Re: Physics first

[Glenn Knapp <kahuna@VCN.COM>]

At 07:47 PM 06/27/2000 -0400, you wrote:
> Dear Colleagues:
> I am working addressing the efficacy of what I call "physics first."
> "Physics first" requires that the core high school science sequence be turned
> around to Physics-Chemistry-Biology. As many of you know, the currently
> accepted and widely used sequence is Biology-Chemistry-Physics.
> I am very interested in your response to this proposed educational reform.
> Thanks for your input.
> Olga

Wyoming has adopted state-wide standards that we must incorporate into our
secondary curriculum.  They pretty much line up with the NSTA standards
with some extra stuff thrown in.  The solution that our district came up
with - developed by the high school and junior high school teachers - was to:

- integrate science courses in grades 7-9
- increase science requirement from 3 years to 4 years
- require students in high school (grades 10-12) to take credits in life
science, physics, chemistry, and earth sciences

We have a "two track" system of  courses, non-challenging ones and the
harder courses.  So in physics we have physical science, physics, and AP
physics (which we will begin teaching this next school year).

Students are exposed to quite a bit of physics in junior high school -
forces, simple motion, gravity, waves, etc.  The teachers had to have quite
a bit of help with physics concepts.  We brought in a physics professor
from the university to hold workshops with them.  After three years, they
are just starting to get comfortable with the curriculum.

Some of the 9th graders can take biology instead of the integrated
class.  The 9th grade teachers are firmly convinced that very few students
are developmentally ready to take a high school biology class and try to
discourage the kids from doing so.  I agree with that assessment.  The idea
of a high school physics course at that level strikes me as very
inappropriate.  This is not to say that the introduction of physics
concepts would be inappropriate.  But the course that we call "physics"
should not be taught at the 9th grade.  Even if you have a dozen education
experts explaining to you why it should be done.

The state standards have had a huge impact on us.  We had a 3 year science
requirement prior to their adoption.  Most high schools in our state have a
2 year requirement.  In my view, there is no way that you can properly
cover all the standards in 2 years - even 3 years would be very difficult.

Glenn
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Physics Kahuna
Kahuna Physics Institute - on the flapping edge of physics research.