In the first video notice that at 10 seconds Matt poses his question "Is thermal energy only the vibrational energy of particles?" in a very strong tone and cadence and really projects his voice clearly. Then to begin his answer Hunter uses the phrase "The Answer is..."
Now have a look at what was going on in the other group. Pay particular attention to the teachers' body language at 47 seconds in the clip.
What I see here is the powerful (dare I say Pavlovian) response of these two teachers to Hunter's use of the magic word Answer. During Matt's question both Linda and Lezlie looked over towards him and Hunter, so they were both aware of the fact they were engaged in conversation. There was also a clear break in the conversation in their own group. So when Hunter used the magic word it was easy for them to indulge their natural reaction which was to look immediately for the answer! (Bonus: in the first clip you can see Linda's ponytail turn sharply as she looks over)
The other fabulous thing about this episode is that both Benedikt and I had the same response! We both immediately perked up when we heard Hunter announce The Answer, and both noted it specifically in our field notes. I think that regardless of whether we are students, teachers, or researchers, we are all still waiting hungrily for someone to give us The Answer.
That is so awesome. I love how "the answer" is not an answer at all, but merely a description of the KIND of answer scientists would give -- yet still the flagging of it with "The Answer Is" makes it compelling.
ReplyDeleteWhy does Matt turn away from Hunter as he begins to give The Answer? What's he doing on his laptop? You can just see Lisa turn toward Hunter and nod as he Answers, and that probably makes it socially possible for Hunter to continue - it would be too weird for Hunter to talk to the back of Matt's head.
I think the bonus in the first clip is not Linda's ponytail but rather her whole shoulder, leaning into the frame.
ReplyDeleteI was also wondering why Matt was turning away, but he might just have been live-blogging about The Answer to his question. At least, there is a note about "chemical" and "thermal" energy on the blog about yesterday: https://sites.google.com/site/spuenergyproject/energy-ii-summer-2010/wednesday-august-11-2010
ReplyDeleteI don't remember, but I would assume that Matt was taking notes on what I was saying, especially considering how into the question he was. At least that would be the most charitable interpretation towards Matt. What else would be plausible?
ReplyDelete@ Rachel's first comment:
ReplyDeleteIn this clip, it is not really an answer yet, but I do think I go on to answer the question. I said that in terms of kinetic and potential (from a micro point of view) it would be wrong to call it kinetic; "the answer" is that it is potential. But from a macro point of view, I don't know what we/they would say. Phase energy sounded the best to me. Costas noted that the introduction of (positive) phase energy acted as a workaround on negative energy, though I doubt many were aware of that. I don't think I was aware of it at the time.
@Rachel, concerning the bonus: I didn't realize at first that Linda is leaning back towards the end of the clip. And I agree with you that this is an even better indicator for her turning her attention totally towards the other table.
ReplyDelete