One of Jerry Gollub and Robin Spital’s principal recommendations for improvements to the Advanced Placement physics program is to develop a high-school physics curriculum that is not based on introductory college courses. However, the authors neglect what I consider the most useful aspect of the AP program: the perceived authority of courses that replicate college-level work.
Those who are not directly involved with high-school politics tend to underestimate the pressure teachers receive from students and parents. Many students have earned top marks in all their classes, including math and science, through middle school and early high school simply by, in Gollub and Spital’s words, “rote memorization of facts or equations, or following narrowly prescribed instructions.” Many physics students become shocked and angry at the beginning of the school year when that approach does not lead to success in physics. Only the rare, ideal student decides for himself that such disillusionment necessitates a reevaluation of his approach rather than a complaint about the teacher’s unfairness and unrealistic expectations. High-school physics teachers who face such complaints are often placed at a further disadvantage because most administrators have no understanding of the content or goals of the physics course. The path of least resistance is thus to water down the course so that the “rote” learners can earn an A.
Students and parents do not usually see the cause-and-effect relationship as “learn a lot, develop intellectual prowess, earn admission to college.” Instead, they understand “get As, get into college.” It is the grade, not the course content, that motivates most students. Students often develop an adversarial relationship with a physics teacher because they perceive that the teacher is “making” them work too hard. In their mind, the less depth of material, the more likely an A becomes. The teacher is perceived as bad for requiring any depth of thought.
With the AP curriculum replicating a college course, though, the tables are turned. A teacher of an AP course can answer those “you’re too tough” complaints in a language the students understand: “If you want to get Advanced Placement and do well in college, you must trust me and learn the skills I ask you to learn.”
Using college admission as a motivation tool is a temporary thing, to be used in that difficult first month of the school year. I find that, by December, such artificial motivation is unnecessary. Once students finally adapt themselves to the study habits and thought processes required for success in physics, the course can drive itself. High-school students are eager and willing to learn physics for its own sake, once they recognize the intellectual beauty of the subject. For teacher and students to get to December, though, the perceived authority of a non-negotiable college-level course is a practical necessity.
