Physics professional development summer 2020: Conceptual Physics Summer Institute

Update July 17 - all participants, for either week, should have today received a welcome letter and zoom link.  If you didn't, please let me know right away, via email or twitter!  One spot has opened up for August, and seven remain for July.

Folks, I'm already teaching a bunch of AP summer institutes - you can find details here.  But what if you are looking for physics professional development that is NOT aimed at college-level physics?  I mean, I meet so many of you each year who teach on-level, honors, college-prep, Regents... to all ages, to all varieties of student.  And in my personal mission to spread physics knowledge to as wide an audience as possible, these sub-college courses represent a critical first point of contact with our discipline.  I focus as much energy on my conceptual course as on my AP course each year.  So I'd like to focus some of my summer professional development expertise on those who teach these first-level courses.

I'm offering a two-day institute on August 1-2 2020 (filled) or July 25-26 2020 (space available).  (Online, obviously, broadcasting via Zoom from my lab.)  Skip past the institute description for fees and registration instructions.  The course will be limited to the first 30 who sign up.  The daily agenda is included here at the bottom of the page.

Jacobs Physics

Conceptual Physics Institute Description
August 1-2 2020 or July 25-26 2020

All levels of high school physics can be taught conceptually – where verbal and experimental reasoning is prioritized over mathematical problem solving.  While mathematics are used extensively, they are used as a tool to create predictions about the workings of the natural world.  Whether you teach “general”, “on-level”, “honors”, “Regents”, or “college-prep” physics, a conceptual approach can be adapted to most any introductory physics topic – and to most any state or district standards. 

In our institute, we will discuss, practice, and share methods of teaching common physics content in a conceptual style.  I will be broadcasting from my laboratory via zoom.  Time will be devoted to experimental methods that are especially useful at the sub-college level; to course planning on a year-long and a unit basis; and to best-practices physics pedagogy, which differs substantially from pedagogy in other disciplines.

Participants will be given a full-year’s set of classroom-ready materials, including fact sheets, in-class and laboratory activities, assessments, and planning documents.  More importantly, through their interactions with the instructor and with their colleagues, participants will develop skills and ideas for adapting these materials to their specific classroom environment.  Those attending will also earn a certificate indicating their participation in 15 hours of physics professional development.

 

How much does it cost:  $200 for the weekend.  The schedule of events is listed below.

How do I register?
(1) Click the "donate" button below (or in the left column of the blog).  It will take you to paypal.
(2) Enter $200.00 as the donation amount, either through paypal or credit card
(3) Click "Add special instructions to seller" or "Add a note"
(4) In the note, please include your name, preferred contact email, and institution
(5) Fill in payment info and click "donate now"

That's all - I'll be back to you within a day or two confirming your registration, and sending you links to the classroom-ready materials.

Cancelation issues: If you register then can't attend, contact me via email.  As long as I can replace your spot, I'll send a full refund; if I can't replace your spot, I'll refund all but $25.

Schedule: Each session will include both whole-group presentation/discussion, and breakout groups for activities.  In between sessions and during breaks, Greg will be available for informal conversation. 

Saturday 1 August or 25 July (all times eastern time)

9:00                 Introductions

                        What does “conceptual” mean – defining levels of physics

Different levels of physics: developing your program

                        Different levels of physics: developing your resources

10:30               Eight styles of physics laboratory activities

            Including the two best-adapted for conceptual physics

My first day activity – reflection experiment

My first group laboratory experiment – refraction

12:00-12:30    break

12:30               Sequencing your course

Starting the year right: the most important physics teaching skill

Justifying answers with facts

Simple ray diagrams for optics in conceptual physics

Justifying answers with equations

In-class laboratory exercises: circuits

                       

2:00                 The daily “quiz”

Tests and quizzes, targeted to different levels

                        Other sorts of assessment

                        Preparing for the trimester/semester exam

                        Adapting a conceptual course to external standards

                        In-class laboratory exercises: motion graphs

Afternoon – asynchronous

                        Read through the shared files

                        Read through the Jacobs Physics blog

                        Adapt to your district or state standards

                        Bring questions and ideas for the social or for Sunday

7:30                 Optional Zoom social: Dinner, dessert, drinks, and conversation.  BYOB, obviously. 

Sunday 2 August  or 26 July 

9:00                 Building and creating experiments with whatever you’ve got

                        Developing your own in-class lab exercises

                        Using or substituting inexpensive equipment

                        In-class laboratory exercises: direction of force and motion

10:30               Methods to speed your grading

                        In-class laboratory exercises: forces in 2-d

                        In-class laboratory exercises: motion in 2-d

                       

12:00-12:30    break

12:30               The final third of the year – once skills are built

                        How I teach impulse/momentum

                        Energy bar charts at the conceptual level      

                        Laboratory exercises with harmonic motion

                       

2:00                 Sharing: Any Other Demos

Online simulations:

                                    The Physics Classroom

The Physics Aviary

                                    Vernier’s Pivot Interactives

                        Ending the year: the Physics Fight

                 

                        

Leave checkboxes for last - start with evidence and reasoning.

In my time teaching, I've coached baseball, football, tennis... and debate.

A common way of teaching students to structure an argument is via “claim, evidence, reasoning.” The debate team uses this in their cases – it’s an excellent way to communicate. The AP exam often encourages this structure by first asking you to check a box to indicate your answer; then, to justify your answer.

To many of you, this brings back bad memories of your 7th grade math class. You knew the answer instantly, because good smart boys and girls always know the answer. And you knew that the teacher knew the answer. But your teacher marked you wrong – “you need to show your work.”  What? Why? This is stupid, I really need to show you how I solved “7-x=3” for x?  The answer’s 4. Justify my answer? Because math and logic. Duh.

