This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Education page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Shortcut WT:EDUCATION

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 90 days

Education Project‑class

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of education and education-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EducationWikipedia:WikiProject EducationTemplate:WikiProject Educationeducation articles Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present.

Over in the Physics Wikiproject we are gearing up for a total rewrite of our woeful Introduction to quantum mechanics. As this is a notoriously difficult subject to teach and yet of increasing importance I thought I would investigate what educators do in this space. To this end I read and summarized some articles into User:Johnjbarton/sandbox/teaching_quantum_mechanics. I didn't go in to the methodology reported in these papers as I believe that would only be of interest to experts.

I plan to create this page into the regular article space soon and I expect to add a bit more as we get into the details of our project.

Suggestions and comments by actual educators would be welcome. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:48, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a 'first place to start' when students want to begin to find out for themselves. One suggestion - I notice that there is a discussion about how much history of science to include in the intro. I suggest from an educational perspective - it's more inclusive to focus on the ideas. Quantum physics and astronomy are topics that can appeal to students broadly because they get our imaginations working. As a female physics graduate, now in education research, I'm interested in finding ways to introduce physics topics that reach out to all students. it would be interesting to create a group of 'critical readers' for a proposed new intro to such an important topic that includes female students and students in developing countries. Summerhouse21 (talk) 04:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm keen to hear from critical readers, especially those who can help uncover common stumbling blocks for new users. If you have any ideas on how to encourage input on our effort to rewrite Introduction to quantum mechanics, please let me know.

History is one path to learn but I think it has low value for most beginners. Historical presentation involves old terminology, old ideas that had some value but are not mainstream now, issues around the scientific process, and historical context that may not be known to readers. The actors in that era of science came from a narrow slice of society in Europe that many readers may not relate to.

Nevertheless, there are some editors on Wikipedia who feel strongly that every topic worthy of Wikipedia will have history and thus history must be included in every article. Rather than start off with a big fight about history, I have been trying to improve the History of quantum mechanics and abbreviate the history section in the Introduction. Maybe we can position the history section later in the page and eventually the remaining content will make it clear that the history does not add value in this particular article. I encourage you to join in the discussion. Johnjbarton (talk) 14:17, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the history of science does matter so important it's there. Your note is about 'where' it comes on the page. I hope my comment next is helpful and not a distraction. We've started an age where school and college students now have 'GenAI' to offer them instant explanations of lots of 'big ideas' and concepts. As a 'user' - of any technology - I have agency over my 'learning journey'. In that space, Wikipedia stands out as remarkable and important. In Wikipedia i can click on links that take me to pages / sections of pages that offer me concepts in context. I'm seeing pages by people who 'know their stuff' - e.g. if it's physics, it's content written by 'experts' who use 'grown up words' precisely - as good experts do. Perhaps Wikiversity is a good space for educators and physicists to collaborate to support learners – linked from the main page? Users can use the links in Wikipedia to navigate the content to build their own understanding and – in contrast with GenAI as it stands - the content is stable (except when science advances) so they can return and read again. Summerhouse21 (talk) 09:54, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, our page is now live at Teaching quantum mechanics.

Per Wikipedia guidelines we ask that content additions be referenced to reliable sources. Perhaps you know of reviews of Wikiversity or of comparative studies of AI vs other sources of educational material? Might be a bit early for that however. Johnjbarton (talk) 13:41, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Nigerian Turkish International Colleges#Requested move 29 July 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 20:36, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings, Previously this article was Unreferenced, so today I added a few references. While I've been updating Wikipedia (mostly orphan articles & association football bios) my attempts at adding references are probably a grade C- at best. Asking for help here to review the cites and make needed changes & improvements. Thanks, JoeNMLC (talk) 02:54, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Digital media use and mental health for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:06, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]