Re: College nowadays - What "should" students know?

["B. Esser" <besser@MARIAN.CREIGHTON.EDU>]

On Sun, 3 Oct 1999, Fran Poodry wrote:


> What proportion of HS Physics classes use Serway
> & Faughn, what proportion use Hewitt (Conceptual Phys), what proportion use
> Active Physics, what proportion use Glencoe (by Zitzewitz), what proportion
> use C3P?  Who did the survey? Where can I read it?  Was it in that review of
> textbooks that TPT published in the spring?
According to "Maintaining Momentum: High School Physics for a New
Millenium" (www.aip.org), there has been an increase in the percentage of
students taking AP physics.
In 1987, under 20% of all students took high school physics with 4% being
classified as conceptual, 80% regular, 11% honors and 4% AP. In 1997, they
reported that almost 28% of all students took high school physics with 11%
conceptual, 66% regular, 15% honors and 8% AP.
In their report on High School Physics Textbooks (www.aip.org) they list
only 6 texts for the AP sections.  College Physics (Serway and Faughn),
Physics (Giancoli), Physics (Cutnell & JOhnson), Fundamentals of Physics
(Halliday et.al.) and University Physics (Sears).  The report also lists
the popularity of texts for honor, regular and conceptual classes.
The percentage of students taking AP physics has doubled over the last 10
years.

> And who is defining the "good" and judging us?
In addition to the administration and community influences mentioned
previously, it should be noted that the College Board and ETS organization
actively lobbies and advertises their test as the appropriate measure of
"good".  They have initiatives in Washington to expand federal funding of
their AP testing program, and a very active PR department working very
hard to tell anyone who listens that AP is how we should measure
student/school success.


Bruce Esser
Physics Teacher                    Something witty
Marian High School                     Should go here
http://marian.creighton.edu