From parkerprice at clear.net.nz Mon Mar 2 08:47:50 2009 From: parkerprice at clear.net.nz (Kerry Parker and Andy Price) Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:47:50 +1300 Subject: Physics Fights this weekend in Christchurch, Auckland and Wellington. In-Reply-To: <6AC36C5F0F8E364CBEC8178DD499F3EF144C71C215@stcc-exchange.stcuthberts.local> References: <6AC36C5F0F8E364CBEC8178DD499F3EF144C71C215@stcc-exchange.stcuthberts.local> Message-ID: <37CD1121633A4A2099679B19EE5E4851@study> Forget the rugby, the cricket or those diy jobs... why not pop in to watch some Physics Fights?! On Saturday 7th March some of our bravest and resourceful Physics students will be facing each other in simultaneous regional heats, competing to win Te Patuki Nga Hinengaro Ahupungao (The battle, in the mind, in physics), the New Zealand tournament of the International Young Physicists' Tournament. IYPT New Zealand has been steadily growing since King's College first entered a team more than 5 years ago. This is the first time we have had regional heats (the national final is in Auckland three weeks later). The events run all day (roughly 9-5) hosted by Kings College (Auckland) and at the Physics Depts of Victoria and Canterbury Universities. You can drop in at any time and having an audience is great for the students. There are three rounds with three fights in each round. Watching a good physics fight is fascinating and you never know, it might just inspire you! hoping to see you there Kerry Kerry Parker Correspondence School From jgladwyn at xtra.co.nz Tue Mar 3 23:13:12 2009 From: jgladwyn at xtra.co.nz (Joan Gladwyn) Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 20:13:12 +1300 Subject: Physics fights in Christchurch Message-ID: <0c07e12c553f44944d7e34615b9a3c83@xtra.co.nz> Just a quick correction to Kerry's notice about the IYPT at the University of Canterbury this Saturday - they will be in the Engineering dept. The entrance is on Creyke Road, at the "mushroom" building. Just follow the signs on the front doors. It would be great to see some people there who might be inspired to bring a team next year! Thanks, Kerry, for thinking to put the notice out! Joan Gladwyn Science Outreach University of Canterbury From parkerprice at clear.net.nz Mon Mar 9 21:42:09 2009 From: parkerprice at clear.net.nz (Kerry Parker and Andy Price) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 17:42:09 +1300 Subject: Nuclear binding energy Message-ID: Kia ora Colleagues I have been troubled for a while by the frequent misconceptions my students have shown when discussing unstable nuclei. They get very muddled up between unstable nuclei (that are radioactive) and the less stable nuclei as shown on the nuclear binding energy curve. It all boils down (well, not literally!) to the fact that I haven't really taught them about nuclear stability. I have taught them nothing about nuclear forces and particle physics and I am feeling that I am doing them a diservice. I am very keen to find out what colleagues in other schools teach, there is precious little in the texts that are geared to NCEA. I was browsing Wikipedia the other day and found http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binding_energy a really straightforward explanation for the binding energy curve that I am thinking that all our level 3 students should understand. For me it makes it all make sense. Is it just me? Kerry The Correspondence School -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From parkerprice at clear.net.nz Thu Mar 12 21:53:25 2009 From: parkerprice at clear.net.nz (Kerry Parker and Andy Price) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 17:53:25 +1300 Subject: Best practice workshops Message-ID: <26A1BBAF371D4763A65793432D38C56A@study> Kia ora koutou You may know that NZQA has now appointed a full-time moderator for Physics: he is a very well-respected colleague, Lyall Prestidge (Physics teacher at Tawa College for....ages!). NZQA is running a series of Best Practice Workshops to be run by National Moderators in all subjects (and Lyall will be running the Physics one). Lyall has asked me to mention these meetings on this list-serve: "The first two Physics meetings are in Wellington, April 22, and Auckland West, April 23. The focus is on helping teachers clarify their understanding of grade boundaries of internally assessed standards and to engage in professional discussion. For Physics this is likely to include discussion of 90774 (3.1), 90252 (2.1), and 90180 (1.1) and issues around their assessment, among other things. "The BPW are advertised in the Gazette, http://www.edgazette.govt.nz/Notices/Notice.aspx?NoticeId=612409 and I think school PNs are being encouraged to inform teachers. The more teachers we can get to come, the better the national standard of Physics teacher assessment is likely to become. " regards Kerry Kerry Parker The Correspondence School -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From parkerprice at clear.net.nz Fri Mar 13 11:10:51 2009 From: parkerprice at clear.net.nz (Kerry Parker and Andy Price) Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 07:10:51 +1300 Subject: Books and Resouces Message-ID: Kia ora For those of you who are interested in the standards-reallignment and our ability to provide students with appropriate resources I am forwarding part of a discussion from the UK-based 'Physics Teachers News and Chat' listserve. David Sang is a well-informed and thoughtful physics teacher and author of many, many excellent texts and course books. Food for thought for resource development here? Kerry ----- Original Message ----- From: David Sang To: PTNC at NETWORKS.IOP.ORG Sent: Saturday, March 14, 2009 5:58 AM Subject: Re: [PTNC] David Sang- Physics 2 (Cambridge Advanced Sciences) Hi Just to add to Ken's comments: Almost all Physics/Science textbooks for GCSE and A-level are now tied to individual specs. In practice, teachers are very reluctant to buy a more general book. This is probably a consequence of the endless push for 'better' exam results and the competition between awarding bodies. It's deplorable, really. Unless the author resists, everything is edited into the examiners' preferred formulations. Students don't learn to sort through a text to find what they need to know. They feel that they will be confused if they are presented with material beyond the spec. In class, they complain if the teacher strays from the straight and narrow. Teachers trust that the book will be reflected in the exam. Physics ends up being what the examiners define it to be. Ten years ago, publishers would send a draft text to a consultant to check the scientific content. Now I don't think this ever happens. The text has to match the spec, not the science. More deplorable is the tie-up between awarding bodies and publishers, so that there is only one endorsed book per spec. (Pearson owns Longman and Edexcel; they also own Heinemann who have an exclusive deal with OCR. AQA is tied up with Nelson Thornes.) This is something the IoP could usefully campaign on. I'm not saying that it's all the fault of the examiners or awarding bodies or publishers or teachers (or authors). But it's a consequence of the mark-chasing sausage-factory version of education we have ended up with. Now, where's my quill? Cheers David Sang sunny Bognor Regis On 13 Mar 2009, at 10:00, Zetie, Ken wrote: ?No use? means, presumably, that these books were written so tightly to an arbitrarily defined specification that when a new spec comes along they have to be discarded and a new text book found that conforms to the new arbitrary content. Of course, not buying these books will disadvantage your students, not least because the examiners occasionally forget the contents of their own spec and include a question on the one topic in the text book which is off-spec (which made it in by mistake, because it was in the original spec but then got cut out of the spec but not the book). Not that I?m thinking of a specific example (OCR A2 question on spectra a few years ago?) ahem. Ken --- Ken Zetie, Head of Physics, St Paul's School, London. kpz at stpaulsschool.org.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This e-mail message has been scanned for Viruses and Content and cleared by MailMarshal ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: