It’s almost sunset, but I just saw a rainbow on the way back from the corner shop. It reminded me of this lovely little poem.
My heart leaps up when I behold
A rainbow in the sky:
So was it when my life began;
So is it now I am a man;
So be it when I shall grow old,
Or let me die!
The Child is father of the Man;
I could wish my days to be
Bound each to each by natural piety.
by William Wordsworth (1770-1850).
Follow @telescoperYesterday’s attempt by the so-called English Defence League (a group of violent Neo-Nazi thugs) to stir up trouble in the East End of London was the cue for thousands of anti-fascists to stage a counter-demonstration. Many were worried that this would lead to a repeat of the Battle of Cable Street, but thankfully that didn’t happen. While it’s reassuring that the number of of EDL supporters amounted to just a few hundred – many fewer than those who protested against them – it still fills me with sadness that there are even that many people who are prepared to follow such an organization. The lessons of history make it clear that the journey they want to take will lead to an England that isn’t worth defending, so they must be stopped at the outset with every peaceful means possible.
I wasn’t able to get to London for the demonstration, but if I had it would no doubt filled me with nostalgia because the anti-EDL protestors were chanting “¡No pasarán!” (“They Shall Not Pass“), a slogan redolent with nostalgia for me, from my time as a student leftie, and which dates from the heroic defence of Madrid against Franco’s fascists during the Spanish Civil War. In those days (when I was student, I mean, not during the Spanish Civil War!) I was a member of the Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign and remember hearing the band, Zinica, singing a song with that title (which I’ve put below). I even bought their album, Bluefields Express, which I still have.
The members of Zinica hailed from the caribbean cost of Nicaragua which was extensively settled by English people, so a number of the towns in that area have English names, such as Bluefields. Many of their songs were based on traditional English folk songs, especially sea shanties, but with a definite flavour of calypso and reggae.
Anyway, now in my complacent middle age, I thank the EDL for one thing only – reminding me of the sad fact that fascism remains a threat to which we all must be alert. Next time the EDL try to incite violence again, I’ll definitely be among those protesting against them.
No pasarán.
Follow @telescoperThe closing of the transfer window for the football Premiership last week left many disappointed with their team’s failure to bring in new talent for the forthcoming season. Meanwhile, talking of things ending in -FC, rumours are circulating as to why there’s been no announcement yet of the new Chief Executive of the Science & Technology Facilities Council. So I thought I’d liven things up by opening a book on the appointment process. Here is the lowdown on the leading contenders, together with their respective odds, from our man in Polaris House.
5-4 ON, Fav. Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. The bookies’ favourite. Known to be seeking employment, experienced at running large facilities. Has not been heard of for weeks, so may in fact already have been appointed.
EVENS. Prof. Richard Wade. Current Director of Science Programme at STFC so has good inside knowledge. His gruff northern exterior masks an interior that’s both gruff and northern. Represents continuity with existing management. Er…
13-8. Professor Brian Cocks. Some bloke off the telly. Popular with the ladies. Born in the Midlands, near Manchester. Currently the only person in the UK who knows anything about either particle physics or astronomy. Will need to stop smiling and get a different haircut, but nevertheless could be worth a punt. Good track record at recording tracks (Groan. Ed).
3-1. George F. Stathew. Enigmatic character thought to be a cosmologist with some sort of connection to Cambridge University. Rarely seen in public so difficult to assess his form. Low profile, together with elusive and uncommunicative nature generally thought to be assets for this position. A bit of a dark horse, this one, but favoured by some smart money in recent months.
7-1. Andy Lawrence. American actor as well as Regius Professor of Astronomy at the University of Edinburgh (Is this right? Ed). Generally considered to be too young for the job (at 58), but known to be particularly fond of the Swindon area and rumoured to be planning to spend several weeks there in the near future. Definitely an outside chance.
10-1. Saddam Hussein. Similar credentials to the favourite. Experienced at dealing effectively with difficult people. Would be an even stronger contender had he not been executed in 2006, but lack of vital signs not thought to preclude appointment to this position. A drawback is that he is known to be highly strung. Definitely worth an outside bet, but may turn out to be a non-runner.
20-1. Steve McClaren. Rumoured to be unsettled at Nottingham Forest, so a move to Swindon Town is definitely possible in the near future (That’s the wrong STFC! Ed). Points in favour include an excellent range of miserable facial expressions, large repertoire of footballing clichés, and a remarkable track-record in management. (Now you’re just being silly. Ed.) Downsides include his remarkable track-record in management.