And this teachery obsession with “showing your work” extended throughout much of high school.  Okay, the problems got harder, but you still could do them without laying out reasoning step by step as if you were a stupid person. Teachers are so condescending.

Except.

In physics, good smart boys and girls aren’t expected to know the answer. In fact, the teacher doesn’t know the answer to a new physics problem.

Really – I’ve been doing physics since 1990. When I see a free response question, I don't know the answers. I figure them out – I start with facts of physics, continue with an energy bar chart or free body diagram, and come to a conclusion.  

I don't do “claim-evidence-reasoning.”  I do “evidence-reasoning-claim.”

When my students do test corrections, they invariably get hung up on the right answer. They might convince themselves that the answer is that the amplitude increases after the collision.  Then they twist and turn facts and equations to show increasing amplitude… and get more and more frustrated with me as I show them their incorrect logic.  Eventually they get every logical step correct, and say “therefore the amplitude increases."

It never occurs to them that their conclusion might be wrong!

My students are like the evil prosecutors on shows like Law & Order or Matlock… we know this person is guilty, how can we arrange the evidence to convince the jury of their guilt?

That’s not how it should work!  You start with the evidence – based on this information, who is most likely to have committed the crime?  Perhaps if more lawyers and police officers were physics majors, our criminal justice system might be improved.

So don’t be the evil prosecutor. Don’t identify the murderer and then cook the evidence to frame them. Instead, on the AP exam, leave the checkboxes blank until you’ve written your justification.  Then, only then, come to a conclusion – and check the box to say whodunnit.

When is something a "point object"?

I've gotten the question a bobzillion times since I did a show about angular momentum: 

I know you said angular momentum is L=Iw* for an extended object, and L=mvr for a point object.  But how do I tell whether something is an extended object or a point object?

* Yes, folks, I committed sacrilege - I wrote the variable for angular velocity not as a Greek omega, but as a Latin w.  And I've neither been struck by lightning, nor lost points on my AP exam.  

Consider the size of the object itself, and then consider the distance from the object's center to the axis of rotation.  If the distance to the axis of rotation is considerably bigger than the object's size, then you've got a point object.

A meterstick pivoted at one end? The distance from its center to the axis of rotation is 50 cm; the object length is 100 cm.  Not a point object.

The ball I shot at a wooden stick during the linked show? The ball was maybe 2 cm across.  The ball hit the stick about 9 cm below the stick's center, which was indicated as the axis of rotation for angular momentum conservation.  So we can consider the ball a point object in this case!

(That same ball rolling down a ramp, with the axis of rotation being the ball's center? That's gotta be treated as an extended object, because there is no distance at all between the ball's center and the rotational axis!)

What does r mean, then, in L=mvr? Isn't that the radius?

No, in the equation L=mvr for the angular momentum of a point object, r represents the "distance of closest approach" - extend the line of the object's motion, and find the closest that line gets to the axis of rotation.  That's r.

And how can something moving in a straight line have angular momentum, anyway?

If you're an AP physics 1 student: it just does.  L=mvr for a point object moving in a straight line.  That's, for now, simply a fact of physics.  If you're in AP physics C or above, you can ask for further detail in the comments, but only if you already understand the mathematics behind vector cross products.

No seriously!  One of the major obstacles to first-year students understanding physics is that they see the deep vector calculus reasoning behind some ideas, usually in a textbook or in wikipedia or from their teacher in response to the fastest student in the class... and they think they're supposed to understand every bit of the reasoning, they don't, and they lose confidence.  It's like trying to teach three different kinds of curve balls to a 10 year old pitcher, or the 1996 Chicago Bulls Triangle Offense to a middle school team.  Don't!  

For now, just use the L=mvr formula as a fact of physics.  You don't need to go any deeper than that for AP Physics 1!

2020 AP Physics exams: Type your answers. Really - TYPE YOUR ANSWERS.

I keep getting questions from people, even people who have read yesterday's post from associate chief reader Matt Sckalor.  They know that Matt and I and everyone associated with the 2020 AP Physics exams says to type your answers.  And yet, they keep asking "wait, but what if the exam asks for derivations" or "but what if we have to draw a diagram" or "but what if the readers take off for..."

I mean, Matt and I and everyone have made it clear as many times as we know how - no drawing diagrams, no derivations, prose is sufficient for everything.  What more can I say?  Do you think I'm going to come out with an evil laugh, ha ha ha ha! Fooled you all! You FAIL now!"?!?!

Look.  I'm a table leader at the reading. I don't want to read fancy formatted equations - I want to read typed prose.  I'll read whatever your student submits, 'cause I'm a professional... but I want to read typed prose.

Let's say a student types "with initial speed zero, the relevant equation is d=1/2at2."

I know what that means - it's very clear.  So does every reader.

But Professor Milhouse says, "Well, actually, that equation doesn't expressly indicate the groupings under the fraction.  The student might really mean one over 2at2.  That's equivalent mathematically to the reciprocal of four times a times t.  That's not a physics equation!  I am certainly not accepting that for credit!"

Um, Professor Milhouse won't last long at my table.  Nor at anyone else's.

Please emphasize to your students that we are physicists, not lawyers; please emphasize to communicate physics as best they can, and not to fear "omg, what if I lose a point because..."

Your students will get credit for good physics.  They will not get credit for bad physics.  That's it.  No matter how they submit.  But it'll sure, sure be easier on them and on us and on EVERYONE if they'll just type.