Why Teach Physics at the High School Level? Before outlining reasons why physics should be part of a high school curriculum, justification for this task will be undertaken. First among the reasons to teach physics is the all encompassing nature of the science. In our present highly technological society, applications, based on the principles of physics can be seen everywhere. From the TV, computer and smart phone to the automobile, the revolving door to the light bulb, physics principles lie at the root. Knowledge of even rudimentary physics takes some of the mystery, if not the “magic” out of these devices. Knowledge of physics can help one cope with the trials and tribulations of everyday life. One can thus discern why a TV set is dangerous, even when turned “off”, why snow-covered roads become icy when heavily traveled and why one is safer in an automobile than under a tree in a lightning storm, to name just a few. In addition, physics may well help one to perform useful tasks, such as fixing a leaky faucet or wiring up a light fixture. Such knowledge renders one, even if to a small degree, more in control of one’s environment. For students about to enter the real world, such information may prove invaluable in later life. The gist of this discussion is this: one need not be a potential engineer or scientist to derive practical information from the subject of physics- a key argument for a wider ranging high school physics program. In addition to knowledge of the physical world, the study of physics presents an ideal opportunity for students to develop the deductive reasoning ability, present in them. Few are those who fail to delight in the joys of success. Mental success that is, using one’s mental faculties to feel in control in new or unusual situations is particularly satisfying. Physics, presented properly, can greatly facilitate the development of this ability and “polish up” our mental machinery. Indeed, one may well contend that one of the primary; if not the goal of a high school physics program should be the development and/or refinement of organized problem-solving techniques in students. Students should come away from a course in physics with an ability to approach new problems without fear or frustration, an ability to relate them to previous experiences and knowledge to proceed from there. This kind of procedure is useful in almost any field. The exercise of reasoning ability is unique to humankind and it seems almost a crime not to encourage its development in students. This is not to say that the physics classroom is uniquely suited to this task, but it does represent a logical point of time in the student’s lives when then they may be mentally ready and a logical place for undertaking it. Often this is the last chance to “catch” students before sending them out (perhaps unprepared) onto the world. For many, this may be the first (and last) time that they get to use this ability in a school setting. All of the above concern the general student. For those planning careers in science or engineering, a background in physics is essential. That physics forms the basis of many types of engineering (electrical, computer, mechanical, civil, etc.) is clear. Less obvious are the ties to chemistry, mathematics, biology and even business. Anyone delving in depth into these fields will find a physics background most useful. Having now argues as to the value of a physics course in a high school program; let us now examine the question of whether or not to make it mandatory. Initially, one must realize that a compulsory (as opposed to elective) subject is likely to be met with resistance and resentment by some students, as, in our permissive society, some will look upon them as infringements on personal freedoms. Therefore, making physics mandatory at first glance appears not to be a productive strategy. On the other hand, one can argue that if students are not mandated to take physics, they will never be exposed to the subject at all. In fact, however, they will, in fact, encounter the subject in everyday experience, perhaps unwittingly, as the public school system fails to relate the subject to the “real” world. The alternative is elective physics. In this case, only those wanting to the the course actually do so. The problem with this approach is that far too few students will end up being exposed to the subject, since most students would have heard (sometimes from their own teachers) that physics is a difficult subject not easily related to the practical world, leading them to avoid this path. The standard solution to this conundrum has been the creation of different sections of the class, each with ostensibly different objectives and geared towards its own subset of students-i.e. “A.P.” physics, advanced physics, standard physics and “scaled-down” physics. This all sounds well and good-modify the course to suit the student. However the danger lies in inadvertently substituting one “useless” (in the “real” world) course for another. Is a general science course (even if called physics) consisting of boring material that students have seen before really more functional than an “irrelevant” physics course? Above all, we must leave the “physics” in Physics, as much of the value of the subject lies in the presentation. We must not arbitrarily discard topics and maintain the self-consistency of the discipline. Also, we should maintain a degree of formalism and must not relinquish the selection of content to the student’s whims, for this may well lead to chaos and eventual boredom. A better solution lies somewhere in between. We should encourage students to take physics. This encouragement should take the form of promotion of the subject from teachers and counselors, when appropriate. We should not make physics a blanket mandatory requirement for all students, especially those not prepared mathematically, as this approach merely serves to frustrate students and teachers alike. These students would be better served from a different type of course, as opposed to a diluted “physics” offering. This mandates that we make a concerted effort to access exactly where on the preparation scale students lie prior to making our recommendations. However, we must also resist making the subject an aloof one and make every effort to relate it to the students’ world. Above all, we must work within a logical framework with respect to presentation. Demonstrations and laboratory exercises, of carefully thought out, provide valuable intuition building experiences. In summary, then, we should vary our style but not our objectives in dealing with students. Of course, the ultimate solution is more complicated. We must arrange the curriculum such that most students will actually want to study physics. This involves a restructuring of earlier science courses, as well. Perhaps most destructive are classes that compelled students to outline chapters in the (one and only!) book, page by page, ones that never involved experiments or demonstrations and ones that seemingly failed to subject the curriculum to simple common sense testing. Taken together, such offerings understandably can lead to fundamental misconceptions about science and a natural aversion to it. Indeed, under such conditions, it takes a strong curiosity about in science, perhaps developed outside of school, to sustain students \interest until a thoughtful offering of physics is encountered in high school. Concurrently, we must shift the emphasis of science, and other subjects, as well, away from memorization and towards the development of thinking processes in students. We must show them that science is a part of their everyday and not just their classroom lives. The time is at hand. We all can see the effects of the failure of our schools to keep pace with an increasingly technological world on current students who are less motivated (and often less informed, despite the ubiquitous presence of the internet) than their peers a generation ago (the space age, say). Failure to de this will result in a diminishing number of students taking physics, the reduction or elimination (in days of fiscal austerity) of advanced classes and, consequently the infusion of less qualified people into the universities and the scientific world as a whole. Indeed, a populace compromised in their ability to rationally problem solve can jeopardize the effectiveness of our democratic system.