Context: This group is working on their diagram based on Energy Theater for the water wheel/light bulb scenario. Brad is uncomfortable with the use of the word "conduct" to describe the mechanism of energy transfer from the generator to the wire (I think--it's hard to tell without seeing the diagram they are pointing to.)
Before the clip begins: Brad asks, "Does that imply what we want it to? Does that conduct electricity? Oh wait, we do say that…Why does that feel bad in my head?" Wendy suggests, "Because we haven't used it in that particular meaning before. But what does it mean…? It means things are…touching and something is transferring…" The group then summarizes their understanding of the diagram so far. Then the clip begins.
During the clip: Brad expresses his discomfort with the term, which seems to be based on a risk of confusion between what they later call electrical conduction and thermal conduction. The group tries negotiates through the best name for this mechanism. I noticed many uses of humor throughout this negotiation. I'm interested in how the use of humor helped or hindered this group from understanding each others' concerns. One other thing to notice is Wendy's role in the conversation--she says very little, and everything she says is phrased as a question, but she seems to me to be leading the conversation toward the instructor-provided goal (generating names for the mechanisms for the energy transfers).
Instances of the Use of Humor
1. Wendy asks "What is an English definition of 'conduct'?" Steve mimes conducting an orchestra; Don says, "An English definition of conduct? Like conduct yourself appropriately?" He seems to be smiling. (My interpretation is that while Steve was explaining how the light bulb worked, the two men had forgotten about the discussion about the word "conduct". They don't understand her question, and both make a facetious response. What other interpretations could there be? What other data might inform those interpretations?)
2. Brad tries to give a Latin etymology of the word, and Don chimes in. Both men seem to be using a silly "faux-scholarly" voice.
3. Brad expresses discomfort with the word "conduct" but then seems to dismiss his feeling: "I don't know if it's not enough coffee…or too much coffee…"
4. Brad says Stamatis' suggests "helps discriminate" the different types of conduction; Wendy says "We don't like discrimination!" Perhaps a politically charged joke?
Transcript
[00:00:00.00]Brad: Is that something that would be a problem
[00:00:04.06]if I say hey we're conducting, from here to here, electrical energy
[00:00:08.12]and later I say we're conducting thermal to thermal...
[00:00:12.05]actually we're radiating cause this is a vac--oh no
[00:00:14.18]Don: That's radiation there
[00:00:21.10]Steve: There's usually argon in there
[00:00:23.04]to keep the filament from burning
[00:00:26.05]Brad: But also to keep the bulb from popping
[00:00:28.01]Steve: Riiiight...if you had it in a vacuum
[00:00:31.03]gas would permeate through the glass
[00:00:33.23]Wendy: So what is an English definition of conduct?
[00:00:38.03](Steve mimes conducting an orchestra)
Don: An English definition of conduct?
[00:00:42.24]Like conduct yourself appropriately?
[00:00:47.16]Brad: From the Latin, meaning to drive, to push, to co-direct, to direct
[00:00:57.25]-so if you're conducting someone you're...
-Wendy: So why not?
[00:01:00.22]Brad: Oh I'm not disagreeing, just my concern is
[00:01:03.20]-we've used it in different contexts...
-Wendy: twice
[00:01:06.09]is that going to be a problem?
[00:01:11.20]My gut feeling is that it is
[00:01:13.10]but I don't know why it would be yet
[00:01:16.01]I don't know if it's not enough coffee...
[00:01:18.15]or too much coffee...
[00:01:21.25]Stamatis: So could you have thermal conduction and electrical conduction?
[00:01:24.19]Brad: Just put in an adjective and use it that way?
[00:01:30.10]That would definitely discriminate them
[00:01:33.11]Wendy: We're against discrimination, aren't we?
[00:01:35.23]Brad: No, science is for discrimination!
[00:01:38.03]Don: It's a pigeonhole thing, just add another hole.
[00:01:47.29]Brad: A pigeonhole thing? Like trying to pigeonhole somebody?
[00:01:50.09]Well I did, I just added a new hole.
[00:01:52.22]Don: Well, if you're trying to take something and fit it through a hole
[00:01:56.09]and it won't fit, just make another hole
[00:01:59.21]make a broader definition
[00:02:02.13]Wendy: Ok, so what are you gonna call thermal to light?
[00:02:08.25]Steve: I'd call it radiation, but haven't really talked about that yet
[00:02:12.26]how that works and all that stuff
[00:02:14.12]Brad: Again, same, so we'll call it...
[00:02:17.15]light radiation versus thermal radiation
[00:02:19.28]cause we used radiation and thermal before, right?
[00:02:22.21]so again the same sort of thing, we'll have to put an adjective up front...
I agree with your interpretation in #1.
ReplyDeleteI am entertained by this group's dynamics. I feel like I often see Wendy taking her time, writing in her notebook, and keeping her focus on the actual question that was asked. Meanwhile Brad and Steve seem to have a lot of other knowledge that they want to connect to the present question, so they tend to wander a little farther afield. I think later in this analysis they were looking up the emission spectra of various filament materials.