How Modeling Instruction developed from PSSC
COMPILATION: How Modeling Instruction developed from PSSC.
In 1998, Jane Jackson emailed modeling teachers-leaders as follows:
Hi, Charles Rhodes, David Boyer, Tom Gordon, Ellis Noll, Lou Turner, David
Braunschweig, Jay Zimmerman, Tony Nicholson, and Gene Easter,
I'm asking you a question because perhaps you are familiar with the PSSC
physics program. How is it different from the modeling method of
instruction? At Friday's AAPT session on high school reforms, David
Braunschweig and Larry Dukerich gave talks on modeling. Cliff Schwartz, the
editor of THE PHYSICS TEACHER, asked questions; he wants to know how
modeling is different from PSSC. He seems to think that PSSC did what
modeling does. He is confused and wants to understand the difference. He
was involved in the PSSC program.
I spoke with him later in the hall and asked if he would like to have
e-mails from teachers who have used both approaches. (I told him that
Malcolm Wells used PSSC, so it is a foundation of the modeling approach.)
If you have used PSSC, will you please e-mail me a paragraph in which you
explain to Cliff Schwartz how the modeling approach builds on PSSC? I will
collate your paragraphs and send them on to Cliff; he will be appreciative.
Jane
P.S. Did I forget anyone who used PSSC?
If you've never used it, will you please tell me?
------------------------------------------Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998
From: David M. Boyer
Subject: PSSC v. Modeling
To: jane.jackson@asu.edu
Dr. Jackson,
What follows is hardly a paragraph, but perhaps it may shed some
light on the PSSC and Modeling philosophies from my 'frame of reference'!
...
...My preservice training at Rhode Island College in the early seventies
was funded by an NSF grant which enabled the Physical Science Group
(formerly associated with the Educational Development Center of Newton,
Massachusetts) to train us in PSSC physics. The project director, Uri
Haber-Shaim, was convinced that traditional approaches to physics education
did not work well.
Dr. Haber-Shaim advocated a thematic, experimental approach to
1
How Modeling Instruction developed from PSSC
investigate and develop fundamental models for the behavior of matter and
energy in the physical world. The Introductory Physical Science (IPS)
curriculum led students to the inevitable construction of the model of the
atom through a series of investigations cleverly designed to also uncover
characteristic properties of matter useful in
physics and chemistry alike.
A teacher properly trained in the execution of this curriculum
could simultaneously guide students through experiments reinforcing the
scientific method while foreshadowing the ultimate discovery of a
"fundamental particle of matter", the atom. This was designed as a 8th or
9th grade course. Prelab discussions similar to the Modeling Method's
'negotiated variables' prelab were followed by experiments conducted by
pairs of students. Lab results were often pooled with other classes. Then
30-50 data blocks were plotted on a histogram and a simple form of
statistical analysis was employed. Classes were invited to analyze and
interpret the results - often asked by the teacher for suggestions on what
may have caused the 'anomalous' results. Sometimes the teams responsible
for these divergent results would confess to a poor technique. The team
would then be asked to logically explain how that poor technique would
affect the outcome...
PSSC also used the experimental approach to push the 'model' of the
atom developed in IPS from the classical to the quantum mechanical model of
the world of modern physics. Once again, this course required a very
skillful practitioner trained in the 'storyline' - otherwise its success
may not be as effective. In my opinion, students trained in PSSC by a
dedicated teacher who 'followed through' were indeed quite fortunate.
PSSC physics and Physics Modeling are similar in many ways. Both
are the product of an inspired genius(es) and a highly motivated, dedicated
and innovative team. Both recognize the need for a 'storyline', use of the
experimental method as a discovery approach, and model building with
reinforcing activities to deepen student understanding.
While the PSSC and Physics Modeling Method share many
similarities, they are, in my view, different in two critical respects. The
Physics Modeling Method provides the student with a variety of
representational tools to aid in the communication of concepts and the
solution of unique problems. The continual use of these tools, peer
presentation and review, and the socratic questioning method enable ALL
students to gain in conceptual understanding. Concurrent to improving
student achievement, ALL teachers can become better practitioners as they
utilize the same tools in their instruction. The provision of a repertoire
of representational tools clearly aids both the student and the teacher to
communicate to a wider audience.
Last, Is there a long term pre/post test study of PSSC students
taught by dedicated PSSC practitioners? If this question is
rhetorical...another important distinction has been made...
2
How Modeling Instruction developed from PSSC
Regards,
Dmb
-------------------------From: Ellis Noll
Subject: Modeling vs PSSC
I received David Boyer's comments on Modeling vs PSSC and was impressed with their
thoroughness and accuracy. I will try to add a few things to his already comprehensive
comments.
