A REVIEW OP THE PHYSICAL SCIFNCE STUDY eommn high school ^iysics co psf by STEPHEN W. DAESCHNER B.S., Baker University, 1961+ A K ASTER'S REPORT submitted in oartial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree WASTER OP SCIENCE College of Education KANS&S STATE UWIfHSXfT Manhattan, Kansas 196* Aporoved by: iff) I a j or Professor 3* ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author wishes to express his sincere appreciation to Dr. Ronald Anderson, Assistant Professor of Education, Kansas State University. His suggestions in planning and comoleting the report have been most helpful. TABU OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 THF PROBLEM 3 Statement of the Problem ••••• •• 3 Importance of the Study . • k Procedures Fnrployed in the Study. •••••••• l± BACKGROUND AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PHYSICAL SCIENCE STUDY COHKIYTH COURSE 5 Organization of the Physical Science Study Co*.'---"ittee ......... 5 Why and How the Physical Science Study Committee Developed Its Course ....... 10 The Physical Science Study Committee Course • • • 22 COMMENTS AND OPINIONS IB ■ r i' TH :>ICAL SCIENCE STUDY COMMITTEE COURSE ........... 25 A REVIEW OF RESEARCH AND EVALUATIONS CONDUCTED ON THF PHYSICAL SClBBCI STUDY GGK&Ttm COURSE . ... 33 SUGARY AND CONCLUSIONS 60 BIBLIOGRAPHY . 6£ IHTROroCTIOH Since the early years of the 20th century, the natural sciences have undergone two distinct and consequential changes. First, the sciences themselves have r-.rown enormously , both In technique and In depth. Mext, science has become inextricably interwoven with our daily life* l odern man whether he la aware of It or not f lives his life in constant aseociation with methods of scientific research an*- 1 consequences of scientific research. In business , legislation, and statesmanship ■ the scientist increasingly is called upon to helo unravel the social nnd economic l^ollcatlon of science. But beyond Its technological goods and meaning, science as a humanistic study stands on its wn terms as a dynamically stable system with Its own ends and precedural st^lc. As a form of human exoresslon, it is one of the triumphs of the intellect. It lends oerspeotive and direction to the other asoects of life. It is a system one can ill afford to ignore If one is. to become a whole man in a world of whole men. 1 The teaching of high school physics has received con- siderable attention during recent years due to accelerated technological and scientific advancement and a recognition on the o»rt of teachers, administrators, and laymen of the vital role that science will play in the future of our country. The traditional neterlals and methods of teaching 1 011bert C. Finlay, "The Physical Science Study Co" lttee," School Review, 70:6I±, Spring, 1962. high school physics have been severely criticised by some people In responsible positions. For example, Flbert P. Little stated, There Is a powerful Intellectual discontent with the present status of science teaching; the scientists, the teachers, and the educated laymen are all disturbed by the discontent that science teaching does not fairly represent science « x Because of this criticism, a multimillion-dollar program for the revision of the high school physics curriculum was under- taken by the Physical Science Study Committee (PSSC) under a grant from the National Science Foundation. The Committee was organized in November of 1956 to devise a modern course in ohysics for the secondary school and to prepare materials for the course. During the 1957-58 school year, the PSSC course was offered in eight schools in the United States. Since this time the number of schools teaching the course has risen sharply. "There are approximately 5,000 teachers using the PSSC program during the 196L-65 school year with around 200,000 students. This is aoproxlmately 50 per cent of the secondary school students in the U.S.A. enrolled in ohysics." 2 x Elbert P. Little, "From the Beginning," Science Teacher , 21+ : 31 8, November, 1958. ^Educational Services Incorporated Newsletter , (Watertown, Massachusetts i Fducatlonal Services Incoroorated, January, 1965), $. k* 3 In 196l4.-65> f fifty-three teachers in Kansas used the PSSC physics materials. There has been wide controversy over the effectiveness of the course* For example, some teachers feel the course is not teaching enoufh ohysics to r»lve the students the back- ground they need for college physics courses and therefore* does not prepare students for college work as well as a con- ventional high school physics course. There have also been opinions stated by some teachers that the PSSC course is a revolution in the teaching of science and will make physics a more meaningful course in the secondary school. This study was designed to make an objective evaluation of the effectiveness of the PSSC course in the secondary schools. SHI PROBLEM S t atone nt of the problem The puroose of this study io to answer the following questions: 1. Why and how was the ^SSC course developed? 2. What are the opinions of teachers and educators icerninfr the course? 3. Are the objectives formulated by the Committee being achieved by the students taking the PSSC course? 1 letter from Warren J. Bell, Fducation Consultant of Science and I nthenatics, 'ansas Stato Fepartment of Public Instruction, Tooeka, Kansas. k Importance of the study . Because of the wide diversity of opinion among teachers and educators on the MUM program, and the fact that many schools are using the program or are considering nutting the Drogram into their curriculum, the author has undertaken this study to determine, if oossible, if the objectives of the Committee have been reached. Procedures employed in the study . The author collected his data for this report from all pertinent articles, papers, newsletters, dissertations, theses, and books that could be located. Most of the material used was located at Kansas State University library, Kansas University library, or was obtained through interlibrary loans, and correspondence with Educational Services Incorporated, Kansas State Department of Education, 8nd the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. The materials are organized into the following categories for presentation: 1. Background and development of the PSSC course. 2. Opinions of teachers end educators on the effec- tiveness of the p SSC course. 3« Research studies to determine the effectiveness of the p SSC course. ij.. Summaries and conclusions regarding the PSSC course for secondary school physics curriculum. IdOHOtflD PUT DFVFLOPMFNT OP TB PHYSICAL SCIFNCE STUDY CO^'ITTEE COURSE A historical study of the inception nnd development of the ?SSC was made In order to better understand the ohilos- ophy end underlyincr beliefs of the committee members • The following oagec also point to the objectives formulated by the PSSC. The organization of the Physical Science Study Committee . The PS?C began formal operations in November, 19£6. The formation of the committee was made possible by e r^rant of $303,000 from the National Science Foundation to the Massa- chusetts Institute of Technology. An additional grant of $1!4.2,000 was made by the National Science Foundation In August, 19 c '7» In October, 19E>7 further grants were made by: the National Science Foundation, #300,000; the Ford Foundation, $£00,000; the Fund for the Advancement of Education, $200,000; 2 and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, 325>0,000. As of January 1, 19£8, the ?SSC had expended *6l4.9, 000, By September 30, 19£8, the PSSC had spent an additional f 1,0)4.5, 700. The budget established for the fiscal year October 1, 1959 to October 1, 1959 was ?2, 600, 000.3 I'he total cost of revision during the 1 First Annual Report of the Physical Science Study Committee , (Watertown f iTassacnu setts: The Committee, January , WPTi p. 13. 2 Ibid. 3lbid. 6 period 19^6-1961 was «o proximately six million dollars, exclusive of teacher-retraining costs which came to approxi- mately an equal sum. Continuing costs of the PSSC are pres- to ently running at a level of #300, 000 per year. The first steps in the development of the committee were informal discussion groups which were formed in and around Boston. These groups developed tentative outlines for a new physics course. The discussions were stimulated primarily by ftr. Jerrold R. Zacharias of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Concurrently with these informal discussion groups, in and around Boston, some essential work was being carried on by the American Institute of Physics, the American Association of Physics Teachers, and the National Science Teacaers* Association. Tnese groups were actively engaged in a study of the traditional physics textbooks being used throughout the United States. With this kind of informal beginning, the committee's work gained impetus with the first grant from the National Science Foundation in November of 1956. ihe newly formed * Jerrold R. Zacharias and Stephen White, "The Require' ments for Major Curriculum Revision, 1 * School and Society , 92:67* February 22, 1964. p Elbert 9 . Little, "The Physical Science Study Committee," Harvard Educational Review , 29:1, inter, 195>9» 7 Physical MltBe* Study CoKu:ittee, directed by Jerrold R. Zacharias, Flbert P. Liltle, end Francis L. Friedman, held its first major planning conference on December 10, 11, 12, 1956 • This conference was held et the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Ihe committee met to discuss and to plan iioroved and modernized courses in physical science for secondary schools. Forty-eight committee members were in attendance , representing more than twelve universities* government agencies, and commercial laboratories. Following this meeting several of the centers prepared out- lines and preliminary drafts to be presented in a conference during the summer of 1957 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology* During this summer conference of 1957* university physicists worked with high school physics teachers from many oarts of the country along with specialists in such fields as testing, film-making, educational administration, and editorial production. All parts of the program were started, but the textbook and laboratory were given priority so that enough material would be available to use in courses the coming year. *"A Planning Conference P.eoort: ihe Physical Science fctudy Committee, w Physics Today , 10:28, March, 1957. ^Gilbert C. Finlay, "The niysical Science Study Committee," School Review, 70:72, Spring, 1962. 8 rurirr* the 1957- c '8 school year eight teachers used the preliminary versions with about three hundred students participating. This first year of experience with the course was veil scceoted by the teachers using '-he course. m i'he •J h% teachers who used the course in 1957-58 claimed thei would never return to the •OBfOttt tonal text apein." 1 Teachers and students were enthusiastic and found the course stimulating, The results of the preliminary achievement tests user* that year indicated that the students attained the e'esired levels.^ However, the shopping for the laboratory equipment by the teachers, and construction of this equipment by the students was both lengthy *nd costl- . Because of this the co/rdttee turned to the development of easily assembled kits of preformed apparatus. Tn the summer of 1958 t I proximately three hundred hi<rh school ohysics teachers attended five national Science adatlon Summer Institutes at which the PS8C corse was the subject of etudy.3 The orelimlnary coarse materials were supplied without cost to any of these teachers who desired to use them the following year. Turing the 1953-59 school ^-Randolnh Jance, "The Six New Science Curricul ims," School Management , 7? 