Tag Archives: Regents Physics

A New Kind of Physics Review Book #physicsed #Regents

Posted on by — 1 Comment ↓

New York’s Regents Physics curriculum outlines an introductory algebra-based physics course covering a range of topics from classical mechanics and electricity and magnetism to waves, optics, modern physics, and even touching on the Standard Model. Several commercial textbooks are available supporting this curriculum relatively well, but as the year comes to a close and students prepare for the formal culminating standardized Regents Physics Exam, review books focusing on problem solving make their way into the equation.

tim_studying_hg_clr Currently, there are several Regents Physics review books available which are quite well done and that I’m very fond of personally. Over the past few years, I’ve pointed students toward several of these books, and even supplied them for my students in some cases. What students have reported, however, indicates that in many cases they quickly become overwhelmed with the size and layout of the review books, especially given the time constraints they have for review before the exam is given. When most of these books contain a minimum of 400 pages, students begin to view the review process as a daunting endeavor, and therefore never begin. When the shorter books (~ 250 pages) contain hundreds of problems but no included solutions, students see a workbook instead of a resource, and become frustrated when they can’t check their answers and obtain immediate feedback. Regardless of the reason, if students don’t engage in the review book, however well written and complete it may be, its effectiveness is extremely limited.

Based on student feedback, input from other physics teachers, and requests from several of this year’s crop of Regents Physics students, work has begun on a review book designed to meet the needs of current Regents Physics students in a friendly, engaging, and efficient manner.

So what’s different about this project? First, the book is not intended as a textbook replacement, but rather a summary of just what students need to know to be successful on the Regents Physics Exam, without any extra fluff, similar to an SAT prep book or an AP prep book. There’s a time for pushing further into topics of interest, building deeper understandings, and refining analytical skills — all extremely important in a modern physics classroom, and well supported by a wide variety of modern resources. This book is designed to meet a different need — to assist students in achieving their highest possible score on the Regents Physics Exam in as efficient and straightforward a manner as possible, while reinforcing fundamental physics concepts in as simple and clear a manner as possible.

Second, this book is designed from the ground up to be high-school-student friendly. Target length is 300 pages, fonts are designed for easy readability, and hundreds of sample problems are included immediately following the concepts required, streamlining adoption and specific topic reviews in both traditional and SBG classrooms.  Detailed solutions (not just answers) are provided immediately following the questions, utilizing the problem-solving format required for optimal scoring on the Regents Exam. No external answer key required! Fun illustrations and clear diagrams abound throughout the text.

Third, the text is tied in to the APlusPhysics.com website, providing students a pathway to obtain further problem practice with immediate feedback as well as receiving help on tricky concepts in the Regents Physics and Homework Help online forums.

physics_md_clr Target publication date for the APlusPhysics: Your Guide to Regents Physics Essentials is May 2011. Instructors interested in learning more and/or reviewing the text may contact the publisher directly by e-mailing info@sillybeagle.com or through the APlusPhysics website.

APlusPhysics Regents Course Tutorials Completed!

Posted on by — No Comments ↓

Whew!  It’s been a long and challenging project, but I am absolutely thrilled to announce that the APlusPhysics.com Regents Physics course tutorial has been completed (well, at least the first revision). I’ve been done with the tutorial less than 20 minutes, and already I’m making notes on additions, modifications, and enhancements, but I think it’s worth taking a moment to step back and look at everything that’s been accomplished.image

A year ago I had never created a web page, and didn’t know the difference between HTML and ELMO. But, with a vision to create a resource specific to the needs of the students I see every day, and with the support of friends and family, I started picking up books, reading web articles, and making many, many designs on paper to script out what I wanted to build.

As of this morning, with the upload of a question bank of more than 500 Regents Physics questions from past years, I’m amazed at how much has been created. The APlusPhysics Regents Tutorials include objectives, explanations, sample problems, FLASH animations, integrated quizzes, videos… just about everything you could ask for in an online resource tailored to a specific course. Further, as the projected progressed, I began to see potential for this resource being used outside my classroom and even outside the scope of NY’s Regents curriculum, and have begun building in further topics of interest to many introductory physics students. Even better, I learned the Regents Physics material better than I could have ever imagined (there’s nothing like digging through 10 years of old exams to help you really learn a course inside and out).

image I wanted this website to be an original work, so not only did I learn webpage design, I also had to learn vector and bitmap graphics, flash animation, basic flash programming, and even a little bit of PHP to make everything work in the background. For an artistically-challenged science guy, I’m pretty amazed with the quality of illustrations I was able to create after reading a few books on the modern tools available!

