"New" is good
I just couldn’t believe in my ears when the Physics staff told my prac group that we will investigate the famous photoelectric effect in the week beginning 13 Aug. They said this is a trial which will lead up to the new teaching scheme which the School of Physics is considering. It’s simply AWESOME. Regardless of the outcome of this trial, I believe they should maintain this innovative approach. The traditional style is seriously lagging behind the stride of technology and the students’ ever-growing demands for polished (and re-polished) educational schemes.
This is exactly what the School of Chemistry has already seen and taken measures to tackle the years-old problem. The brand new Learning Centre is beyond innovation. Recently, they even trialled the new multiple choice controls, where each student is just like the audience in “Who wants to a millionaire”: you’re given a controller, then you press the appropriate button to select A, B, C, or D. After 20 seconds, the data are collated and the results are displayed in graphical form. At the end of each question and the display of results, the tutor will go through the question in great details or just briefly, depending on the performance of the class for that particular question.
My vision of a science lecture involves 2 things: the white/blackboard which the lecturer will mainly use and a PowerPoint slide for referencing. For example, my Physics and Maths lecturers use the blackboard for working out, while relying on the slides for examples (including images from external sources which are not readily available on the blackboard. -lol-), reference materials and so on. But the point is that it is the combination of both that keeps a lecture alive. Preference for one over the other will fail to interest the students who are either sitting doing nothing (as in the Powerpoint style) or just copying off the board, not seeing the vivid demonstrations/applications of the materials they’re learning (as in the blackboard style). The one exception is Biology where the Powerpoint style perhaps should dominate due to the nature of the subject (literature-based rather than mathematics-based). However, innovations should know no limits. I think they will find a way to make Biology lectures better (something already seen in the pracs).
As a science student, my vision is limited to the context of science teaching. I would love to hear from everyone in the other faculties.
Have a nice day,
Cheers
Isn’t the photoelectric effect a relatively simple experiment? Get element, shine light, measure current – for kicks, introduce a separate potential difference across the same area the element is emitting electrons and measure how much voltage you need to stop those electrons from reaching the anode of your measuring device and you can calculate the actual values of the energy levels from there. I always thought it would be an experiment you’d have in any physics curriculum at university level, not just for a new and shiny educational system.
*stops being a know-it-all and goes back to reading invasion of privacy laws*
To Suzanne: *sigh*
I am not being a know-it-all. I’m just being positive. In the first semester, the Science faculty actively asked us for feedback and it seems they’ve already done something about it.
Regarding the experiment, I think it’s a pretty cool one (simple but cool) because it changed the way we thought about light back then. Unfortunately it has not been introduced into first year pracs (at least, I flipped through the lab manual and couldn’t find it). Sorry if my excitement conveyed a wrong message in any way.
Perhaps I sound a bit like Mr. Know-it-all when explaining the different lecture styles, but that’s not what I intended. It’s drawn from my own experience. During semester one, I either fell asleep halfway through the lectures or just couldn’t keep myself interested simply because I just sat still for the whole 50 minutes. Please don’t get me wrong, I absolutely loved everything I learned in the last semester.
And I don’t get what you mean about privacy laws.
Cheers,
Exodius – I think Suzanne was referring to herself, not you. And that she though she was being a know it all and would go back to reading about ‘invasion of privacy laws’.
I love the way they teach arts, but there is always room for improvement. I always feel I get more out of the tutes than the lectures and sometimes wonder if rather than having 2 hours of lectures per week and a 1 hours tute, it should be the other way around.
Interesting blog! 🙂
Yep, I was apologising for my own know-it-all-ness. Sorry if it seemed otherwise!
Yea. I kind of figured it out. -lol-
Sorry, Suzanne. I read your comment too quickly, so I missed a bit here and there. Next time, I will spend more time on reading people’s comments, I promise. XD
Have a nice day, everyone.
I get the feeling I did do the photoelectric effect last year. Too bad I threw my lab manual out since it just fell apart on me and I figured I’d never use it again.
I think it might have been part of our light topic when we wanted to know the energy of the light. It’s not that the assessment is slightly different is it? Are you still having to do a lab report within the class and you feel like you have no time and comes with a marking system which the demonstrators feel like they shouldn’t give a 10 to anyone? (and 8 or 9 to almost everyone).
I personally think they need to cross mark the lab reports and get more consistent expectations so the demonstrators know how to mark people, and students actually know what’s expected of them.
I strongly agree with how you think lecturers should be, in general.
I have found though that for my computer programming subject the absence of lecturer slides has not been detrimental and having the lecturer go through the stuff on the computer has been well.
In History and Philosophy of Science subjects in second year tend to have two lecturers and is made really interesting by this way. The nature of the area makes this really good and encourages us to understand different views.