This is a phrase that I haven't heard since I was performing analyses on water and soil samples. I recall reading in some of the manuals in order to confirm and be certain the signal came from the sought after analyte, the S to NR had to be 3 to 1 or better. This 3 to 1 ratio is referred to as the detection limit. But one also had to be aware of interfering analytes that emitted signals in close proximity as well...
If you have ever listened to two people talking at the same time about entirely different topics and their voices were at the same volume/loudness and you tried to concentrate on what one of them was saying (the signal), the other would be considered the noise. In this situation, the signal to noise ratio would be considered 1 to 1. Attempting to concentrate on what the signal is broadcasting is a difficult thing to do in this scenario and is far below the limit of detection. In other words, the person you want to hear has to be talking about 3 times louder than the other person in order for you just to be confident that you are actually hearing what they are saying, let alone understand it. That brings in the concept of limit of quantification, which I won't get into. Let me just say, obviously the bigger the signal to noise ratio, the better.
The point that I am trying to make is: It excites me to remember some of the information from earlier classes and experience and tie it in with this one. I called upon a previous understanding of signal to noise ratio to further my understanding of what it can be applied to. Seems kinda silly to make such a big deal out of it, but I get the idea [and buy into it 'cause I felt it happen to me] of my students having to tie the information into something they know in order to understand it and undergo deeper cognition.
Bill--You are so funny
ReplyDeleteI think to myself sometimes, how surprised I am to be a teacher. I don't like noise and especially more than 3 people talking at once. I guess I deal with it well at school. I have to deal with it I guess. It's my job, but I try to keep the crazy noise to a minimum in my life. Your last sentence is so true. I too try to tie all the information I'm teaching into something that the students will be able to make a deeper connection with. I try to compare things to their lives.
I never knew about the 3 to 1 ratio. If I think about it in the classroom as well there are a lot of "noises" that can occur. They are not simply audible noises they can be gestures or another person's presence. I, now wonder whether keeping presentations simple with improve our signal.
ReplyDeleteBill - I think it's interesting how signal to noise ratio is used in so many different areas of life. Take for example the signal to noise ratio in sound production. It can be either from a video or audio source and the signal is the desired frequency and the noise is the static behind it. Think of the old TV sets where we could turn to channel 3 with the old turn dile style of set, and all you would see and hear would be static. But, in all of that static is a frequency, or pitch if you will, that is heard very faintly. This is the signal to noise ratio that is used in the audio world. :)
ReplyDeleteFunny how different aspects of life use similar terminology.
Bill, I'm always amazed after reading your blog posts because you always seem to have a way to relate the information to your life on a personal level. I sometimes struggle with making that connection or think of an experience that I can relate it to. I respect that very much about you. Sometimes I get that "ah ha" moment after reading your blog and realize how it relates to my life or how I've experienced the subject matter/content in my own life. Thank you for that!
ReplyDelete