[Archangelsk]

Physics is taught later in the education process to allow the use of higher levels of math.

For engineers, yes. However, F=ma is an algebra equation and vector problems only use rudimentary trigonometry. This is well within the capability of an 8th grader. Given all that, I agree with you that math is the key, but math courses can run concurrently with physics courses.

[Wonder Warthog]

"However, F=ma is an algebra equation and vector problems only use rudimentary trigonometry. This is well within the capability of an 8th grader. Given all that, I agree with you that math is the key, but math courses can run concurrently with physics courses.

I don't know what country or schools you are talking about, but it certainly ISN'T any part of the US of A that "I" know about--by the 8th grade I certainly hadn't had either algebra or trig (just starting algebra). I doubt seriously that things have gotten BETTER in math instruction (and in fact I know they have gotten worse). The problem with having the math courses "run concurrently with the physics courses" is that they never really do. You invaribly hit a need in physics for a math concept you haven't yet had.

[eniapmot]

F=ma is an algebra equation

Huh?

It is not.

[KC_for_Freedom]

You and I are saying the same thing. A "survey" physics course can always be designed, usually for the student who wants to know the what and the how but not the why. These courses can be designed with any level of math required by the prerequisites the students have. I point out that for the student headed into a "hard" science, the non-math rigor takes time from a stronger program I am all in favor of people who are not tracked into a college bound program taking whatever they like, and "general Physics" is as good a course as any, and better than many for explaining how to solve problems in the real world where the underlying mathematical explaination may not be required, (Such as F = ma and F= the derivative of momentum)