63, June, 1963 • ^Gilbert C. Finis.;, Thi ''hysical Science Study ittce >" School Review , 70:73, Spring, 1962* ^Flbert t* Little, "The Physical Science tttttf] Com- mittee," Harvard r ducat lonal Review j 29o» Winter, 1959. year 12,500 students In 286 schools in the United States were taught the new physics course. The new course materials used during the 1958-59 school year included a preliminary textbook, teacher's guide, laboratory program, a few films, and a set of ten achievement tests. ^ All the feedback information from the teachers that used the materials was accumulated and used to revise the textbook and other materials. Also, during this school year a non-profit organization, Educational Services Incorporated, was created to assume the administration of the PSSC-* During the summer of 1959 about seven hundred teachers studied the course in fifteen institutes. For the 1959-60 school year the course materials were provided at cost to the schools that wished to use them. About 560 teachers and 22,500 students used the materials. Of the teachers that had used the course the previous year, 96 per cent elected to continue with the PSSC.^ Except for the films* a complete set of preliminary materials was on hand. ^"Frederick L. Ferris, Jr., "The Physical Science Study Committee: will It Succeed?," Harvard Fducatlonel Review , 29:32, Winter, 1959. 2 Gilbert C. Flnlay, "The Physical Science Study Com- mittee," School Review , 70:7lj.# Spring, 1962. ^Annual Report of the Educational Testing Service for the Year 1953-59 (Princeton, New Jersey: Educational Testing Service), p. 15 • ^•Finlay, oj>. clt ., p. 75» 10 Puring the 19^9-60 school year, the Committee's major effort was directed to a complete revision of ell printed materials and the design changes appropriate to the commercial production of kits of laboratory apparatus . By the fall of I960 the textbooks, laboratory guidebooks, apparatus, teats, films, and teachers' guidebooks had been turned over to commercial supoliers and were available to all teachers who desired them. During 1960-61 the course was used by about eleven hundred teachers with lj5,000 students. In 1962, 20 per cent of all students taking high school physics in the United States were using the ?SSC materials and by 196!j. this percentage had risen to 50 per cent. Why and how the Physical Science Study Committee developed its course . In content, the traditional (or conventional) course imitates the introductory physics course in college. Applications of physics to technology are stressed rather heavily. Problem-solving, ranging from the simple exercises in substituting data into a formula to more demanding tasks, is a part of the course. Laboratory exercises are usually of the highly organized variety called "cookbook" experiments .3 lGilbert C. Flnlay, "The Physical Science Study Committee, * School Review , 70:73>, Spring, 1962. 2 W. C. Kelly, Survey of Education in ^hyslcs in Universities of the United States , (Hew York; American Institute of "Physics , 19614. ) p • 10 • 3 Ibid., p. 11. 11 For the purpose of this paper the author will use the term traditional or conventional to refer to any physics course being taught on the secondary level other than the Physical Science Study Committee course* The conventional texts today are built around Newtonian mechanics* The course begins with statics, goes on to kinematics and dynamics, and In the light of these disciplines undertakes to explain, one after another, heat, light, and sound* 1 There was a feeling by rzsny educators before 19!>5 that such an organization was beyond criticism; it had logical unity and reflected both the current state of knowledge and general attitude of the physicists* "In the years that have passed, physics has thrust out wider roots an<5 borne unimaginably richer fruits, like quantum theory, relativity, and nucleus and subnueleus of the atom*" 2 Because Newtonian mechanics rapidly ceased to serve as a unifying concept, the subject compartmentalized and physics became several distinct and disconnected subjects such as mechanics, optics, heat, sound, and others* Since none of these could be covered adequately In the time at the teacher's disposal, the temptation grew to shift Elbert ?. Little, n From the Beginning, n Science Teacher , 2!j.:3l6, November, 19£7* 2 Ibid., p. 317. 12 the emphasis from the science, which in many cases was not beinr taught, to the technology* This helped students under- stand oractical applications they could observe, as an internal combustion engine, a refrigerator, a radio, and even a sDace shin* More and more the teachers were teaching a subject the scientists did not even recognize as science* The informal co^'ittee of 1956 came to the following conclusions about the traditional high school physics textbook: 1* Textbooks in general reflected a scientific outlook that dated back half a century and was no longer representative of the views of the scientific community. 2* Genuine attempts to remain abreast of sci- entific develooments had given even the best text- books a patchwork quality in which the unity of physios disappeared* 3» The sheer mass of material in the textbooks had become so great that it could no longer be re&sonably taught in an academic year or even in two years* U.» With the increasing application of science in everyday environment, physics textbooks had given over more and more of their attention to technology, thus further overloading the course and further minimising the concepts of science itself, and Its unity** Meanwhile, as the syllabus had come to be steadily less representative of the subject matter, the need had become greater* A large and constantly increasing proportion 1 Elbert P* Little, "From the Beginning," Science Teacher , 2k' 317, November, 1957* 2 Flrgt Annual Report of the Physical Science Study C o mr i i 1 1 ee (Watertown, ? assacEusetts : The Committee ,"" January, 1958), p* 3* 13 of high school students were going on to make careers of science and engineering. The rest, whether businessmen or skilled laborers, could almost certainly expect to come in contact with science. 3ut in the face of these realities, secondary school curricula failed to make science a meaningful oart of general education. "Misapprehensions about science In the public mind have become one of the principal reasons why we have today, too few students studying scientific careers, and too few teachers competent to teach science."* In summary the 19£6 problems in science involved: 1. A recognition of the real significance of science In our modern world. 2. The need for a change in attitude toward scienoe and the necessity for reducing the gap between the eclences and humanities. 3» The develooment of a truly new curriculum which cannot be done by accretion, but which must be done by a total and complete reorganization which will also orovide for the development of a high degree of scientific literacy among the rank and file of our peoole. 14.. A necessary change in attitude towards teaching at all levels with a view of recog- nizing its imoortance and its Droblems and with a dedicated effort toward the solution of these oroblems, while at the same time retaining and expanding our efforts in the creation of new knowledge.-' Animated by an outlook such as this, the PSSC was Albert P. Little, "From the Beginning, " Science Teacher , 2U?3l8* November, 1957« 2 Ibid ., o. 3I6. ^Addison F. Lee, "Current Problems in Science Education," Science Education, 1^9:1^0, March, 196£. 14 organized to seek ways of giving this outlook expression In the high school curriculum. Therefore, the original statement of the Committee's alms was: 1. To olan a course of study in which the major develooments of physics, up to the present time, are presented as a logical and integrated whole; 2. To oresent ohysics as an intellectual and cultural pursuit which is part of oresent-day human activity and achievement; 3. To assist physics teachers by ":eans of various teaching aids to carry out the proposed program.! As an initial target, the Committee chose to design a new course to fit into the current pattern of the high school curriculum. The Committee addressed itself to the oreparation of a one year ohysics course for the students who are currently taking physics. These students make up about one-fourth of the high school population, drawn mostly from the uooer half in achievement and aptitude, and include a large number who are not seeking a career in science. The Committee decided to plan a course dealing with ohysics as an explanatory system, a system that extends from the domain inside the atom to distant galaxies. The course was designed to tell a unified story— one in which the successive topics are chosen and develooed to lead toward 1 Leo F. Klopfer, "The p hysiea Course of the Physical Science Study Committee: A View from the Classroom, n Harvard Educational Review , 29:26, Winter, 1959* ^Gilbert C. Finlay, "Secondary School Physics: Physical Science Study Committee," American Journal of Physics, 23:2^7, March, I960. IS an atomic oicture of matter, its motions and interrelations* The aim was to oresent a view of physics that would bring a student close to the nature of modern physics and to the 1 nature of ohysioal inquiry* The student should see ohysics as an unfinished and continuing activity* For example, ideas about waves and oarticles keep reoccurring, each time to be carried further in a higher synthesis of ideas* This coherent, searching character of Man's aporoach to building an explanatory structure of the ohysical world is one of the course's principle aims and caief pedagogical characteristics* 2 It was also decided that the course would be directed toward familiarizing the student with two central notions of modern physics, the wave particle duality and the modern concept of the atora*^ The Committee attempts to develoo scientific ohysics from the ground up with nothing being handed down from high authority* The course is built to read like a novel, with a continuous building of physical concepts* The oroblem was to create enough comorehension to generate the motivation for wading through tough logical sequences ^Gilbert C. Finlay, "The Physical Science Study Committee," School Review , 70:61*, Spring, 1962* 2 0ilbert C. Finlay, "Secondary School Physics: Physical Science Study Committee," American Journal of ?hyglcs , 2fl:292, March, I960* 3jerrold R* Zacharias and Stephen White, "The Requirements for Major Curriculum Re vis ion, " School and Society , 92:67, February 22, I96I4.. 16 end develop a genuine interest in scientific ideas and fc 1 concepts. The student is expected to be an active Participant in thia course. The student is expected to wrestle with a line of inquiry, including his own laboratory investigations, that lead to basic ideas* The fundamental idees are brought out partially in the students work on end-of -chapter problems, but Tore importantly the ideas are brought out aequentially through using those ideas which are introduced early to illuminate ot.ier ideas in a chain that comorises an introduction of the structure of physical No one-year course in physics can give an adequate account of both an exoanding physics and the related technology. The Committee therefore, chose for its subject matter the big overarching ideas of ohysics; those that con- tribute most to contemporary physicists' views of the nature of the physical world • Through its material the Committee seeks to convey those asoects of science which have the deepest meaning, the widest applicability, and the greatest power for further thought and activity. Because of thia feeling, some of the long familiar topics in secondary school ^-Parrel W. Tomer, "New Physios Course for High Schools Fevelooed by the "SSC," California Journal of Secondary Fducatlon , 33*^93* December, 1959 • 2 Gllbert C. Finlay, "The Physical Science Study Committee, " School Review , 70:65, Spring, 1962. 3Gilbert C. Finlay, "Secondary School p hysics: Physical Science Study Committee," American Journal of Physics, 261287, March, 1960. 