|
Physics
Prepared by Larry Coleman,
UC Davis, Lead Discipline Faculty for Physics
Summary of Identified Issues
Two physics sequences are of importance in articulation.
We define these as follows.
1. University Physics (CAN Physics B or C) is the course
taken by physical science and engineering majors. It uses
calculus up to and including multivariable (vector) differential
and integral calculus. This course has an associated laboratory
for all but the modern physics term. It may or may not include
a discussion section as well as a lecture.
2. College physics (CAN Physics A), sometimes referred to
a "pre-med" physics, physics for biologists, or
"algebra-trig" physics. This course is/can be taught
with a small amount of calculus. College physics includes
an associated laboratory.
Out of these designations arises a fundamental issue: the
lack of articulation for the college physics course, as the
vast majority of community colleges cannot offer both an algebra-trig
course and physics course demanding "a little bit of
calculus, in addition to the more demanding physics course
for the intended major. The solution here will demand a collaboration
of the physics faculty and faculty in other disciplines, particularly
those in biological sciences, to reach an agreement that the
"little bit of calculus" course can be articulated
to the algebra-trig course. The solution of this issue would
be a major step in easing this problem encountered by transferring
students in these fields.
A related issue is the nature of the physics needed by those
bioscience students intending to enter the health science
fields. Presently, there is confusion as to what medical and
similar professional schools require of their incoming students
and what may be tested as part of their admissions process.
We have agreed with the biological sciences faculty to investigate
the desires of these post-graduate schools and seek to respond
to the needs of those students.
A third issue emerges when students do not complete the physics
sequence at a single institution, rather taking a semester
here, another there, and hoping to complete some work after
transfer. This piecemeal approach seldom is serviceable: students
miss out on crucial units or topics offered in differing semesters
at different institutions, and repeat segments they have had
in a prior course. On the other side of the transfer process,
the receiving institution is likely to require these students
to repeat an entire course simply to acquire those essential
modules not yet taken. To reduce costly and needless repetition,
to reduce students' understandable frustration, to promote
progress to degree, yet to ensure students' appropriate preparation,
physics faculty must continue to resolve this issue. Several
potential solutions are discussed in this report.
Identified Trends/Future Directions
Some universities (UC Davis) and several community colleges
are currently offering mini-units to augment existing course
work, permit review of topics, and allow transfer students
who did not acquire education in some modules to make up that
deficit.
At UC Davis, for example, one-unit modules are offered as
a need is identified on a case-by-case basis as students transfer
into the physics program. Similar self-paced modules are being
explored on community college campuses in conjunction with
labs or learning centers.
Comments from Statewide Meetings and
the General Field
Physics faculty from all three segments met at the statewide
meeting. Overall, there was easy agreement on the basic lower
division major curriculum. The introductory physics curriculum
has been fairly "standardized" as evidenced by the
lack of variance in the textbooks.
During the 2001 statewide meeting, the assembled physics
faculty focused on the university physics course, and in discussions
with our bioscience colleagues on the college physics course.
Outstanding questions for the major preparation curriculum
are these:
- How much modern physics and when? _ CAN Physics Sequence
B or C?
- Is introductory calculus based physics one year, four
quarters, or three semesters?
- How much of what type mathematics should be pre or co-requisite
to which sections of the course?
- How to deal with non-uniformity of sequencing within the
course—a particular problem for students who do not
complete the sequence before transfer, or who attempt to
assemble the sequence by taking different terms at different
community colleges.
- How much linear algebra and differential equations should
be required in the lower division?
The first two questions are linked as the amount of modern
physics included in the "introductory course" is
a major portion (but not all) of the differences in the course
length. The third question is complicated by the differences
in mathematics sequences and the sequencing of the physics
topics within the university physics course. We spent a good
part of the statewide meeting working out a solution to the
fourth question of sequence variation (see below). The fifth
question was not significantly addressed and will need more
discussion among physics faculty.
The statewide meeting focused on questions of topic sequence
within the university physics course. We agree that some variation
is to be expected and that we can ameliorate the negative
effects of this on transfer by "decreasing the granularity"
of the CAN system. We propose to agree on a set of physics
topics or modules that could then be assigned module numbers.
Thus the university physics sequence (as well as the college
physics sequence) would be described not only by the current
brief catalog description but also by the module numbers in
each term. In this way instructors and articulation officers
and college staff would get a much clearer picture of how
much a student had covered in the sequence. This scheme would
mean that an individual term-long course would be designated
with a CAN number followed by a listing of the covered modules.
