🚀 go-pugleaf

I suffer the same frustrations.....I've tried to get cooperation from the
mathematics department(to teach trig in geometry...its in their book but
they skip over it...they say it confuses the kids....its better to present
it with the unit circle stuff) geometry is a prerequisite for our regular
physics course....15 yrs of suggestions have falled on deaf ears.  I spend
about 1.5 weeks a year reviewing(?) trig using first scaled drawings then
the using the functions check their work.  I find the sine and cosine laws
too complex for the majority of regular physics students and don't go over
the procedure unless pressed.  For solving non-right(whadaya cal those?)
they are expected to use scaled drawings.  Most like the drawings over the
functions.   The high ability students find the drawings unnecessary and
even boorriinngg.
  With the Honors Physics students it's a different story.  Most of them
are in Calculus and trig is simple stuff....I just review for 2
days(sometimes less.)
  In large schools(our High school is 2000) each department really does
it's own thing.  Some departments like English and Soc. Studies have
cooperative efforts but that cooperation is not typical.  Right now we
have 2 physics teachers with 8 sections of two kinds of physics...I really
can't complain...just bitch.

Lawrence L'Hote
David H. Hickman High School
Columbia, MO   65203
llhote@bigcat.missouri.edu



On Thu, 3 Feb 1994, Joe McLaughlin wrote:

> Dear physharers, do any of you share my frustration in trying to get trig
> across?  I long ago gave up on trying to teach the math of non-right
> components, and generally find the struggle to get the relatively simple
> math of right angle vectors across.  Physics is just such a good way to
> teach math that it is easy to fall int the trap of devoting too much time to
> it!  I am contemplating a whole new approach- why should we devote so much
> time to learning the math, when we can easily get resultants/components from
> our readily available networked spreadsheets?  The extra time could be
> devoted to activities & investigations with all results easily and quickly
> calculated.  Furthermore , the Hewitt approach, which I understand to be
> strictly (or at least largely), graphical, isn't a solution for me.  We do
> properly scaled vector additions, and I find it to be just about as time
> comsuming.  I insist on correctly drawn graphs, and I have to hand them back
> to be corrected sometimes 3-4 times.  Any Suggestions or sympathies?
> <<Joe>>
>       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>    Joseph F. McLaughlin, Physics
>    jxm39.psuvm.psu.edu
>    Brentwood High School
>    Brentwood (Pittsburgh), PA
>
>