Return to Q&A main page: Q_A
Q&A for the previous lecture: Q_A_1009
Q&A for the next lecture: Q_A_1014

If you want to see lecture notes, click lec_notes

Main class wiki page: home

Here is a wiki poll on the use of a note card in the future quizzes. I wrote in the Email:
In terms of allowing a note card in the future quizzes, I am receptive to the idea. How does this proposal sound? 1. you are allowed to bring a note card carrying 10 equations and/or definitions. 2. you will turn it in on the Wednesday before the quiz. We will give a copy to you at the exam.

It sounds like the Yuichi really wants to know what we think about lecture and what could make it better. It’s not very often that professors ask for input on how to make their class better, so let’s take advantage of this opportunity.

For me, the class is working well, because the book is really good and the lectures help me clear up my conceptual understanding.

I think it would help me to have see a prototypical worked example for each section. I wouldn’t need to see the math worked out, but just an outline of how to do it.

It would also help me to hear more people ask questions. I learn a lot from other people’s questions.

What do other people think? What’s working and what isn’t? What could make things better? Also, if the class is going well, what made our test scores lower than expected?

PS I hope it's okay I posted this here, I know it's not exactly a physics question.

I agree. I do appreciate so much that Yuichi cares so much about how we're progressing and that we are on track with him …. (after many professors seemed to care sooo little…)

For me, the ideal of this class is great. I think a lot of us are having a hard time staying up with reading ahead on time, and that kind of impedes the ability of the class. I'm honestly trying to make an even greater effort to read ahead more, but I think that's one of the biggest problems. For example when we're starting tri-terms/mid-terms, it's hard to do homework, study for tests, AND read… as for this problem, I think sometimes Yuichi would probably do better to just work on explaining concepts, because, at least for today's lecture, I hadn't been able to read enough to have an honest question. (questions, but not ones that haven't been covered in reading).

The other thing I was thinking about, is I agree with Mr. Faraday, that having one proto-typical problem is very helpful. Perhaps a day or two after discussing a topic Yuichi could post a problem that we could review with. That way we could have the benefit of studying and working on our own, and discussing in class, and then afterwards, tie up any loose ends with what we didn't understand or have inadvertently overlooked with one example.

I do appreciate that Yuichi is trying to graduate us to being responsible for our own learning, the way we will be in grad school or in doing our own research – where we don't get spoon fed solutions with each problem. But I don't think a prototype problem would be detrimental to us.

It seems like the plan is that you read the material, get a general grasp of what's going on, and then have the conceptually finer points talked about in class - but when you come across a problem that is very calculation heavy you can use the book or any other outside resource (integral tables for example) to help you out. So far it seems to be working as a mixed bag; if I read and think about it, then it's nice to get the more conceptually tricky things (as is often the case in QM it seems) and I can do the calculation heavy things without too much pain. But if I don't read and am rather lost, then it just adds more confusion. I think it would be somewhat helpful to get a little bit more of the broad view of things in class - so often we've been looking at various potentials but I'm not sure what they can model or how they can be compared to each other, I just know how to find the wavefunction.

I think it's a great forum discussion topic. I'll admit that I screwed up the test–pretty badly. It wasn't that I didn't know what was going on, it's more that I just choked under the stress of different conditions. My homework has always been nearly perfect and I do it all myself, I read and reread the book and mark up the hell out of it, I take notes in class, review homework and discussion problems, try outside problems, and I spent a week before hand making up note cards of important formulas, identities and results so I'd be okay without a note sheet or book on the exam. When exam time came I felt panicked, as usual, thinking of a dozen things I should have done to prepare better–maybe review more problems and not focus so much on memorizing–if I had more time. When we're in discussion groups we actively interact to solve problems, getting help from the TA; for homework, we have books and notes and TAs and calculators and integral tables and other outside material (and partners for some) to help us understand and solve problems; during the test we were all exposed to a closed environment where we didn't have much time to interpret the meaning of each question, draw on what we know without reference material, plan a strategy and execute a solution (usually cumbersome mathematically and time consuming). The general class performance on the exam shouldn't be very surprising considering the differences in homework and discussion conditions compared to that of the exam, especially in terms of time allotted. I don't know about the rest of you, but it generally takes me anywhere from half an hour to two or three hours to solve and write up each homework problem. Up to half the time is spent interpreting the problem and planning out a solution strategy. In the test it took me most of the hour to realize that the last question was asking me to solve one of our homework problems–and by the time I had interpreted the question I didn't have time to do more than the first few steps. As soon as I walked out of the exam I set to work successfully solving each of the problems and confirmed the solutions with the book, homework or calculator. It took me longer than the exam time and I needed a little bit of reference material, but I did it; and I think most people in the class can, too.

