Socratic dialogue-inducing (SDI) labs1,2 are based on Arnold Arons' half-century of ethnographic research, listening carefully to students' responses to probing Socratic questions on physics, science, and ways of thinking, and culminating in his landmark Teaching Introductory Physics.3 They utilize “interactive engagement” methods4 and are designed, in part, to help students think like scientists, e.g., to: (1) appreciate the need for operational definitions; (2) use and interpret pictorial, graphical, vectorial, mathematical, and written representations; and (3) consider dimensions, thought experiments, and limiting conditions. After giving some SDI lab examples from those categories, I conclude that the SDI lab attempts to help students think like scientists have been relatively successful.

1.
R. R.
Hake
, “
Socratic pedagogy in the introductory physics lab
,”
Phys. Teach.
30
,
546
552
(
Dec. 1992
); updated version (4/27/98) online at bit.ly/9tSTdB. The author discusses pervasive misunderstandings of the Socratic method at bit.ly/ b5v58m.
2.
R. R
Hake
, “
Design-based research in Physics Education Research: A review
,” in
A. E.
Kelly
,
R. A.
Lesh
, and
J. Y.
Baek
,
Handbook of Design Research Methods in Education: Innovations in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Learning and Teaching
(
Routledge
,
2008
), pp.
493
508
, online at bit.ly/9kORMZ.
3.
A. B.
Arons
,
Teaching Introductory Physics
(
Wiley
,
1997
).
See also
A. B.
Arons
, “
Guiding insight and inquiry in the introductory physics laboratory
,”
Phys. Teach.
31
,
278
282
(
May 1993
). The authors appreciation of Arons is at bit.ly/boeQQt.
4.
“Interactive engagement” methods were operationally defined by Hake [
R. R.
Hake
, “
Interactive-engagement vs traditional methods: A six thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses
,”
Am. J. Phys.
66
,
64
74
(
Jan. 1998
) and Ref. 17] as those “designed at least in part to promote conceptual understanding through active engagement of students in heads-on (always) and hands-on (usually) activities which yield immediate feedback through discussion with peers and/ or instructors.” The immediate formative assessment afforded by such feedback and its importance in promoting student learning has been emphasized by, e.g.,
P.
Black
and
D.
Wiliam
, “
Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment
,”
Phi Delta Kappan
80
(
2
),
139
148
(
1998
) and
R. J.
Shavelson
 et al., “
On the impact of curriculum-embedded formative assessment on learning: A collaboration between curriculum and assessment developers
,”
Appl. Meas. Educ.
21
(
4
),
295
310
(
2008
); online at bit.ly/rMrGLi.
5.
H.
Poincaré
,
Science and Hypothesis
(
Walter Scott Publishing
,
1905
). online at bit.ly9hVfA8, thanks to the Mead Project. An essay on Poincaré by Jean Mawhin in Notices of the AMS is at bit.ly/tVGIJt.
6.
G.
Holton
and
S. G.
Brush
,
Physics the Human Adventure: From Copernicus to Einstein and Beyond
(
Rutgers University Press
,
2001
). Operational definitions are discussed in Chap. 12, “On the Nature of Concepts.”
7.
D. C.
Phillips
,
Expanded Social Scientist's Bestiary: A Guide To Fabled Threats to, and Defenses of, Naturalistic Social Science
(
Rowman & Littlefield
,
2000
), p.
157
.
8.

SDI #2 Pre-Lab Assignment Operational Definitions of Kinematic Terms, as well as the SDI lab manuals referred to in this paper: #0.1, Frames of Reference, Position, and Vectors; #0.2, Introduction to Kinematics; #1, Newton's First and Third Laws; #2, Newton's Second Law; and #3, Circular Motion and Frictional Forces, are all online at the SDI lab website, bit.ly/9nGd3M, but to save space they will not be separately referenced. Some Teacher's Guides are available by request to rrhake@earthlink. net.

