‘Modeling Assessments of InnovativePhysics Courses’ Response by Frits L Gravenberch ( f.gravenberch@wxs.nl )

1. ‘Modeling Assessments of InnovativePhysics Courses’Response by Frits L Gravenberch (f.gravenberch@wxs.nl) Setting the scene • About Frits • 1965 – 1978 Physics Teacher in Secondary Science (integrated practical work in groups) • 1978 – 1983 PLON (UU) (physics in themes) • 1983 – 2001National Institute for Curriculum Development, SLO (co-ordinated educational research) • Currently: Acting President of NVON (www.nvon.nl) (BOBO, OBO, Impresse) Modeling Assesments of Innovative Physics Courses

2. A limited view i.e. coming from • Expertise in (Upper) Secondary Science (and not Tertiary) • Expertise • in curriculum development (not educational research or teacher training) • based on information from the ‘grassroot level’ • A special interest in constraints for implementation Modeling Assesments of Innovative Physics Courses

3. Science in context • Fuller c.s. in: ‘Introduction’: ‘It was anticipated that the experimental physics sections would help faculty and students focus on addressing ill-defined problems from the natural world.’ • PLON • Motivation: “PLON materials indeed enhanced students’ interest in the new kind of teaching contexts and classroom activities”, • Concept development “… efforts to establish a considerable improvement in students’ concept development –compared to ‘common physics education at the time’- were not too successful Modeling Assesments of Innovative Physics Courses

4. Expanding the traditional curriculum with • Fuller c.s. emphasized unique, diverse, and generalizable approaches to problem solving, e.g.: • ‘Electronic Resources’ : …… the experimental activities were constructed so that students had opportunities to make maximum use of the CO-ROM's research potential and its capacity to aid unique, diverse, and generalizable approaches to problem solving • ‘Curriculum Change’: …... activities that were designed to facilitate the development of broader professional skills grounded in critical thinking and problem solving. • Our experiences to extend the traditional curriculum along similar lines illustrate that: efforts to innovate the science curriculum in these ways are not necessarily non-realistic but mostly very difficult to accomplish Modeling Assesments of Innovative Physics Courses

5. IT, Haarlemmer-oil for renovation of Science Ed.? • Fuller c.s.: ‘Students' Perceptions of the Experimental Process: • technology as a tool for studying physics added unwanted complexity’ • some student support for a practical, inquiry, activity-based, hands-on program declined • From Dutch experiences in curriculum projects we could add : • “Information techology skills” students did develop previously obviously are not too long lasting, • ‘simple’ IT-infrastructure is hard to establish within general IT school environment however, is a very important border condition for success Modeling Assesments of Innovative Physics Courses

6. In summary • This research work of Fuller c.s. illustrates many opportunities for IT also for secondary science teaching in the Netherlands • IT however, is not the final solution for all problems in science teaching Modeling Assesments of Innovative Physics Courses

7. EpilogueConstraints of curriculum renovation • short vs. long term effects • Succesful pilots with well motivated teachers who are assisted by educational researchers deliver mostly short term successes • curriculum innovation in the long term is only noticeable with ‘common’ teachers and students who could benefit from a variety of supportive facilities over a rather long period of time • danger of internal blow up of the curriculum • Mind the pitfall to develop a new program by ‘simply’ adding new content elements to the already overloaded existing collection of concepts, laws and formulas. Modeling Assesments of Innovative Physics Courses