Saturday, November 29, 2008

97/100. Competent enough?

Today, most parents want their children to top their class in academics and get cent percent marks or say at least a 97 percent. It’s good that parents encourage their children to perform well in academics (and it’s also good to get a 97 percent ;-)) but does a 97 percent prove that the student is good and is capable of thinking out of the box to apply what he/she has learnt in the classroom? Or for that matter is a student with 80 percent worse than the student who got 97 percent? Looking at our current education system, my answer to both these questions would be a big “NO”.

Even though marks and grades are important for a lot of things (like getting jobs), it really does not prove a student’s intellectual capability. I say this because most exams (be it in school, college or even most professional courses) check the students’ memorizing capability. Any student who has good memory can get a 97 percent but ask the same student some simple applications of what he/she studied and you may not get any response. You can’t blame the student for this because our education system works this way and even some teachers don’t seem to realize the fact that education doesn’t mean marks (earned by memorizing textbooks) alone.

To prove my point, I would like you to read the following story that was told by Sir Ernest Rutherford (President of the Royal Academy, and recipient of the Nobel Prize in Physics):

Some time ago I received a call from a colleague. He was about to give a student a zero for his answer to a physics question, while the student claimed a perfect score. The instructor and the student agreed to an impartial arbiter, and I was selected.

I read the examination question: "Show how it is possible to determine the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer."

The student had answered: "Take the barometer to the top of the building, attach a long rope to it, lower it to the street, and then bring it up, measuring the length of the rope. The length of the rope is the height of the building."

The student really had a strong case for full credit since he had really answered the question completely and correctly! On the other hand, if full credit were given, it could well contribute to a high grade in his physics course and certify competence in physics, but the answer did not confirm this.

I suggested that the student have another try. I gave the student six minutes to answer the question with the warning that the answer should show some knowledge of physics. At the end of five minutes, he hadn't written anything. I asked if he wished to give up, but he said he had many answers to this problem; he was just thinking of the best one.

I excused myself for interrupting him and asked him to please go on. In the next minute, he dashed off his answer, which read: "Take the barometer to the top of the building and lean over the edge of the roof. Drop the barometer, timing its fall with a stopwatch. Then, using the formula x=0.5*a*t^2, calculate the height of the building."

At this point, I asked my colleague if he would give up. He conceded, and gave the student almost full credit. While leaving my colleague's office, I recalled that the student had said that he had other answers to the problem, so I asked him what they were.

"Well," said the student, "there are many ways of getting the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer. For example, you could take the barometer out on a sunny day and measure the height of the barometer, the length of its shadow, and the length of the shadow of the building, and by the use of simple proportion, determine the height of the building."

"Fine," I said, "and others?"

"Yes," said the student, "there is a very basic measurement method you will like. In this method, you take the barometer and begin to walk up the stairs. As you climb the stairs, you mark off the length of the barometer along the wall. You then count the number of marks, and this will give you the height of the building in barometer units. A very direct method."

"Of course. If you want a more sophisticated method, you can tie the barometer to the end of a string, swing it as a pendulum, and determine the value of g [gravity] at the street level and at the top of the building. From the difference between the two values of g, the height of the building, in principle, can be calculated." "On this same tack, you could take the barometer to the top of the building, attach a long rope to it, lower it to just above the street, and then swing it as a pendulum. You could then calculate the height of the building by the period of the precession".

"Finally," he concluded, "there are many other ways of solving the problem. Probably the best," he said, "is to take the barometer to the basement and knock on the superintendent's door. When the superintendent answers, you speak to him as follows: 'Mr. Superintendent, here is a fine barometer. If you will tell me the height of the building, I will give you this barometer."

At this point, I asked the student if he really did not know the conventional answer to this question. He admitted that he did, but said that he was fed up with high school and college instructors trying to teach him how to think.

The name of the student was Niels Bohr." (1885-1962) Danish Physicist; Nobel Prize 1922; best known for proposing the first 'model' of the atom with protons & neutrons, and various energy state of the surrounding electrons - the familiar icon of the small nucleus circled by three elliptical orbits ... but more significantly, an innovator in Quantum Theory.

This story proves one thing for sure; that our education system has to change. Change - in order to make students think out of the box, to be able to discover the Neils Bohrs of our country and also to prevent students from saying what Beatrix Potter (the noted children’s novelist) once said - “Thank goodness I was never sent to school; it would have rubbed off some of the originality.” 

1 comment:

Gayatri said...

True... Our education system focusses mainly on memorising stuff, we study many formulae in maths, but only a few can actually apply them to real life and there are only a few which can be applied to the specific field we choose later on...Y is it that more weightage is given to theory as compared to practicals? I, myself hav seen students (who chose a particular stream/course against their will), running away from practicals and relying entirely on theory to pass...this happens because they don't have any interest in that subject, n practicals are all about hw well u understand the subject, and since many of us have been used to rote-learning, we find it easier to attempt theoretical questions....n if u ask these questions to them an hour after the exam...well, i guess we all know the outcome...This happens 'coz our education system does not understand the importance of practical studying, their focus is entirely on the final percentage, not on logical thinking...n maybe this is the reason why many teachers allow their institution's students to copy in an exam...A student gets 1 % less than the topper and he goes into depression, but what if the topper scored more 'coz he did well in theory and the other scored more in practicals??? There is more probability that the latter is goin to retain wat he studied for a longer period than the former...We understand the importance of the applications of whatever we've studied only wen we start workin on projects, well, sum jus lift projects frm the NET, so they understand the imp. wen they get a job.We can say "Better late then never"...but the earlier we understand, the better we'll b in our respective professions...Our syllabus is such that it contains many stuff which hav no use in our lives...The govt. is not likely to do nethin abt. this in the near future, so we must contribute in our own small way, n try to make the young ones apply whatever they study, in their daily life, as much as possible(obviously we can't teach them hw to use electrons n protons ;) ).Teach India is a very intelligent step that has been taken. The details are available on their site. I guess teachers can take them to field trips, give them mini projects, bring articles related to the subject and show it to them etc..Wen i was in 5th std., my teacher had askd us to look at the moon everyday n draw it in our copy for 14 consecutive days to understand the waxing and waning of the moon...n it was quite interesting...Hopefully our system will change and so will the way of thinking...