Digg

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Physicists protest changes to Education

news.bbc.co.uk — Recent changes to the education system have caused physics teachers to revolt.

Bury

grey1618 1 year 157 days ago, made popular 1 year 157 days ago

737 diggs
digg it

78 Comments
Who Dugg It?

BigManOnCampus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+65Dugg as I am biased, I have a degree in physics. Students whine all the time about having to learn mathematically rigourous things, it never ends. Somehow schools started listening to the students too much and started changing everything. Now, students learn things from books that tell stories about "John the friendly physicist." what a joke. The students whine because they feel either they cannot learn it (they have convinced themselves of this before trying) or that the knowledge gained is completely useless. Math teachers make little effort to convince students of the usefulness of problem solving in their own lives.

The point that is missed is that, yes, learning math can be painful, but likewise is learning proper english. Everything in education holds the potential of extraneous rigor. Yet students never whine about the difficulties of learning proper english as it is plainly demonstrable how useful it can be in later life, nor do school boards turn english exams into "What do you feel the proper sentence structure should sound like?" It's bogus.
- Error601, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8I agree. I remember practically driving myself nuts trying to get my brain wrapped around some concepts that seem simple now. When you build into the system telling people that kind of effort is too hard, the next generation won't even try, and we'll be seriously short of real scientist. Instead we'll have a bunch of idiots bashing religion and jumping at every solar power whatever some marketing person promotes.
  - geometry, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Hey, everybody wants to be like the USA. We've been dumbing down our education system for decades, glad to see you guys catching up. Remember, no child left behind, we'll just slow down the whole group rather than leaving somebody behind.
    - HairyFotr, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Here in Slovenia primary and some secondary schools have obligatory additional hours for students with bad marks... Is there something similar in other countries?
      Repeating everything too many times just bores the hell out of smarter students(i mean the ones that actually pay attention) and the majority of others don't care much about school anyway, and will say its too hard no matter what...
- satanatnmtedu, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10I was with you until the line about English. Kids whine about every subject. I complained about why I needed to match my teachers ideas about novels we had to read.
  
  At the same time, taking physics or chemistry should be about observing the world and solving problems. If you do not do these things with the tools you are given, then it is not a worthy class. Debate is part of science, but it is driven by observations and analysis rather than feelings and rhetoric. I have an example in my undergrad of a class that every engineering student had to take - most failed it at least once. Complaints were made, and now only Materials Engineering students must take it. It was a major weed out class, and now students can avoid this difficult class (I didn' t think was difficult though).
  
  It should be more about making sure the students learn how to think than making sure the students pass.
  - Gramage, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Getting a good grade in an English course is exceedingly difficult if you disagree with your teacher. I've been lucky enough to have a few gems who will grade you based on the merits of your opinion and writing, regardless of how much they disagree with you.
  - BigManOnCampus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2How is making an effort while disagreeing with the opinion of an english instructor at all comparable to students simply giving up on a subject because they whine about having to learn the subject at all?
    
    I see a difference there that I was hoping everyone would see. Students will whine about having to learn any math/science at all, remember the phrase "When am I ever gonna use this?" Students will not whine about having to learn english to the same extent, there is no similar phrase in the humanities courses.
- RobN, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6I disagree only slightly -- with your assertion that "students never whine about the difficulties of learning proper english." You're kidding me, right? Either that, or you got lost in math and science classes, and didn't take enough English classes to have heard all the whining that goes on.
  
  Nevertheless, I agree with the rest of your point. Many times in school I remember kids giving up before they even tried. I didn't, so I was the "nerd" who could do everything -- because I was stubborn enough to figure it out.
  - miriclaire, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Kids today don't whine about learning proper english because they DON'T!!!! The lastest gobbely-gook pedagogy about that is that texting is good for youth because now at least they are writing! Have you ever seen what they text? WTF!
    - docbob84, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Using the "phrase" 'WTF!' in a complaint about kids not using proper English... the irony kills...
  - BigManOnCampus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I see a difference there that I was hoping everyone would see. Students will whine about having to learn any math/science at all, remember the phrase "When am I ever gonna use this?" Students will not whine about having to learn english to the same extent, there is no similar phrase in the humanities course
    - tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"Oh come on. When am I ever going to have to use the Oxford comma?"
      "When am I ever going to need to know about he symbolism in Dickens' works?"
- Gatesophile, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I have to disagree about one point: most of the English tests I take are "What do you feel the proper sentence structure should sound like?" It's really pretty insulting to find that gem on the state exam for No Child Left Behind...
- dilberter, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I went to middle school in Brazil, where I grew up, and I remember having to memorize the table of elements in Chemistry with all its corresponding values.
  I love physics and science in general because I had great teachers who helped me see its real-world applications and all we owe to it today.
  This is really a shame and it's bound to have repercussions on many other aspects of education.
  - tech42er, on 11/01/2007, -1/+1Actually, memorizing the Periodic Table of the Elements isn't as useful as seeing the periodic trends underlying the table, in my opinion.
- EdLesMann, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"or that the knowledge gained is completely useless"
  
  I am going to have to disagree with you on this. I just got out of college a couple of years ago and Physics was by far one of the most useless classes I ever took. I am completely for changing the education standard because of classes like my physics class. I argued more then anyone in my class. Why did I hate it so much?
  
  Because Physics Does Not Work In Real Life!
  
  At least not the crap that was taught. The reason why the class was so difficult was because I could not replicate it. I will give you a few examples.
  We had a test question that said a boy threw a firework of certain weight in the air at a certain speed at a certain angle. The firework explodes at the peak of the throw. Calculate the radius of the circle of debris on the ground. The thought is that you calculate the range of where all the various pieces may land on the ground and use that circle to get the radius. The problem is you cant.
  First, you will never get a firework to explode evenly in equal pieces (otherwise mass will change the landing significantly). Second, you have to assume there is absolutely no other force on the pieces (wind, resistance as it falls , ect). Third, you have to assume that the explosion did not alter the trajectory and that all pieces continue on the path with the same force they once had (which they won't). All of that still means you have a sphere falling at an angle so you end up with an oval not a circle (therefore a varying radius).
  I argued my points and I demonstrated on multiple occasions why that problem was wrong. No one could demonstrate that the problem was correct.
  
  Another problem stated that a car was traveling at 60mph around a banked curve (of certain degree and length ect) and the driver lets off the gas, find the angle at which the car leaves the curve as it coasts to a stop. What tires does he have? Specifically what kind of grip on the tires? How heavy is the car? how much wind resistance does he have? What are the weather conditions? In my mind without these facts (and others), that question can not be properly answered.
  
  My 6th grade physics was a hell of a lot more informative because at least then they proved their statements. Gravity works, watch! *drops apple from desk* It falls at this speed *drops apple between to lasers and gets the time between and converts it into an understandable number*. The entire semester of my "physics 2 for engineers" I constantly asked the professor and classmates to prove the problem and answer. Constantly, I was given answers like "well you can't without removing all of these variables and assuming that these variables have numbers that are almost impossible to replicate on earth." If I can't replicate it in a classroom how the hell do you expect me to believe the universe as we know it runs on these principles and "facts"?
  
  As far as I am concerned, School Physics do not work in real life.
  
  Also, I think I missed the episode of the Crocodile Hunter where he showed the frogs of different weights floating on magnetic fields in the wild... (yes an actual question asked in exams). And I still want to see a group of penguins pulling a rope in opposite directions on frictionless ice. Or a greased pig on a frictionless slide. And if any of you have a frictionless slide, how the hell do you hold on to it at an angle to put greased pigs on? And why are you greasing up pigs or do I want to know?
  
