| Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
| [Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
I also push four years, with electives for the general
student, but I have
a
compromise plan. Parts of my compromise plan are very old...
it's partly
what high schools around here were doing when I went to high
school. I
graduated from high school in 1968.
At that time the "college prep" students took a four-year
science sequence
of
- general science (physical science)
- biology
- chemistry
- physics
The general/physical science was introductory physics and introductory
chemistry. Hence, students who took general science followed
by biology
did
exactly what Lederman, et.al. propose. They got a bit of
physics, then a
bit of chemistry, then a year of biology built upon the physics and
chemistry from the previous year.
After all, if the physics and chemistry are primarily
conceptual, and are
based only on simple algebra, and primarily provide supporting science
background for what comes later... half a year of each is fine.
* * * Aside * * * My school at that time only required two
science courses
for graduation. The bulk of students took general science followed by
biology... and that was it. Aside from being only two years
of science,
the
subject sequencing was actually quite good.
* * * Back to the main track * * * The year of chemistry in the junior
year,
and the year of physics in the senior year were rigorous college-prep
courses. By the time I got to the senior year I had had two years of
algebra and one year of analytical geometry. My senior year
I took trig
concurrent with physics. This meant we could do a vector
analysis, etc.
Although we did not do any calculus in high school at that
time (no limits,
no derivatives, certainly no integration) I felt my high
school math (and
chemistry and physics) were excellent preparation when I began a
chemistry/physics double major in college. I wish my entering
chemistry/physics students today were as well prepared as I was.
Yes, I know, back then we also walked through 5 feet of snow,
uphill both
ways. But seriously, the subjects taught and the sequencing
were really
quite good back in the sixties. I've seen a lot of "changes"
over the past
30 years, and I can't say I see much improvement. The drive to get
calculus
into high school, as well as "advanced topics" such as anatomy,
microbiology, molecular biology, advanced chemistry, advanced
physics, etc.
just don't make any sense to me. I repeat, if my present
college students
had what I had in high school, and did a reasonable job with it (i.e.
understood and could use most of it) I would be a very happy
person, and I
believe my chemistry and biology colleagues here would
strongly agree with
me.
Summary: I would advocate the general science, biology,
chemistry, physics
track for students who think they might want to be scientists.
For the others, assuming we want four years of science, I
would first do
the
general science and biology, then I think there could be
things like earth
science, astronomy, science ethics, environmental science, and other
integrated science courses for the junior/senior year. Unless they're
totally bogged down in extracurricular stuff (band, choir,
sports, clubs)
it
seems the students heading into science could also take the ethics,
environmental science, etc. as electives in addition to their
college-prep
chemistry and physics.
Michael D. Edmiston, Ph.D. Phone/voice-mail:
419-358-3270
Professor of Chemistry & Physics FAX:
419-358-3323
Chairman, Science Department E-Mail
edmiston@bluffton.edu
Bluffton College
280 West College Avenue
Bluffton, OH 45817