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]

[Phys-l] More Stupidity in state exams



http://www.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/special-ed/taksm/released-test
s/

TAKS-M 11th grade

30 Which of these happens after a baseball is hit at a constant speed with a
baseball bat?
F The speed of the baseball bat decreases.
G The speed of the baseball bat increases.
H The force of gravity on the baseball bat decreases.

This is a nonsensical question because of the word "after". It also
highlights a common misconception that students and apparently physics
question writers think the bat has an effect on the ball when it is no
longer in contact with the ball.

F is correct if you assume the word should be during, or if you assume a
long period of time. Eventually it does stop moving.
G is correct if the person continues to push on the bat and you assume a
short time after the hit.
H is of cours nonsense.

You know I am not making this up! (quote from Anna Russell)

The mushroom discussion came about because there was a TAKS test where the
correct answer was a mushroom is a predator.

The plant growth discussion came about because someone with sharp eyes
noticed that a "purportedly informative" web site said that mushrooms feed
on the soil just as trees do. This is of course nonsense, but it has been
exposed as a common misconception in a video by Philip Sadler from the
"Minds of our Own" which is part of "The Private Universe" series. Both of
these videos should be watched by anyone who is teaching science. They are
free to watch on the web.
http://www.learner.org/resources/series26.html?pop=yes&pid=77#

As to biology misconceptions virtually 100% of my calculus based physics
students agreed that "bonds contain energy". This is promoted by biology
and IPC texts where they actually say that breaking bonds releases energy.
Bull crap! They ignore the release of energy by subsequent bonding when the
products in the Krebs cycle hydrate. So I had them think of bonds as being
like rubber bands which just get thinner and weaker and never disappear.
The words "breaking bonds" produce the wrong picture and they think of a
rubber band being cut and snapping.

As to physicists doing economics, that is already happening. I took a
physicist to figure out that stock market gyrations are evidence that it is
a chaotic system and not a perfect mirror of economic growth as Friedman
proposed.

Scientists are now being asked to get into politics so that they can combat
the abysmal ignorance shown by legislators and school boards about
scientific topics.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX