More feedback from community
gvwilson opened this issue · comments
From @ntmoore:
In the paper, you mention that online Q&A sites "present a chorus of explanations geared at different levels and needs" (line 593 in the tex source)
This idea feels like a reference to the "multiple representations" than experts use to solve Physics (and Chemistry, Math, etc) problems. Sort of relevant reference: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0By53x8SYAF1lOGlCSTVPTHpYaUk/view
For example, in physics, when we talk about the trajectory of a ball (kinematics), we might:
Draw a picture, write an equation, sketch x-v-a stacks (plots), draw a force diagram and sum forces, make a series of energy bar charts, or actually toss a few balls.
Some people in Physics Education refer to this diversity of ways of telling the story of what's happening as using "multiple representations." If it seems relevant, such a reference might be a useful hook for readers with Science/Math Education backgrounds.
In the paper, you seem to be saying that providing a bunch of different explanations is useful, because people have both different needs and different understandings of the tools available. It might be relevant to add that as people become more expert in a domain, their facility with all available representations should increase (indeed, that's probably a working definition of expertise).
So (perhaps), in providing many different representations/answers etc, you are helping learners understand the scope of the field they're being introduced to.
Thanks for sharing.
Absolutely!