scientific reasoning abilities and had greater conceptual gains would stop their loose (and technically inaccurate) usage of “force” in colloquial usage. In short, I expected that students who demonstrated an aptitude for physics would not mix “force” with other terms (like energy, momentum, strength, etc.).

While the hypothesis was not fully supported, there were other trends revealed that dovetailed other work in Physics Education Research (PER) (see the work of Coletta and Phillips) and can serve as a source for further study. The scatterplot below is pretty loaded. While the axes suggest one trend, the color coding reveals something more subtle:

MLU stands for Mechanics Language Usage instrument (developed for the study). FCI refers to the instrument used to determine conceptual gains in 1st semester physics. “Developmental Stage” refers to performance on a reasoning ability test and is actually much more detailed than 3-point scale–it was reported in this way for simplicity.

The axes suggest the opposite of what was hypothesized: Namely, those with the greatest conceptual gains actually changed their loose usage of “force” the least. And it wasn’t because they had the usage correct to begin with . . . These students were simply more resistant to changing their language usage. I have to admit, the lack of delineation between a decrease and an increase in the amount of “mixing” (loose usage of “force”) was a bit disappointing. I was hoping for more dots above zero.

But look at the vertical dashed lines added to the graph. Notice that to the right of the green line (a gain of 0.65) there are no green dots. To the right of the blue line (a gain of 0.5), there are no blue dots. These are effectively conceptual limit lines based on performance on the reasoning ability test. The average HS/early college student scores nominally in the range of the blue to green category in scientific reasoning ability (an indirect measure of developmental stage). These are potentially gain limits. For additional information on “gain” as reported here, see this document by Richard Hake.

Full Disclosure:

1. It’s important to note that the participants in this study were enrolled in a typical lecture-based physics class (3 hours lecture, 2 hours lab, 1 hour recitation) with only limited interactive engagement components. So one could argue the data suggest that this format of instruction (primarily lecture) imposes a limit on gains for the average student.
2. I would be inattentive of me to neglect to mention the successes Modeling Instruction has had in this arena. Modelers report average gains in excess of .85 for students of similar demographics. The highly engaging environment of their classrooms make conceptual gains acheivable despite the varied levels of proficiency in scientific reasoning ability.
3. Although this study involved 240 participants across two universities, these findings are exploratory– secondary to the intent of the original research question. Which means however convincing the arguments above may seem, further study designed to test that question really needs to be done.

Cross Traffic Does Not Stop

How do you accommodate for students’ extra-curricular activities, course loads and other demands in your classroom?

You might think the question above applies only for public school teachers: battling the bustle of students’ schedules can be evidenced by creative assignment schemes to accommodate athletics schedules, quiz bowls, club events and the like. Recording classroom sessions and posting them to the web as videos or screencasts is another way students can review/catch up on what they may have missed during regular class time.

However, “cross traffic” can be more than just extra-curricular activities that act as a physical time constraint. Other coursework generates additional cognitive load. So even if a student has ample “time” for getting work done, they may be struggling cognitively with the overall influx of material.

If learning 400 years of physics content in a single year is like drinking from a fire hose, then what does this times “n” other coursework equate to?

While we would hope scheduled courses are well-balanced and everything dovetails the overall curriculum seamlessly, and that we can relate our course material to everyday life–it doesn’t take long to realize that is an idealistic pipe dream.

For example, when teaching calculus-based physics, I often have students new to physics and concurrently enrolled in calculus. While I can take advantage of this by having students investigate real world applications of elementary calculus (the meaning of a derivative, for example), some care and reservation is required before getting too deep into applications of mathematical integration. So OK, that’s not too bad . . . it’s managable.

But when I try to capitalize on students’ interests so they can better “relate” to the physics, I’ve had mixed results. Discussing what bull riders or line backers experience (rodeo and football are big at NWOSU) and how it applies to “jerk,” I’ve found, does not necessarily bring the physics closer to the students. In fact, sometimes entering a discussion of examples like these makes me come across as Shrek over identifying with Artie in Shrek the Third (go 1:30 minutes into this preview). And then my students post things like #physicsfail.

So what began as a question in a caption of a road sign and led you to believe I had an answer, actually ends with me genuinely soliciting your advice: How do you accommodate for students’ extra-curricular activities, course loads and other demands in your classroom? Do you:

• Ignore the “noise”?
• Solicit for student interests and target as many of those as you can?
• Use the cross traffic as teaching moments only from time to time (once a week, a couple times a semester, as assignments …)?
• Structure the entire course curriculum around it (see Physics for Future Presidents or Service-Learning: Engineering in Your Community)?

Thoughts?

Be Prepared to Stop

For just about any drive, this sign is loathsome

It means delays.

It means less time is spent covering new ground.

And it means we might not get where we wanted by the time others expected.

We are unwitting victims of a “productivity paradigm” that has convinced us more can (and must) be done in less time. Our schedules and professions demand it.

To what degree, do you think, has this paradigm carried over into US education? One of the things I’ve noticed in education policy, program assessments and education research is that a significant motivation is to somehow make more “stuff” fit into prescribed time slots in ways that are “more effective:” we want improved test scores over greater breadths of material in less time.

So here’s a thought: Maybe instructors and learners should be prepared to stop every once in a while. Slow down, engage in some formative assessment and allow for ideas to incubate a bit before pushing on.

Some of the most interesting work I’ve seen in science education research breaks from the paradigm bolded above. These studies investigate how learners and instructors take time to slow down and reflect on what they’ve done before moving forward. This can be accomplished during formative assessment exercises by frequently jotting ideas down on whiteboards individually or in groups for whole class discussion. Or it can be accomplished by taking more extensive time to regularly write and revisit journal entries on one’s own learning. It’s more about having learners stop to think critically about what they know and formalize it in a dialogue with others so they can then move forward with a more complete picture before tacking new content.

But these kinds of practices in a classroom take time.

It means delays.

It means less time is spent covering new ground.

And it means we might not get where we wanted by the time others expected.

No Passing Zone

Have you established a “No Passing Zone” culture in your class?

As the start of a new academic year begins, I find myself remeniscing grading schemes of the past.  Not necessarily just those I’ve implemented, but the ones I’ve had to contend with as an undergrad and a graduate student.

If I’m to generalize the most damaging of grading schemes I experienced as a student, it would be those that created a sense of helplessness due to exceptionally acceptable low exam performances coupled with high curves.  Everyone knew their performance was going to be horrible and there was almost a collective bargaining among students about minimizing the time to invest in preparing for the tests.  It turned into a failure avoidance type of mechanism.

The logic of the scheme goes like this: if the class average is 50% or less on exams, that’s ok.  As long as there is a semi-reasonable grade distribution (very loosely defined, by the way), it demonstrates to students they still have a lot to learn and that they must work harder for a deeper understanding of the material.

Could there be more of a mismatch between motive and outcome?

Fast Food Physics

On my 7-hour drive home from the 2011 AAPT/PERC summer meetings in Omaha, Nebraska, I decided to get a quick meal on the road. Without divulging the name of the franchise, let me just generally express my dissatisfaction:

It was one of the worst fast food meals I’ve experienced in recent memory.

Are you feeding your students fast food physics?

The service was okay and the employees’ efforts were well intended. In fact, for all intensive purposes they were performing their jobs as effectively as possible. However, I simply could not stomach completing the meal or the soft drink. It just wasn’t settling well. And deep down, I knew it wasn’t wholesome or healthful. I lost my appetite and that got me thinking.

What if our efforts as physics educators are like those of the fast food business?

The phrase “Fast Food Physics” came to mind and the metaphors began rolling one after another.

