Recent posts View all
Home of real teaching & learning
  • Full support for teachers
  • Focus on critical thinking
  • Engaging classroom activities
  • Integrated student eBook
  • Assessed tasks / qBank
  • Practice exam questions
Find out more Download brochure

The InThinking Guarantee: Our sites are written by expert practitioners and not by AI

See our AI policy

Disclaimer: InThinking subject sites are neither endorsed by nor connected with the International Baccalaureate Organisation.

Don't miss out, find out!
IB Approved Workshops
Physics
IB DP Category 1

Paris, France, 13 - 15 November 2026

Find out more
Physics: A focus on the experimental programme
IB DP Category 3

Paris, France, 19 - 21 February 2027

Find out more
Physics
IB DP Category 2

Berlin, Germany, 26 - 28 February 2027

Find out more
Virtual Think-Ins
Focus On: IB Teaching – A Practical Guide for Teachers new to the IB

20 November 2026

Find out more

Find all InThinking events at
inthinking.net

digital dementia

One of the nice things about using simulations to illustrate a point is that they always do exactly what you expect, well almost always. Today I challenged my first year students to draw st, vt and at graphs for a bouncing ball, a pool ball and a pendulum. They first sketch what they think is the answer, I then do them on the board and prove that I'm right by showing the motion and graphs with interactive physics. Everything went well until the pool ball. I specified the velocity was constant across the table so acceleration was therefore zero. Not according to IP, there is even a vector clearly showing that there is a constant acceleration. This was quite worrying but a quick check with Algodoo showed zero acceleration with sharp peaks every time there is a collision restoring my faith . Still don't know what is going on in IP though, maybe its just getting old

Help