Brasil Final Report - Department of Physics - The Ohio State University

98
CONFERENCE RESPONSE – VII IACPE
Ruth Howes
Ball State University
Department of Physics and Astronomy
47306 - Muncie - IN USA
rhowes@bsu.edu
During this conference week, I have been impressed by the likenesses and the differences in
the challenges and opportunities facing physics education in our countries. It is clear that no one
nation has a monopoly on good ideas and that we have much to learn from one another.
Physics departments in all our countries are seeing a declining number of undergraduate
physics majors. Prior to this meeting, I though the problem existed only in the United States, but
clearly it extends to most other countries as well. In all our countries, many physics departments
have valued research productivity and the ability to attract research funding above providing
excellent undergraduate education in physics. Faculty have focused on graduate education and
neglected the needs of undergraduates.
Second, all our countries face a shortage of qualified secondary level physics teachers. The
primary reason in all countries appears to be poor pay. In Brazil, secondary teachers barely earn a
living wage. In the U.S., competent physics teachers are hired by industry at much higher salaries
than those of teachers. The result of the shortage is high school graduates who have poor
introductions to physics and little interest in studying it at the universities.
Finally, the educated public in all our countries seems to perceive physics as a finished and
relatively uninteresting science. This contrasts sharply to the situation in astronomy, at least in the
United States. The roots of this problem are well-hidden. Perhaps it arises because few
undergraduates take more than one year of physics. In that one year, they learn no science finished
after the first decade or two of the last century. No wonder that they think of physics as a finished
and dead subject!
Perhaps it arises because physics courses have long been hurdles that talented students must
clear to get into engineering or medical school. Many university faculty have neglected their
teaching to advance their research, leaving these bright students and future opinion leaders with a
distinctly poor impression of physics and physicists. Perhaps it arises because researchers in
physics have not taken the time to explain their results to the public. Up until 10 years or so ago,
we were all confident that our research would continue to be funded as a matter of national security.
Some of us even denigrated such expert publicizers of science as Carl Sagan. Or perhaps the
problem in public perception of physics arises from the lack of qualified secondary physics
teachers.
These three issues in physics education cross national borders. When we seek solutions, we
find that the physics education communities in our countries face different problems. In the first
place, many American countries have uniform national curricula established by an agency of the
central government. To change physics curriculum, reformers must convince that one federal
agency. For example, the careful and excellent study presented by Marco Antonio Moreira on the
requirements for training physicists in Brazil has a very good chance very good chance of
influencing national education policy. In contrast, each university in the United States jealously
guards the right to establish an individual curriculum to meet the needs of its particular students or