I had been using PSSC about 10 years before participating in Modeling. I served as a pilot
teacher for the 7th edition of PSSC. I was surprised how much Modeling was like PSSC but
soon learned that Modeling was significantly different in important ways. While both methods
use an experimental, 'storyline' approach with reinforcing activities to strengthen student
understanding, Modeling provides specific models that serve as anchors for further and deeper
understanding and application of physics concepts.
A Modeling student obtains understanding of physics by discovering the model experimentally if
possible, followed by peer discussion of the model, and application of the model in diverse
circumstances. A student who practices the Modeling Method should have less difficulty solving
problems because he/she recognizes which model can be applied in many different situations.
Most times students have difficulty solving problems because they don't know how to start the
problem. By using representational tools discussed in Modeling, students often can get a
problem started and thus arrive at a successful solution. Thus, representational tools also serve
as anchors.
Besides the anchors that the models and representational tools provide, maybe the biggest
contribution that Modeling makes is that it recognizes that students need to be given sufficient
time to work out an understanding of the way nature behaves.
While PSSC appealed to the brighter student, Modeling appeals to a wider range of student
abilities.
Peer presentations in particular make it possible for students to gain deeper understanding and
built confidence that leads to successfully mastering basic concepts. Students are encouraged by
the fact that mistakes made during presentations will be accepted by their peers and teacher as
"normal." Through peer presentations and the use of technology to discover models and
interrogate nature, Modeling makes it possible for a larger audience to be successful at learning
physics. Unlike some PSSC students, Modeling students are not turned off by physics because
they may feel that they cannot reach even a basic level of mastery.
PSSC is not involved with how students learn physics. The paucity of attention given pedagogy
may be PSSC's greatest weakness. The student presentations used in Modeling are key for
3
How Modeling Instruction developed from PSSC
students to understand physics; They add a human dimension that PSSC lacks. The longer I
teach the more I realize that students learn best when there is student/student as well as
student/teacher interaction. In my experience, Modeling does this better and more effectively
than any other method of teaching physics.
I still use the PSSC text because PSSC and Modeling complement each other very well. If
another edition of PSSC is written, it could be significantly improved by including what
Modeling has learned about effective physics teaching.
Regards,
Ellis D. Noll
----------------------From: Tony Nicholson, Greenwich High School [He is a Presidential Award Winner. - Jane]
Subject: PSSC & Modeling
Hi Jane,
Here are my thoughts on PSSC& Modeling.
I was introduced to the PSSC approach during an NSF Academic Year Institute in
1965 and it was the curriculum that has been a major influence on my teaching
to this day along with the Harvard Project Physics approach which came a bit
later. I'm sure "Modeling" will be the driving force for my remaining years.
As many of your other respondents have stated, there are many similarities
between PSSC and Modeling and they have described them and in this sense I can
see why Cliff Swartz has raised the question; but it may be more fruitful to
ask about what improvements the modeling approach brings to the table than
differences.
I see "modeling" as another evolutionary (rather than revolutionary) next step
in the continued development of a basic physics curriculum to be presented to
high school physics students. The PSSC storyline of "get to the atom" was
useful but still lent itself to a fragmented physics viewpoint as you went
from particles to waves to the atom; and most teachers never found time to
complete the atom. We must also remember that even PSSC went through some
changes in its story line when it switched from starting with light to
beginning with mechanics (more in line with the Harvard Project historical
approach).
The "modeling" storyline especially as it was presented this summer
by David Hestenes at UWRF is a real contribution and different from the PSSC
approach in its cohesive elegance. His emphasis on the "particle-field" model
generates a storyline to attach our physics to that will help students arrive
at a more unified view of our physical world (macro: big and seen and micro:
small and unseen). The intensive study of motion as a fundamental aspect of
our universe is enhanced when it's connected to vehicles and planets on the
4
How Modeling Instruction developed from PSSC
one hand and acceleration of charged particles (radiation) on the other; and I
think the common thread of the particle throughout the physics story will lead
to a less fragmented view of the basic ideas of physics. There is still work
to be done on light, which was begun successfully at UWRF this summer, but when
the work is completed this will clarify our use of the wave models to describe
this area of physics. In short "Modeling" has a terrific way to tell the
physics story and is working on making it better.
A second strong point that "modeling" has included in its structure is the
listening to students express their physics so that misconceptions can be
revealed and then Socratically cleared up. Nearly daily presentations are a
part of this for sharing lab results as well as problem work, and students are
taught the process of asking questions for understanding rather than to simply
give other students the correct answer. This process, though it certainly could
have been part of PSSC, was not included in its structure and I believe the
extent of its use is unique to modeling.
