Interesting. That makes sense, but what’s the reason for using current instead of voltage as the variable?
In electrical circuits made with normal conductors and insulators, e.g. copper wires and organic polymer insulators, it is possible to ignore the currents that branch from the wires and close through the insulators, because they are extremely small (e.g. in the femtoampere range), but frequently it is not possible to ignore the voltage drops along the copper wires, which are caused by the resistances of the wires, and which may be in the millivolt range.
Generally, the biggest problem with math, physics and chemistry is that if you miss just one lesson (no matter if you physically miss it, or in worst case miss out understanding a concept for a couple minutes), you can easily end up "left behind" for years. With history, arts, languages, a number of computer science topics or most of biology you can either skip out on a certain subject or catch up easily on your own, but not getting a specific part in math/physics/chemistry and lacking the resources to follow up is setting oneself up for exponential learning gap later on.
The societal problem is that we've not set up schools or universities to deal with this "failure mode". Privileged kids can have after-school teaching or siblings helping out, but most will sooner or later resign and hate these subjects for the rest of their lives - and that is incredibly sad.
Why do I get a sneaking suspicion that few in the machinery of education want this, as it is a fast-track to continuous accountability?
As much as I love academia, I really wish there were more instructors with real experience that could say things like, "for math purposes assume a zero-loss conductor" while still emphasizing that real life is not so simple.
We did have a healthy incubation program, where instructors helped companies with product development, so perhaps that is what brought the real-world experience.