Conceptual Physics

Traditionally, physics has been the most difficult science; it should be attempted only by adult students with a solid mathematical training. There is some truth in that to be comfortable with advanced mathematics cans certainly still some areas of physics, and there are issues that require a college robust physics-class preparation, some pretty serious number-crunching. However, there is another aspect of this story, and a growing sense of trainers () myself, that elementary students should study and even physics.

One of the strongest arguments for the introduction of physics at a young age is that the “base” is science. In other words, it is not really possible to have a good understanding of photosynthesis, if you do not know what the light. Learning the light is, of course, a branch of physics.

There is currently a “physics first” movement that seeks to overthrow the traditional order of high school science classes, so that the sequence in the first year of physics, chemistry, biology, and finally. In this model, physics as a theoretical and less focused on business computing, the younger students lack the mathematical knowledge of their elders.

Physics first is the best thing that ever happened to physical education, if properly followed. Besides the obvious benefit of fans around the physical world that physics would be far more people than ever studied before, it could possibly be taught more effectively. One of the flaws in the traditional teaching of physics is that they assumed that students with concepts to illustrate the mathematics learning of mathematics problems. Unfortunately, this does not work most of the time. Most people need at the physical point of view of the conceptual approach before they can understand mathematics in a meaningful way. This is true even for intelligent, mathematically oriented people, and it is at least part of the reason why so many people get so little in physics classes. In essence, the goal of physical training first is that all students achieve a qualitative understanding of the physical world. Interested students can then specify that existing knowledge into a quantitative understanding of the quality later in a more advanced class.

The philosophy of physics will be the first thing to do is not limited to the education of school students. It can be effectively applied to children much younger, very well. For example, I teach science to a group of nine and ten years homeschoolers and we have a little physics, mathematics with very little about the basic arithmetic operations. For example, last year we studied the levers and turning effect. This year, we will evaluate the roles and simple circuits. I do not know how to use age appropriate math, including simple formulas, reserved, but not, I stress formulas on a verbal understanding of events. These children are barely advanced students of physics, but they have achieved considerable understanding while maintaining a strong interest in learning more.

Critics fear a conceptual approach to physical education; it is just a way of lowering standards. I share the desire of the highest possible level, and I certify that can be poorly conducted a lack of theoretical physics program rigor. As always, details matter. A good program should include theoretical physics hands-on (and “brain-on”) experiences, write off and a little math. It should not be easy. On the other hand, it must not rely too conscientious, hard-working students feel they are not studying the topic of physics and traditional education leaves too many students with this sentiment.

This entry was posted on January 10, 2010 at January 10, 2010 and is filed under Education. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.