Back to Documents

Marie Plumb, Jamestown Community College, Jamestown, New York 14701 and Marv Nelson, Green River Community College, Auburn, Washington. 98092

Improving physics education at two year colleges by encouraging faculty to critically examine teaching and learning practices at these institutions has been the focus of the TYC 21 initiative for the past four years. The 1989 Critical Issues Conference in Washington, D.C. was the origin of the original idea of TYC 21. That conference identified several issues critical to two-year colleges and recommendations were offered by the different groups. As with any new endeavor, the planning and the execution often have no recognizable links. The missing link in this case seems to be the lack of prioritization of the recommendations and implementation plans. The results of TYC21 actions suggest that we have learned that the importance of . Most TYC21 regions have identified issues important to them and have begun work on them. The critical issues studied by the regions have been grouped into 5 broad categories.

Critical Issues Investigated by Regions Participating in TYC21:

Isolation

One of the primary issues that was identified by several regions across the country was isolation. Isolation is clearly one of the most significant issues facing two-year college physics. It is being addressed in a separate report by Enger, Monroe and O’Kuma.

The isolation issue as addressed by the regions occurs in two contexts: (1) In this instance we mean isolation of TYC physics faculty from other TYC physics faculty. (2) The second form of isolation is isolation of the physics curriculum from the world of work and from the other disciplines. The first was identified by Tavel at the ‘89 Critical Issues Conference. Isolation is not surprising given the large number of one person physics departments, especially those in rural areas of the country. However, it even existed in some metropolitan areas as well. For example, the regional coordinators responsible for the Bay Area of California and for the Kansas City area reported no previous mechanism existed for interaction with colleagues. In both these cases their first goal was getting to know one’s colleagues and to share basic classroom ideas.

One solution to this problem was the development of a network of TYC faculty. It is interesting to note that in the Physics at the Crossroads document there is a wish list for circa 2005 and among the priorities is: "An easily accessible communications infrastructure that keeps all faculty members informed of the latest results in curriculum development, physics education research, and the latest examples of best practice in undergraduate physics teaching . The system provides multiple mechanisms for faculty members to share their experiences and curricular materials." Regions have attempted to network outside of face-to-face meetings through newsletters, e-mail list serves and web pages. In most cases use of the latter two has been limited. It may be take it will take some time for people to become acclimated to new methods of interacting.

The idea of networking was raised by so many of the regions and is such an all encompassing issue that it was singled out as an issue in and of itself. It has been addressed in a report given by Richard Swanson and Alex Dickinson. The seven traits of a successful network which they delineated address several of the critical issues that regions have chosen. A sustained network is essential . Building the network is taking time and is still in progress. Having spent time and money to build it, it seems it is foolish not to maintain the undergirding it needs to withstand the pressure of time. A viable network is crucial to the solutions of the other critical issues which were targeted.

The importance of good networking is supported by a statement from "Revitalizing Undergraduate Physics-Stage 2, by Hilborn, Howes and Stith. They state, " Our correspondents report that many faculty remain disconnected from the concerns of Crossroads. It's not clear how to get their attention. .... If we are to have a significant change ...we must reach out..." Communication problems experienced by four year colleges and universities are amplified in the two year college. And finally, the 1995 National Research Council (NRC) and National Science Foundation (NSF) convocation concluded: " Undergraduate education will not change in a permanent way unless there is a coordinated effort of many people. Change requires ongoing interaction among communities of people and institutions that will reinforce and drive reform."

b.) The other mode of isolation is separating the physics curriculum from the world of work and from the other disciplines. This particular issue has been recognized in other forums. For example the 1996 Shaping the Future report to the NSF Directorate quotes from a report of the National Research Council which states " Undergraduate education ... is often hampered ... fragmentation of knowledge by disciplinary specialization more appropriate to advanced research." And again a quote from a 1995 NRC-NSF report, " The needs of the work force are changing. ... This dynamism in the labor market is putting a premium on students who have a broad knowledge of different subjects. ... Students educated with a narrow disciplinary focus and in solitary learning styles can have difficulties adjusting to such an environment."

While many acknowledge this isolation problem, region five attacked it head on and has made a significant impact in Minnesota. Region 5 Coordinator Aaron Wenger and colleague Ron Ulseth, acknowledged the isolation of physics and decided that to improve the physics program they needed to admit that a physics curriculum that concentrated on educating physics majors was in a real sense the problem and not the solution. They turned their attention to re-building the physics program by concentrating applications to the "real world.". For example, they restructured their physics curriculum to emphasize motion of real objects (not point particles) and when developing electricity concepts circuits are emphasized (not fields). They refer to this as Camouflage--they "camouflage a lot of physics analysis within applications and systems closer to being real...". In so doing their engineering program has flourished.

Their success is a direct result of their enthusiasm, commitment and endless hours of hard work. They have gone from 4-5 students in 1990 to a combined freshman enrollment (two campuses) of 70 in 1998 and sophomore class of 50! Students are successfully transferring to universities and becoming engineers! Wenger explains that, "Every once in a while we even have a physics major!"