17 sics arc not central to the overarching view sought in the P SSC course, and as a result, do not appear in the course. In attempting to transmit those ideas and styles of thought that have the broadest apolicability, the Committee judged it wise to shift the emphasis in secondary school physics away from technology toward a deeper exploration of basic ideas and the nature of inquiries* Technological application has not been eliminated fron the course, but it has been cut back sharply from its previous role* The reduced emphasis on technology does not imply disapproval any more than the reduced dependence upon trigonometry implies disapproval of mathematics. This technology was at the forefront of sci- entific im'estigation several centuries ago, but now it does not shed as much light on our present day picture of the physical world as does a study of waves and particles. Perhaos one of the text's most distinctive character- istics is its technique of attempting to build familiarity with the substructure of the concepts of physics, rather 2 than assert principles, then show applications. The course exoloree oarts of optics, mechanics, and atomic physics more deeoly than usual in order to show how a field of thought is developed. barrel W. Tomer, "Hew Physics Course for High Schools: Developed by the P SSC," California Journal of Secondary Education , 33 :1^9U# December, 195o". ^Gilbert C« Finlay, "Secondary School Physics: Physical Science Study Committee," American Journal of Physics , 2B:292, March, I960. 18 In summary, the principles underlying the coarse are the following: 1. The Com- ittee seeks to oresent ohysics as an intellectual activity, rather than as a body of rules for the control or the manipula- tion of natural phenomena. 2. The Committee seeks to reflect in its course the spirit of inquiry. 3* The course reflects, as much as oossible, the world of physics as it appears to the profes- sional pfcytltlftlj "op only In this manner is it likely to have eny clear relevance to the student himself. 1+. The Committee's course prefers to pre?ent the traditional subdivisions of ohysics as various asoects of t single discipline. 5. The nature of the American school system makes it desirable to create a course which will be relatively independent of the order and content of the rest of the secondary school curriculum. 6. The most difficult decision which faced the ^SSG at the outset of its work was the decision to omit from the course large areas of nhysics, and the selection of those areas which would be omitted. A whole br.ttery of techniques is being used to get the story of physics across to the students. The text attempts to lay out a coherent framework. Problems and exercises lead the student into inference and interpretation as well as practice In elementary reasoning with basic concepts. The text was developed simultaneously with laboratory experiments; and, although it was intended that the text should be able to Isteohen White, "The Physical Science Study Committee: The Planning and Structure of the Course, " Contemporary Physics , ?:[|.1-Iv3, October, I960. 2 A. B. Arons, "The New High School Physics Course," ^hyslcs Today , 13*12* June, I960. 19 stand as nearly as possible on its own, it was written with laboratory work in mind. The laboratory orogram includes about fifty experiments in all and ten of these experiments are done in modern physics. Since laboratory work is used as a tool contributing to the generation of ideas, the laboratory is designed to give the student an opportunity for personal discovery. The exDerlments are designed to supoly firm rooting for the growth of ideas by providing non-verbal contact with rele- vant data* The experimental situations as they are presented to the students are "open ended". The basic ideas of the experiment are carefully discussed, but very few explicit instructions are given. Students are led to do as much as possible within a minimum of directing and are urged to extend the inquiry on their own initiative. The experiments are both qualitative and quantitative. The most common use of the laboratory experiment is to introduce a topic or to contribute to the early stages of its development. Because the Committee realizes that physics teachers have a budget to meet, all costs for the laboratory have been measured in dimes and dollars. "Almost all the apparatus ^■Gilbert C. Finlay, "Secondary School Physics: Physical Science Study Committee," American Journal of Physics , 28:292, March, I960. 2 A. B. Arons, "The New High School Physics Course," ^hysics Today , 13:22, June, I960* 20 is designed to be built by the students themselves, either In the laboratory or, in rare instances, In the school 1 s shop courses." The building of aooarstus is as much a oart of physics as learning about different concepts. There will be little the student will use in the school laboratory that he cannot duolicate in his garage or cellar. There he can modify, elaborate, or redesign an experience, and set up "doing ohyelcs" on his own. 2 Also the time taken for con- striction in the laboratory is small and very rewording. For examole, in ten minutes a student can make a microbalance out of two oins, a eoda straw, and a wood screw, with sensitivity down to twenty micrograms oor millimeter deflection.-* A great deal of what might ordinarily be called demon- stration is provided by the films produced by the Committee. Films are being used to bring to the classroom certain extended ideas beyond the level of the text and certain key exper5.ments that are likely to be too difficult, too time consuming, or too costly for students to perform or for teachers to demonstrate. Because the films articulate closely with these resources and most of the film producers assume that the viewer Is familiar with earlier parts of the course, ^Jerrold R. Zacharias, "Into the Laboratory," Science Teacher , 2lj.:32i4., November, 1957. 2 Ibid ., p. 325. ■^Harold ^. Knauss, Physics for Secondary Schools," ••■■lei'lcan Journnl o^ ''hygics , 24 1 379 1 September, 195'-. 21 the sched.lins o* the films is quite easy* r Ihe films are intended as take-off points for teachers and students. As of February, 1965* sixty-five films were available • The Committee also developed a teacher's guidebook in order that teachers could outline their class procedures and as inquisitive questions. Through theso questions, the stu- dents may find insight into the physical concepts* In addi- tion to the guidebook, ten standardized tests were developed to check the progress of the students. As supplementary sources of authoritative and scientific information, the Committee developed ■ series of paperback books. The purpose of these books was to ittpply deeoar meaning to the course and to cover material omitted froa the course. For example* related fields like biophysies, technology, the history of physics, and biographies of noted physicists are covered in the paper- back books. ■ books are a.) p earing as the "Science Study Series*, ^s of February, 1961, fifty books had been published in the series.^ In sumiary, the PS3C developed the following material for the course j Wxtboo!:, laboratory guide and a sot of new Gilbert C. Finlay, "The Physical Science Study Committee," School Review , 70:68, Spring, 1962. ^ Fc::; optional Services Incorporated Newsletter , February, 1965* (Watertown, ^assschusetts : Educational Services Incorporated), p. 7. 3lbid. 22 and inexpensive apparatus, a large number of films, stan- dardized teste, a growing eerie? of psoerbaek books by leaders in related fields, end a comprehensive teacher's resource book directly releted to the course. To be retained, each item of subject matter hod to meet the following criteria: 1. To etrese najor achievement in ohyeiee such as the great conservation principles. 2. To r>ive insight into the way in which these powerful ideas were conceived, nurtured, and some- times over thrown by even more powerful ideas. 3. To present a unified story in which the inner connections within ohysics were brought to light. I;.. To show ohysice as a human ectivity co - parable in significance with the humanities, the languages and tho other major studies of high school students .1 Finally, the Committee recognized that no material could be teacher-prosjf • The physicists ran summer institutes, more of them every year, to train teachers. "By the end of 1962, nearly twenty-five hundred teachers, who came into con- tact with perhaps a quarter of a million students each year, had spent at least one summer working on the PSSC course ."^ The Physical Science Study Committee Course . The PSSC course is divided into four major sections. The first ^Elbert P. Little, "The Physical Science Study Com- mittee," larvard Fducational Review , 29s2, Winter, 19£9* ^Martin ?*ayer, "Scientists In the Classroom," Commentary , 35i31lj., April a 1963. 23 Is with J '. basic concents of wh' ' *ie student trust have rtd«rf tandlng before he c r Me a worthwhile study of the ml *ect ^.ntter of yMonce. Time, distance, motion, the BttttPt of measurement, the «to»it structure of matter, end the molsculnr lntc-nrct-tlon of cho^ittry t?re the main topics first section. The presentation is through neral BOBOaptl "r''- N 'r thai soecific definitions, and the Bt'.'dent maker scrv tact et once with ^ost of the subject Iter ;ith which he will desl later in rro- ter depth* The second oart of the course Is a study of optics and waves. Ootical phenomena are described first In terms of rays and then a particle theory is developed to provide a possible piftto r^ 9t the nature of light « Wnen this model fails to - }« an explanation of the refraction of li^ht, concents of wave action are introduced as an alternative H»6el« B7 stttd; ' ig waves in ropes, eorings, and ripple tanks, the student is guided to observe the comparison between v;aves Of tone properties of light. In this way the student should be able to ore diet some new principles of light through his experience with waves. The understanding of waves is goneral 3- Physical Science Study Committee » Physics , (Boston: . C« He sth and Company, i960; p. v« 2 lb Id., p. vl. 2k enough to allow extension to other areas. "For instance, the nature and properties of sound, though not stressed in the course, can be developed by the student because of his basic understanding of waves." 1 iheae two sections, constituting the first half of the course, emphasize the kinematics of our universe. Ihe third section introduces Newton's laws of motion, showing the relationship between force and -notion and leading to the extraordinary story of the discovery of universal gravitation. Conservation laws form a substantial part of this section of the course and lead naturally to a development of the kinetic theory of heat as an application of dynamics in this particular field of physics. Ihe fourth section includes a careful introduction of electrical and magnetic phenomena, especially the inter- actions of charged particles with electric and magnetic fields .3 The techniques of the electrical and electronic industries are omitted* but the major experiments of modern Dhysics are carefully developed. The photoelectric effect, for examole, requires the return to a particle concept of 1 Elbert ?. Little, "The Physical Science Study Committee, ; ' Harvard Educational Review , 29:2, 'winter, 19^9. 2 Physical Science Study Committee , "^hysics , (Boston: P. C. Heath and Comoany, 1960J, p. vi. 3 Ibid., p. vii. 25 light, with new insights Into the nature of both matter and 15f?ht.l "The course returns to the study of the atom; Its discreteness, Its structure, its charges, its nucleus, and its behavior. "^ Thus, the circle U el*fl«d «nd the student ft u r ttl to the basic concepts of science with *♦ new understanding oomaan in ofimiom ibo i ra PHYSICAL SCIWNCF STCPY 00MKIT1 Because of the difficulty of finding statistical data on the achievement of the objectives 01 the Committee, the author felt this section was needed to better understand the Committee's course. ihis section is designed to rive the comments ano opinions of teachers and educators both for and against r>f»rts of the Committee's ^•gWi One question that is usually considered in reviewing a book is the language and language structure used. On this point there seems to be two oooosing opinions. One teacher believes the language is inoffensively inform**!; *l center of mass 'sits still', enarres on ins 1, tors are 'nailed down 1 , and dark centers of contour oatterns arc 'globs ' • "■' Another aspect of the Committee's oolicy, with rerard to language, lElbert ?. Little, "The Physical Science Study <"o~r-.1t tee," Harv ard ^du cat long! Review, ?9:3, winter, 19^9. 