In support of the static web tutorials, the site also features a discussion forum based on the latest version of vBulletin, integrated student and educator blogs, course notes, calendars, project activities, and even hosting for old episodes of the Physics in Action Podcast.  So what’s next?

I’ve said from the beginning I want to follow up the Regents Physics tutorials with the AP-1 and AP-2 curricula, but with delays from the College Board, we’re all still waiting to find out exactly what those courses will entail (and to what depth).  I have been considering creating a tutorial for AP-C physics, but I’m not certain I see as great a need for such a site, as the AP-C course mirrors many introductory university physics courses, and that material is already widely available throughout the web. With these challenges in mind, I think I’m on hold for creating static tutorial pages for the time being.

This feels like a blessing in disguise, however, as I’ve been quite excited to dive into several other projects. First, I want to expand the build out the Semiconductor Technology Enrichment Program (STEP), a program designed to take the weeks in class after the AP Physics exams and introduce students to basic semiconductor physics and micro/nano technology. Second, I need to spend time planning on the details of the Skills Based Grading (SBG) program I’m planning on implementing in my Regents Physics courses next year. Third, I’d like to continue my work to pre-record video lessons of all the major topics in the Regents Physics course, with the ultimate goal of spending in-class time working on hands-on lab activities, as well as supporting students individually and in small groups, and minimizing the less-effective entire-class-instruction time. Finally, several students have inquired as to whether I might take the course content material on APlusPhysics and expand it into a written mini-book / synopsis for the Regents Physics course. Though initially hesitant, the more I think about it, the more I find value in creation of the written “APlusPhysics’s Guide to Regents Physics.” And oh, by the way, did I mention the list of website enhancements I’ve already started on?

The question, then, is where to start. I oftentimes prioritize items both by “bang for the buck” as well as cost to implement. SBG work will largely occur in late spring and early summer due to some outside interests and external timing constraints. The STEP program may find some external funding in a month or so, and if I can get paid to work on something, why not wait until there’s a bit of income for my time? That really leaves the printed physics guidebook, video mini-lessons, and website revisions. As much as I try to deny it, I know I’ll be working on website revisions by tonight, in tandem with my next project.  So which to tackle next, the video mini-lessons, or the printed guidebook?  Or both? Would love to hear your feedback and thoughts!

And, as with any endeavor of such scale, allow me to again thank all my supporters, colleagues, family members and contributors. This is a huge milestone for APlusPhysics and the culmination of hundreds of hours of frustration and effort, which has already paid for itself in learning and confidence. I’ve come out all the better for it, and I hope this resource helps others say the same.

Mid-Term Review with High Engagement

Posted on by — No Comments ↓

If you’re like me, you absolutely abhor “review” time.  I’m not saying review of key material isn’t important, but trying to differentiate instructions to meet the needs of individual learners in large classes, while also differentiating across a fairly wide range of proficiencies can be a challenge.  Sure, doing it for a single class isn’t too bad, but accomplishing it over several days and several units of material is not only difficult, it’s also downright dull.

Of course, we try to mix things up to keep our review sessions as fresh as possible… we’ll work individually some days, in groups in others, attempt various types of problems, use computers, use clickers, use whiteboards, all with varying degrees of success.  Yesterday I thought I’d try something a bit different though… nothing drastic by any stretch, just several small tweaks that put together made for the highest level of engagement I’d seen for a review activity.

 

The Setup

To begin with, I rearranged the room and all the student desks and lab tables to make a total of six massive tables, with chairs and stools around each. One of the table was designated “belongings,” and students were asked to place all of their bags, books, etc. on the belongings table at the beginning of class, keeping only a pencil or pen with them.

At each of the remaining tables I placed a formula sheet, a few calculators, and a problem set of about 15 problems. Each of the five tables had a problem set from a different unit (Kinematics, Dynamics, UCM & Gravity, Impulse and Momentum, and Work/Energy/Power).  I also placed an answer key at each table.

Once everyone had huddled up, I provided each student with a blank sheet of paper and asked them to rank the topics we’d covered so far this year from strongest to weakest (we’ve been working on building meta-cognition skills sporadically throughout the year).  Once that was completed, detailed M&Mgroupinstructions were given.  Students were to travel to each “station” and complete five problems on the blank sheets of paper, showing all work as demonstrated in class, and checking their answers using the solution sheets as they went.  Once five problems were successfully completed, they could come to the front of the room, grab an M&M reward, and move on to the next topic.