The second prong of this two pronged attack is Collaboration. They collaborate with high schools and with transfer universities, and businesses. They visit area high schools and talk about engineering. They take high school students to the universities to talk about engineering. They believe in recruiting for engineering the same way coaches recruit for sports teams. They have seamless transfer agreements and they have viable internships for students with local industries. They were awarded an NSF grant for interactive video to connect remote sites to offer engineering courses. Graduates are used as an Advisory Council to talk to their students.

The National Science Foundation has recently funded the extension of their concept of Lab Centered Instruction to include a collaborative effort with other two-year colleges and high school teachers across the state of Minnesota to develop modules featuring an "open lab", student active format.

2. Outcomes and Outcomes Assessment for Introductory Physics

Outcomes based education is becoming a recommended approach by many in the two year and four year college arena. It is not a simple process to develop desired outcomes for a class or a program and it is even more difficult to develop a meaningful assessment tool as well as a scoring rubric for that assessment. Assessment can be divided into four components (Hodson, D. 1992. Assessment of practical work. "Science and Education" 1: pp114-144). They are summative , formative, evaluation, and educative. It is important for educators to be cognizant of these functions and understand how to use them to better serve students. It can be a daunting task or it can be a way to improve teaching and learning and thus be a positive experience. Included in this list of assessments is student self-evaluation. We must continue the move away from anecdotal evidence and toward more substantive evidence. We need to be certain that the assessment tool reflects the objectives of the course. In a recent paper, "Moving the mountain: impediments to change", Eric Mazur of Harvard University stated, " My goal was to teach them physics; their goal was to get a good grade....the assessment ....properly reflects the goals of the course. ... A recent retention study carried out at Carnegie Mellon has shown that two years after completion of a traditionally taught introductory course, students' knowledge of the material is back to where it was before they took the course..." The message here is that unless we can state our objectives and provide an assessment that addresses those objectives, we have no real way of knowing if our objective have been met. It is simple to say, but not so simple to do.

TYC 21 can take pride in the fact that through the opportunities afforded by the meetings and strategies of this project two of the regions cooperated to produce a scholarly report which can be used by everyone to attain these goals. Regions three and nine have cooperated in an outcomes and assessment format for introductory physics. They have developed the tools and are in the process of sharing them with colleagues through workshops and papers.

They have demonstrated the viability of a successful network and have shown that meaningful and scholarly work can be accomplished when TYC faculty have the opportunity to communicate and cooperate.

The results of their work are appended to this document.

3. Science for all Americans

This critical issue can be traced back to the original document of the same name. It is not the case that the document had any influence on the choice of this critical issue, but the sentiment is the same. Regions addressed issues such as Conceptual Physics and how it can be taught. Others considered how to best use technology to aid in the teaching of physics. Still others were considering how to teach about technology. All of these ideas can be summarized by acknowledging that while we agree that not everyone wants to be a physicist, we also agree that everyone is capable of understanding some of the basic concepts of physics. Everyone needs to know how to use technology and needs to know what technology can and cannot do.

While it is important to spend time making certain that we can teach physics at a conceptual level, it is equally imperative that we get the word out so students understand that physics is something they want to learn. A 1996 talk by Neal Lane addressed this issue. He said, " All scholarly fields...suffer from their separation from the public, although in the case of science, the separation may be more extreme. And yet science and the technology it spawns pervade the very structure of everyone's life... All scientists should help educate the public."

In Shaping the Future, the authors asked that the SMET community . "seek to serve all students, focusing on student learning."

Region 13 has dedicated its time to the development of Conceptual Physics in the Two Year Colleges. They state that a survey of several colleges and universities reveals that nearly all four year schools offer a conceptual physics course, while two year colleges usually do not. In his paper on this issue, William Warren recommends that CPTYC of the AAPT should organize sessions on conceptual physics and that they should also establish a nationwide project to examine conceptual physics in two year colleges and promote curricular development, especially for technical programs.

Region 15 has its own unique idea to serve the broader physics community. They have submitted a grant entitled PANIC (Physics Answers In Cyberspace) which will be an internet physics department. Thus enabling students in small community colleges to have access to other professors and for such professors to have access to each other. The idea encompasses virtual office hours as well as class collaborations. The authors of this proposal, Tony Zito and David Emigh are committed to this project and to its success.

Region 14 has taken the idea to the high schools in an outreach program that works closely with high school students and high school teachers. Some of these initiatives were in place before TYC 21, but the network of meetings has allowed others to hear about these efforts and get help in developing such outreach projects in their own areas. One of these areas is Tech-Prep which is highly successful in some areas, as is school-to-work projects. These are programs that need a leader at the college level. They can have a significant influence on high school science curriculum.

The outreach can take the form of workshops for teachers, high school students taking college courses, loaning equipment to high schools, meetings between high school and college teachers to share ideas, or science and technology days which bring students of different levels onto campus. Each of these ideas can help bridge the gap between high school and college and influence students' attitudes about science.

