🚀 go-pugleaf

It is time for my two cents worth.  I think that it is time to tie this
thread to an earlier one that I belive was on this list (It may have been
on Phys-l, if so I am sorry) concerning the ABC order of courses in high
school science.

I teach 4 sections of Physical Science at North Mesquite High School.
This is a large ( 2000+ student ) suburban high school just east of
Dallas TX.  The population is aprox. 64% anglo, 20% hispanic, and 16%
Africian Am. In this district the Phy.Sci course is a sophmore level
dumping ground for any student that has failed freshman algebra or is
taking one year of algebra over two years. (i.e. Algebra 1A and Algebra 2A)
We use a pathetic text book that is basicaly a reading book since the
only activies or questions in it are reading comprehension questions.
These students HATE!!! science. (Pardon me for yelling)  Now dosent my
job sound fun.  The "curriclume" for this class is non existant.  The
only guidlines we are given are the state Essential Ellements, wich will
fit on one side of an 8.5X11 page, double spaced.  The first year I
followed the text book as a guide.  That was a mistake.  One half year
wattered down physics and one half year more wattered down chemistry.  i
nearly puked!

The next summer my principal showed  us a video of a speaker that he had
seen.  ( I have not been able to find his name)  This gentalman claimed
that the order of science courses was strickly "Alphabetical"  due to
some advice from a national science orginazation around the turn of the
century.  I am sorry that I don't have the details.  That is why I did
not respond to the origional thread.  He went on to argue for an applied
physics course as an introduction to high school science, followed by
chemistry, and then Biology.  He argued that physics had the most
information to offer people that they might use in their daily lives.  He
also felt that the concept of causality, that He felt is best presented
in physics, would help students understanding of chemistry.  Finaly he
argured that a basic understanding of physics and chemistry might elevate
biology from a basic memorization course.  I can hear the Bio. teachers
screaming and I am sorry but that is what he said and to be honest that
is what I remember from both high school and college freshman Bio.

As school started that fall I became convincet that there was come truth
to what he had said.  After all I had a B.S. in chemistry and yet
with the acception of two summers working for TI I could not recal
one time that I was able to apply any of my chemistry knowledge to
solve a problem out side of a teaching situation.  On the other
hand I use ome physics "onderstanding" every day.  What impressed
me even more were memories of a trip a few years ago to Hondouras.  I
was struck at the time by how easily people in that area use levers
and pullies and other simple machines that my students in our
modern world had a great deal of difficulty with.  I taugh for a
number of years at a Gifted Academy and coached a number of teams
in Odessy of the Mind and Technology Olympiads.  I had disscurved
that I desperaately needed studets that were use to doing things with
thier hands not just their heads.  Many of my students do not have basic
gut feelings for a number of physics principles. I decided that this, at
least was somthing that I could offer them.
Thanks to an understanding principal I was allowed to completely revamp
my course.  I now teach a hands on applied physics course that borrows
heavly from the Operation Physics program,  (I was a member of the OP 1989
group) and from a work text put out by AMSCO called "Physical Science" by
Jules J. Weisler.  We still have the other text book and I use it for
what it is good for, a standerd mass!! (just kidding the kids keep it a
home an read out of it).  I also do some basic chemistry and use ideas
froma book called "Chemistry in the marketplace" by Ben Selinger pub. H.B.J.
I do not use this book as text book but rather as a source that I leran
from and pull ideas.

Now to the heart of this disscussion, (for thoes who have hung on this
long) there is very little math in course.  I have consulted with our
math department and try to push certian skills.  We have state wide exam
called TAAS,
that all H.S. studnts must pass in order to graduate and by which all
H.S.'s are judged.  I try to work on those math skills that my studnets
need to pass TAAS, since I basicaly have all the at risk students.  The
most complicated math we use is the equation A=B*C and the two other
forms of it.  i.e. B=A/C and C=A/B  It is amazing how many students are
unable to apply these mathematical formula even at the end of the year!!

One of the big questions that I saw come up in this disscussion was "How
do you measure a studnets understanding of the physics with out the
math"  To this I answer YOU ASK THEM!

I have become disenchanted in most if not all forms of standerd
evaluations so two years ago I started talking to my students to find out
how well they understand the concepts that we have covered.  I want to be
perfectly clear this is the ONLY way that I evaluate students
comprehension.  I do not use written test to take grades!!!  After being
on a couple of formal test writing committes I realized how difficult it
is to come up with a single valid question in an hours time no to mention
the 20 to 30 that the average tries to compose in one to two hours.  I do
not accept "Text book" answers.  My students know that if they give me a
book deffinition I will always ask "Nice, but what does that mean?" If it
is possible I require hands on demonstration of their understanding.
Try pulling a reeeealy long nail out of a hard peice of wood with a
standard curved claw hammer.  By obsereving you I will be able to tell
weither you understand leavers and fulcrums or are just doing math.

I know some of you are saying "you must have realy small classes".  Guess
agian the first year I tried this I had classes of 38, 37, 39, and 42.
This year it is a little better (I kept threating to quit) they are 28,
31, 32, and 34.  By the way incase you were wondering and lest you think
I have only four courses and one prep, my other class is a 30 member
Gifted and Talented Physics 1 class that has a number of students taking
the AP B exam.  By the way I use this type of evaluation in the GT
Physics class also. I think it helps my understand better what my
students are learning.  This form of evaluation does take time but with a
non
math baised course  it is esential, unless the course is just to be come
a rote memory session.

The results of this new curriclum and teaching style were over whelming.
I would love to share with you the volumes of colobrating data from pre
and post testing of a control and experimental group done by an
independent research at a local university.....   ;-) Weeeellll I would
like to but I can't.  Had I known at the out set the impact that it would
have I would have done it for my doctorial research but alass hind site
is twenty twenty and I am miopic.  I do have tons of anticdotial
evidence.  1. The number of studnets from my classes chosing to enrole on
a third H.S. science course (only two are required) jumped significantly,
and was almost four times higher than an other Physical Science
teachers.   2. A large number of letters to my self and my principal from
parents that were impressed by changes in addituide of their children to
both science and school in general.

Conclusion:
Thanks for hanging in here with me, this is the longest message that I
have ever sent to the list.  I have a great deal of trouble writing down
my ideas so please forgive any verbosity and/or errors.

I want to say that you can teach physics with out much math.  Hundred of
Operation Physics trainers have been doing it to middle and elementry
school teachers all over this country for last eight years or so.  We,
physics teachers, have one of the most fun subjects that there is.  Look
at the popularity of the Physics Circus at U.T. Austin, the Exploratorium
in San Fransco, and other similar programs around the U.S. and yet most
high school students are afraid to take our class in high school.  Is
there not a place and even a need for a conceptual physics course that
"De-emphasis" the math aspect and whoes primay goal is to hook students in
to science?

Your friend

Joel C. Palmer
The Wizzard
North Mesquite High School
palmer@tenet.edu