I've been listening with half an ear for a while. I've strung
together some facts and opinions in a chatty way...
I teach the International Baccalaureate Higher and Subsidiary
physics courses in a school where we take students on
scholarship from about 60 countries, so (i) I tend to get rather
able students and (ii) I routinely teach people from most kinds
of educational system.
I recall being incredulous when I first learnt that students
from the US, having completed grade 10 or sometimes 11, had
never done a physics course, but I've got used to it. Certainly
the system is unique in presenting the sciences in series rather
than in parallel.
We get 2 US scholars every year, which means that there have been
26 in the time I've been here. I can recall 5 taking the Higher
Level course, 3 of whom were oustanding physics students. Rather
more took Subsidiary Level.
People have mentioned the "European system". There isn't one. My
Italian students arrive after doing 3 out of 5 years of high
school. Those who have been to the academic school (liceo)
rather than the technical school will have done 2 years of
physics, consisting of mechanics only. The other topics come
later. The British system I knew quite well (it has changed, so
my knowledge is some years out of date): typically in the first
3 years of high school (age 12,13,14) they did combined science,
the physics component of which included mechanics,
thermodynamics and electricity and magnetism. Then at age 15/16
they could choose physics as a separate science for "O-levels".
Again they covered all the major areas, including atomic and
nuclear physics. Those going on to do A-Levels at age 17/18 and
choosing physics would once again cover the whole lot: the term
"spiral curriculum" presents the metaphor of going round the same
material several times, at a higher level of sophistication each
time around. Overkill? Perhaps, but where the British Empire has
been, similar systems prevail.
I've had quite a procession of brilliant East European students.
I think it is the case that the education system in these
countries was a fine one for the academically able, but I'm not
so sure about the rest. I've visited schools in Yugoslavia (when
it was still), Slovakia, Czech Rep and Poland, and sometimes sat
in on physics classes and always browsed through textbooks (the
formulas and diagrams always give a good idea of what's going
on). These books often seemed to plunge into a topic at what I
considered a totally unsuitable level for the age group they
were intended for. So I'm left wondering.
In September I'll have two Bosnian physics students who have learnt
their physics in the school cellar in Sarajevo. They'll probably
be very good!
How are US students different? I did a one year exchange at one
of our sister colleges, in New Mexico, where there was a higher
proportion of US students, all of them selected for
scholarships, not only for their high academic achievement, but
this was a criterion. There, too, my HL physics classes had a tiny
minority of Americans, but they rather dominated the SL classes.
It was really hard work teaching them! I mean this in the sense
that they seemed to require me to facilitate their learning in a
much more active way than any other class I had taught. (I used
to joke with colleagues that I felt like they were all pressing
imaginary remote control devices, trying to change the channel!)
It's worth bearing in mind that European countries usually have
several "systems" running side by side at high school level. The
British have the split between the independent schools and the
state schools, and then the latter divide into a plethora of
school types, the products of various attempts at educational
reform. The Italian system is more rational, but weird: there is
the division between the technical schools and the licei, and
then the licei divide up into classical, scientific and
liguistic. The weird part is that the classical schools are the
most prestigious, so the best students go there and spend most
of their time learning Latin and Greek, even if they intend to
become physicists.
Concluding thought: Could it be that in the US you suffer the
drawbacks of an education system which is too democratic?