Difference between revisions of "Must physics basics come first?"
m (Reverted edits by 180.139.139.13 (Talk) to last revision by Shawn) |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
In a policy recommendation, the AAPT defended against the integration of physics and chemistry in a 2010 national standards document, arguing that "Since these disciplines have very different fundamental principles and discuss the principles using very different language; we believe that a more effective approach would be to explicitly define the core ideas for each discipline separately and then build bridges between the two content areas." http://www.aapt.org/Resources/policy/conceptualframeworks.cfm | In a policy recommendation, the AAPT defended against the integration of physics and chemistry in a 2010 national standards document, arguing that "Since these disciplines have very different fundamental principles and discuss the principles using very different language; we believe that a more effective approach would be to explicitly define the core ideas for each discipline separately and then build bridges between the two content areas." http://www.aapt.org/Resources/policy/conceptualframeworks.cfm | ||
| − | + | HHIS I solhud have thought of that! | |
===Are so-called basics prerequisites to learning?=== | ===Are so-called basics prerequisites to learning?=== | ||
Revision as of 19:18, 4 January 2012
Issues
Physical science, the union and division of chemistry and physics
In a policy recommendation, the AAPT defended against the integration of physics and chemistry in a 2010 national standards document, arguing that "Since these disciplines have very different fundamental principles and discuss the principles using very different language; we believe that a more effective approach would be to explicitly define the core ideas for each discipline separately and then build bridges between the two content areas." http://www.aapt.org/Resources/policy/conceptualframeworks.cfm
HHIS I solhud have thought of that!
Are so-called basics prerequisites to learning?
In William Thomson's introductory lectures, he stated before any considerable progress can be made in a philosophical study of nature a thorough knowledge of dynamical principles is absolutely necessary. See p.241 of Sylvanus P. Thompson's The Life of William Thomson v.1, 1910.