There are three ways I can see to solve this issue: one, making exams more like homework, which would require take-home tests and isn't feasible at a school this large; two, we all know what to expect from Yuichi's exams now that we've taken one and can more efficiently and effectively study for the next exam, and perform much better under the exact same conditions; three, same exam conditions but allowing us to use a page of notes or preferably our textbook. Everybody has the same textbook, we all should have read it, we should be making notes and highlighting important results and concepts, and it's what we reference to solve homework problems. Even professors use lecture notes for derivations or example solutions in class. There's a difference, in my opinion, between knowing how to solve a problem using reference tools and solving a problem in addition to memorized material without reference tools. We just have to determine to which standard we'll be held for exams. In the professional field we'll be expected to know formulas and results to a certain extent. We'll definitely be required to know how to solve every problem we encounter; but we'll still be able to reference our textbooks to solve problems. I would personally like to have open book exams, or be able to use a page of notes. I think I could do much, much better. But even if the conditions of next exam are exactly like the first, I know I'll do much better because I now know what to expect and how to study and prepare for it.

Sorry for the long-winded response, but in summary: I'd prefer open book exams and the first exam was a learning experience so students now know how to study and prepare. The next exam should go much better for all of us regardless of testing conditions.

Personally, I like how conceptual Yuichi's lectures are. I also like the way that he organizes them by topic. The hardest thing for me is always figuring out how concepts are related, and a lot of professors do a bad job of summarizing this kind of information. One thing that I think might be helpful is if an important or useful relation is given, that it be appropriately emphasized over the rest of what is being given. (bold face Yuichi) It's easy to get lost when there are a lot of equations going up on the board. I'm not particularly good at math, especially math I've never seen before, so it's hard sometimes to recognize when one relation is mathematically more powerful or more general than another. Being given some hints about that would be nice (how key concepts connect mathematically, and ways to see how certain relations are more generally applicable or useful than others).

I agree with a lot of stuff Zeno said – The only comment I wanted to add was – I'm fearful of allowing our books to be used – because professors usually feel they have to make up for the text book by making problems even more difficult and complex – so given we'd still have the same amount of time, I'd rather not have that option. But I agree that being able to solve a problem and being able to pull it out on demand in such a limited time is kind of …. dis-similar to real live demands and what we should be trying to do in the objective of learning material… I'm very much for allowing a limited amount of notes or a card or something – something that allows helps us remain confident (something I have a horrible problem with in exams, like Zeno) yet is limited enough to show we understand concepts. Like Zeno said, in real life, we are usually allowed a much more flexible amount of time to solve problems, the ability to look up our own notes etc… I don't see that allowing students to write a small note card would compromise the integrity of the standard, or keep us from obtaining the 'independent reasoning' we're trying to learn.

I'm in for the notecard too. We would still need to have the ability to know how to apply what we have on our card, we just then wouldn't have to spend time memorizing every equation perfectly. It also helps because it allows the student to put the information down in a way that they are used to and comfortable with. Sometimes the given equation sheets have the same basic equation in a less helpful way. I would also like to second the thought that this book is good. I really enjoy Griffiths writing style, much less dry than some.

I agree that at least being allowed a notecard would be very helpful. We would still have to understand the physics, but it would require less time because we wouldn't be worried about having each equation perfect. I feel like without some material to reference, we'll be more worried about memorization than actual comprehension of the concepts. I do agree with Zeno, though, in that we now know what to expect so hopefully the next exam will go smoother even if we aren't allowed to use some sort of reference material.