2 Tbid. ^Thomas P. Miner, "^hysicr? PSSOf" ^mo^i^n Journa l of ?n?s ics , 29:338, May, 1961. 26 was the reluctance to use a key word until proDerly defined • "Because Newton's second law of notion is not treated until P« 307, the word 'force* is taboo before that. Consequently, we have until that point, 'pushes', 'shoves', and 'pulls' galore." Another author believes some of the things that the students are assumed to know, probably are not known. For example, on page 18, galaxies are mentioned but they are not defined until o. 28. On p. 398 there is mention of "mesons" and "hyperons". The authors must have been dreaming to assume that the students know what these terms mean. 2 Another complaint given regarding language was that no effort was made to get the students to learn to use the words and language they should be learning* In general the problems given in the text are excellent and logically conceived; but they fail to create opportunities in which students recognize and talk about definitions, describe simple physical events in the technical language they are learning, articulate lines of reasoning and logical connections between steps, recognize In words the idealization imolicit in the han- dling of a problem.- Thomas P. Miner, "Physics: PSSC," American Journal of Physics , 29:338, ' ? ay, 1961. ^Oscar L. Brauer, "Something Dangerously New in Physics Teaching," Science Fducatlon , i|J:369~70, October, 1963. ^A. B. Arons, "The New High School °hysics Course," Physics Today , 13 :25 9 June, I960. 27 A drawback that was often found concerning the Committee *e coarse was the lack of enough applications of orinciples of physics» T quite a?-ree that nhysics, 1959* should not be merely a course in technology, but this should not rule out the teaching of life situ- ations where a principle being taught may be applied. One of the best physics teachers I know continually. stresses, "Physics is the world about us", 1 All of the physics that is necessary to enable the student to understand what he sees about him is avoided. For Instance he wonders about the electrical refrigerator, the gas refrigerator, radio, television, and heat engines. Nothing in the PSSC text will enlighten him on any of these topics. Even alternating current snd sound is not discussed In the text. 2 However, there are some that believe the Committee's orogram is en answer to a long needed understanding of science. By trying to educate for an understanding of total perspective of science we will naturally avoid excesses of detail end the cram course that i^-oarts no real understanding of science; that does not excite the creative imagination, and that rewards only memory and gadgeteering.3 CNM of the most common criticisms encountered was that the course was too long to be taught effectively in one year. ^William Bsrish, "Reader's Column," Science Teacher , 26J389, October, 1959. 2 0scar L. Srauer, "Something Dangerously New in Physics Teaching," Science Education , 57:366, October, 1963. 3Addison K« Lee, "Current Problems in Science Education," Science Fducatlon, ij.9:ll4.9* March, 196£. 28 ost of the indoctrinated teachers never finished the book and some ^nly pot half way through* To teach everything in that book would take all the school time of the student leaving no time for other studies • * The Committee's textbook is the largest high school physics text ever oublished. It has 63U two column pages or text material on a page size 7»5 inches by 9 inches. There is a feeling by some that the concepts in the textbook are too hard even Tor the top twenty-five oer cent of the high school population. tfy students remrted that in their opinion, these volumes (?SSC text) were written by phys- icists to please themselves and other physicists, and not for secondary school students. Trie writing of the text has tended to obscure the facts, bringing them In a vast sea of explanatory words. It Is too hard for the students to get at the imoortant ideas .3 However, another opinion was: Hy better students (A or B) developed under- standing of the subject matter much better than in orevious years. However, the C and B students aeemed to understand only after detailed expla- nation. The C and D students understanding was about as usual, but their appreciation of phvsics and their attention to detail eeem&d hlgher.M- *Oscar L, Srauer, "Something T^n^erously New in Physics Teachinp," Science Fducation , Jj.7:367, October, 1963. p Hichard ?. Peynman, "The Relation of Phytlei to Other Sciences," The Physics Teacher . 3*112* March, 1961;. 3summary of Judgments Made by Teacher," Science Teacher , 26:£8l, December, 1959. **Ibid., p. 530. 29 In view of these opinions one could drew the conclusion that it Is difficult for the student who does not want to think or analyze , but not so for the student who is sincerely interested* Another general view that goos along with the opinion I the course is hard, is the op in! on that the problems are too difficult for the majority of students. The PSSC authors work no problems in the text and it has very few problems that could be classed as easy. Some of the problems even depend on theory developed in chapters several lhapttN ahead .1 "Many of the problems arc exceedingly difficult and are p insurmountable for many of our students*" The most effective aspect of the course Is generally civen by critics as the laboratory experiments. The laboratory experiments may well be the most effective aspect of the work of the TB6G at this point i &nd continued efforts along these lines "it make a major contribution to the teaching of ohysics. The emphasis on inexpensive •qui orient Is, of course, very admirable, even if not actually as new as claimed. Although such emphasis is most desirable, it should not be oermitted to obscure the fact that much scientific work does require sophisticated equipraent.3 ^Oscar L. Brauer, "Something Dangerously New in Physics Teaching," Science " cation , £7*368, October, 1963 . ? rold . 3Alexander Calandra, "Some Observations of the Work of the PSBC 9 m Harvard Educational Review , 29- , Winter, 19S9. 30 Another r.enaral criticism of ."ogram i^ that it tends to stabilize the oresent sequence of science coursei i.i ol, whic r ally start with General Science in the ninth grade, biology in the tenth, chemistry in the eleventh, end physics in the twelfth* This sequence is toe order of increasing difficulty as these subjects are now taught. It would appear more sound to present tin science CMrses in o^der of dependence; thus, since biology depends to a substantial extent on chemistry, and l -try on physics, it would n^ear desirable to teach physics first, chemistry second, and biology last.l ^lmer Hutchison, director of the Ajnerican Institute of Physics, believes the Con-rittee's course has added a fourth W 3 W to the list of rearing, writing, and arithmetic. 2 This fourth "H tt is reasoning and the vehicle for finding Lhis excellence for acquiring t e skill In precise reaso aim is physics. "?To secondary fthool education can be sr,ld to be either liberal or complete without some study of this important subject. "3 The ability to reason is one of the Alexander Calandra, M £>ome Observations of the Work of the ^SSC," '-Tnrvard Ed ucational Review , 29:20, Winter, 1959. 2"Plmer Hutchison, "°hysics in Our High Schools," The p hysics Teacher , 2*386, November, I96I4. • 3Tbid, 1 p. 385^. 31 princiole characteristics by which the advancement of a civilization may be measured. "A truly civilized nation is one in which the public has a measured confidence in man's ability to observe nature and to reason from these obser- vations » nl Several authorities believe that the most important and most difficult phase of the Committee's course is for teachers to learn how to teach the course .^ Because some teachers are so resistive to change and hate to alter the routine of their classrooms, the Committee's program is hard to instill in the teachers* In Indiana, a survey was taken to determine why teachers did not use the PSBC course. The reasons priven were as follows: !• Many teachers use Darts of the orogram. Usually this means the laboratory exercises. A few used the PSSC course in the first part for an advanced physics course. These people have not attended an institute and for some reason do not want to identify themselves with our group. 2« Several have said after looking at the text, they thought it to be too difficult for their students* Some of these people were skeptical of the intent of the course since it was associated with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 3. Some teachers frankly admit they were unable to teach the course. They do not go to ^Fdward C. Colby, "The New Science Curriculum," School Management , 8:87, November, 196ij.. 2 Ibid. 32 summer Institutes or evening classes because they have a steady Job paying them as much as their teaching Job. [j.* A great many feel they would like to teach PSSC physics, but they already have four or five preparations for five or six classes of thirty to thirty-five students and Just do not feel they have time to prepare for such a course. 5* There are those few that are really conservative. Their reasons are obvious .1 Maybe the major lessons to be learned from the whole ^S^C program fall in another category* The Progfan oresents us with strong evidence that: 1. High school teachers and college teachers can work together and the experience is stimulating to both. 2* Subject matter revision should be made by practicing specialists In a field. 3* High school students will respond to an intellectual presentation of subject matter, In which rational thought and analysis are more i^oort^nt than brute force memory* [j.. High school teachers, with proper suoport can teach subject matter far beyond the limits of what they studied In college* 5* p roper support consists not only of subject ^atter but of the specialists* 6* An exceptionally favorable method for providing this kind of supnort is through the use of teaching films In wh* ^h these specia- lists are the film personalities, seen and heard by the students *2 Lawrence Gene Poorman, "Indiana p hysics Teachers React to PSSC," Science Fducation , 29:171-172, March, 196$. 2 Elbert P. Little, "PSSC," Science Educational Leadership, 17:169, December, 1929*"" 33 One final opinion should be given since this teacher may have hit at the heart of the oroblem of evaluation of the O^^rittee's course, as compared to the conventional course, even if his opinion ir somewhat biased. If one starts with the oremise that the aim of a physics course is to oroduce students who dan aonly neatly boxed equation? to every- day life, end in this way calculate such quan- tities as the final temperature of a mixture of two liquids or determine the focal length of a l«ai| then the conventional texts will suffice. The second view, if one considers it more imocrtant to stress the very basic concepts with s doeper treatment than is customarily accorded them, and to build up a view of physics as a modern quantitative science which relies on experiment, deduction, analysis, and pre- diction, then the Pftyall ] Science Study Com- mittee course is the answer. *• A REVIEW OF RESEARCH |HD STAKJAf IOHS r I CTE7: 0!f THE PH78ICAI. SCIF^Cn ?T>: rvv COKWIfTFS C Several statistical studies hpve been conducted since 1957 on the PSSO program. In this section the author will attempt to show what research studies have been conducted to determine if the objectives of the Committee's course have been reached. The objectives of the PSSC course have been listed in a study by Leslie W. Trowbridge. Trowbridge proposed fifty- *M. to". Frledlander, "Book Reviews," Physics Today , 15:63, January, 1962» 3U five objectives of the Committee find confirmed thore objec- tives by Interviews and -ueationaires with the directors of the PMC« Trowbridge hop listed sixteen objectives which are norMc 1 .! ?irly oroo-^ged by the °SSC course and thirty- nine objectives which are common to both the p S?C course and the traditional course. M ost of these objectives can be classified under several general objectives formulated by Trowbridge. Prim the outhor's wide reading pboMt the aims and j^oals of the Committee, he determined that the following eight objectives of Trowbridge are the main objectives the Committee was tryin^ to achieve in introducing the course. These objectives are: 1* To emohesize the continuity and unity of Physics. ?