I am in a position to influence a change in which physics classes
students in the education program here take. The committee I'm on is
pretty clear about what science courses elementary and secondary ed
students should take (and I'm fairly satisfied with our decisions);
the question we have is at the middle school level. The state
(Indiana) is suggesting that middle school teachers specialize like
they do in high school. A middle school teacher has 35 hrs of science
courses and they can take these hours in one of 4 'concentrations'.
The physical science concentration is the area I have influence over.
The scenario we are considering is 13 hrs of chem and 13 of physics
(2 semesters algebra based physics plus a jr level environmental
course). Now I'm all in favor of more content but there are three
questions that I have with this: 1) this scenario leaves only 9 hrs
for ALL OTHER science and math courses (biology, geology, computers,
math beyond algebra). Shouldn't a middle school teacher have a
broader science background?; 2) it seems to me that a good 100 level
Hewitt based course is really the highest level a middle school
teacher should be teaching at. Should we teach teachers the same
stuff they themselves will be teaching or should we teach them at a
higher level than they will actually need? 3) We have good evidence
that the current requirements (the first semester of physics only)
drives students away from a physical science concentration. Are these
additional requirements going to further deplete the available
teachers in this area?
These opportunities to affect the future generation of teachers only
occurs once in a while and I want to do it well. Any advice on this
would be appreciated.
kyle
-----------------------------------------------------
kyle forinash 812-941-2390
kforinas@ius.edu
Natural Science Division
Indiana University Southeast
New Albany, IN 47150 http://Physics.ius.edu/
-----------------------------------------------------