COPFIC report on teaching physics in the four‐year colleges

Commentary: Diversity in physics: Are you part of the problem?

The data we report on in this column come from the Nationwide Survey of High School Physics Teachers. Since 1987, the American Institute of Physics (AIP) and the American Association of Physics Teachers (AAPT) have sponsored the High School Teacher Survey. Prior to our initial study, much of the previous literature focusing on high school physics employed anecdotal evidence or qualitative surveys for curriculum reviews or explorations of teachers' experiences and pedagogical techniques. As a direct response to this dearth of data, the Nationwide Survey of High School Physics Teachers was initiated in 1986–87 to answer questions about the number of teachers teaching physics, the educational background of these teachers, the number of students enrolled in physics, the variety of physics classes being offered, the demographics of the students and teachers, the textbooks being used, and the number of high schools offering physics regularly. Since the beginning of this study, we have surveyed both public and private high schools in the United States. The results of our study provide the definitive data about physics in U.S. high schools. The initial survey was conducted during the 1986–87 school year. The second was completed during 1989–90. Beginning with the 1992–93 survey, we have conducted the survey every four years. The 2012–13 survey will be the eighth in the series. Thus, we have a rich history of physics teaching in U.S. high schools.

There are indications that the physics teaching situation in the United States is especially acute at the present time and that it will be even more so in the years to come unless physicists act promptly to expand and intensify their programs relating to physics education. In recognition of this need the American Institute of Physics and the American Association of Physics Teachers, being the two physics organizations most immediately concerned, joined with the Fund for the Advancement of Education in calling a conference in August, 1956, to review the status of their present activities and to consider what further steps might be taken to insure the best use of the good physics teachers now available, to increase the number of competent teachers, and to assist teachers in continuing their education and in improving the quality of their teaching.

PHYSICS teaching by television or film, in terms of measuralbe contributions to learning, appears to compare favorably with conventional classroom instruction in high schools, according to a report issued recently by the American Institute of Physics. The report (A Study of the Teaching of Physics by Film and Television, by Grant O. Gale) summarizes the results of an evaluation program carried out in 1957–58 under the joint sponsorship of the AIP and the American Association of Physics Teachers and with support of the Fund for the Advancement of Education.

An important finding of Physics Education Research (PER) is that traditional, transmission‐based instructional approaches are generally not effective in promoting meaningful student learning. Instead, PER advocates that physics be taught using more interactive instructional methods. Although the research base and corresponding pedagogies and strategies are well‐documented and widely available to physics faculty, widespread change in physics teaching at the college level has yet to occur. Since 1996, the Workshop for New Physics and Astronomy Faculty has been working to address this problem. This workshop, jointly administered by the American Association of Physics Teachers, the American Astronomical Society, and the American Physical Society with funding from the National Science Foundation, has attracted approximately 25% of all new physics and astronomy faculty each year to an intensive 4‐day workshop designed to introduce new faculty to PER‐based instructional ideas and materials. This paper describes the impact of the New Faculty Workshop as measured by web‐based surveys of 527 workshop participants and 206 physics and astronomy department chairs. Results indicate that the NFW is quite successful in meeting its goals and that it may be significantly contributing to the spread and acceptance of PER and PER‐based instructional ideas and materials.

The American Center for Physics will bring three of the nation's leading physics organizations to College Park, Md., to create a focus for physics in the nation's capital. Groundbreaking for the new center was on July 29. It is scheduled to open in September 1993. The initial organizations that will share the site are the American Association of Physics Teachers, the American Institute of Physics, and the American Physical Society.

This occasion is especially noteworthy in view of the historic significance of the Twenty-Fifth Anniversary of the founding of both the American Association of Physics Teachers and the American Institute of Physics. Just a quarter-century ago, on December 29, 1930, I had the pleasure of participating in that momentous luncheon conference in Cleveland, Ohio, when the AAPT was officially organized. A short time later, on January 27, 1932, the fledgling Association acquired equal status with the other physics societies in the plans for the work of the AIP, this Institute having been officially activated on May 3, 1931.

Robert Resnick

Thomas E. Graedel, an atmospheric scientist at AT&T Bell Laboratories (Murray Hill, N.J.), has been made an AGU representative to the Governing Board of the American Institute of Physics (AIP). The board oversees the operations of AIP, a nonprofit umbrella organization for 10 member societies, including AGU. Other AGU members currently on the governing board include Orson Anderson, a geophysicist at the University of California, Los Angeles; AGU General Secretary Peter M. Bell of the Norton Company, Worcester, Mass.; AGU Executive Director A. F. Spilhaus, Jr.; and Martin Walt, a geophysicist with the Lockheed Corporation in Palo Alto, Calif.All AGU members receive the benefits of membership in AIP, including the monthly magazine Physics Today. Other AIP services available to AGU members include access to an employment service, AIP's electronic network Pi‐NET, and an insurance program. AGU members can also subscribe to journals published by the American Physical Society, another AIP member society, at discounted rates.—WWM

YOUR NEWS WANTED The news section gives updates on what has been happening in physics education worldwide. Items included show how events in one country could be relevant to good practice elsewhere in the world. Contributions are welcome from all our readers and should be about 200 to 300 words and can include a picture.

