My Assessment Plans for AP Physics 1

Introduction

This fall, I am diving back into the world of teaching AP Physics 1 after a hiatus of a few years. AP Physics 1 is an algebra-based, first-year physics course that covers seven units, typically equivalent to the material in a 100-level college physics course. However, this curriculum comes with its own set of challenges, particularly for schools like mine. We start in September, giving us one month less than usual to cover the material comprehensively, including incorporating laboratory experiences and practice. Assessment for an Advanced Placement course must be adapted to its unique requirements, as outlined by the College Board.

Background

I first started teaching AP Physics around 2001 when it was known as AP Physics B. In 2014, the College Board revamped the program, splitting it into two separate courses and streamlining some of the mathematical and calculative aspects. The new version places more emphasis on skills such as experimental design and graph interpretation, and it features fewer simple content-based questions in the multiple-choice section, focusing instead on a deeper understanding of core concepts.

Previous Challenges

While I appreciated the challenge and academic rigor of the program, I often found myself disheartened when it came to teaching it. My frustrations stemmed from two primary issues. First, the fixed pace: Since I had to adhere to a strict curriculum outline, I had little control over what and when I taught. If students struggled with a particular topic, it meant sacrificing time allocated for another. This rigidity became problematic, especially considering that not all students taking the course had the same level of prerequisite skills or intrinsic motivation. Some enrolled merely to bolster their transcripts, lacking genuine interest or aptitude for the subject.

A Negative Classroom Environment

These types of student motivations created a less than ideal classroom atmosphere. The course’s demanding nature left no room for engaging activities like projects where students could explore and apply concepts in a relaxed manner. Instead, our focus was unrelenting work, with every day holding critical importance. Without a solid grasp of the foundational material, such as Unit 1 on motion, students would struggle in subsequent units. Physics builds on itself, with each unit depending on the previous ones.

Problems Encountered with LPM

When I transitioned to a Learning Progression Model (LPM), I applied the same assessment methodology in AP as I did in regular and honors physics. I assessed all students based on the prescribed practices. Since my practices aligned significantly with those outlined by the College Board, I made slight adjustments to grade translation to account for Expert-level expectations, corresponding to scores of 4 or 5 on the exam. However, this approach didn’t yield the desired results. Time constraints prevented us from elevating students from the Beginning to the Expert level in all ten Practices within the eight-month timeframe before the exam. Furthermore, by starting at the Beginning level in Unit 1, students didn’t grasp Unit 1 material at a high enough achievement level to handle AP-style questions effectively.

Student Engagement

A significant issue arose concerning homework completion. In this course, more than any other, students needed to invest substantial effort outside the classroom to cover the required content. However, the LPM model didn’t assign significant value to homework, causing students to deprioritize it. These AP Physics students typically had a demanding academic workload and, when forced to make choices about their time, often neglected their physics homework because it wasn’t graded.

 

This dilemma presented a unique challenge. In regular and Honors physics, I tried to address homework issues through grading contracts, but the consequences were less severe. I could engage in discussions with individual students, persuading them to complete assignments. In AP Physics, time constraints and the high stakes left no room for such conversations, and my attempts to change student habits fell short.

Grading and Student Anxiety

Grading overall became another headache. The “no-grades-posted-until-January” approach didn’t sit well with students and parents in an AP-level class. Pushback was frequent, particularly among high-achieving students whose self-identity often hinged on top grades. The absence of grades left them adrift in defining their academic success, causing substantial anxiety.

My Return to Teaching AP Physics

Despite my initial decision to step away from teaching AP Physics in 2021, circumstances have led me back to it. As I prepare for this academic year, I’ve identified three primary challenges that I need to address:

  1. Effectively using LPM to develop student skills.
  2. Assessing multiple-choice questions effectively.
  3. Resolving the homework dilemma.

So here is how I am planning to conduct the class.

Effective Use of LPM

I believe in the efficacy of the Learning Progression Model (LPM). The Practices in LPM align well with the Science and Engineering Practices (SEPs) outlined in NGSS and by the College Board. I intend to continue using these practices, with slight modifications. Since projects are not a part of our curriculum, I will exclude LP10 (Engineering Design Process). Additionally, I will omit Content Mastery Checkpoints (CMCs) as I expect students to have a strong grasp of terminology. This leaves us with eight Practices, which align better with the constraints of the course’s timeframe.

Implementing the new Grade Translation system should alleviate some of the grading issues I faced before. Instead of focusing on achieving Expert-level proficiency in all practices, students will be required to meet Target Levels, which they can then translate into grades at the end of each unit or even for individual assignments.

Here’s my plan for Target Levels in AP Physics 1:

Table of target levels for each unit in AP PHysics
Target levels for each unit in AP Physics

The yellow highlights denote new levels that will be introduced. I will adjust the Target Levels based on the assumption that students enter the course with Developing-level skills, progressing to Proficient and Proficient+ as they gain a better understanding. This adjustment should better align with the pace set by the College Board, providing students with ample time to reach Expert levels by May.

Assessing Multiple-Choice Questions

Assessing multiple-choice questions (MCQs) presents a unique challenge in AP Physics. Unlike regular and Honors physics, where I value reasoning over the correct answer, the AP exam places significant emphasis on selecting the correct answer. The nuances of reasoning don’t contribute directly to test scores, as all that matters is the answer. Did they get it wrong because they made a careless error? Did they understand the material but applied it incorrectly? Was it a completely random guess? There is no easy way to tell.

However, students need practice with AP-style questions. To address this, there will be occasions when I provide sets of 40 MCQs for students to complete within a 90-minute timeframe. These questions will help gauge their readiness for the AP exam.

Handling Homework

The issue of grading homework remains a complex one. While I understand the pedagogical arguments against grading homework, I’ve come to terms with the necessity of doing so. Homework in this course primarily consists of three types: note-taking from video guides, drill and practice exercises, and lab reports. Lab reports will be assessed using the LPs, so they won’t factor into this category. However, I will need to evaluate the notes and exercises. Initially, I plan to assign one point for each completed, authentically attempted, and on-time assignment. Over time, I hope to negotiate the volume and frequency of assignments with my students, allowing them to tailor their homework load to their needs.

Calculating the Grade

For grading purposes, I will use the grade translation chart to assess the Learning Progressions, assigning grades based on how close students are to the target levels within each unit. This will account for 80% of their final grade.

Teaching AP Physics 1 means that MCQs must be graded. In my class, any MCQs will contribute 10% of the grade.

Midterm and final exams will be divided into sections, with FRQs factored into the LP bucket and MCQs in a separate category. Homework will make up the remaining 10% of the overall grade.

To keep to the general LPM philosophy, I do not plan to average unit scores together. I also hope to omit the homework grade in the second half of the year, which is more in keeping with my general mindset. If I do that, I will dedicate that 10% to the post-AP work. However, I will see how things evolve.

Conclusion

I acknowledge that this approach may need adjustments as I work with real students in the coming year. Striking a balance between pedagogy and ingrained habits may prove challenging, but I’m committed to navigating this journey. I understand that compromises are sometimes necessary, especially when teaching AP Physics 1. I have to deal with externally designed curricula and assessments.

I promise to keep you updated on both the short-term and long-term outcomes of this approach. As I fine-tune the details, I’d love to hear about your experiences with your AP classes and whether you’ve integrated the LPM or other ungrading practices into your teaching strategy. Teaching AP Physics 1 remains a dynamic challenge, but I’m dedicated to finding effective strategies to ensure my students’ success. It’s an ongoing process of adaptation and learning, and I look forward to the journey ahead.