Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A story in the June 2017 issue of Physics Today recently caught my eye. An Issues and Events story by Toni Feder (page 28) stated that project-based learning is gaining popularity. I am a retired industrial physicist with my PhD in atomic theory. I’d like to share a related story.I think it was my junior year, 1966–67, at Colorado State University. I was taking a course on modern physics; the class had two parts. The lecture part was traditional and worth five credits, if memory serves me, and the laboratory part would now be called project-based learning. It was worth two credits.On the first day of lab class, the professor took us to the basement of the physics wing, unlocked the doors of three rooms, and said, “You may use any materials in this room, the next one, and the one at the end of the hall. You are to design and execute five experiments in modern physics, record the data, and make a report on each. The notebooks and reports will be turned in at the end of the quarter and will determine your grade for the class.” He then went back upstairs to his office. He was always available, but few needed to consult him.We were teamed up into groups of two. In addition to choosing from several “canned” experiments, each group took on at least one original experiment. My partner and I chose to measure the stopping potential of the photoelectron. We found a regulated DC power supply with shielding, a student spectroscope, and a few odds and ends, and we cobbled together a credible experiment. The result was within 20% of the accepted value, a quite good result for the equipment available to us.That class served me well throughout my career. It taught me to read what others had done, adapt their work, and solve problems with the equipment at hand, and it developed in me a passion for the projects I encountered. I had an exciting career that involved topics from reprogramming a direct-reading spectrograph for analytical chemistry to studying iron aluminides. The work was an equal mix of the theoretical and the experimental and was highly interdisciplinary. For example, one summer I was a student hire at Aerojet General to work on Project NERVA, an effort to develop nuclear propulsion for spacecraft.Among other things, the project-based lab fostered a can-do attitude in me. I strongly applaud the efforts described in Feder’s story. Section:ChooseTop of page <<© 2019 American Institute of Physics.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».