4. Invigorating the Introductory Physics Course Curriculum

In some ways this critical issue is related to the issue of isolation of physics from the rest of the curriculum. Both issues strive to increase the understanding of those who enroll in physics courses and also to increase the number of students in those courses. The emphasis is different. One employs methods to recruit students into engineering curricula, while the other strives to promote the use of more effective pedagogical strategies. These include, among other topics, successful models of active learning. The idea is to identify such successful models and share how to implement them into the two year college curriculum. This of course speaks to the issue of networking. Again the Shaping the Future Report also speaks to this idea when it recommends that all SMET faculty " be familiar with and use the results of professional scholarship on learning and teaching."

The issue for physics goes into the problems of what topics to include or more realistically which topics to leave out. The "less is more" philosophy applies here. Region 11 suggests, "we cannot agree on what needs to be done, but we become aware of the research and can then have dynamic discussions on methods and topics." If we adequately assess the results of changes made in classroom instruction, we will have the necessary data to support our ideas. Such data will also provide a feedback mechanism for further improving the learning of our students. Again, it comes down to sharing and being aware of what is occurring in other schools.

Region 6 studied the issue of lecture/lab parity which indirectly influences the teaching and learning process. If active learning has the attention of those interested in improving teaching and learning, then it makes sense that laboratories, which are the ultimate active learning setting, need to be recognized as substantive parts of a teaching load.

5. Improving the Math and Science Background of Future Teachers

Addressing the needs of future teachers does not appear as an issue to be directly addressed by any region. However, its importance became clear during the course of the TYC21 Project when The Integral Role of Community Colleges in Teacher Preparation Conference reported that approximately 40% of teachers take some of their science and mathematics in a two-year college and many elementary teachers take their only math and science course work at a two-year college. This issue is now regarded as one of the top 5 critical issues facing two-year colleges. People in several regions have begun working on this issue. It is directly linked to the issue involving Science for All Americans, but is specifically targeted to those considering a career in teaching. Shaping the Future states: " A large percentage of prospective K-12 teachers begin their education in two year colleges. These institutions with their clear commitment to teaching and with so many prospective teachers as students must be more significant partners in the system of teacher preparation. ... It should be kept in mind also that many prospective teachers prepared in the undergraduate level eventually will become principals and superintendents....Their attitude toward science, math and technology ...will depend in part on the kind of experience they had in SMET as undergraduates." During the past two years this issue has been receiving a lot of consideration, and now ranks as one of the more important issues for two-year colleges to address. The most obvious way to have a positive effect on the training of future teachers is by developing courses relevant to their goals. It is imperative that we develop courses that show prospective teachers the elements of science. In that context we can act as role models and provide a significant mentoring function for them.

It is apparent that all of these issues are intertwined. None of the work will be sustained without networking and networking will not succeed without regular face to face meetings. It has been obvious from the start of TYC 21 that people are energized by face to face meetings. There is a strong likelihood that without a national presence several regions will not continue to function as a viable group. Those regions may fall back into the same problem of isolation that was present before TYC 21. The difference will be that people know now what it could be like and will not only be isolated, but will also be frustrated. However, the regions having a viable issue to work on will likely continue into the foreseeable future.

RECOMMENDATION ONE: There be a recognizable component of a national meeting focused on issues facing two-year college physics. The need for two year college faculty to maintain a national presence is vital to the continuation of the good that has begun. One meeting a year would probably be sufficient to keep the national agenda on course. Coupled with this recommendation is the necessity to make members of the two-year college physics community aware of the importance of reporting their work to the broader community.

RECOMMENDATION TWO: The Two-Year College Physics Committee of the American Association of Physics Teachers encourage groups of individuals interested in similar issues to organize themselves into a group to organize a continuing study, seeking funding if necessary.

One critical issue that was not addressed is related to the article in The Washington Post by Clifford Adelman concerning the low percentage of students who actually graduate from community colleges. According o the April 15, 1997 article, only 23% of those who attend community colleges actually earn an associate's degree. These "retention figures" as assessed by administrations is often attributed as a failing on behalf of the faculty. This in turn is used to justify hiring more part-time instructors which in turn undermines the consistency and continuity of the programs. The article stressed that this heavy dependency on part time instructors will have to cease as more and more students work toward a degree in accordance with the president's vision of universality of K-14 education. In the author's words , community colleges are "in a position to turn the whole (educational) system around--if slowly. They have a weighty set of challenges on their table." A related issue is the large fraction of students in two-year colleges who do not take a physics course while enrolled. This critical issue encompasses many of those chosen by different regions. This particular broader issue should be brought to the attention of all of the TYC 21 participants.

RECOMMENDATION THREE: We encourage the commission of a study to determine (a) the validity of figures used when discussing retention, and (2) outline steps that we might take to encourage staying in school and to increase the fraction of two-year college students taking a physics course.

RECOMMENDATION FOUR: The Physics in the Two-Year College Committee of the American Association take a pro-active role addressing the disparity between lecture and lab hours when determining instructors’ work loads.

As in all of these critical issues, a national voice is the key to effective change. We possess strength of numbers and experience teaching a diverse student population beginning physics. We need to continue to use this expertise to develop our voice as an important player in the science education community.