33-1. Keith Mason. Current Chief Executive of the Science and Technology Facilities Council and prop forward for Huddersfield Giants Rugby Leage Team (Shurely Shome Mishtake? Ed.) Probably a bit old to be a serious contender for the position but an outside chance that he might stay on for another season. Thought to be keen to complete the job that he started (unfortunately). Better the devil you know? Definitely a wild card but don’t rule him out.
50-1. BAR. Are they open yet? (You’re fired. Ed.)
On a lighter note, I couldn’t resist posting this completely wonderful anagrammatical map of the London Underground. You’ll have to view the image at higher resolution (which you can do by clicking on it) to see it in its full glory, but it’s worth it…
Now, who fancies a game of Mornington Crescent Concerning Torments?
I had to force myself to use the “Like” option on WordPress on this one, because that’s the only way to reblog posts….
This supercilious item is an attempt to counter a polemical piece in the Grauniad recently by George Monbiot. That article was about the extortionate cost and general uselessness of the so-called Learned Journals, i.e. precisely the Academic Journal Racket I’ve blogged about previously. I agree with most of what Monbiot says.
You can tell from the tone of the opening paragraph that this rejoinder doesn’t present a coherent argument because it launches straight into invective. And notice too that this from an academic publisher, so it’s hardly unbiased….
Nevertheless I thought I’d reblog this in the interest of balance. Indeed, if the best arguments for retaining the monstrous expense of “scholarly” journals are those presented here then it’s just a question of time before real scholars see them for what they are and get rid of them.
Come the revolution, next in line after the bankers….*
*For the benefit of the entirely humourless amongst you, let me stress that I am not advocating armed revolution, summary execution or any other form of violence against the academic publishing industry. This line is what we in my country call “a joke”.
Follow @telescoperAt the risk of becoming one of the Great Bores of the Day on the subject of past examinations I thought I’d follow up my old O-level Physics paper with a Physics A-level examination paper to see what people think about it. It might add to the discussion over on another blog I read too.
I took this particular examination myself in 1981. Can it really be 30 years ago? Agh. Paper 1 comprised a collection of short questions of multiple-choice type from which I’ve already posted one example on this blog. This one is Paper 2 and, as you’ll see, it consists of longer questions with a freer format.
One comment I’ll make is that Question 5 is remarkably similar to a coursework questions we have been using here in the School of Physics & Astronomy at Cardiff University in our First year Physics module on Electricity and Magnetism.
Any other comments from people who’ve done A-levels more recently would be very welcome through the Comments Box, e.g. is there anything in this paper that you wouldn’t expect to see nowadays? Is it easier, harder, or about the same as current A-level physics papers?
Follow @telescoperWell, the summer’s just about over again once more and soon we’ll be welcoming the new academic year. I thought I’d mark the occasion of the First of September with the same song that I posted this time a couple of years ago. It’s quite a different version, though, this one featuring the luscious velvet voice of Sarah Vaughan, not to mention the trumpet of Clifford Brown. Here they are with September Song, by Kurt Weill:
Oh, it’s a long, long while from May to December
But the days grow short when you reach September
When the autumn weather turns the leaves to flame
And you ain’t got time for the waiting game
Oh the days days dwindle down to a precious few
September November,
And these few golden days I’d share with you
Those golden days I share with you
I think I’m getting the hang of this slideshare malarky so I thought I’d try it out by posting the slides I used for my (short) talk at the workshop in Copenhagen I told you about two or three weeks ago. I’m not sure how useful they will be to anyone, as I suppose it will be quite hard to reconstruct the talk using only the small amount of information I bother to put on the slides..
If you’re wondering about the presence of various apparently random works of art then what can I say? I like paintings!
Follow @telescoperMy recent post about the O-level Mathematics examination I took way back in 1979 seems to have generated quite a lot of comment, both here and elsewhere, so I thought I’d follow it up with a Physics examination paper to see what people think about that.
One complication with this is that I didn’t actually take Physics O-level; the School I went to preferred to offer Combined Science instead. This examination covered a general syllabus including Physics, Chemistry and Biology but was worth two O-levels rather than three. More or less, therefore, I did 2/3 of a Physics O-level.
I think the reason for choosing Combined Science rather than three separate subjects was to allow us kids the chance to take as broad a range of subjects as possible. In fact I did ten O-levels: Combined Science (2); Mathematics; Additional Mathematics; History; Geography; English Literature; English Language; French; and Latin. My best mark at O-level was in neither mathematics nor science subjects, actually, but in Latin…
Anyway, the examination for Combined Science consisted of four papers. Paper 1 was a general paper with a range of short questions in a booklet into which candidates had to write their answers in the space provided. Obviously I don’t have this paper because I handed it in. The three other papers were each on one of the main subjects and Paper 2, shown below, was the Physics paper.
This also gives me the opportunity to try out slideshare as a better way of displaying the paper than the clumsy method of photographing it on my desk I used for the Mathematics paper. Unfortunately our temperamental scanner – which is rapidly becoming my arch enemy – seems to have missed some of the question numbers, so I put them in by hand.
The first thing that struck me about Question 5 is “During an experiment a boy obtained…”. Girls don’t do physics, obviously.
Any other comments or comparison with GCSE Physics papers should be written in the space provided. Write clearly and legibly, and show clearly the reasoning by which you arrive at your conclusions. You may begin.
Follow @telescoperI came across a press release this morning which contains the following
More should be done to encourage students to use their drawing skills in science education, researchers at The University of Nottingham say.
In a paper being published in Science this week, academics say that although producing visualisations is key to scientific thinking, pupils are often not encouraged to create their own drawings to develop and demonstrate their understanding.
In the paper the authors, led by Dr Shaaron Ainsworth in the University’s School of Psychology and Learning Sciences Research Institute, said: “Scientists do not use words only but rely on diagrams, graphs, videos, photographs and other images to make discoveries, explain findings, and excite public interest.
In the light of this I thought it would be topical to post an updated version of an old piece I wrote on the theme of sketching. This is quite a strange subject for me to have picked pick because drawing is something I’m completely useless at, but I hope you’ll bear with me and hopefully it will make some sense in the end. I always thought that drawing was an important and neglected aspect of education, but I hadn’t until today any solid research to back it up!
-0-
What spurred me on to think about this subject was the exhibit I was involved with for the Architecture Biennale in Venice as part of a project called Beyond Entropy organized by the Architectural Association School of Architecture. In the course of researching this project I came across this image of the Moon as drawn by Galileo
This led to an interesting discussion about the role of drawings like this in science. Of course the use of sketches for the scientific representation of images has been superseded by photographic techniques, initially using film and more recently by digital techniques. The advantage of these methods is that they are quicker and also more “objective”. However, there are still many amateur astronomers who make drawings of the Moon as well as objects such as Jupiter and Saturn (which Galileo also drew). Moreover there are other fields in which experienced practioners continue to use pencil drawings in preference to photographic techniques. Archaeology provides many good examples, e.g.
The reason sketching still has a role in such fields is not that it can compete with photography for accuracy or objectivity but that there’s something about the process of sketching that engages the sketcher’s brain in a way that’s very different from taking a photograph. The connection between eye, brain and hand seems to involve a cognitive element that is extremely useful in interpreting notes at a later date. In fact it’s probably their very subjectivity that makes them useful. A thicker stroke of the pencil, or deliberately enhanced shading, or leaving out seemingly irrelevant detail, can help pick out features that seem to the observer to be of particular significance. Months later when you’re trying to write up what you saw from your notes, those deliberate interventions against objectivity will take you back to what you saw with your mind, not just with your eyes.
It doesn’t even matter whether or not you can draw well. The point isn’t so much to explain to other people what you’ve seen, but to record your own interaction with the object you’ve sketched in a way that allows you to preserve something more than a surface recollection.
You might think this is an unscientific thing to do, but I don’t think it is. The scientific process involves an interplay between objective reality and theoretical interpretation and drawing can be a useful part of this discourse. It’s as if the pencil allows the observer to interact with what is observed, forming a closer bond and probably a deeper level of understanding patterns and textures. I’m not saying it replaces a purely passive recording method like photography, but it can definitely help it.
I have not a shred of psychological evidence to back this up, but I’d also assert that sketching is very good for the learning process too. Nowadays we tend to give out handouts of diagrams involved in physics, whether they relate to the design of apparatus or the geometrical configuration of a physical system. There’s a reason for doing this – they take a long time to draw and there’s a likelihood students will make mistakes copying them down. However, I’ve always found that the only way to really take in what a diagram is saying is to try to draw it again myself. Even if the level of draftsmanship is worse, the level of understanding is undoubtedly better.Merely looking at someone else’s representation of something won’t give your brain as a good a feeling for what it is trying to say as you would get if you tried to draw it yourself.
Perhaps what happens is that simply looking at a diagram only involves the connection between eye and brain. Drawing a copy requires also the connection between brain and hand. Maybe this additional connection brings in additional levels of brain functionality. Sketching iinvolves your brain in an interaction that is different from merely looking.
The problem with excessive use of handouts – and this applies not only to figures but also to lecture notes – is that they turn teaching into a very passive process. Taking notes in your own hand, and supplementing them with your own sketches – however scribbly and incomprehensible they may appear to other people – is a much more active way to learn than collecting a stack of printed notes and meticulously accurate diagrams. And if it was good enough for Galileo, it should good enough for most of us!
Follow @telescoper
In the Dark 