Thus, those students required to have physics for a variety
of majors, and particularly those who do not complete the
sequence at a single institution, would readily understand
in which term they would be offered urgent sequences. This
method would also permit their counselors and their receiving
institutions to readily identify which modules the student
had completed, and identify strategies to enable students
to complete needed "missing" modules without repeating
coursework or delaying progress for transfer.
Our group discussion resulted in the following set of draft
"course modules." For each module we have listed
the major subtopics/concepts. We present the below for discussion
in a wider group of physics faculty.
Module 1: MECHANICS
· Vectors and Scalars
· Newton’s Laws
· Statistics
· Linear Kinematics and Dynamics
· Rotational Kinematics and Dynamics
· Conservation Laws
· Gravitation
Module 2: MECHANICAL WAVES & OSCILLATIONS
· Waves on a string
· Standing Waves
· Interference
· Resonance
· Superposition
· Sound
· Doppler Effect
Module 3: SIMPLE HARMONIC MOTION
Module 4: THERMAL PHYSICS
· Calorimetry
· Heat Transfer
· Kinetic Theory
· Thermodynamics
Module 5: FLUIDS
· Density
· Hydrostatics
· Archimedes Principle
· Pascal’s Principle
· Hydrodynamics
· Bernoulli’s Principle
Module 6: ELECTROSTATICS & DC CIRCUITS
· Charge
· Coulomb’s Law
· Fields
· Potentials
· Gauss’s Law
· Voltage, Current, Resistance
· Capacitance
· Kirchoff’s Rules
· Flux
· EMF (?)
Module 7: MAGNETISM, AC CIRCUITS
& MAXWELL’S EQUATIONS
· Faraday’s Law
· Ampere’s Law
· Biot-Savart Law
· Magnetic Fields
· RC,RL,RLC Circuits
· Phasors
· Inductance
· Lenz’s Law
· Flux(?)
Module 8: E&M WAVES
· Speed of Light
· Color, Frequency
· Momentum and Energy of E&M Waves
Module 9: GEOMETRIC OPTICS
· Reflection
· Refraction
· Ray Tracing
· Lenses
· Mirrors
· Optical Instruments
Module 10: PHYSICAL OPTICS
· Interference
· Diffraction
· Polarization
· Dispersion
· Resolution
· Phase
Module 11: SPECIAL RELATIVITY
Module 12: QUANTUM MECHANICS
· Experimental Basis of Quantum Mechanics
· Particle-Wave Duality
· Wave Functions
· Atoms and Molecules
· Applications of Schrodinger’s Equation
· Topics from Solid State, Nuclear & Particle Physics
It should be noted this is but a starting point for needed
further discussion. The CAN Board and the segments would also
have to adopt this modification/addition to the CAN scheme.
Our discussion with the biology faculty centered on the college
physics sequence (CAN Physics Sequence A). This is the course
required for biological science majors of all types and some
of the other science majors, for example psychology, BA in
geology, physical therapy, consumer science, et cetera.
On all of the UC campuses and approximately one half of the
CSU campuses, this course has a calculus prerequisite. While
little calculus is used in the course, the reasons given for
requiring it range from—"it raises the level of
the course" to "because we can, since calculus is
required for the bioscience major." Called for is continued
discussion and collaboration of the physics faculty with the
faculty in biological sciences to reach an agreement on this
matter to resolve this barrier.
At the 2001 statewide meeting the issue of what the medical
schools require was raised. It was found that much confusion
exists as to exactly what is being taught on our campuses
and what the health science professional schools desire/require.
We will survey the CSU and UC physics departments and work
to establish what the health science school requirements are.
Recommendations for the Discipline
- Survey the CSU and UC physics departments
to determine how they respond to demands in the health sciences
professional schools.
- Determine what is presently being required for MCAT preparation
and for admission to health science professional schools.
Recommendations for Support Courses
- Continue to review the college physics courses as needed
by majors in bioscience, seeking a resolution to this dilemma.
Topics for Further Discussion
- Seek to resolve how much linear algebra and differential
equations should be required in the lower division.
Recommendations Forwarded/to be forwarded
to
CAN: Advise the CAN Board
of the discussions in the field concerning the modules proposal.
CIAC: Work with articulation
officers and counselors to continue recommending to students
that they complete sequences of courses at a single institution
and that they complete their lower division preparation for
the major prior to transfer.
Outreach presentations made by members
of this group
Lead Faculty Coordinator Lawrence Coleman made an IMPAC presentation
to a system-wide gathering of deans of undergraduate education.
|
