Other Become Proficient in School Physics Problems

  • Thread starter Thread starter Isaac0427
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physics
AI Thread Summary
Proficiency in solving high school physics problems, particularly in projectile motion and force/tension scenarios, is less about speed and more about understanding the underlying principles. While students may take around 12.5 minutes per problem in exams, the focus should be on grasping the physical and mathematical concepts rather than just quick calculations. Many professionals emphasize that familiarity with the equations and the ability to reason through a problem are crucial. They suggest that proficiency develops through practice, where understanding the context and applying the correct models is key. Engaging with more complex problems, such as those found in physics and math competitions, can further enhance problem-solving skills. Ultimately, the goal is to cultivate a deep comprehension of physics rather than simply memorizing solutions.
Isaac0427
Insights Author
Gold Member
Messages
718
Reaction score
163
I'm not sure if this is the right forum, but I wasn't sure where to post this.

I was just wondering how long a basic high school physics problem should take you for you to be considered proficient. Specifically, projectile motion problems and force/tension problems that require you to look at the x- and y-components of the force vectors. For example, a problem modeled by this picture (on the left)
p4-20.gif

where you are given 3 pieces of information and you have to find the fourth (either vi, d, h or theta) and the final velocity of the water. Or a problem like this
p5-24.gif
where you are given the angles and the mass of the bag.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Although many people find it useful to do several problems that are much the same, I would say that proficiency involves seeing the general solution and realising that if you change the numbers it's really just the same problem again. And, being able to sanity-check the solution - what happens as ##\theta \rightarrow 0##, does my solution make sense?

Perhaps at high school level it is useful and important to get the methods engrained by repetition, but if you take a mechanics book like Kleppner and Kolenkow, the problems are almost entirely algebraic.

Personally, I don't think it matters how quickly someone can plug and chug (!), but rather how well they understand the physical and mathematical structure of the solution.
 
  • Like
Likes Student100 and Isaac0427
In the first year Physics courses I have taught, most exams required students to work 4 problems of that level of difficulty in 50 minutes - an average of 12.5 minutes each. Most students would finish a couple problems quickly that they remembered how to do right away and use the balance of the time on the ones they found harder.
 
  • Like
Likes Isaac0427
Thanks! As professionals, when you see a problem like this, do you just look at it and immediately know what to do and what equations to use? How long does it usually take you?
 
Isaac0427 said:
Thanks! As professionals, when you see a problem like this, do you just look at it and immediately know what to do and what equations to use? How long does it usually take you?

In the spirit of the question there's only one equation you need here F=ma. Everything else can be obtain directly from it. So yes?

I don't think it's right to say we could look at it and instantly know how to "solve it." Without context I might look at the picture and develop a different set of assumptions. With the context that was provided it's trival to develop a general solution. So yes?

I wouldn't get caught up on how long it takes you. Obviously it's important for exams and tests, but the initial goal should be understanding. You can be proficient without speed. Speed comes with lots of practice and experience.

Instead to become proficient make sure you understand why you approach a problem a certain way, what the equations tell you, do they make sense, do extreme cases provide any interesting insights, etc.
 
  • Like
Likes Isaac0427
when i was in my prime for a level mechanics I could solve those under 3-10 minutes. Looking back since I have forgotten a lot of the basics, It would take me anything from 20 to an hour Most of it would be spent remembering the approach and the basic assumptions. They are looking like pretty simple problems to me especially the cement bag one with it being in equilibrium and all...shouldnt take long. Its not about being quick, but being able to know which models fit with the situation and use correct equations, i guess.

One of my best memories was in an exam where we had a question about a box attached to a mass on a pulley hanging from a table, the mass is released and the rope breaks after some time, then we were asked to find if the box falls off the table and how far it travels or something like that. It was really fun, mechanics can be quite fun to get right. I got very excited and wrote a lot of english and physics on it and the teacher wrote a remark "good" on the side, i don't remember the specifics but it was a question of a higher complexity than the norm, we had to apply knowledge and not plug and chug

This is the official exam that I gave:
https://docs.google.com/viewerng/vi...wp-content/uploads/2012/11/9709_s14_qp_42.pdf

its out of 50, I got 40. The time is one hour 15 minutes. You should start going for maths and physics olympiads because you are young and ambitious. There you will be exposed to questions in a different manner and level than just from regular university and school courses, so if you want to develop proficiency in physics and maths, that is my recommendation. Even a dumbo like me can pass exams well given training, time and lots of practice.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Isaac0427
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
0
Views
2K
Back
Top