• To encourage students to oreoare for careers In tho phyaleal sciences. 3. To orenare students for advanced work in colleges and universities. lj.« To emohasSze the study of a few major tonics at considerable deoth. 5. To !*moloy thests as a means of deter- mining the ability of students to reason to logical conclusions when working with unfamiliar data. i w' « To develon the spirit of scientific inquiry. 7. To teach ohvslce to the typical kind of hi^h school group which has traditionally taken high school physic3 in the past. 8. To help students learn techniques of experimentation in order to find the answers to 8ll emblems. ^ *• Leslie W. Trowbridge, "A Comparison of the Objectives and Instructional Material in Two Types of High School Physles Courses," Science Education , 1|.9:117-122, March, 1965« 2Ibid. 35 The reoort cent Inn es with a summary of the reeeerch flndlnps. Then an analysis ie made to determine If the objectives have or hrve not been reached . From the very berJnninr, a systematic pnrran of achievement testing was built Into the development of the course Itself. The achievement tests t^rere designed to measure the kinds of learninr eroected of students by the authors of the course, ^en tests were ?ivcn throughout the year. The achievement tests measured the extent to which the course objective? hsd been met, and also served as a criterion measure ''or ■ self-eooraisnl by the Committee. Tn 19^-59 the tests wer^ .^iven to see if the following questions could be answered: 1, Is the group of students enrolled in the PSSC ^ogram during 19^-£9 representative of the aotltude level for which the course wu designed? Is the course generally I ooropriate to the ability range of students for which the course was designed? 3» Is the course, as many critics had ore- dieted, hopelessly beyond the capacity of the students in the lower aotitudo ranges of those who normally take ohysics?^ * Frederick L« Ferris, frej "An Achievement Test Peoort, n Science Teacher , ?6:£?7# December, 1959. 2 Ibid. 36 No comoarison of the effectiveness of the Committee 'a course with other methods of secondary school physics instruc- tion was contemplated* Fach school was asked to administer the School and College Ability Test (SCAT) yielding verbal, quantitative, and composite scores for all Physical Science Study Committee students and thereby establishing control on scholastic aptitude for the test group* As the year progressed the schools administered each of the tests in the achievement-battery. Consistent with the aims of the course, nearly every test situation demanded not only a knowledge of the subject matter, but also an ability to use and apoly this know- ledge in the context of a variety of situ- ations new to the student.*- The consensus of teachers giving the test seemed to be that the tests led to discussion that served to summarize and clarify the course content and its objectives. The test reliabilities of all instruments, including the SCAT test, were satisfactorily high. The mean diffi- culty of the tests was a little high, but the test did an excellent job of discrimination as compared to the College Fntrance Fxamination Board .^ Frederick L. ^erris, Jr., "An Achievement Test Report, " Science Teacher , 26:5>7o» December, 195)9. 2 Ibid. 37 The results of the aptitude testing showed that 80 per cent of the ?SSC students scored better than the 7£ oercentile of the national norms grouD of the United States twelfth grade students on SCAT. 1 Since the Committee's course was designed for those who gen- erally rank In the uooer half of their clasp, Ferrls's study concluded that the test grouD of students enrolled In the course was essentially reoresentative of the aotltude range for which the course was designed. ^ A special study was made of the achievement test results for students in each of three aptitude groups mea- sured by SCAT. The three groups were: (Jrouo I, students ranking above the 90th oercentile; Group II, students ranking between the 90th and 7£tn oercentile; Group III, students below the 75>th percentile. One striking fact emerged in that there wa^ a marked overlap In the score distribution of the respective grouos. A high percentage of students in the lower aotitud* 1 group performed better on the achievement tests than the median score of the grouo ranking above the 90th oercentile on SCAT. ^Frederick L. Ferris, Jr.. "An Achievement Test Reoort," Science Teacher , 26:578, Pecember, 1959* g Ibid . 3lbid. 38 Therefore, it Is now possible to exclude the idea that the Committee f c course is apnro- oriate only for students of tho highest acadomic aotitude. 'ihe evidence obtained from tho testing program overwhelr.ingly points to the conclusion that* not only is tho course well within the capability of the great majority of United States high school ohysics students, but that experience in it is also highly profitable to a sizeable oercentap:© of relatively low- aotitude students.* °>ne of the earliest studies conducted on the evalu- ation of the °hysical Science Study Committee course was done by Warren L. Hiosher in Tulsa, Oklahoma, i^g investigation was designed to comoare the relative effectiveness of the traditional hiirh school physics curriculum and the PSSC physics curriculum. This v:is accomolished by comparing scores of two groups of students who took the Coooerative Physics Test, when the variables of scholastic aotitude, prior achievement in nat^rnl science, physical science aptitude, and socio-economic status are statistically controlled. The exoeriment was carried out over a two year oeriod at the Will Rogers High School in Tulsa, Oklahoma. All students in the school that took hirrh school ohysics during the 19£7-£o* school were taught using the traditional physics curriculum. A total of ll|.5> high school seniors were enrolled ■*• Frederick L. Ferris, Jr., "An Achievement Test Report f " Science Teacher , 26:578, December, 195>9. 2 Warren I#. HiDsher, "A Comparative Study of High School ^hysics Achievement," (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, Oklahoma, I960). 39 In five clflsros. This proup was designated ns the control grouo. The following school veer, 195G*59| five classes of 13l|. high school seniors completed the course c'evelooec by the Committor, which we s designated st thr exoerlmental group. The seme teacher was used in ee^h of the different groups. Form Z, the latest revision of the Co^oera 5ve ^hysics Test, wes used to measure the l?vel of achievement in physics of the students. This test was actually based on the objec- tives of the traditional course. The objectives of the authors of the Committee's n rorran, however, were different from the objectives of those who had shaped the traditional physics course. Consequently, a test which measured achieve- ment thst was exoected to result from the use of the tradi- tional course would not be comoletely applicable for measuring achievement of the Committee's course. Nevertheless most colleges and universities were and are oriented toward traditional ohysics in their introductory course in college physics. Thus the preoaretion of hi^h school (rr^duates to succeed in a traditional physics curriculum at the collepe level mln-ht be one of the e:*oec- tations and requirements that might be postulated for any hiph school ohysics or' ir *^"m.2 ^Warren L. Hipsher, *M Comoarative Study of Hich School ^hysics Achievement^' (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Tulsa, Oklahoma, I960.) o. 9« ? IMd., o. I4.. Thus the decision was made to use the Cooperative p hysics Test* In the statistical analysis the effect of the fol- lowing four variables were taken into account when comparing scores on the Cooperative ^hysics Test. Scholastic aptitude was measured by the Gamma Form of the Otis Quick-Scoring Mental Ability Test. Prior achievement in natural science was tested by the General Achievement Test in Natural Science, "'hysical science aotitude was measured by the Engineering and Physical Science Aptitude. To establish the socio-economic level of each of the students, the North-Hatt Scale was used. The analysis of covarianees was used to test the following null -hypothesis : There is no differ- nee in the achievement of the control and the experimental groups in their response to the criterion, the Cooperative Physics Test, when the variables of scholastic aotitude, prior achievement in natural science, physical science aptitude and socio-economic status are statistically controlled.* The null -hypo the sis was rejected and the findings of the investigation indicated that students taught physics using the traditional hip-h school physics curriculum per- formed significantly better on the Cooperative Physics ^Warren L. Hiosher, "A Comparative ?tudy of High School Physics Achievement ," (doctoral Pissertation, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, Oklahoma, I960.), p. I4.9. Test, than students taught high school physics using the curriculum developed hy the ^SSC. In light of their Inves- tigation a question has been raised relative to the effec- tiveness of the Committee's course in Preparing students for traditionally oriented courses in college physics* Robert W. Heath of the Fducational Testing Service developed a new test which he felt was able to test the objectives of the Committee. This test was called the Cognitive ^reference Test.*- This tost presented a state- ment with four ootions designed to demonstrate different forms of cognitive preference in ohysics. One option was to show preference for memory of specific facts or terms. Another orovided a practical application of the information given in the statement. A third choice reflected some challenging or questioning of the information given The fourth option was a statement of fundamental principle of nhys ics underlying the data. The purpose of this test was to comoare PSSC classes and conventional physics classes with a reference to the four cognitive oreferences. The population was made uo of forty-nine teachers and their classes using the traditional course and thirty ^Robert W. Heath, "Curriculum, Cognition, and Fducational Measurement," Educational and Psychological Measurement, 2k: 239-53* Summer, 196l(.. k2 teachers and their classes using the ''SSC course. The control group was designated as the traditional physics clashes. All students in both groups took the followinr tests: 1. The School and College Ability Test, °art I, II, and Form 1A for scholastic aptitude. 2. The Coooerative n hysics Test, Form Z for a traditionally oriented comorehensive examination. 3. The P SSC Comorehensive Final Fxamination. I+. The Concealed Figures Test to measure the ability to change the function or significance of structural elements of an object and to use them in a new way.-*- Table I shows how the students scored on the dif- ferent tests. The 3 SSC grouo, on the average, demonstrated less preference for menory of specific facts and for oractical aoolication ootions In the Cognitive '"'reference Test, and a stronger ^reference for the questioning of assumption and a statement of fimdamental principles option than the control grouo. The ^SSC groups are, on the average, superior in ability as measured by SCAT. The control group performed slightly better on the conventional achievement test but the °SSC group is much superior on the PSSC test. The °SSC ^Robert W. Heath, "Curriculum, Cognition, and Fducationrl J'easvrement," Educational and Psychological Measurement , 2\± : ?lj.f>-2l}.6 , Summer, 1961^. ' 43 TABLE I QUI? ST' T r CS W °SSC in CONTROL CiROO P| PSSC Moan Score 1 GROUP Standard Dev. CONTROL GH0U° M oan Standard Score Pev. SCAT k**l 14 39.3 4-3 Coop. Physics 39.6 7.7 kl*k 6.4 PSSC Final 29.5 54 18.7 4.0 Concealed Figures 61.3 6.0 52.4 7.7 Cognitive Preference: *'emory 5.6 .8 6.8 1.5 Cognitive ^reference: Application W .7 *•? 