Physical Science vs. General Science?

[SuperDad]

What are the key differences between these two courses? I'm a little confused as to why the former is accepted as a high school credit, but the latter oftentimes isn't. Why would that be the case if both courses were completed at a high school level?

[regentrude]

As far as I understand, General science also contains a life science component whereas physical is just physics, chem and Earth sci. This means that even less material in each field is covered during the year, which I imagine is the reason that it is frowned upon.

What do you consider a high school level Gen Sci course? By construction, it is limited in the amount it can cover compared to doing real physics, chemistry, and biology courses, respectively. So why not do the real thing, either consecutively, or integrated (three years of three sciences simultaneously)?

Edited May 17, 2012 by regentrude

[redsquirrel]

It might have to do with the fact that 'general science' is what elementary and early middle schools often call their science courses.

 

I know that if I see the term 'general science' I think of something designed for young children. High School is typically a time of moving beyond general and into specialization. I am not saying it makes sense, just what is considered typical.

[SuperDad]

Thank you to both of you.

 

regentrude- I am not actually considering doing a General Science course (or even a Physical Science course at that). I was just curious. We are firmly physics-first and preferably integrated when it comes to science.