  # Sorry for the rant. Physics is a bit of a sore subject for me. Complete waste of time, effort, and money.
  - tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Good point. That's why I prefer biology and chemistry, but physics is still very useful as the basis for those two, along with many physical sciences (astronomy, particle physics) and engineering.
TheCaterpillar, on 10/11/2007, -0/+24I heartily agree. Highschool physics is an introduction to the foundation of all the "hard" sciences. Today physics is turning into a glorified debate class where students simply regurgitate already solved problems rather than to rigorously derive the solutions themselves.
- pinkxmastree, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Well i took physics B last year and we learned the basics to physics and i found it a lot of fun and not even that hard to do the math, I think the students are being a bunch of babies
rald84, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5do as many US high schools do, make a watered down version called "physical science" and have that as a requirement and make "real" physics an elective. then everyone's happy!
- jasonvw, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Until student's like me find that the schools cut the class as an elective, or there is only one available class that is full. Now I can choose to take college physics and pay near a grand for the class (after tuition and books) and be taking it for no other reason than personal gratification (I am earning a CS degree, psychics is not part of the degree). I wish I could have taken it in high school, because as a poor college student, I just can't afford to be taking classes for fun.
pianonotes1010, on 10/11/2007, -12/+3I never took Physics
- cminardi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7And I applaud you. I'm going to assume the content of a phsyics class didn't appeal to you and as such you chose another class in its place. Thank you for knowing your own capabilities and finding alternatives instead of demanding everything be tailored to you. :)
amrush4th, on 10/11/2007, -0/+24We don't need to up the stupid. Come on schools, the goal is not for every kids to feel good, its to give a good education.
- Danjamin, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Yeah, somewhere along the lines stupid people started getting louder and people paid more attention to them and look where we are now.
Error601, on 10/11/2007, -0/+17Second time for this one but I dug it twice because gutting hard science for political indoctrination is a serious problem. Understanding science is all about massive amounts of detail and not opinion.
- tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Yup. If rhetoric decides scientific debates instead of evidence and experimentation, we're all *****. We're already seeing this with global warming, evolution, and GM foods.
bennyfreshness, on 10/11/2007, -12/+4american students are oversocialized and obsessed with being cool. they'd rather facebook than grind out a derivative, its a cultural problem, younger generation doesn't respect the pursuit of knowledge, look at our engineering and math graduation rates in comparison with rest of world, pathetic
- Error601, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Didn't RTFA I take it.
spudnic, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2"Debate drives science, but pupils do not learn meaningful information about the topics they debate."
Sounds like they're being perfectly prepared for real life to be honest.
- Error601, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Maybe blog real life. If you start spouting nonsense among people that know the topic, they'll just snicker and ignore you.
cminardi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13Honest to God, I'm sick and tired of schools dumbing things down so that they appeal to more students. I don't want these idiots taking the class if they cannot handle the math or the concepts behind it. If they can't handle the class, then reject them. It's what happens in life and school is supposed to be an extension of just that.

As an analogy, if you were to apply for a job which you were completely unqualified for, would you get it? Hell no, and I'm damn sure that the employer would not cater to your special needs. Reject the kids from the class that can't handle it - they won't even appreciate what they're learning anyway.
- stopnaziisrael, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5"As an analogy, if you were to apply for a job which you were completely unqualified for, would you get it? Hell no"
  
  It depends on your race. The right minority has to get the job.
- PopcornDave, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Haven't you ever heard of politics? Talk about jobs going to people that aren't qualified.
chocolatetacos, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I can see where the QCA is coming from, where natural sciences, like physics, must compete with the social sciences. Because introductory economics, sociology, and politics classes do not teach the statistics behind their theories, they're more accessible, and attract more students, while not really providing a basis for students to come up with their own evidence.
- Fafnir43, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2So I guess your line of reasoning is:
  
  Problem: Ecomonics, Sociology and Politics A levels are far too easy, especially compared to Physics. (Which is admittedly true.) Solution: dumb down Physics!
  