1.1 Cognitive ^references Ouestion k-$ .7 U.l •4 Cognitive Preference: Principle 5.3 .6 *0 .5 ^Robert W. rteath, "Curriculum, Cognition, and Fducationsl ^e8Puremont, ,, Fducstlonal and Psychological *-.eagure^nt, 24:247, Summer, 196Ij.. grouos wore also higher on the Concealed Plngures Test. The possibility that the difference In cognitive preference can be accounted for by differences in ability was tested and discounted. Based on the orooosition that the PSSC hip-h school physios course has an objective of encouraging cognitive preferences different from tho traditional course, the fol- lowing hypotheses wore tested, and were accented: 1* that ~S?.C students demonstrate a stronger reference for fundanental principles and ques- tioning than non-PS BO students* ?.m that non- *"' ~ ifc Santl orefer m&mW f for facts find practical application %% a greater degreo than PSSC student a J 3« that preference for fundamental orinci ^les and questioning Is rcore positively related to ac liaraaant test scores for PSSC students than for the control gVOttpj and km that ^reference for facts anc terms &nd for practical application Is more negatively related to achievement test aoores for PSSC atudenta than for control (VOttp students.^ One of the most recent research studies concerning the P8S€ was done by Wtlliem W. T>ay to deternine if a rela* tionehin exists bet«ean the amount and tyoe of physics tak^n by a pupil rid his critical thinking ability • ^Robert W« Heath, " Curriculum, Cognition, and Fducwtionr.l 'aasurement," Educational and Psychological Measurement , P!j.:?i|7, Sumner, 196I|. ? md # , p. 251. 3willlam w. r a y, ""hysics sn6 Critical Thinking: A Comparison of PSSC and Traditional Physics," (A summary of doctoral dissertation, University of Nebraska, June, 1961+) . us A test population consisting of three groups was selected from thirteen Colorado secondary schools and con- tained 890 individuals* The grouos were divided as follows: the ?SSC group comprised 2S oer cent of the total population, the traditional physics group comprised 29 per cent of the total pooulation, and the no-physics group comprised ij.6 per cent of the total population. "All three groups were equated on the basis of intelligence; achievement; course background in Fnglish, mathematics, social studies, and science; and mobility." The evaluative instruments used as a basis of critical thinking were the Watson-Glaeer Critical Thinking Appraisal, form XM f and Logical Reasoning, form A. A questionaire was given to the students whose teachers taught both the P SSC and traditional courses and this questionaire revealed a distinct difference in accep- tance of the physics courses and students 1 attitudes toward science. On a question asked about the course being up to the students* expectations, the D SSC students answered "no" by ^1 ner cent; whereas, the Traditional students answered n yes tt by 82 per cent. A question about the method of iwilliam w. Day, "Physics and Critical Thinking: A Comparison of P SSC and Traditional Physics," (A summary of Poctoral rissertatlon, University of Nebraska, June, 1964). u presentation Indicates the 79 oer cent of the PSSC group were not pleased with the presentation; while 61 per cent of the Traditional group felt the oresentation was satisfactory. The students were tested for the following asoects of critical thinking; inference, deduction, interpretation, logical reasoning, total critical thinking appraisal, assump- tion, and argument. Inference, deduction, interpretation, logical reasoning and total critical thinking critical aporai- sal are all significant at the 1 oer cent level, while assump- tion and argument ere significant et the J per cent level." An examination of Table II reveals that the ^SSC mean is higher than the traditional mean in all but one of the categories of critical thinking tested, this being the assumption category. n The difference between the PSSC group and the Traditional grouo, as well as the Traditional group end the no-ohysies eroup, is much less than the difference between the PSSC group and the No-Physics group #"-* 3y adding the differences between the PSSC and the Traditional groups and the Traditional and No-Physics group, it can be iwilllam W. Day, "Physics and Critical Thinking: A Comoarison of PSSC and Traditional Physics," (A summary of Toctoral Fissertation, University of Nebraska, June, 1961;), p. 12. 2 Ibld «, p. 13. 3 Ibid., p. 15. TABLE II ANALYSES OP THE NO -PHYSICS, TRADITIONAL PHYSICS, AND PSSC PHYSICS, WITH SEVEN DIFFERENT CATEGORIES kl 1.8 l.S Difference measured in lOOths of a unit with the lowest score as base m o •H 01 m ui C •H O 03 «H !>>.P X! «H 1 CO 03 O •H 03 !» O 1.0 17 V K £Zk 17" z?tx O c <D c o •H ■P O CO ft \ R l I A tv ■P © < &0 C c o 03 03 «D co o •H o 1-3 A CO o *1 ^William W. Day, "Physics and Critical Thinking: A Comparison of PSSC and Traditional Physics," (Summary of Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Nebraska, June, 1961+) p. llj.. M seen that the difference between the P SSC and Traditional groups Is ebout ^ne end one half times la rger than the em- ulative difference between the Traditional and No-Phye^cs group. The following were the conclusions made by the investigator: 1. Students who take P8SC nhyslcs exhibit a greater ability to solve critical tninkiw? orob- lems than do those students who do not take physics* as measured by the evaluative instruments. 2. The results also sucgest an advantage of P8S€ physics over Traditional physics in developing critical thinking ability and an advantage of Traditional physics students over students who do not take ohyslcs is measured by the evaluative instruments* These differ- ences were not tested statistically for sig- nificance. 3. The results of the study support the conclusion that of the small sub-population of ?SSC and Traditional students whose instruc- tor taught both ?SSC and Traditional sections of ohyslcs , the p SSC physics students h&ve a negative attitude toward the course, when compared to the Traditional students. The Traditional students were not only more positive In nttitude toward their course but were also more positive in the areas of interest in science and science activities. !i* The school population is highly mobile and college bound. • One of the first ideas that enters the researchers mind when considering the °SSC course, is what are the William W. Pay, "^hysies end Critical Thinking: A Comparison of n SSC znd Traditional Physics, (a sumnary of Poctoral Pissertation, University of Nebraska, June, 196^), pp. 1^-16. objectives of the Committee* Leslie W. Trowbridge did research on the comparison of the objectives of the MM and a Tradition*! nhvsics course* 1 He developed a composite list of seventy-two objectives , sone which were unique to the PSSC course, some to the traditional course, and some eo-r^on to both courses* '3 his be sent to various high school physics teachers to have them indicate what they thought were tho main objectives of both courses* >n>? the objectives on which the PS80 teachers and, teachers of traditional courses differed significantly were the following: 1* To help the student become a more Intel 1 Lgftitt 90 tubuses 1 of |ha n ^s of modern technology* 2a To teach the ap >lloation ft! ibyj ice princioles to rrofarn technology and to devices SOWOfl in the life of the student* 3* To cover the requirements of standard state and looftjl syllabi ond examination* k» To use a textbook which helps students retail) learned inf^r^nti-jn by uee of eumn'ar'ra** glossaries, tables, list of conclusions, etc* ^. o use laboratories to verify facts and orinciples of ohysics* 6* To eriphasJ-ze or*ct5cal On-lish) units of measurement *2 The six objectives listed above were favored signi- ficantly by the traditional teachers ov«r PSSC teachers* ^Leslie W* Trowbridge, *l Conv^p.rieon of the Objectives and Instructional Material in Two lyp&t of High School Physics Courses," Science Education , lj.9Jll7-12?, 'arch, 196$. 2 Xbld*_. p. 120. 50 The following objectives were favored significantly by PSSC teachers over teachers of traditional courses I 1. To emphasize the intellectual* cultural, and liberal education aspects of physics. 2. To develop an understanding of the pur- poses, uses, development, and limitations of scientific "Theories" in general • 3« To teach some of the imoortant historical and ohilosophical developments of physics. )4.« To emphasize that physicists are typical people of academic life with typical human asoirations. 5. To emphasize the major concents and principles of physics mainly from the stand- point of their contributions to physics as a pure science rather than an applied science. 6. To emphasize the study of a few major tooics at considerable depth* 7. To emphasize the method of laboratory investigation for learning. 8. To emphasize the understanding and use of Dhysical approximations and models in helping to explain theoretical concepts.! A research study, conducted aporoximately like the Trowbridge study, has been done on the generalizations of the PSSC course. Pate D« Rathe proposed an investigation: 1. To identify and state subject matter physics generalizations which are preliminary to and basic for those found in PSSC physics and 2* To seek, through the opinions of PSSC high school instructors, the relative desir- ability of students attaining these generali- zations prior to taking the PSSC high school physics course .2 ^Leslie W. Trowbridge, n A Comparison of the Objectives and Instructional Material in Two Types of High School Physics Courses," Science Education , lj.9:121, March, 1965* 2pate D« Rathe, "Certain Physics Generalizations Desirable for Student to Attain Before Taking the PSSC High School Physics Course," Science Education , 14.9:128, March, 1965. 51 Two hundred twenty-three generalizations were listed and twenty-three selected teachers were used to find out if they believe these generalizations were stressed by the ^SSC course* The following conclusions were develooed: 1* One hundred thirty-four of these generalizations showed relatively high desirability for students to attain before taking P88C ohysics* 2* Generalisations showinc relatively high desirability for students to attain before taking PSSC physics relate mainly to topics of matter* magnetism, and some asoeots of light and energy* 3* Generalizations showing relatively low desirability for students to attain before taking PSSC physics relate mainly to topics of waves* dynamics* and some asoects of light and energy. !j.. This investigation indicated dis- agreement among college and high school physics teachers as to a) the ability of certain science terms to convey a fairly accurate scientific meaning and b) how accurately quantitative relationships should be expressed for pre-PSSC science courses #2- A research study was completed on the local level in Grossmont, California* 2 The purpose of the study was to answer the following questions before edootlng the PSSC l ;:> ate T. Rathe. "Certain Physics Generalizations Desirable for Student to Attain Before Taking the P SSC High School Physics Course," Science Education . lj.9:128, March, 1965* ? Leon M. Lessinger, "An Evaluation of PSSC Physics, n California £gujpnal c 'idary Education , 37:97-99* February, 1^62* 52 oro^am: 1. What contribution*! would the new progrem yr.ake in the educational life of the pu->ile not now being made by the traditional progrera? ?. Would ell oralis co^i only electing physics be a^le to handle the subject matter? 3» What would the reaction be from pupils, orrpnts, teachers, btio administrators? I±* Would the coarse cause lower rrj&rks earned by the pupils? 5>* What weaknesses were there in the urogram which Right require reraerilatlve treatment?! The research Dlan, selected to answer the above questions, wes to have five of the six schools teach the PSSC program while the sixth school taught the traditional course. The Otis test of general intelligence, P8SC tests, and a test produced by the teachers of the district were administered to all ouoils* ouestionaires and rating sheets were developed to obtain oupil, parent, teacher, and admin- istrator reaction to the program* The results may be summarized as follows: 1. Pupils stated that they experienced marked growth in their understanding of ohysics* They were particularly favortible towards their Increased ability to see relationships, judge the usefulness of facts, and the oooortunity to experiment and use Ideas* ^Leon R« Lessinger, "An "valuation of PSSC Physics," California Journal of Secondary Educ ation , 37s97« February, 53 2« The parents general reaction was favorsbl© 5 they stressed, in Derticular, the contribution of the program in their youngs vera ability to think independently* 3» Teachers and administrators felt that the pv- f .:ram not yny- tau-ht ohysics but el so helped toe pupils learn to think* A by-product of the program war I more Insi^htf .1 under- standing of Physics by the teachers themselves* U» The raarka B&rned, as well ae the actual performance of the pupils of oomoerable ability* on the PS5C and traditional physics tests do not support the thesis that the PSSC program is either harder to grass or more difficult to succeed in than the traditional program, !?• ^SSC pupils were not penalized in their understanding of classical nhysics when com arod to the pupils or comparable ability taking the traditional progras i in the district • 6. The California sample of PSSC pupils did better, statistically, on one of the HMO tests and significantly better on two of the five ?3SC tests than the New York Stat© sample* ?• Weaknesses in the program, center mainly around the text material, tin© allotted for laboratory and previous preparation of the iile in the mathematics*! Some of the studies reviewed have tried to compare the PSSC course and the tradtl nal course* The major problem in this tyoo of evaluation will be realistic only if the nature and objectives of the co.-rsa are talren into account* This is one reason it Is practically impossible to ccmoare and tralnate bin rOsmitt*e*S physics course zn6 the tradi- tional pnysiea course* fhs complexity of this problem led the Oollege Board to authorise a special study to determine 3- La on H* Lesslnfter* "An Evaluation of PSSC Physics, California Journal of Secondary Fducation , 37:97- 9, February* l%g* * the extent of tic ha -.d leaps of the PSSC physics students on the College Entrance Examination Board Physics Vest. The results she i the validity of the traditional evaluative instrument vr.s questionable for both types of courses* Consequently, they ha e reverted to a single examination consisting of ouotrtlont involving both co r:;c: f study. mother major problem in evaluating a new courte such as the °S£C is the difficulty to cetermine whether the differences are die to variables which are being evaluated or whether the differences exist due to some other variable which has not been takoE into consideration. Prom the research studies reviewed, the author will attemot to indicate which objectives have or have not been reached. For some of these objectives it will be possible to compare the P SSC and traditional students. In such cases If the scores on a test indicate that the PSSC grouo did significantly better than the traditional group, then the author will assume that the objective has hsen reached. Objective number one, "to euphasize the continuity and unity o r pfcyales"* and objective number two, "to encourage students to oreonre for careers in the Physical sciences, * c are the only two objectives that are given Leslie V« Trowbridge, W A Comparison of the Objectives and Instructional Material in Two Types of High School Physics Courses, n Science F&icatlon , 49*117-122, March, 196£. 2 Ibid. where the research studies failed to Indicate whether or not these objectives have been reached. Hipsher f s research study on the cor arison of the PSSC course and the traditional course seems to indicate that objective number three, "to prepare students for advanced work in college and universities,"! has not been reached. Hipsher has shown this by comparing test scores of studentB of both the PSSC course and the traditional course who took the Cooperative Physics Test. These test scores showed the traditional students significantly higher than the °SSC students. This Cooperative Physics Test is designed to mea- sure the level of achievement and the ability of students to succeed in an introductory college physics course. How- ever, as Hipsher has commented, the Cooperative p hysics Test is designed for the traditionally oriented student because most of the introductory college courses are taught like the traditional ohysics course. 3ecause of this the student in the traditional course may have had an advantage over the students in the ^SSC course. Trowbridge's study, conducted by sending questionaires 1 Leslie W. Trowbridge, "A Comparison of the Objectives and Instructional Material in Two Types of High School Physics Courses," Science Fducatlon, 1^9:117-122, March, 1965>. 56 to teachers, indicates that objective number four, "to emohasize the study of a few major topics at considerable depth, ■• has been reached. This was shown by the fact that this was one of the objectives favored significantly by PSSC teachers over teachers of traditional courses. The author is asFuminrr that because this objective obtained a Msrher rating from PSSC teachers that this objective has been reached. Objective number five, to determine the ability of students to reason to logical conclusions when working with unfamiliar data, has been reached and verified by Heaths study and by Pay's study. This is shown in Heath's study by the 3 SSC group getting higher scores on the Concealed Flcrurea Test than the traditional group. The Concealed Fiprures Test is designed to measure the ability of students to change t^e function of structural elements of en object and use them in a new way. In Day's study this is shown by the PSSC croup scoring higher scores on the items, logical reasoning and deduction on the Watson-Clazer Critical Thinking /Iporaisal. On the basis of Heath's study and Lessinger's study objective number six, "to develoo the spirit of scientific lLeslie W. Trowbridge, "A Comparison of the Objectives and Instructional "aterisl in Two Types of High School Physics Courses," Science Education, 1^.9:117-122, March, 1965. 57 inquiry, ■* has been readied. In Leseinger's study, conducted in Grossri nt, California, he shows that the objective has been reached by stnting that the study showed the pupils who were taking the PSSC course showed more growth in their under- standing of relationships and the opportunity to experiment and use ideas as compared to a traditional ohysics grouo. death's study also shows this objective has been reached by showing the PSSC gFoap scored higher than the traditional group on the Cognitive Preference Test items, "questioning 3f information given" and "fundamental principles of physics underlying the data". Objective number seven, "to teach physics to the tyoical kind of high school group which has traditionally 2 taken hirh school physics in the past," has been reached. This is shown by the Ferris study and the Les singer study. One of the main purposes of the achievement test given to the PSSC grouD in Perris*s study was to determine if this objective hnd been reached. This was shown by the results of the aptitude test in that -ost of the students taking PSSC course scored in the upper 25> percentile of the national norms crrouD of the United States' twelfth grade students ^Leslie V. Trowbridge, "A Comparison of the Objectives and Instructional Material In Two Tyoes of High School Physics Courses," Science Education , lj.9 Jll7-1?2» March, 1965* 2 Ibid. on Iff* The Committee believed that the atudentc who traditionally took physics were in the upper 2$ percentile on the national norms c • Therefore, in tl is's Judr- nient, this study indicated that tho st-: dents vr'.io enrolled in the PSSC course are representative of the aptitude ran^e for which the course was designed. He also believes that I res on the achievement tests indicate that the R88C students achieved tho level of cometency In physics that the Committee had ori inally taq ccted of then, This objective is alEO v rifled in Lesrlngcr's study by the fact that the marks earned, as veil as the classroom performance of the pupils in the study, support the objective thst the rse is designed to be taught to the students who generally take physios* &*eath*s study tn Day*! study verify that the last objective, *fcs help students learn techniques of experiijen- totion in order to find the answer to a problem,* 2 has been reached. Heath's study determined if this objective had been reached by comparing the score* of the PSSC group and the traditional rroup on tho Cognitive ^reference Test for the ^Frederick L. Ferris, "An Achievement Test Report," Science Teacher , 26:£77, December, 1959* o Leslie W» T^ovbridcre, "^ Conpsrlson of the Objectives and Instruction terial in Two Ty?>es of Hi~h School Physics Courses," Science Education , IJ.9J117-122* March, 196£. 59 choices "qu^ftlonlftg of information givta" nnd "fundamental nrioetoles of obysics nndtrljl lg the data". The scores showed the PMC rrouo ranked significantly hi -her than the traditional crouo. ray's study verified that the lfttt objec- tive had been reached by observing the hirher scores earned by the p SSC group over the traditional group on the test Items deduction and Interpretation on the Watson-Glazer Critical Thinking Aooraisal. SUMNARY AND CONCLUSIONS This renort w«?e conducted in or< > r to <»lve a com- plete summary and compilation of all evaluations that have been Wtda about the Physical Science Study Committee high school physics course* The ^SSC course was designed to answer a lonr-gtandinf feeling of dissatisfaction with the crerent teaching of ohysics in the hi^h school. The P8SC designed a completely new hi^h school ohysics course inclu- ding ■ new textbook, laboratory galdt* set of inexpensive aonaratus, n- mber of films, standardized tests, series of paoorback books, end a teacher's guidebook. The aim of this material was to develop In he students a deeoer under- standing of the meaning of science by teaching the student to develop hie critical thinking ability. The Committee 'a aooroach was that selected topics are diecui. jed in great detail, with each tooic Itadlag to greater generalizations and constant reference to exoerimental observation. 60 There has boen wide and varied ooinion about the ^SSC program. The most frequently listed shortcomings of the course are the following: 1« The text is difficult to read and lacks generally the easier drill tyoe oroblems that bridge the gar> between first contact with an idea and some mastery of it. 2. Practical «o^li cations are lacking in the course* 3. The quantity of subject matter is substantially more than can be thoroughly covered by a normal class in one year. [4.. A large quantity of the subject matter in the course as well as the suggested method of presentation, is unfamiliar to most high school physics teachers. The advantages of the co .rse usually listed Include the following: 1. The laboratory phase of the program is generally outstanding* 2. The students are guided to understand the way a physicist learns by using logical deductions and creative thinking. 3. Physics is both a body of knowledge and an activity. The orosram unfolds this dual nature of science to the students. l\.» The students come away from the course, understanding the general orinciples better than they would have in a tradi- tional course. 