To the Department of Physics at MIT,

We, the current and past students of 8.012 (under the instruction of Professor Philip Harris), would like to bring our concerns to your attention and kindly ask you to take relevant actions addressing this matter.

We found that the organization of this course made it very difficult for us to learn and fully understand the appropriate material. Professor Harris’ lectures are mostly taught using abstract examples without systematically going through the fundamental concepts (and often very different from the lecture notes posted on Canvas), with the examples usually having little relevance from one another. Furthermore, the majority of the class (even for those that have strong understanding in the material prior to lectures) are often confused by Professor Harris’ written notes on the blackboard: in addition to the lack of explanations, the professor himself admits that he makes quite a few mathematical errors, and the lecture is frequently paused by students making corrections to his written expressions.

Additionally, lectures, PSETS and exams are mostly independent from one another. All the PSET problems (except the last question) are taken from our assigned textbook, and most of us found that the lectures had very little contribution towards PSET completion, requiring us to either have a high level of prior knowledge in the topic or self-teach the relevant material by consulting the textbook. Exams are also very different from the lectures and PSETS—questions are a lot more abstract and unpredictable compared to PSET problems and practice tests given prior to the exams. Professor Harris made a comment with respect to the first exam that he “deliberately made it difficult to show you what MIT is like.”

Furthermore, the implication we received from Professor Harris is that 8.012 is exclusive to students who have a strong background in classical mechanics and an aptitude for physics (note that placement in 8.012 is recommended based upon the results of the Math Diagnostic). One of the remarks he made during an informal conversation with students after the first exam was that due to the significant difficulty of 8.012, about 30% of the class switches to 8.01 each year. However, when we compare the PSET problems from 8.012 to those in 8.01, there is a surprisingly large percentage of overlap. Moreover, GIR classes in a similar fashion to 8.012 (including 8.022, 18.022, and 5.112) have a much lower drop rate, which implies that there are factors other than 8.012’s difficulty that contributed to its drop rate.

These patterns have been consistent across the last three years since Professor Harris became the instructor for 8.012, a class for passionate first-year physics students who love to be challenged. Yet, it is concerning that currently the opposite of 8.012’s intentions is achieved: many expressed a disinterest in physics after taking this class and began to consider other course options. Hence, we believe actions must be taken as soon as possible to not only ensure a successful foundational education but also an environment that fosters passion for physics, and we have the following recommendations for both Professor Harris and future instructors for this class:

• Re-organize the course so that it is taught cohesively (lectures, recitations, PSETs and exams should be built upon each other), and takes into consideration the level of knowledge tested in the Math Diagnostic.
• Systematically teach the fundamental concepts (at least those taught in the learning sequences of 8.01) in lectures with prepared lecture notes (cross-checked for errors); then discuss the applications of these concepts and problem solving strategies.
• Write PSET questions that explore the lecture material in-depth.
• Construct exam problems similar to those in the PSETs and post at least two practice exams for each midterm/final (that provide fair representations of the actual exam).

These are our thoughts merely from the students’ perspectives. We understand that the department has much more to consider and balance, and we would be open to any further discussions and suggestions.