Vice
Chancellor Premo-Hopkins
21 May 2001
Office of
Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs
University
of South Carolina Aiken
Aiken S.C.
29801
Dear Vice
Chancellor Premo-Hopkins
In your letter of 13 May 1999, you
requested assessment information concerning the physics class supplementary
reading Zen and the Art of Motorcycle
Maintenance (ZMM) by Robert Pirsig.
I enclose herewith documents titled Student
Writings Concerning the Book Zen and the
Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. These student writings have been my
primary assessment information concerning the use of ZMM in my physics classes.
I have marked with gray-tone the student writing which shows the student’s
learning progress.
You
also expressed interest in evidence for increased motivation, better conceptual
grasp, and better problem solving skills. Accordingly I have marked in the left
margins of the above mentioned documents, instances of student writing in each
of these areas using respective abbreviations:
M (n=98), C (n=9), and P (n=35). Other areas of student gain are
summarized on page 3 of the 1993 -1996 document.
In three
cases there was exceptional improvement in student performance in which the Zen
Book reading seemed to play a large roll in the student’s progress. See RP, SS, and AD included in the above mentioned documents.
At the end of each of these student’s compositions, I have added an analysis of
what was happening to these students during their physics school year.
I expect you will have time to read only
a small portion of these documents. It will be sufficient to base
your conclusions on a random reading sample of writing marked with
gray-tone. The large number of pages is (only) for the purpose of allowing you
to visually judge the full extent and variety of the student’s responses.
The student
writing is in three separate documents as noted below.
|
YEARS |
Grade Credit? |
Lab Book Writing |
Final Exam Quest. |
Book Reports |
|
Required for “A” |
Yes |
S98 What
Learn? |
One |
|
|
Optional |
Yes |
F98 Zen
Survey. |
None |
|
|
Optional |
Yes + 2
Book Reports During Semester. |
None |
Five At
End of Spring Semester |
In your letter you stated: “I have
wondered how you incorporated Poincare’s mathematical principals which are
certainly involved in Pirsig’s approach into your teaching of the book.” I will
answer your specific question below but to do so allow me to explain how,
overall, the study of ZMM was conducted in my classes and why.
First off, I compliment you on your choice of the Poincare passages, since these are centrally important topics. In the New Age Edition of ZMM Pirsig’s discussion of Poincare’ covers: The Crisis of Non-Euclidean Geometry. (p 234.6), What Is Truth? (p 236.5), Where Does An Important Hypothesis Come From? (p 237.7), and Hierarchy of Facts. (p 238.1). Good Philosophy. Good Science. Good Physics. Indeed Pirsig’s Poincare’ discussion, building upon Pirsig’s Einstein discussion (p 97-103), are important for any liberal art educated person, especially science majors. Don’t I wish there were time and priority for these topics in APHY 201, 202, 211, & 212!!! [But, since the priorities for class time did not allow discussion of these topics, I had to depend on the students learning about them on their own. I fact almost no class time was devoted to discussion of the ZMM Book on any topic.]
Originally I had concluded that Pirsig’s use of the above-mentioned passages was just as supportive illustrations. After I studied your letter, I realized that Pirsig’s Einstein and Poincare’ sections are, in outline form, a major thrust of Mr. Pirsig's entire book. His book is a “how-to-put-into-everyday-real-world-practice” the conclusions of these major thinkers. Einstein and Poincare’ are both physicists and mathematicians extraordinare, who guide us on the foundations of science (and physics)!
Thus it may come as a surprise to you, that beyond “promotional efforts” to get the students to seriously read and gain an over all understanding of ZMM, very little ZMM oriented instruction took place during physics class or lab. The in-class priorities were dictated by 1) standard traditional textbook subjects and 2) intensive efforts to help the average student to gain an understanding of the basics.[1]
So it was, that for the most part, ZMM could not be “covered” in class. I had to trust that the better student would gain, by their own ZMM reading efforts, the intended understanding of their university education and the overall project of science. As demonstrated by their own words, I believe they were successful! Moreover I believe the better students need a challenge beyond the standard course material, which is trudgingly paced to the average student.
I must especially emphasize that I wanted to help the (better) students to stop the widespread practice of superficial learning.[2] Many students are “studying” in such a fashion as to guarantee they will negate the entire purpose of the study of physics. Without desire for knowledge, no amount of lab-book writing or pressure of exam questions can force the needed approach. Without desire for knowledge, the “knowledge” gained will be sterile[3].
I have given you the why and how of my
overall ZMM teaching. Now I take up your specific question. The following is
where Pirsig’s Poincare’ discussion was used in my physics teaching.
In the third physics laboratory
students experimentally prove the Commutative Property of Vector Addition.
Vectors, in mathematics and physics, depend on the properties of
parallel lines, and specifically, Euclid’s 5-th Postulate. As part of my
laboratory follow-up, I ask the students what would happen to their proof if
somehow a black hole were located on their lab desk during their experimental
effort. They were to see that Euclid’s 5-th Postulate would no longer be true
and this would have serious consequences. As optional reading, in preparation
for their laboratory report, I suggested the students read Pirsig’s Crisis of Non-Euclidean Geometry and
in an encyclopedia read-up on Euclidean
and Non-Euclidean Geometry.
These topics were later taken up in one
of the (one-hour) meetings of our optional ZMM discussion group. The reading
assignment for that week stated: “All the [Chapter 22 ZMM] discussion of
geometry and Professor Poincare’ is very important for a science major.”
…The assignment sheet also directed the student’s attention to (p 235 ZMM) and
stated: “In the case of intense gravity,
for example a black hole, a beam of light is “bent”, and Euclid’s 5-th
Postulate is not true. In this case Rienman Geometry (i.e. General Relativity)
is better than Euclid’s Geometry.”
Pirsig’s Poincare discussion of, Where Does An Important Hypothesis Come
From? (p 237.7) covers the roll of Insight, Flash of Insight or AHA in
hypothesis forming and problem solving. This is a major theme of Pirsig’s
entire book. I have my students read my article on dealing with the
frustrations of being blocked on problem solving (stuck) and the associated
conceptual blindness. I work with the students quite a bit on this aspect of
problem solving and ZMM is used as a source of quotations for this effort
including what Poincare’ said. Of course students reading ZMM become proficient
in dealing with “stuckness” in problem solving and this is mentioned in their
ZMM reports.
I sincerely
hope you will find these comments interesting. Education has to work or we all
are in trouble.
Sincerely
Henry Gurr
Professor of Physics
University of South Carolina Aiken
[1] A lengthly explanation of these priorities was eliminated from this letter, but a copy is available upon request.
[2] See Superficial Learning in the beginning of the attached documents.
[3]
“You must care about what you are doing.” is a continuing motif of
ZMM.
“Superficial
learning is caused by a “don’t care” attitude. The need to care about what you
are doing is a most important aspect of value and quality. ZMM subtitle is
An Inquiry Into Values.
Appropriate "care" is an especial need in our
own time for all persons, not just students!!