Finally, the problem work selected to work on exclusive of the hands-on
activities is more carefully selected to reveal misconceptions students may
have of the physics ideas that they are studying to a greater extent in
"modeling" than in PSSC. PSSC problems were more numerous and of greater range
of difficulty but not necessarily helpful in revealing misconceptions. In fact
the test banks that came with the PSSC curriculum were graded on a curve with
a national scale. More techniques (motion maps, energy diagrams, free body
diagrams etc) are taught students for solving basic problems in modeling than
was emphasized in the PSSC curriculum.
In closing, "Modeling's continuing search for a good story line, emphasis on
ferreting out student misconceptions, emphasis on Socratic techniques by
teacher and students for learning and accent on basic problems rather than
difficult problems or numbers of problems are some of the most valuable
attributes of the "Modeling" method of presenting the physics story.
thanks for asking,
Tony Nicholson
-------------------------------Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998
From: Charles Rhodes
Subject: Modeling and PSSC
To: Jane.Jackson@asu.edu
Hello Jane,
I very much agree with the responses of Dave Boyer and Tony Nicholson to
your request for a comparison of Modeling and PSSC physics. The first
semester modeling materials which were first developed by Malcolm Wells
5
How Modeling Instruction developed from PSSC
obviously show that Malcolm was a PSSC trained teacher. The Modeling
Workshops present a well-developed instructional strategy and specific
instructional tools which go well beyond anything I ever experienced in
PSSC training. Whiteboarding, motion maps, the use of technology, focused
problem sets, schema and lab practicums are important tools used in the
mechanics materials which teachers learn to seek when teaching other
topics.
Even if the Modeling method were identical to PSSC in every way, the renewed
training opportunities are very valuable to the many teachers who have
entered the profession in the years after PSSC trainings were common and
who very likely have no experience teaching PSSC. Moreover, the Modeling
emphasis on pedagogy deeply rooted in research prepares today’s teachers to
choose and /or develop the science curriculum that is yet to be.
-------------------------------------Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998
From: Lou Turner
Subject: Re: PSSC and modeling
To: Jane Jackson <jane.jackson@asu.edu>
Jane,
PSSC was wonderful in that it had a great story line, it was model-based. I
loved teaching it, but I will never go back to it because it is subject to the
ills associated with all textbooks. A textbook is a silent lecturer, and it
is teaching by telling. I taught PSSC for about ten years, and I taught it in
a traditional manner, and with hindsight, I am willing to bet that very few
students understood the material I covered with them.
The modeling method is different in that the student occupies center stage.
The class is managed so the students must make decisions and go through
thought processes on their own. They become active participants. They must
listen to their peers and evaluate what they say. They are guided in doing
labs, but they must decide exactly how they are going to achieve the agreed-upon
objective. This gives them ownership, and they know why they [think] certain things
because they are the ones who make the decision. Whiteboards and the
representational tools available to students make the modeling approach a more user-friendly
environment.
To me, the major difference in the two is the way in which the class is managed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
6
How Modeling Instruction developed from PSSC
[Jane’s note in 2009: the following articles about PSSC are at
http://www.aapt.org/Publications/pssc.cfm]
Article Collections
Teaching PSSC Physics: A Remembrance of Things Past by Chris Chiaverina
PSSC: Hearing the Music by Leon Cooper
When PSSC came to Long Island by Cliff Swartz
PSSC PHYSICS: By One Who Saw It from Beginning to End by John H. Dodge
Discovering the PSSC: A Personal Memoir by A. P. French
A Summer with PSSC by Tom Greenslade
PSSC PHYSICS: A Personal Perspective by Uri Haber-Schaim (pdf)
How PSSC Shaped My Teaching by Dick Heckathorn
PSSC Reflections by Jim Hicks
PSSC: a Student Perspective by Jane Bray Nelson
PSSC and me by Jim Nelson (pdf)
Personal Views of the Beginnings of PSSC and My Film Experiences by John
G. King
Happy Birthday PSSC by Karen Kwitter
PSSC: Instant Credibility for a Beginning High School Physics Teacher by
John W. Layman (pdf)
From New Brunswick to Tirupati with PSSC by Peter Lindenfeld
With PSSC, Teachers and Students Had To Think by John S. Rigden
PSSC in Historical Context: Science, National Security, and American Culture
during the Cold War by John L. Rudolph
Twenty Seven Years with PSSC by McLaurin Smith-Williams
Thoughts on My Experiences with PSSC Physics by Robert Stair
An Ode to PSSC by Arnold A. Strassenberg
PSSC Birthday Remembrance by Carl Berger
7