The Problem (I take full responsibility for my statements and opinion expressed here): As a pedagogic discipline, physics is today in a unique position. While being among the oldest subjects of enquiry, it continues to move forward in leaps and bounds. The undergraduate student must start by first learning (not as a historical survey, but by mastering critical foundation-building content) concepts developed 4-5 centuries ago. A BS degree and a couple of years in graduate school later, the student barely scratches content from the early 1900's, and must remain in training another 5-10 years to be accepted as a practicing physicist. What's more, a successful physicist must also master advanced mathematics and several different aspects of engineering. As a result, physics can only be to an extremely talented self-learner. Not only does this lead to an exclusionary (gatekeeperlike) approach towards younger generations of seekers, it puts pedagogy in an interesting situation. The result of all this is that both teachers and seekers are now a rare breed (10 graduates a year is considered a success in any physics department). To survive the many courses which compete for students’ time in a typical campus, physics curricula have squeezed a fast-expanding body of content into progressively smaller number of classroom hours. How do these parameters affect the question posed above? I wish to study these aspects of physics pedagogy, how they have changed, and how they affect student learning.

Methodologies & Types of Evidence of Student Learning Gathered

Project Summary

Annotated List of Helpful Resources & References

Preliminary Findings, Results, Conclusions, & Implications

Career relevance and Acknowledgements This SoTL project was the result of a Wisconsin Teaching Scholarship. Support from the National Science Foundation CAREER award is also acknowledged.