• Have you ever just given out the answer to a question in class to save time? That’s the salt on your fast food physics fries. It’s an immediate “taste good” sensation without long-term benefits.
• Have you created a review outline and led an evening session just prior to an exam to “help” students study? That could be seen as an entire fast food meal to get one through the day. While it may well help students get by on the upcoming exam, deeper understanding comes from self-study rather than top down delivery.
• Have you employed occasional bouts of interactive engagement in class only to return to lecture as usual? That’s the equivalent of sporadically substituting a typical value/combo meal for a salad or veggie wrap. As refreshing and novel as it may be, a one-time dose is not by itself an effective agent of change.
• Have you completely restructured your curriculum and instructional strategies to fully engage the classroom? If so, wow! That’s analogous to an entire shift to “slow food”—a fairly recent movement you should look into if unaware. Why? Because it is a long-term solution to healthful living and sustainability. This is not unlike fully committing to instructional modes that are student-centered rather than teacher-centered.
• Have you thought of your own fast food physics metaphor yet? Chime in by leaving a comment!

A group is determing how to describe the motion of a cart.

So as the semester’s start nears, I am thrust into the same series of issues I face each fall. Namely, how do I get away from this newly termed fast food physics amidst the constraints of class size, lack of a recitation hour, student math preparation, pre-med student expectations, lack of LA’s/TA’s/GA’s, high course load and institutional norms?

For starters, I’ll be using an online homework system that can provide instant problem solving feedback (a partial solution to slow turnaround issues I face without a grader). I am also going to cut fifty 9” x 12” whiteboards this weekend and fully stock my classroom with dry erase markers. As for labs, my new semester resolution is to eliminate the exercises where students are simply following a set of instructions to verify a constant. Instead, students will be working to answer questions my PTRA colleagues opened my eyes to this summer during the NWOSU ToPPS Science Institute (see also Brian Lamore’s blog and my other posts). I am also very interested in exploring facets of Standards Based Grading (follow him @arundquist to get a taste, or if you’re brave enough take a look at his mechanics course). Other items of interest are using screencasting/YouTube clips for “flipped classroom” activities and modified implementation of peer instruction. For my comfort level and available resources, these will take some more thought before rushing in full throttle.

Moral of the story: there are numerous agents for moving away from fast food physics out there. Employing them takes a willingness to break from the mold and the courage to set aside the convenience of readymade/rehearsed teacher-centered deliveries.

NFL* Garners Cheers

With all of the excitement related to NFL lately, I just had to jump on the bandwagon and write a post on the subject.  Honestly, who knew that a room filled with teachers could get so excited about Newton’s First Law!  I truly am delighted that during the ToPPS Science Institute at NWOSU, laughter and cheering ensued as participants successfully demonstrated the law of inertia.

Once in motion, objects remain in that state of motion if in the absence of unbalanced forces:

How about the dedication of everyone in the room measuring the times at known distances to determine the nature of this law empirically?  It only takes a minute or two to run a few trials.

—

This video is one of my favorites from the institute.  And it’s not because of the successful demonstration.  Its appeal to me has to do with the excitement and camaraderie in the room.  On day one, this former engineer revealed he had changed careers to begin teaching this fall.  I can only imagine his thoughts, anticipations, expectations as summer works its way to the first day of classes.  But, less than halfway through the institute, he’d forged friendships and developed a newfound confidence in his role as a teacher within the PTRA / ToPPS community.  This clip shows him sharing a moment similar to those he’ll help create in his own classroom in the coming years.

...remained in its state of rest in the amphitheater until an unbalanced force acted on it ...

—

And can you believe Brian Lamore?  Even as the institute came to an end, he was thinking ahead.  By leaving his roll away luggage in the amphitheater while on the way to the airport, he was intentionally reminding us of the law of inertia.  And he was right!  His luggage, which was at rest, did not change its state of motion until an unbalance force was applied to accelerate it to the post office.  I just cannot fathom the “forward thinkingness” of Brian, can you?? 🙂

—

*For those led to this post searching for stories on the other NFL, you’ve been lured here shamelessly by a physics educator who finds humor in the acronym.  Don’t worry though, there’s lots here for you too.  Get your game on and watch these halftime shows worth your time!!!  http://physics.unl.edu/outreach/football.html .  As for ToPPS participants, if you want support and attention drawn to your science program(s), isn’t this an amazing idea?!  What about putting on basketball halftime shows–could you and your students carry out a demonstration every once in a while?  I know it’s got me thinking . . .