Editor's Note

Chris Ohana

Like many elementary teachers, I was better prepared in the life sciences than in the physical sciences. My memories of high school chemistry are filled with visions of moles—but not the warm, fuzzy ones in the garden. In physics, I wondered why anyone would care why those two trains would cross. The way we were taught didn’t help. Physics seemed like an unofficial IQ test for the pocket-protector crowd.

Then, over 20 years ago, I had an “a-ha” experience in graduate school—I took biochemistry. What a beautiful thing it was. Suddenly, I understood why we took chemistry and physics, and I wished I paid more attention in my earlier courses. It seems obvious now, but living things are part of the physical world of electrons, orbitals, and even moles.

If science is the study of the natural world, how can we avoid physics and chemistry? Our students should understand the connections of the biological and physical realms before they hit the more abstract treatment in high school.

Many of us who teach preservice teachers note they seem to shy away from physics. If these teachers feel that way under the controlled environment of a university classroom, I fear once they start their inservice career, with all its attendant demands and stresses, that finding time to learn about teaching physics will not be a high priority. This is unfortunate because teaching physical science has so much to offer.

When I started teaching elementary science, I discovered physical science was a big hit—sometimes literally. The kids loved working with levers and pulleys or building solar cars. Things that moved were always popular. It was better yet when they got a chance to move their bodies. Total immersion science.

In one impromptu lesson, a day in which the kids seemed extremely energetic, I took the lesson outside and had the kids do a physics “par course” (remember that exercise fad of a decade ago in which you ran from station to station, doing push-ups or sit-ups, then running to the next callisthenic?). Instead of calisthenics, the fourth-grade students had to do a playground activity—toss a ball, swing on the monkey bars—and describe the motion in terms of forces and then run to the next station. The kids had to apply their knowledge of forces and came in exhausted. It was perfect.

There are other advantages to teaching physical science. When you are teaching about motion or machines, nothing dies. You don’t have to read something like The Tenth Good Thing About Pulleys through sniffles and tears. In a related sense, nothing stinks. There are no cages to clean or water bottles to fill. You don’t need to worry about long weekends or vacation care. Levers don’t need a summer foster family. And the most important reason to teach physical science?—It is all around us. It helps to explain the world. How can we not teach it?

To help you start thinking “physical science,” this issue features classrooms where teachers took a different approach to teaching force and motion.

• The Force of Multimedia Slideshows describes how to integrate multimedia presentation software with learning about forces.
• Newton’s First Law: Not So Simple After All invites us to rethink our approach to seemingly “simple” concepts.
• P.H.Y.S.I.C.S. Can Be Done! shares the experience of an award-winning teacher who created an outdoor trail that integrated physics learning with environmental science and local history.

You’ll find physical science explorations in our departments, too (Teaching Through Trade Books, Science 101, and Home Connections).

Of course, physics isn’t all we’re about this month, either. We’ve also included our yearly list of Outstanding Science Trade Books for Students K–12, a selection of recent science trade books in Spanish, and a few other articles for your reading pleasure. So, whatever your interests, I hope you find in the issue something that gets you and your students moving toward “a-ha” moments of your own in science.

Click here for PDF file.