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]

Re: [Phys-L] Sequence



Most of the PER curricula follow the conventional sequence of velocity,
acceleration, then forces. So if you use research based materials you will
do things in that order. The most commonly used Real Time Physics labs do
that order. There are ordering issues which do make a difference. Doing
momentum before energy is beneficial. Delaying 2d stuff until you can't
avoid it is also beneficial. Interactions AKA Newton's third law should
come first followed by the second law. There is also evidence from the
Amherst group that you should mix general gravitation with magnetic and
electrical forces and essentially do all 3 at once. In addition they
advocate doing all forces at once rather than making frictional force a
separate unit or chapter.

As far as I know there is no evidence for doing forces first, but it could
be a good research project. Try it and use the FCI/FMCE as evidence for
which works better. Arguments are not a good basis for making the decision.
Research based data should be used because we now know that logic is not a
good guide to what actually works. Even Priscilla Laws claims that her
intuition is still often wrong, although it has improved by her research.
It may well be that forces first works just as well, but there is no
evidence for it. I would say that forces should be mentioned and be in the
background even when doing velocity and acceleration. The college Modeling
program uses a strong energy thread throught the curriculum which appears to
be beneficial.

And of course minimal, but not necessarily zero lecture is beneficial as
long as you have strong IE to replace it. The best way to improve the
teaching is to have the teachers take the Modeling courses. If 9th grade
physic is taught conventionally, it is most probably doomed to be
ineffective. They do have Modeling for 9th grade! Modeling.asu.edu

John M. Clement
Houston, TX



Good day all!

Several teachers at my school have decided they want to teach
forces first in our ninth grade physics course.
I currently teach constant velocity, balanced forces,
constant acceleration, constant net force, energy and finally
mechanical waves. One teacher does motion then forces, and
another does forces first, then motion.

We are being told to show up with our arguments why we should
follow a certain sequence. All the headache of college
teaching with none of the joy it seems!
Anyone here have an opinion on sequence? I'd love to hear from you!

Jim Cibulka
Kirkwood high school
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@phys-l.org
http://www.phys-l.org/mailman/listinfo/phys-l