Physics First? 1

I think emphasizing a more formal physics course in junior high school would be a great step forward in improving the adverse perception that our youngsters have in science and what it will gain for them in the "real" world. They need to know it is the REAL world.

I feel that one problem with Physics is that there aren't enough qualified teachers available not to mention teachers who actually make the subject interesting and motivate the student to learn own his own.

Chemistry, while certainly necessary as a pre-requisite for admission to many college and university programs is abstract and foriegn to high school students.

Biology, in my opinion is already represented quite well in the secondary education.

the only problem I see, is that much of physics depends on a basic knowledge of algebra, goemetry and trigonometry. Unless, the student has already had those classes, it would be difficult to focus on the physics.

cvq, that question apparently has been dealt with. A quote from the Cornell news article:

"A significant question posed at the Cornell conference was whether freshmen (described by one conference attendee as "really just eighth-graders plus a couple of months&quot have the intellectual capacity to handle some highly conceptual topics in physics, or other topics that could require a solid background in math. But the overwhelming consensus was that they have: "It's not so much that they can do it, as how do you modify your instruction so that they can achieve it," said Mark Vanacore of Albion High School, N.Y., speaking on math and physics integration."

If you look at the results from places that have tried it, you'll see that it can work. In one class, average freshman students taught physics by a biology teacher scored better on a standardized physics test than junior & senior year honors students. (

The problem I see (and this is not just physics first) is that our schools in general, maintain a minimum standard. Often, they must do this to receive funding. Hence, the focus is to bring all students up to the minimum level. The focus is not on the college bound, but on the low achievers.

I would be in favor of any school or system that would challenge students, especially the brighter ones. Kids need to be challenged, or they get bored. If these bright children are challenged early in their school years, they will achieve more. My daughter is a good example. She was bored in 3rd grade, but in 4th - she was able to achieve high enough grades on her placement test to enter the "gifted resources" program. She loves it and has learned so much more this year it really is amazing. Thankfully, our school district has this program, but not all do.

We would be better off having study of the various code books.

There will always be someone who asks why a wire that's twice the diameter is allowed to carry more than twice the amperage.

Or why a beam half as long is allowed to carry more than twice the load.

If the questions lead to physics explanations, that's okay too.

As long as this thread is in 'other topics,' I feel it is a proper topic of discussion. Perhaps better if it could be posted in a general area for all engineering fields.

My opinion of the Physics First educational scheme: For proper understanding, biology requires chemistry requires physics requires mathematics. Ergo, the course sequence should be
Math
Physics
Chemistry
Biology
Based upon the California high school graduates my company hires, any improvement in any of these areas would help.