9.
At the website www.its.caltech.edu/∼tmu/ it is stated that “The Mechanical Universe…and Beyond is a critically acclaimed series of 52 thirty-minute videotape programs covering the basic topics of an introductory university physics course. The series was originally produced as a broadcast telecourse by the California Institute of Technology and Intelecom, Inc. with program funding from the Annenberg/CPB Project.” See also
D. L.
Goodstein
and
R. P.
Olenick
, “
Making ‘The Mechanical Universe,’
Am. J. Phys.
56
(
9
),
779
785
(
1988
). Some of these videotapes were shown to students in the “lecture” portion of the course that included SDI labs, but some students, thinking that the videotape material would not be covered on the tests, headed for the doors when the lights dimmed! To counter this tendency I started to use a few test questions based on historical or literary details discussed in the videotapes. Some students were outraged: “What is this, a poetry class?”
10.

The Teacher's Guide to SDI Lab 0.2 Introduction to Kinematics, states: “Although about 70% of students entering the non-calculus-based Indiana University (IU) introductory physics course have completed a university calculus course, almost none seems to have the foggiest notion of the graphical meaning of a derivative or integral, as addressed in this section. Similar calculus illiteracy is commonly found among students in calculus-based introductory physics courses at IU. In my judgment, these calculus interpretations are essential to the crucial operational definitions of instantaneous position, velocity, and acceleration: the term ‘substantive non-calculus-based mechanics course’ is an oxymoron

11.
E.
Mazur
,
Peer Instruction: A User's Manual
(
Prentice Hall
,
1997
); ComPADRE information at bit.ly/bygvAd.
12.
P. A.
Kirschner
,
J.
Sweller
, and
R. E.
Clark
, “
Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching
,”
Educ. Psychol.
41
(
2
),
75
86
(
2006
).
13.
S.
Tobias
and
T. M.
Duffy
,
Constructivist Instruction: Success or Failure?
(
Routledge
,
2009
).
14.

Ground Rules for SDI labs are given in SDI Lab #0.1 Frames of Reference, Position, and Vectors. Rule #5 states: “In some cases you will draw a series of ‘snapshot sketches’ at sequential instants of time, e.g., t1, t2, t3. In such cases always show clocks near each sketch to emphasize the time sequence.” A figure and explanation similar to that of the present Fig. 1 is shown.

15.

SDI Lab Ground Rule #11 states: “The lab manual questions are designed to help you think about the experiments and how they relate to Newton's laws. You will often be asked to predict the outcome of an experiment and then perform that experiment. A curly bracket {……} indicates that you should encircle (O) a response within the bracket and then, we insist, briefly explain or justify your answers in the space provided on these sheets. The letters {Y, N, U, NOT} stand for {Yes, No, Uncertain, None of These}.” And the Teacher's Guide to SDI Lab #0.1 Introduction to Kinematics states: “Requiring students to encircle one of {Y, N, U, NOT} serves to initiate their thinking processes and forces them to give some definite signal (useful to dialogists) as to their mental states even if they are unable, at the moment, to clearly articulate those states. An annotator's check (correct) or cross (wrong) just above an encirclement yields quick and valuable feedback to a student. Requiring students to write explanations or justifications induces at least some to partake of the ‘intolerable labor of thought, that most distasteful of all our activities’ (Justice Learned Hand as quoted by Arons in his book cited in Ref. 3, p. 383). To avoid this painful and unaccustomed activity, students may lapse into merely encircling a letter unless the justification rule is rigidly enforced.”

16.
U.
Haber-Schaim
and
J. H.
Dodge
, “
There's more to it than friction
,”
Phys. Teach.
29
,
56
57
(
Jan. 1991
).
17.
R. R.
Hake
, “
Interactive-engagement methods in introductory mechanics courses
” (
1998
), online at bit.ly/aH2JQN.
18.
D.
Hestenes
,
M.
Wells
, and
G.
Swackhamer
, “
Force Concept Inventory
,”
Phys. Teach.
30
,
141
158
(
March 1992
); online (but without the test itself) at bit.ly/b 1488v.
19.
I.
Halloun
,
R. R.
Hake
,
E. P.
Mosca
, and
D.
Hestenes
, “
Force Concept Inventory (1995 Revision)
,” online (password protected) at bit.ly/b1488v; scroll down to “Evaluation Instruments.”
AAPT members receive access to The Physics Teacher and the American Journal of Physics as a member benefit. To learn more about this member benefit and becoming an AAPT member, visit the Joining AAPT page.