In response to Joel (see below) I would say, exactly so... because many
of the students in the introductory phsyics course are not physics
majors and will not be compensated for the loss of introductory physics
hours by an increase in upper-division physics, because they don't take
upper-division physics.
At my school the introductory physics is taken not only by physics
majors, but also by chemistry majors, biology majors, computer science
majors, pre-med majors, and middle-school science teachers. None of
these non-physics-major students are required to take any other physics
courses except the middle-school teachers also have to take an astronomy
course.
Joel's number of 90% would get short changed is probably pretty
accurate, because at least 90% of students in my intro-physics class are
not physics majors.
This is perhaps the biggest reason why we moved intro physics from 5-5-5
to 5-5 rather than to 4-4. The intro is a required and important course
for so many students in so many different majors that we did not want to
reduce it.
Michael D. Edmiston, Ph.D.
Professor of Chemistry and Physics
Bluffton University
Bluffton, OH 45817
(419)-358-3270
edmiston@bluffton.edu
Mike E. said:
|I would hope that those schools for which the year-longs contract from
|5-5-5 to 4-4 counteracted that with expansion of sufficient singles so
|the overall physics major stayed about the same percentage of total
|graduation hours as before the conversion.
|
Joel R. said
For the sake of discussion lets assume the above occurred and that the
year wasn't shortened. This would rate as a good department I gather
this would judged a "good" department.
However, the 90% or more of the students in the year-long introductory
physics course have still been short changed significantly.
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l