Prepared at the request of the AAPT Committee on Resource Letters; supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation. This is one of a series of Resource Letters on different topics, intended to guide college physicists to some of the literature and other teaching aids that may help them improve course contents in specified fields of physics. No Resource Letter is meant to be exhaustive and complete; in time there may be more than one letter on some of the main subjects of interest. Comments and suggestions concerning the content and arrangement of letters as well as suggestions for future topics will be welcomed. Please send such communications to Professor Arnold Arons, Chairman Resource Letter Committee, Department of Physics, Amherst College, Amherst, Massachusetts. Notation: The letter E after an item number indicates elementary level, useful principally for freshman liberal arts through sophomore physics courses; the letter I indicates intermediate (junior, senior) level; and the letter A indicates advanced material principally suited for senior, graduate study. An asterisk (*) indicates items particularly recommended for introductory study. Additional copies: Available from American Institute of Physics, 335 East 45 Street, New York, New York 10017. When ordering, request Resource Letter MOP-1 and enclose a stamped return envelope. A small booklet containing reprints of some of the fundamental references will soon be available for purchase from the American Institute of Physics.

The 2021 Inclusive Curriculum in Physics Workshop Series is a three part series organized and led by the National Society of Black Physicists, the National Society of Hispanic Physicists, and the American Association of Physics Teachers. The series leverages the expertise of equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) experts, as well as an organizing team of physics students, faculty and STEM professionals at different stages of their studies and careers.The purpose of the series is to: Explore the importance of EDI in the classroom and the existing instructional materials that focus on EDI, with members of the broad physics education community; Engage participants in discussion and action items around the current challenges to equity in STEM education with input from experts in the field; Provide support to working groups through a network of partners to engage in specific physics education projects using the lens of inclusion. 

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore whether the databases from a certain library are Pareto-compliant or not? If so, to what extent is the Pareto principle performance evident among these databases? The other purpose is to determine the differences in Pareto principle performance according to time change and database type. Design/methodology/approach Data on full-text downloads from six e-resources – Elsevier ScienceDirect (SD), Wiley Blackwell, Springer Journal, EBSCO Business Source Premier (BSP), American Chemical Society and American Institute of Physics (AIP) – for the period 2007-2013 were analysed; 42 samples were collected from these databases. The proportion of frequently downloaded journals from databases was selected as an indicator to determine differences in Pareto principle performance according to time change. The difference between the proportion of frequently downloaded journals and the classic proportion of 20 per cent was used as indicator to determine difference in Pareto principle performance related to database type. Findings There are 33 samples (78.57 per cent) which exhibited the Pareto principle. Four databases – Elsevier SD, Wiley Blackwell, EBSCO BSP and AIP – constantly exhibited the Pareto principle. The differences were not significant according to time change. The two multi-discipline databases – Elsevier SD and Wiley Blackwell – fluctuated more moderately than the two single-discipline databases – EBSCO BSP and AIP. Multi-discipline and single-discipline databases showed some differences in Pareto principle performance; however, these differences were not remarkable. Originality/value The Pareto principle confirmed that there were frequent and infrequent downloads of e-journals from e-journal databases. It was of great importance to analyse these to improve digital resources acquisition and user service.

BEGINNING with this month's issue, the American Journal of Physics, which is the official publication of the American Association of Physics Teachers, will be under the editorship of Walter C. Michels of Bryn Mawr College in Pennsylvania. Professor Michels, who holds the Marion Reilly Chair of Physics and is chairman of Bryn Mawr's Physics Department, succeeds the Journal's former editor, Thomas H. Osgood, who is now on leave from his post as dean of the Graduate School at Michigan State University while serving as the State Department's scientific attaché assigned to the United States Embassy in London. Dean Osgood was the Journal's second editor and served in that capacity for a period of ten years.

To assist physics departments and faculty as they improve undergraduate education, the American Physical Society, in collaboration with the American Association of Physics Teachers, is developing a comprehensive guide for program improvement and evaluation, drawn from research findings and community knowledge. Scheduled for release in late 2020, the guide will provide concise advice on nearly all aspects of undergraduate education including suggestions on how to effectively evaluate impact. The EP3 guide will also offer departments guidance on how to produce detailed evidence of how they plan, evaluate, and improve undergraduate learning to help meet university accreditation requirements or prepare for or conduct external site reviews. This presentation will give a broad introduction to the guide and solicit feedback from the audience on how best to make these materials available to the community.