  I'm sorry, but that's not really an argument I can get behind...
  - tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1That's their line of reasoning, not his.
tomz17, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Yet one more reason we will all be desperately trying to learn Chinese in 50 years.
- Urusai, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1Good thing most Chinese people think that feng shui counts as physics.
- Gramage, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I plan to start very soon. It's not that Chinese people are inherently smarter than anyone else, it's just that in China the teachers are free to control the class without fear of getting sued for being a meanie. Ideological problems with the CCP aside, their school system is much more effective. I have friends my age, born in mainland China, who can do in their heads the kind of math that makes me nauseous.
- tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Zhongwen hen nan!
  
  /first year Mandarin student, nearly failed the final
RayTomes, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Galileo said that maths is the basis of understanding nature. That hasn't changed in 400 years. Rigour is all important, but the trend to dumb science has been going on for some time now, with Scientific American and New Scientist magazines preferring pretty marketing image type articles on meaningless cosmology theories to sensible science.
hiPpymIck, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3i dont understand..
theyre complaining about a course that isnt aimed at ppl who want to do sciences at
university
its a general course (13 -16yrs) - hence the everyman approach to mathematical rigour

..you are also expected to do Additional Science (general or applied)
..plus you do Math seperately

explained here
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/6039950.stm

i think theyre just being overly fussy
- acetv, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3So if this course is the polar opposite of an Advanced Placement course, does the grade you receive from this course count as one less point in the GPA? If you get an A in this course, it should count as a B in your GPA.
- Fafnir43, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Problem 1: This will be the only exposure to Physics most people get - most students take three or four subjects max to A level (17-18). Hence, a wussy course will result in a population that knows absolutely sod all about science. Because of the wussy debate parts of the course (GM foods, global warming, drug use, etc.), they will also think they know enough to seriously debate the issues. This is not a good thing.
  
  Problem 2: I've had a look at the syllabus. It's all crap, including Additional Science. One exam board (Edexcel) appears to examine all the papers in multiple choice format, with no penalties for incorrect answers. I'd recomment you have a look over at http://360science.edexcel.org.uk/home/sample-assessment-material/ . Here's a fun game: look through all the papers and pick out all the questions that either require no scientific knowledge or ability to answer, and then go and pick out all the ones that have nothing to do with the paper's subject in the first place, even tangentially. In the papers I looked at, they made up about a third of the paper.
  
  Problem 3: Doing maths separately means nothing if it's never tied into science.
  
  Science GCSEs were wussy as all hell over here before this came in. Now it's as though they aren't even trying any more...
- catxors, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Seems ok to me too. At least here in the US, hardly any adults except engineers know anything at all about physics, so it's not like they'd miss out by taking a 'dumbed down' physics class.
Dustmuffins, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6It seems that the UK school has been being dumbed down and dropping things in the interest of satisfying religious and other beliefs
- dilberter, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Nowhere in the article is religion even mentioned!!!
  It's people that make comments such as these where it's not warranted that give the non-religious a bad rap.
  - Dustmuffins, on 11/01/2007, -1/+1"religious and other beliefs"
    
