After the passage of the U.S. National Quantum Initiative Act in December 2018, the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) recently assembled an interagency working group and conducted a workshop titled “Key Concepts for Future Quantum Information Science Learners” that focused on identifying core concepts for future curricular and educator activities to help precollege students engage with quantum information science (QIS). Helping precollege students learn these key concepts in QIS is an effective approach to introducing them to the second quantum revolution and inspiring them to become future contributors in the growing field of quantum information science and technology as leaders in areas related to quantum computing, communication, and sensing. This paper is a call to precollege educators to contemplate including QIS concepts into their existing courses at appropriate levels and get involved in the development of curricular materials suitable for their students. Also, research shows that compare-and-contrast activities can provide an effective approach to helping students learn. Therefore, we illustrate a pedagogical approach that contrasts the classical and quantum concepts so that educators can adapt them for their students in their lesson plans to help them learn the differences between key concepts in quantum and classical contexts.

1.
C.
Monroe
,
M.
Raymer
and
J.
Taylor
, “
The U.S. National Quantum Initiative: From act to action
,”
Science
364
,
440
442
(
2019
).
4.
H. F.
Silver
,
Compare & Contrast: Teaching Comparative Thinking to Strengthen Student Learning
(
ACSD
,
Alexandria, VA
,
2010
);
R.
Marzano
,
D.
Pickering
, and
J.
Pollock
,
Classroom Instruction That Works: Research-Based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement
(
ACSD
,
Alexandria, VA
,
2001
).
5.
W.
Wootters
and
W.
Zurek
,
A single quantum cannot be cloned
,
Nature
299
,
802
803
(
1982
).
6.
C.
Bennett
and
G.
Brassard
, “
Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing,” in
Proceedings of International Conference on Computers, Systems & Signal Processing,
Dec. 9-12, 1984
,
Bangalore, India
(Steering Committee,
1984
), p.
175
.
7.
C.
Bennett
, “
Quantum cryptography using any two nonorthogonal states
,”
Phys. Rev. Lett.
68
,
3121
3124
(
1992
).
8.
C.
Bennett
,
G.
Brassard
, and
N. D.
Mermin
, “
Quantum cryptography without Bell’s theorem
,”
Phys. Rev. Lett.
68
,
557
(
1992
).
9.
C.
Bennett
et al, “
Experimental quantum cryptography
,”
J. Cryptology
5
,
3
(
1992
).
10.
G.
Brassard
and
L.
Salvail
, “Secret key reconciliation by public discussion,” in
Advances in Cryptology— EUROCRYPT ’93. Lecture Notes in Computer Science
, edited by
T.
Helleseth
(
Springer
,
Berlin
,
1994
), Vol.
765
, pp.
410
423
.
11.
C.
Bennett
et al, “
Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen channels
,”
Phys. Rev. Lett.
70
,
1895
1899
(
1993
).
12.
P. W.
Shor
, “
Algorithms for quantum computation: Discrete logarithms and factoring
,” in
Proceedings 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
(
1994
), pp.
124
134
.
13.
I.
Gerhardt
et al, “
Full-field implementation of a perfect eavesdropper on a quantum cryptography system
,”
Nat. Commun.
2
,
1
(
2011
).
14.
R.
Hughes
and
J.
Nordholt
, “
Refining quantum cryptography
,”
Science
333
,
1584
(
2011
).
15.
S.
Devore
and
C.
Singh
, “
An interactive learning tutorial on quantum key distribution
,”
Phys. Rev. PER
16
,
010126
(
2020
).
16.
A.
Kohnle
, “
Quantum Cryptography, QuVis: The University of St. Andrews Quantum Mechanics Visualisation Project,” http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/physics/quvis
.
17.
C.
Degen
et al, “
Quantum sensing
,”
Rev. Mod. Phys.
89
,
035002
(
2017
).
18.
C.
Singh
, “
Student understanding of quantum mechanics
,”
Am. J. Phys.
69
,
885
895
(
2001
).
19.
D.
Zollman
,
N. S.
Rebello
, and
K.
Hogg
, “
Quantum mechanics for everyone: Hands-on activities integrated with technology
,”
Am. J. Phys.
70
,
252
259
(
2002
).
20.
M.
Wittmann
et al, “
Investigating student understanding of quantum physics: Spontaneous models of conductivity
,”
Am. J. Phys.
70
,
218
(
2002
).
21.
E.
Galvez
and
C.
Holbrow
, “
Interference with correlated photons: Five quantum mechanics experiments for undergraduates
,”
Am. J. Phys.
73
,
127
140
(
2005
).
22.
C.
Singh
,
M.
Belloni
, and
W.
Christian
, “
Improving students’ understanding of quantum mechanics
,”
Phys. Today
59
,
43
49
(
2006
).
23.
C.
Manogue
,
E.
Gire
,
D.
McIntyre
, and
J.
Tate
, “
Representations for a spins-first approach to quantum mechanics
,”
AIP Conf. Proc.
1413
,
55
(
2012
).
24.
A.
Kohnle
et al, “
A new introductory quantum mechanics curriculum
,”
Eur. J. Phys.
35
,
015001
(
2014
).
25.
E.
Galvez
, “
Resource letter SPE-1: Single-photon experiments in the undergraduate laboratory
,”
Am. J. Phys.
82
,
1018
(
2014
).
26.
Readers can access the Appendix at TPT Online at https://doi.org/10.1119/5.0027661, under the Supplemental tab.

Supplementary Material

AAPT members receive access to The Physics Teacher and the American Journal of Physics as a member benefit. To learn more about this member benefit and becoming an AAPT member, visit the Joining AAPT page.