Lecture Improvements: I think Yuichi is doing a great job at the lectures so far, and would agree that an improvement would be a general “this is what to look for when solving equations, this is a good method to set it up,” for each chapter. (bold face by Yuichi)

As for the test I would agree that not having anything given for us was a bit difficult. I tried to remember the most simple of equations thinking that that would be the most we would need, but then was surprised by the amount of equations we needed but weren't given exactly. What I'm referring to I guess would be the first problem where we were expected to solve the integral of sin^2 and the last problem where we should have remembered the first derivative with respect to time of psi. I know we should know how to do these, and I do remember how to do them, but these take a lot of time and that is not a good thing during a test. I actually did the integral during the test of the first problem, but as a result I wasted a good 20 minutes before he said we should just guess the value. This took away enough time that by the time I got around to the last problem I only had about 5 minutes left, and I had to try to substitute in the derivatives and I ended up not finishing the problem – even though it was merely an easier version of a problem we did for the homework. Getting a notecard would be a great improvement at least for me, plus it is very calming for some reason to be able to bring that in there and know that if you completely freak out, because the professor says “I don't expect any of you to finish this, I made it long on purpose,” at least when your mind suddenly blanks and you start to panic you have a small base of knowledge written down to hopefully bring you back from that white panic.

Making points about how the concepts connect to experiments is very helpful. As is pointing out general things we can apply to more than, for example, the few problems we can simulate with a certain potential. I think that a note sheet would be helpful on the next exam, but I am more in favor of a standard note sheet for the entire class. It really doesn't help to have equations crammed on to a note card when you won't be using them, anyways. If the back of the test was printed with equations Yuichi thinks would be useful, that would probably be enough.

I don't think the lack of equations was my problem, it was my (in)ability to actually execute the problems. Like any test, I wrote out the equations pertaining to each problem. I had the very basic foundations (both conceptual & mathematic), but was not able to build off of these. Maybe I should just work through more of the problems at the end of the chapter so I get used to manipulating the equations? So hopefully in class we can do more examples, I'm always game for that.

As far as open book, I will go with a no. I don't think there was any point during the test that I thought the book would help me. If you have the basic equations & know the concepts, the test should be manageable.

I have not all these comments but saw some comments about open book exam and wanted to share my point of view. I am totally against open book exams for two reasons: 1)It is very distracting and hard to focus with people flipping through pages and making noises(sorry but it really is) 2)I tend to not really think about the problem in depth and waste time just looking for that one magical equation in the book. As far as equation sheet goes i think it will be very helpfull to be allowed to have one especially for integral formulas. it is very time consuming trying to do the integral on the test.

I agree very much with Andromeda. I feel like a list of relevant integrals or very basic equations would not take away from the physics we should understand, yet would make the test much easier to complete in the allotted time. I don't like the idea of a student-generated notecard with a set number of allowed equations. Standardized resources make for the most fair test.

I also agree with poit0009 and Andromeda. Who would have put half angle identities on a note card? Not me. On the other hand, a note card would not have made my score on the exam worse. However it my not have been useful.

I would rather do more homework problems than have shorter or easier or open notes or open book tests. I just want the homework to be similar to the test and the examples in class to be similar to the homework. I think a pretty good job is being done on this, but that more examples and more homework might be a good idea. This could be facilitated by having the discussion sections not be about group problem solving so much, as it seems, often enough, that groups have very little idea how to do the problems presented in discussion section anyway, no matter how well they cooperate, and that it might be more useful to spend that time on a detailed problem solving lesson. I really like this idea. Does anyone else?

I sort of like your idea John, but I would like to change it a bit. The problem solving discussions are actually one of my favorite ways to learn since the problems require a lot of thinking and usually discussion on what everyone thinks should happen. This is particularly useful because it highlights everyone's decision processes in how to go about solving problems (and what relevant parameters and solution methods are to a particular QM problem). What I don't like about the discussions is that the problems are generally hard enough that most people don't have any idea on what to do, and it feels like this is very unhelpful when it happens. I feel like being given multiple problems that are at an easier or more basic level would probably be much better for helping us understand how to solve problems.

One of the most difficult parts of QM is just understanding it, so being given a problem that is over our heads is not usually very productive. I realize we should learn how to do these harder problems as well, but a lot of the time it just feels like “Okay I understand how to do it after you told me, but I never would have thought of that myself…”

There's no “right” solution to this issue but I believe there are some prerequisites that must be satisfied.

1) Reading must be completed prior to lecture and discussion. For whatever reason (busy schedules, higher priorities) I've heard more then once that someone hadn't completed the reading prior to class. 2) Beginning (attempting) homework prior to Monday. This goes along with reading. Attempting the homework expands upon what basic knowledge was attained after reading. In addition, attempting homework generates questions for lecture and discussion. Putting off homework until the last minute is a bad, but very easy, habit to fall into.

Before we point fault elsewhere let's first evaluate ourselves!

Return to Q&A main page: Q_A
Q&A for the previous lecture: Q_A_1009
Q&A for the next lecture: Q_A_1014