    This article is covered in the "and other" part
leejae, on 10/11/2007, -9/+4***** GLOBAL WARMING!
- FAT_PIGGY, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2thanks you
- Fafnir43, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Well, I suppose it's going to be ***** us a few years down the line - fair's fair... ;)
Gramage, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7I never understoof all the whining. I found chemistry to be the hard subject. Physics was much easier, and more interesting.
- tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1And less useful. How'd you feel about biology?
bluegender, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Germany pwns physics.
superyounan1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6I wish my Phsyics 3 midterm was dumbed down, I JUST walked out of it, and I got completely annihilated like colliding positrons and neutrinos
- tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Colliding positrons and neutrinos are completely annihilated? I thought colliding electrons and positrons would be completely annihilated.
FaithclubDotNet, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6I'm a minor in Physics, and I am good at math. I had such an awesome Physics teacher in High school that we learned solid Newtonian Physics there. I actually had fun in that class, and it'd piss me off if someone tried to rattle off environmentalist ***** instead.
ninalama, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3I'm in high school, and I took physics last year; it was painful for me and I struggled with it. However, I have enjoyed english and writing since I was in elementary school, and naturally excelled in that area. I do think that kids need to take the time to learn what they are good at and stick with what will help them in life, instead of complaining about the education system. Physics class is good for those who are going to have a science career, and for those who aren't, they should just shut up and drop the course.
EnglishVoodoo, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Sounds like 'The Mold Of Yancy" by phillip k. dick. The goal isn't to make them more intelligent or better physicists - the goal quite simply is to hollow out the students skulls and fill those skulls with notions, with propaganda more in line with the global agenda, which is a carbon tax on each person, a limit on private travel, a low-protein diet, chips in the babies and no God in sight.
geekee, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8Physics in high school should be about learning the fundamentals and developing analytic skills. They shouldn't be bombarded by politically motivated propagabda from either the left or right. Global warming and intelligent design are not relevant to high school physics (or any other high school science class, for that matter).
alky, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4We have the same problem at my university, except in CS. The first and second year courses are all too easy. Apparently a lot of people coast through the first and second year, then BAM!, hard class, and they have to drop out because they can't do it.

All lowering standards does is push back the time when you have to face the reality of what you can and can't do.
Vapours, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7My friend was watching a BBC debate about education just a week ago. One guy from the audience complained about feminization of education, meaning the introduction of soft subjects like sociology or media study.

Aside from his rather sexist spin, he was spot on. If you make media study technically equal to subject like physics, then of course, students will opt out from subject like math or physics, which, in turn, will force spineless government to water down physics to the level of media study.

Get rid of any humanities subject aside from hard ones like Law, English, Accounting, History, Languages (Germany, Japanese, etc) or Classic.
phenolholic, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1being a physicist isnt something for the common man. most of these kids have no desire to be physicists. and those that do, will continue that path beyond these "physics" courses.
Hotrod89, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0This is ridiculous. Having done A level Physics you need the grounding in calculations that you get in GCSE in order to have any chance of passing. Removing all that just makes A level even harder, and to be honest the difference in difficulty between GCSE and A level is already too great. GCSEs at the moment are a complete joke, and it seems like once you get to A level, that's when you actually start studying the subject.
gradeahonky, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Ughh, the way logic is taught is becoming more and more fuzzy. Its getting to the point where, to answer any question correctly, you can fall back on saying something about "all walks of life" or how "its probably related to global warming."

Its like how little kids can learn to answer every question with jesus at bible school. No one learns anything except how to fake being smart. And even that isn't taught very well!
Seggallion, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I'm kinda new to Digg (the IT folk at my workplace blocked fark.com...bastards!), but this is the first thread I've seen on this site which wasn't full to the brim with uneducated hate speech from the left-wingers. I'm not saying that there's any hope for the vast majority of Digg users, but seeing a thread where people recognize idiocy for what it is deserves recognition.
ffelix, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1It often seems to me that Diggers don't actually read the articles before flying off the handle. It sounds like this course is just the first in a series of increasingly technical & difficult physics courses. It is designed to force students to think about the cultural implications of technology they will be designing & applying. There's no such thing as a social vacuum--physics doesn't exist in a world without funding agencies, politics & media.

If we had done this in the US, we probably wouldn't be dealing with so much anti-science sentiment today.
brianloving12, 2 hr 16 min ago, -0/+0To surpass in studies and to desire a better career alternative attending tests likes ****** to some extent can make a bigger difference in producing quality level of students.
http://test-help.org/nclex.htm
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

Physicists protest changes to Education

Login or register to add a comment