Students in need of help had two options… they could ask their cohorts at the same station, or come to the “help desk” (aka teacher), who would provide help, but only by asking more questions.  Out of 100 students, only two came to the help desk all day.  Instead, they taught each other.

 

The Results

Our goal was to complete all five stations in our 42-minute period.  Many students succeeded in the goal, and a small contingent made it through several extra stations.  More importantly, I had students working diligently on problems for a solid 90% of our class time.  I saw students teaching each other patiently, explaining concepts and notation in detail, and checking for understanding as they went.  And as they left the class, a number of students mentioned how helpful an exercise this had been as they prepared for their mid-term.

I don’t know what was so magical about the lesson.  We’ve done practice problems with answers before, individually and in groups.  We’ve rotated through stations before.  We’ve re-arranged the room.  Maybe it was the M&M’s – I’m not usually a fan of external motivations, especially something so simple and benign as a single M&M for each five-problem set done correctly.  Whatever the reason, it appears the combination of changes did the trick, and not only did the students get extra practice in their areas of greatest need, I also gained valuable feedback by watching which stations had the greatest “pile-ups” during the lesson, allowing me to focus our next class on the areas of greatest need.

So simple, yet so effective… I’ll have to ask the kids why they thought the lesson worked so well!

Three Wishes for Standardized Exams in 2011

Posted on by — No Comments ↓

As we begin the new year, I have high hopes for several changes in the administration, timing, and implementation of standardized physics exams from both the College Board and the NY State Board of Regents. Although I believe the likelihood of all of these happening in 2011 is quite slim, I maintain that all three are reasonable and feasible.

 

#1 Finalize Plans for AP-B Physics

The College Board’s decision to redesign the AP-B course deeply effects course sequencing at Irondequoit High School.  We’ve heard talk of the split for several years now. A seminar describing the changes was presented at last summer’s national AP conference in Washington, D.C., where the presenter and College Board representative stated “it’s a done deal, the only question is timing.”  We were told that the changes would be implemented in the 2011-2012 school year or 2012-2013 school year.  That’s fast!  We were promised more detailed information by last fall.  And we’ve heard nothing beyond a New York Times article which mentions potential changes in the 2014-2015 school year.

The preliminary redesign information presented at the 2010 AP conference indicated the course would be split into AP-1 and AP-2, where AP-1 is designed as a first-year course, and AP-2 is the more detailed, deeper second-year course.  The courses could be taken concurrently, although this was strongly discouraged during the presentation.

Actual implementation will have profound consequences for our district.  First, our school currently offers three levels of physics.  Regents Physics for juniors or seniors (a college-prep course based on NY state standards, equivalent to a typical Honors Physics course); AP-B, which can be taken as a first-year course by advanced students or as a second-year course following Regents Physics; and AP-C Mechanics and E&M, which can be taken by seniors who took AP-B as a first-year course.

Our concerns center around what the added AP-1 and AP-2 offerings will do to our other programs.  As a NY state school, we are highly encouraged to offer Regents Physics, consistent with state standards and a formal state-administered final exam in June.  Splitting the AP-B course into a two-year sequence could potentially damage our AP-C course, unless we replaced our current AP-B offerings with a combined one-year AP-1 and AP-2 (which is making the problem of the AP-B course having too much information in too little time even worse!). Or, we could combine AP-1 and Regents Physics together although the defined curricula don’t make for a smooth overlap, and offer AP-2 in place of our current AP-B course. Unfortunately, this makes it difficult for our enterprising students to jump right into AP-2 prior to AP-C, which means we would likely need to add yet another physics course, AP-12, as a first-year course for those students who want to take AP-C as a second-year course.  As you can see, this gets complicated in a hurry.

The bottom line — this change is going to take some time and require an overhaul of our entire science program and sequencing.  College Board, we need a timeline, we need details, and we need sample exams.

 

#2 Eliminate the NY State Regents Physics Exam

As a teacher, I want as much information as I can get about my students.  I use assessment to plan instruction. I use assessment to grade. I use assessment to let me know what I’m doing that’s working and what needs refinement. The current physics Regents exam and curriculum, however, doesn’t meet my needs for a culminating final exam, nor do I feel it adequately assesses my students’ understanding of physics.

