12
$\begingroup$

Observing the behavior of many community members about closing votes, I feel more and more doubtful about the coherence between the rules written in the help center and the practice. The last example is the case of this question closed a few minutes ago, as homework-like and check-my-work.

Re-reading the Meta page on How do I ask homework questions on Physics Stack Exchange?, I have difficulty seeing the difference between the above question and the examples indicated on this Meta page as examples of good homework questions. In particular, the problem is clearly stated; the steps to solve the problem are shown; a strategy to overcome the problem is provided, and a conceptual doubt is clearly stated (the final sentence "I guess that we are dealing with energy which is a scalar quantity and hence signs should not be used. Not sure of this, though.")

What else is missing? Why is this question not acceptable according to our rules? I feel that the reasonable policy against bad homework-like questions of limited interest is sometimes transformed into a conditioned reflex to close every question related to exercises, independently of its actual content and quality. Am I wrong? The community can favor such an approach, but the stated policy should be consistently modified.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yeah, I also think it was a good question, mostly conceptual mistake than homework $\endgroup$
    – naturallyInconsistent
    May 23 at 7:20
  • $\begingroup$ Related: Can "doubt" sometimes mean "question"? $\endgroup$
    – Peter Mortensen
    May 23 at 9:37
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @PeterMortensen No, it was not intended as a question. The title means that I do not have confidence that rules and practice are coherent (see www.merriam-webster.com about the name "doubt"). $\endgroup$
    – GiorgioP-DoomsdayClockIsAt-90
    May 23 at 10:30
  • $\begingroup$ ... and I have just voted again for reopening. I also note that I am still waiting for an explanation about my question on what is the difference between this question and the examples provided on the Meta page about good homework questions. Do some people think that the level of the question is too low for this site? However, conceptual problems have a very wide range, and I do not see reasons for closing a question like this. Whoever feels the question is too trivial can avoid providing an answer. I still do not see what is the connection between closing and the public rules of this site. $\endgroup$
    – GiorgioP-DoomsdayClockIsAt-90
    May 25 at 5:11

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
8
$\begingroup$

I also think the question you refer to is a good conceptual question and I voted to reopen.

Opinions differ and people will fall on different sides of the line but one strength of this community is that more controversial decisions to close can be reversed when a good case is made.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Certainly, opinions differ, and a closed question may be opened again. However, I think that rules and examples are there to provide a guide. If they are frequently ignored, there is some mismatch between rules and their practical application. $\endgroup$
    – GiorgioP-DoomsdayClockIsAt-90
    Jun 11 at 21:33
3
$\begingroup$

The question starts with the oddly specific assumption that the initial velocity is 4.5 m/s. This doesn't convey much confidence that the OP did much experimenting with other values to try to get a handle on what's driving the apparently wrong conclusion. That in turn doesn't convey much confidence that the OP did much experimenting with alternative approaches to the problem. That sort of experimentation is likely to have led to an "aha" moment, which is exactly what a good homework question is supposed to do.

I think this question was closed appropriately.

$\endgroup$
8
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ it is true that the problem is specific but the question "why are we getting a negative height" is not. In fact the OP has stated why they expect a certain result and highlighted precisely where the computation differs from the expectation. Indeed this is IMO an example of an excellent conceptual question... $\endgroup$
    – ZeroTheHero
    May 23 at 14:31
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @ZeroTheHero: I don't think we can know for sure how much effort the OP expended on this. You are offering reasonable evidence that the effort was substantial. It still seems to me that the appearance of the 4.5 is reasonable evidence to the contrary. $\endgroup$
    – WillO
    May 23 at 14:35
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Seems like we have experimental confirmation that "opinions differ". $\endgroup$
    – Jon Custer
    May 23 at 14:42
  • $\begingroup$ @WillO My point is that putting numbers is not an immediate disqualifier, especially as in this case they are used to exemplify the issue, which is with the sign. I do agree including numbers is not ideal but if it's a real hurdle it's easily fixed and I edited accordingly. $\endgroup$
    – ZeroTheHero
    May 23 at 14:47
  • $\begingroup$ @JonCuster it's fine: we chose to have a low threshold for closing questions (for which I'm very glad!) so some borderline cases will have to be clarified. $\endgroup$
    – ZeroTheHero
    May 23 at 14:50
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @ZeroTheHero - I agree fully. And we happily discuss things here, usually collegially. Personally I find that particular question still problematic - "I got this weird answer and don't understand why". Clarification by the OP would help. $\endgroup$
    – Jon Custer
    May 23 at 14:52
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I feel that the proposed approach to "simply remove all signs" to fix a problem one observes is far from asking a conceptual question. $\endgroup$
    – Norbert Schuch
    May 24 at 13:31
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ @NorbertSchuch , your judgment is based on the point of view of a person with a good experience in Physics. However, there are conceptual questions at every level. The relevant point in the present case is that inexperienced people frequently have problems in connection with signed quantities in Physics. I do think that if this site is intended to provide resources for understanding Physics at all levels, this question deserves an answer. If the consensus is that only questions at Ph.D. level should be allowed, it should be explicitly stated in the rules. $\endgroup$
    – GiorgioP-DoomsdayClockIsAt-90
    May 25 at 5:19
1
$\begingroup$

I am an engineering professor, I teach thermodynamics, I certainly don't want my students to google the answer to their homework or get it without effort from some well-meaning expert in Physics SE.

But I do want them to get the answer. If they ask me I will lead them, and if they ask the wrong question I will tell them to try again with a better question, to get them to focus on their point of confusion, which is usually not obvious at all, even to the OP themselves. When a student finally asks the right question, much of the time they will also answer it themselves. I've seen it happen.

I think that when it comes to the debate about homework, which seems to have been going on for a while on this site, most of the emphasis is on preventing free answers with less emphasis on teaching the OP something new. I don't claim to have the answer because the balance is delicate. But I would rather err on the side of giving perhaps too many free answers for the benefit of teaching few, than to stifle the opportunity for learning by being overly strict with what questions are or are not allowed. Believe me, those who get "free" answers will not sail to success because of it.

Here is an example: In this post the OP asks a question that is vague. The OP's answer to my comment makes it clear that the question as asked is a small part of a bigger question, but this context is missing from the original post making it impossible to give a meaningful answer (my own answer does not address the point because it is based on my misreading of the OP's misstated question). The OP is new to Physics SE, inexperienced with asking questions on the platform and unsure in their own understanding of the physics they discus. One could choose to close this question for lack of detail, but this would only cause harm because it would merely prolong the OP's confusion on the subject. A better way would be to prod the OP to improve and focus the question without the humiliation of a closed post. Perhaps Physics SE is not set up for this kind of thing, especially given the volume of questions. Still, it is something worth thinking about.

$\endgroup$

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .