Are AP Physics 1 FRQ's appropriate for First Year Student

[Hlud]

The people I am advocating on behalf of are the many students who are getting screwed.

Let's say i was asked to teach AP Physics 2. Let's say, while teaching AP Physics 2, i use the AP Physics 1 curriculum. Most of my students fail. Should i really be blaming the AP tests for my failure to change my curriculum? Certainly not. Most of the teachers in my area choose to keep their curriculum roughly the same. You clearly updated your curriculum, and it has benefited your students. Why can't others do the same? Debating whether or not the AP tests prepare you for college is a separate issue.

Why is this algebra based physics.? Where did the students need to manipulate equations to solve a physics problem?

Do you teach algebra-based physics, or physics-based algebra?

This same list can be applied (nearly verbatim) to elementary school kids. If the primary schools are not teaching these skills, why do you assign responsibility to the colleges?

I do not. I believe all education should be responsible for these sets of skills.

A broader comment is that the skills you list do not require earning a college degree- repair techs need to troubleshoot all the time, for example. And it seems to me that there is an inverse relationship between level of formal education and ability to criticize the accomplishments of mankind. Uninformed people seem to make the loudest judgements...

Depends on how you define criticize. Voicing a complaint that isn't thought out is not what i was going for. Using a skill that is applicable to the real world? I was indeed going for that.

So let me ask again- what exactly do you think earning a baccalaureate degree should entail? What (ideally) is the unique value of that credential?

Can you find a specific set of skills that both physics majors and fine arts majors should have, that does not also apply to high schoolers? Seems like you are asking me an impossible question.

 

[Andy Resnick]

<snip>
Can you find a specific set of skills that both physics majors and fine arts majors should have, that does not also apply to high schoolers? Seems like you are asking me an impossible question.

I'm asking you to think a little more deeply about the purpose and function of formal education. I can list 'skills' that I expect college graduates to have over and above high school students, but my deeper point is that 'acquisition of skills' is a peripheral function of education, not the core function.

Consider the phrase 'have a set of skills', or 'acquire a skill set'. The underlying meaning does not correspond to reality- a skill cannot be 'owned' in the same way someone may own a spoon. Rather, the educational process (and it is an ongoing process, not a transaction) is one of ongoing refining and distilling. One becomes increasingly proficient in a decreasing scope of activity.

I expect college graduates to be able to interpret and explain a discipline-specific piece of work much more deeply than a high schooler. I expect a college graduate to be more aware of the scope of their own ignorance than a high schooler. I expect a college graduate can express their own ideas and opinions more clearly, with more supporting context, than a high schooler. I do not expect a college graduate to be able to fix my car any better than a high schooler (unless the college is a vocational-technical school).

 

[Hlud]

I'm asking you to think a little more deeply about the purpose and function of formal education. I can list 'skills' that I expect college graduates to have over and above high school students, but my deeper point is that 'acquisition of skills' is a peripheral function of education, not the core function.

Fair enough. I am at the beginning of my career; i love discussing its purpose with those who are more experienced than i. I do plan on continuing my graduate studies to improve how physics is taught in high school.

I expect college graduates to be able to interpret and explain a discipline-specific piece of work much more deeply than a high schooler.

Is college prep a sufficient goal of high school? Historical reasons alone are not enough to justify the current structure of high school.

I expect a college graduate to be more aware of the scope of their own ignorance than a high schooler. I expect a college graduate can express their own ideas and opinions more clearly, with more supporting context, than a high schooler. I do not expect a college graduate to be able to fix my car any better than a high schooler (unless the college is a vocational-technical school).

I definitely agree with these well-written sets of goals. I do not believe physics classes in my school succeed at these goals.

 

[Diaz Lilahk]

You clearly updated your curriculum, and it has benefited your students. Why can't others do the same?

I am not so sure that it has benefited my average students. My absolute best students, yes. But my average students simply do not appreciate nor should they appreciate all of this depth. It is completely wasted.

I am at the beginning of my career; i love discussing its purpose with those who are more experienced than i. I do plan on continuing my graduate studies to improve how physics is taught in high school.

Well I have an important piece of advice, education is wasted on the young. The average teenager will not devote themselves to your class or any class for that matter. They will copy their homework, cram for exams, fudge data or do just about anything to maximize the amount of time dedicated to their social lives and minimize the amount of work they have to do. There is a reason why physics that used to be taught to teenagers was a mile wide and an inch deep. If you try to spend more time to explore the subject in greater depth all that ends up happening is that your average students learn less material in the course because they are not going to bother learning the material until the night before the exam anyhow. They cram and they dump. Furthermore, the real tragedy is that your best students would have learned the material at a greater depth anyway, all that happened was that they end up learning less material. So the net result is a wash at best, at worst it is a net loss.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Is college prep a sufficient goal of high school?

Of course not- the goal of high school is not go to college. *A* goal for some, and while I'm intrigued by the European (German?) model for K-12 that places students on various 'tracks', I'm not sure it can work here.

I definitely agree with these well-written sets of goals. I do not believe physics classes in my school succeed at these goals.

Don't worry too much, most college courses don't either :) I'm on an NSF-funded project that, among other things, brings K-16 (!) STEM teachers together to generate new ideas for the classroom and it seems to be working well: 'STEM teacher education' is a hot topic now. If you are able, try approaching a local university (probably start with the education college) and see if they have any existing outreach efforts. There's more university support for high school teachers than you may expect.

Glad to hear you are 'all in' for teaching! (sorry for the plug, but I'm on my way to a parade...

 

[Andy Resnick]

<snip>Well I have an important piece of advice, education is wasted on the young. The average teenager will not devote themselves to your class or any class for that matter. They will copy their homework, cram for exams, fudge data or do just about anything to maximize the amount of time dedicated to their social lives and minimize the amount of work they have to do. There is a reason why physics that used to be taught to teenagers was a mile wide and an inch deep. If you try to spend more time to explore the subject in greater depth all that ends up happening is that your average students learn less material in the course because they are not going to bother learning the material until the night before the exam anyhow. They cram and they dump. Furthermore, the real tragedy is that your best students would have learned the material at a greater depth anyway, all that happened was that they end up learning less material. So the net result is a wash at best, at worst it is a net loss.

All teachers rant like this from time to time. Just remember it's not really the 'average', you are talking about below-average students that suck up above-average amounts of your time and attention.

 

[Diaz Lilahk]

All teachers rant like this from time to time. Just remember it's not really the 'average', you are talking about below-average students that suck up above-average amounts of your time and attention.

Not really. Most of these kids that I mention don't take much of my time or attention at all. They can not be bothered to, it would interfere with what matters most in our society, socializing and athletics. It is not a rant either, it is a reality and not necessarily a bad one. I remember being young and having much of the same passions. I thought of myself as having a passion for academics, but looking back it was hardly true. Whether these are average students is also questionable. I see these traits as typical of my average honors and AP students, the characteristics of lower level students tend to be worse. If these traits do not describe your students then consider yourself lucky.

 

[Andy Resnick]

If these traits do not describe your students then consider yourself lucky.

I guess I'm lucky, then.

 

[ecoo]

Not really. Most of these kids that I mention don't take much of my time or attention at all. They can not be bothered to, it would interfere with what matters most in our society, socializing and athletics. It is not a rant either, it is a reality and not necessarily a bad one. I remember being young and having much of the same passions. I thought of myself as having a passion for academics, but looking back it was hardly true. Whether these are average students is also questionable. I see these traits as typical of my average honors and AP students, the characteristics of lower level students tend to be worse. If these traits do not describe your students then consider yourself lucky.

I guess I'm lucky, then.

Really surprised with your experiences, Andy, considering what Diaz Lilahk says is very true and normal. Most high school students simply don't care about physics or math, and it makes sense. There are so many other subjects to be interested in. A majority of people will not enter a field that has anything to do with calculus, and it doesn't really make sense to have to spend years in high school learning a subject that one hates and has no interest in.

 

[Diaz Lilahk]

Most high school students simply don't care about physics or math, and it makes sense. There are so many other subjects to be interested in.

It's true but I also feel like that is the minority of students. The majority of students I find to be not particularly interested in any of the academic subjects. They are passionate about things outside of their classes. It could be playing an instrument, playing in a rock band, playing lacrosse, football, soccer. Some are passionate about sports that they don't play. Or they like "business" which is just code for socializing in a club like FBLA. To really see this in action just go to the school's football games and then attend an academic competition, I can assure everyone that they are very different experiences.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Really surprised with your experiences, Andy, considering what Diaz Lilahk says is very true and normal. Most high school students simply don't care about physics or math, and it makes sense. There are so many other subjects to be interested in. A majority of people will not enter a field that has anything to do with calculus, and it doesn't really make sense to have to spend years in high school learning a subject that one hates and has no interest in.

I'm not a high school teacher, I'm a university professor.