Transcript PHYSICS TEACHER TRAINING HIGH SCHOOL

PHYSICS TEACHER TRAINING
HIGH SCHOOL - UNIVERSITY TRAINING
GAP IN PHYSICS
GARETH JONES (COACH)
IMPERIAL COLLEGE
UNIVERSITY OF LONDON
LONDON (UK)
[email protected]
ALEXANDER POPOV
FACULTY OF PHYSICS
SOFIA UNIVERSITY
BULGARIA
[email protected]
M. C. CARMO
PHYSICS DEPARTMENT
UNIVERSITY OF AVEIRO
AVEIRO (PT)
[email protected]
RATISLAV BANIK
PHYSICS DEPARTMENT
MBELL-UNIVERSITY
SLOVAK REPUBLIC
[email protected]
HAY GURTS
PHYSICS DEPARTMENT
UNIVERSITY OF NIJMEGEN (ND)
[email protected]
OVIDIU CALTUN
SOLID STATE AND THEORETICAL
PHYSICS
ALEXANDRU IOAN CUZA
UNIVERSITY
IASI
ROMANIA
[email protected]
METHODOLOGY
•
•
•
Surveying the views of university
physics departments
Surveying the university physics
students
Making personal contact with a number
of physics teachers in high schools
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
1. QUESTIONAIRE TO UNIVERSITY STAFF
Returns per country
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
AT BE BG CH CZ DE ES FI FR GR HU IE
IT LT MT NL NO PL PT RO SE SK TR UK AL HR MK YU
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Q1: Is your department aware of the objectives and
curricula of high-school physics education in your
country?
60
Question 1
1%
nº of respondents
50
4%
yes
40
yes
28%
reasonably
reasonably
30
little
20
no
NO-ANS
10
0
categories
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
little
67%
no
NO-ANS
INCOMING STUDENTS
Q2: Does your department consider that the incoming
students have a general knowledge, skills and
competences expected for studying physics?
nº of respondents
40
35
30
yes
25
20
just enough
15
significantly
less
no
10
5
NO ANS
0
categories
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Q3: Does your department perceive any change in
scientific level of incoming students?
nº of respondents
60
the level is
higher
no change
50
40
30
the level is
low er
NO ANS
20
10
0
categories
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Q4.4. Physics skills and knowledge
40
nº of respondents
35
30
very good
25
good
20
reasonable
15
poor
NO ANS
10
5
0
categories
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Q 4.3. Mathematical skills and knowledge
35
nº of respondents
30
25
very good
good
20
reasonable
15
poor
10
NO ANS
5
0
categories
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Q 4.5. Computer skills
40
nº of respondents
35
30
very good
25
good
20
reasonable
15
poor
10
NO ANS
5
0
categories
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Q4.1: Independent work attitude
35
nº of respondents
30
25
very good
20
good
15
reasonable
10
poor
5
NO ANS
0
categories
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
TIME EVOLUTION
Have you noticed an evolution in incoming student
competences and skills?
Q5.1: Independent work attitude
nº of respondents
45
40
35
30
25
better
same
20
15
10
w orse
NO ANS
5
0
categories
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Q5.3.Mathematical skills and knowledge
50
nº of respondents
45
40
35
better
30
same
25
w orse
20
NO ANS
15
10
5
0
categories
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Q 5.4.Physics skills and know ledge
nº of respondents
35
30
25
better
20
same
15
w orse
10
NO ANS
5
0
categories
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Q 5.5: Com pute r s k ills
60
nº of respondents
50
40
better
same
30
w orse
NO ANS
20
10
0
cate gorie s
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
5.2.Communication skills
40
nº of respondents
35
30
better
25
same
20
w orse
15
NO ANS
10
5
0
categories
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Q 6. Have any kind of measures been taken to
address this problem?
nº of respondents
50
45
40
35
30
yes
25
20
NO ANS
no
15
10
Q 6.1: Specify the level
5
0
12%
4%
categories
16%
68%
department
university/faculty
individual teacher
NO ANS
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
EXAMPLES OF MEASURES TAKEN
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Extra courses (physics and mathematics);
More time with basic concepts;
More gradual learning;
Small group teaching;
Extra student guidance (tutorials, homework, more
discussion time and guidance in experimental planning;
more often evaluation);
e-learning in maths;
Extra time for problem solving;
Cooperation with high school teachers;
Workshops for high school teachers;
Promote discussion of teaching issues;
Draw the attention of education authorities;
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
2. STUDENT’S QUESTIONAIRE
Replies per country
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
AT
BE
BE
IS
LT
NL
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
PT
SK
Q1: Did you feel a gap betw een high school and
university curricula?
20%
24%
yes
reasonably
little
22%
no
34%
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Q2:Do you consider you had the general nkowledge,
skills and competences to study physics when you
entered university?
19%
yes
48%
just enough
significantly less
no
33%
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
The majority of students feel a gap between school and University
but consider having the generic skills and competences needed.
Main difficulty in the first year:
(i) Personal difficulties in: organizing their own timetable; deciding
what to learn for an exam; lack of pressure to learn/make exams;
difficulty to decide what lectures and lecturers to attend.
(ii) System problems: much more personal effort needed due to the
large amount of information to be processed; low level in
mathematics then needed; not used to apply mathematics
concepts to physics;
more lectures compared to high school; no previous development
of skills in problem solving; steeper learning curve in University.
(iii) Social reasons: Integration difficulties; lack of knowledge of
what the university system expects from the student.
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Students awareness of remedial measures
Q6: Where you aware of any measures taken by the
department to address the gap between high school and
University
44%
yes
no
56%
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Q7: Do you think those m easures w here
needed?
5%
yes
no
95%
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006
Most effective of the remedial measures taken in
the University (as seen by the students):
Pre course in Mathematics
Extra courses with extra tuition
Homework
Extra tuition hours for overviews and questions
Social measures of integration.
WORK GROUP 5, GENT 2006