The exam is largely a test of how well you can use your formula sheet (known as the reference table). If you can write down "givens," "finds," and pick a formula, you can plug and chug your way to a fairly high score without demonstrating true understanding. Not only that, but typically this is the last exam given after a week of exams, and in some cases it actually falls on a date after our school’s graduation. Most of the students taking the course have already been accepted into college, don’t need to pass the course to graduate, and therefore have no vested interest in doing well on the exam. Yet our department goals focus on students scores on this exam.

Further, topics included in the curriculum are addressed at inconsistent depths. Mechanics coverage is adequate, but electricity and magnetism, the precursors to so many aspects of our daily lives in the 2000s, is quite inconsistent. Students learn basic electrostatics as well as series and parallel circuits, then move into fundamentals of magnetism and basic EM induction. However, past exams indicate VERY few magnetism questions… less than one question every two years! Waves are introduced, leading into optics, but optics is quite incomplete. Lenses are not addressed, but refraction and diffraction are (although only qualitatively).

Most disturbing, however, is the final unit of the course.  Where you would expect to introduce basic atomic / nuclear physics and applications, the curriculum dictates a study of the Standard Model.  Not only is this topic inconsistent with learning "fundamentals" first, but the level at which it can be taught with the students’ background to this point in the course leads to rote memorization of a few facts and learning to copy answers off the formula sheet.  Teaching for Understanding?  Not a chance.

My wish for 2011 would be to see the state eliminate the Regents Physics exam, a consideration that has been rumored in light of state budget issues. There are plenty of standardized exams already available if we see a need for comparing students across classes, districts, and regions.

Instead, allow us more freedom within our districts to differentiate to student needs and interests.  Of course, fundamental concepts need to be covered in an introductory course — mechanics, energy, E&M, waves, atomic physics, and so on — but within these core areas, give me the freedom and time to focus on student needs and interests appropriately. Are the students excited about projectile motion? Let’s take the time to go further, learning how to apply concepts to real-world situations, making predictions, verifying, and including real-world parameters such as wind and drag. Students want to know about relativity and special relativity? Take some time to explore time dilation, length contraction, space-time, and point of view. Students are excited about electronics — expand E&M to include more than just resistive circuits… introduce diodes, transistors, integrated circuits, even design and processing!

There are so many areas students are interested in. Let’s eliminate an unnecessary exam that creates excessive paperwork, wastes money, and provides minimal qualitr5fy information about students while simultaneously providing teachers the opportunity to differentiate while encouraging engagement and enthusiasm.  In addition, eliminating the exam would provide an inviting avenue to replace our school’s current Regents Physics course with AP-1 physics, which is being designed to allow time for deeper exploration of selected topics.

 

#3 Offer AP-C Mechanics Exam in Winter

Yet another wish for the College Board. I teach AP-C physics (both mechanics and E&M) as a year-long course. Roughly 80% of AP-C students in the country take only AP-C Mechanics. Therefore, they spend the year preparing for their single exam in the spring, which they take as soon as they complete the course while the material is fresh.

The 20 percent of AP-C students taking both mechanics and E&M exams take the exams back-to-back on the same day, with a couple minutes of breather between the tests. They are therefore at a disadvantage because their mechanics course ended several months earlier — the material isn’t as fresh.

I would love to see the College Board offer a winter AP-C Mechanics exam, allowing us to complete this exam while the material is fresh in students’ minds before moving into E&M. Further, this would benefit students who are on waiting lists to the most prestigious colleges… a 5 on the AP-C Mechanics exam could help set them apart from other applicants, and results could be available in time for colleges to use the information in their final decision-making process.

College Board, please consider offering the AP-C Mechanics Exam in the winter.  (Yes, I know this is not likely to happen due to the cost incurred in creating another exam and scoring it, especially given the small number of students who would take it, but I have to think there’s a way this could be offered in a digitized format to protect exam integrity and reduce costs.)

 

Will It Happen?

There you have it, three wishes for administrative physics exam changes in the year 2011. Are they likely? Some more than others. I believe we will see more information from the College Board about the AP-B redesign, but I’m not holding my breath for any promised dates. I don’t believe the College Board sees any issue in the timing of the AP-C Mechanics Exam, so the first step is to at least communicate this desire. As for elimination of the Regents Exam, If state budget funding does push this to fruition, I believe there’s a strong chance the AP-B course split may push this issue on its own, although, once again, timing is uncertain.

What do you think? What changes are you envisioning in the coming year?