5. The Committee 1 * program foresees every need of the teacher in providing all the necessary items for a comolete high school physics course* 61 ■valuation has been attempted and has oroduced some insight into the oroblems confronted. A number of group comparative evaluations have been completed In the high school oertaining to the Committee's ohysics and traditional nhysics co -rses. The studies reviewed indicate that most of the main objectives first set up by the Committee have been reached* The objectives reached are: l±* To emohasize the study of a few major topics at considers le depth. £• To employ tests as a means of determining the ability of students to reason to iocical conclusions when working with unfamiliar data. 6. To develop the spirit of scientific inquiry. 7» To teach ohysics to the typical kind of high school grouo which has traditionally taken high school physics in the oast. 8. To help students learn techniques of exoerimentation in order to find the answer to a problem.! The research studies olso Indicate that the objective "to orepare students for advanced work in college and universities, " esoecially for the traditionally oriented colleges coarse, may not have been reached. The research studies reviewed did not Indicate whether iLeslie W. Trowbridge, "A Comparison of the Objectives and Instructional Material in Two Types of High School ^hysics Courses," Scfe nee Education, J±9:117-122, March, 196£. 62 the objective "to emphasize the continuity and unity of physics,"* and "to encourage students to ore pare for careers in the physical sciences, "^ had or had not been reached. Observed from the point of view of educational research the P SSC program offers -rany problems for further study, but there is no denying that the way bai been opened to make 3 physics a far more valuable part of the high 10 »ol curriculum. The achievements of this new coarse should serve to reralnc educators what they are often prone to forget, that In physics, and also in every other academic discipline, there lies resources for the solutions of educational oroblems which are usually neglected.^- The author believes if the ?SSC course is to be a total success, the ori-nary concern must be to obtain the cooperation of the high school science teacher. He and his students are the customers for this product. The teacher must try out the program, qt\6 measure carefully its triumphs and its failures. The teacher must keep a constant feedback flowing to the physicists, the educators, the editors, the film oroducers, the designers of apparatus, and all those who are seeking to out the course together. If the course ^•Leslie V* Trowbridge, "A Comparison of the Objectives and Instructional Material in Two 'iypes of Sigh School Physics Courses," Science Education , lj.9:117-122, March, 1965). 2lbid. 3 J. A. Easley, Jr., "The Physical Science Study Committee and Educational Theory," Harvarc Educational Review , 29:11, Winter, 19S9. 63 Is to succeed In the classroom and in the classroom alone, Its final form mist In the end be determined by the closrroonw Because of the need for a greater understanding of science, the ^SSC course was developed. This does not mean that the P S£C course is the only possible approach to the teachinr of ohyslcs» Under way at the prasont time is another project that is being developed for the teachinr of high school -sics. This project is being done at Harvard University, called the harvard °ro,1oct» If man is to continue to live successfully in a scientific world, there is a constant need for physics teaching and the teachings of all sciences to be contemoorary with the times. BIBLIOGRAPHY 65 TBLIOGRAPHY Kelly, W. C Survey of ^du est Ion In "'hyelcs In Universities of the United State-T il New YorTr: American Institute o7 ""hysics, l<?Wr Physical Science Stud Committee : ^hysics. Boeton: r. C. Heath and Company, I960 •"" Periodicals Arons, ft. B. "The Mew Hlch School ^hysics," 'hyslcs Today , 13:20-25, June, 1960. Barish, William. "Reader f s Column," Science Teacher , 26:3*9, October, 1959. Erauer, ^scar L. "Something fsngerously New in Physics Teaching," Science Teacher , U7:365-72, October, 1963. . "Attempts to Tnorove High School ^hysics Education," "Science Question , l;7:372-76, October, 1963. Calandra, Alexander. "Some Observations of the Work of the P SSC," Harvard Fducatlonal Review , 29:19-22, Winter, 1959. • "What's Wronp with Them?," School Management t BT75*83i November, 196lj.. Colby, Fdward G. "The New Science Curriculums," School Management , 8:83-88, November, 1961j.. Cowan, ^aul J. "An Autoinstructional Program in PSSC Physics for Small Schools," American Journal of Physics , 32:79, October, 196!j.. Crane, H. R. "Creative Thinking and Fxoerimenting," American Journal of Physics , 28:14.37-^3, May, I960. Peall, Louis and Lawrence Badar. "Preparatory Curriculum for PSSC and ?ther Physics Programs," American Journal of Physics , 31:1814.-90, March, 1963. 66 r asley, J. 4. "The Physical Science Study Committee and Educational Theory," Harvard Educational Review , 29:lj.-ll, Winter, 1959. Finlay, Gilbert C. "Physical Science Study Committee: A Status Rcoort," So 3 > net Teacher , 2lj.:571i.-76, December, 1959. i "Secondary School Physics: Physical Science Study Committee," erican Journal or Physics , 28:286-93* rch, I960, "The Physical Science Study Committee," School Review , 70:63-^1, Soring, 1962. . "What Are the Puestions," Science Teacher , 5TjT32 7 -29, November, 1957. Ferris, Frederick L. *Al Achievement Test Reoort," Science Teacher , 26*576-79, December, 1959. . "The Physical Science Study Committee: Will It Succeed?," Harvard retentional Review , 29:29-32, V/inter* 1959. Friedlander, K« W. "Book Reviews," ^hysics Today , 15:61-63, January, 1962. Friedman, Francis L. "A Blueprint," Science Teacher , 2J+: 320-23, November, 1957. Heath, Robert W. "Curriculum, Cognition, and Educational v eesurement," Educational rnd Psychological Measurement , 2^}.: 239-53* Summer, 196>|. Hipsher, Warren L. "Study of Hi,^h School Physics Achievoment," Science ueacher , 28:36-67* October, 1961. Hutchison, Flmer. "Physics in Our Hirrh Schools," The p hysics Teac ior , 2:385-86, November, I96J4.. Jance, Randolph. "The Six New Science Currlculuma," School Management , 7:63, June, 1963. John, Rev, Richard T. "The Use of PSSC Physics in Kinor Seminaries," National Catholic Educational Association Bulletin , 57:75, August, 1960. Klofer, Leo F. "The Physics Course of the Physical Science Study Committee, * Harvard Educational Review , 29:26-28, Winter, 1959. 67 Knauss, Harold P. "Physics for Secondary Schools." American Journal of Physics , 26:37Q-$0, September, 195°. Lee, Addison F. "Current Problems In Science Education," Science Education , l4.9:li|.6-5l» March, 1965. Lesslnger, Leon K 9 "An Evaluation of PSSC Physics," California Jc rnal of Secondary Education , 37:97-99* February, 1962 • Little, Flbert P. "A Commentary," flarvard Educational Review , 29:33-36, Winter, 1959. ' . "A Mew ".o has is on the 'Tow 1 of Physics," Nation's TScBools , 65:10l;-05» February, I960. ♦ "From the Feginni ng," Science Teacher , 2l±: 315-19* November, 1957. . " n S£C: A Physloi Pro gran," Educational Leadership , "T7T167-69, Fecember, 1959. •tn The p h. -nee Study C. '-lee," Tarvart 7 ; ducabional Review , 29:1-3, Winter, 1959. J-ayer, ,-rtin. "Scientists in the Classroom," Commentary , 35:312-19, April, 1963. Miner, Thomas D« 'ftagrilo*: •: . C," American Journal of Physics , 29:33^-39, May, 1961. Poorm^n, Lawrence Oenem "Indiana Physics Teachers React to PS3C," Science Education , 29:171-2, v arch, 1965. Bathe, Pate P. "Certain Physics Generalizations Desirable for* Stud«ntl to Attain Before Taking the Physical Science Study Conmittee High School Physics Course," Science Education , 1^9:127-37, April, 1962. Rosenheim, Edward ~>. "i atheraatics and Physics," Harvard Fducational Review , 29:16-18, Winter, 1959. Shamus, frother. "a High School ^hysics Survey," The Physics Teacher , 3:121, Harch, 1965. "Summary of Judgments Made by Teachers," Science Teacher , 26:579-^], Fece-bcr, 1959. 'lomer, Parrel W. "New Physics Course for High School: Tevelonod by the I'ScC," California Journal of Sec ndary Fc-ucatlon, 33 :*4-92-95» Fecember, 195 ST" 68 Trowbridge, Leslie W. n A Comparison of the Objectives and Instructional Material in Two Types of High School °hysics Courses," Science Education , lj.9:117-22, March, 1965. Watson, Fletcher G. "Comments on the Program of the Physical Science Studv Committee," Harvard 'ducational Review , 20:l?-l5, Winter, 1959. White, Steohen. n The Physical Science Study Committee: The D lanninc; and Structure of the Course," Contemporary °hysics , 2:39-51+, October, I960. Youne, Victor J. "Survey on Enrollment in Physics," The Physics 'Jeocher , 3:117, March, 1965. Zacharias, Jerrold R. "Into the Laboratory," Science Teacher , 2k * 321+-26 , November, 1957. snd Stephen White. "The Requirements for Major Curriculum Revision," School and Society , 92:67-72, February, 22, 196^. Miscellaneous Annual Report of the Educational Testing Service for the Year , 195-3-59" ^rinceton, New Jersey : lr ducat ionaT"" Testing Service . Pay, William W. "Physics and Critical Thinking: A Comparison of PSSC and Traditional Physics," Summary of Unpublished r octoral Dissertation, University of Nebraska, June, 19614.. Educational Services Incorporated Newsletter . Watertown, "assachu setts : Educational Services Incorporated, January, 1965. Pirst Annual Re port of the Physical Science Study Committee . Itfatertown, t-'sssacliu set ts: The Committee, January, 195o" • Hipsher, Warren L. "A Comparative Study of High School Physics Achievement," Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Tulsa, Tulsa, Oklahoma, I960. Letter from Warren J. Bell, Education Consultant of Science and Mathematics, Kansas State Department of Public Instruction, Topeka, Kansas. A RffTXEM i KB PHYSICAL SCI&NCB SWOT COMMITT1 high school raraxca cour.- by M r W. rAESC^NFl B.S., Raker University, 1961; AN ABSTRACT ^F \ TS R^?")RT submitted in martial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree MASTER OF SCIFNCF College of Fducstion KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY Manhattan, Kansas 1965 The threefold puroose of this study was to answer the following questions: 1* Why and how was the Physical Science Study Committee high school ohysics course developed? 2. What are the ooinione of teachers and educators concerning the course? 3* Are the objectives formulated by the Committee for t^e course being achieved? The procedure emoloyed in this study was to review the oertinent literature concerning the PSSC course located at Kansas State University, Kansas University library, and obtained through interl'brary loans, and various sources obtained through correspondence. This investigation produced a considerable amount of information oertaining to the PSSC course which was organized into the following categories: 1. Background and develooment of the PSSC course. 2. Ooinions of teachers and educators on the effec- tiveness of the PSSC course. 3« Research studies to determine the effectiveness of the PSSC course. 2|.« Summary and conclusion. It was found that the P SSC course was a multimillion dollar orogram designed for the revision of high school physics. The D SSC develooed for this course: a textbook, laboratory wide and a set of new and inexpensive sooaratus, a large number of films, standardized tests, a growing series of paoerback books, and a teacher's guidebook. The PSSC course was designed to tell a unified story- one in which the successive topics are chosen and developed to lead toward an atomic oicture of natter* The student is exoected to be an active oarticioant in the course, and use deduction and logical reasoning to develop the fundamental orincinles. The main criticisms against the Committee's course are 1) oractical applications are lacking, 2) the course is too long to cover in one year, and 3) it is difficult to read and lacks the easier drill tyoe problems. The advantages of the course are usually listed as 1) the laboratory experiments are outstanding, 2) the students are guided to use deductive and creative thinking when solving problems, and 3) the students understand the general principles better than they would in a traditional course. The research studies reviewed seem to indicate that most of the objectives first orooosed by the Committee have been reached.