When I was a child myself I hated this and as adult I am still unconvinced it is necessary.
Also this sort of stuff made me lose lots of trust for educators in general, even university level ones are willing to teach junk.
Also this sort of stuff made me lose lots of trust for educators in general, even university level ones are willing to teach junk.
It's also absolutely useful to tell 8th-graders that x(t) = at² + v₀t + x₀ since now they can handle exponents.
And it's useful to tell 12th-graders how to do the calculus to get x(t) for variable acceleration.
But that's also inaccurate for very large values of v (or a) due to relativistic effects. However, it's a very convenient simplification ("lie") for the vast majority of people in the vast majority of cases. It's probably possible to explain the relativity math to most 4th-graders, but for most of them it's a terrible use of teaching time and the old "rate times time equals distance" that was drilled into my head at a young age is much more practical.
Why is this useful? Where and when are they going to use this equation until they learn the correct one?
(admittedly that's not what tsm's post implied, but still...)
Yet I know for sure I do not understand electricity, as I do not even understand most of the answers given to me when I ask about whether electricity has mass. And, apparently, many people who claim to know about physics don't either, because I get all sorts of answers that contradict each other.
Should I not know what I do know about electricity because my mental model is a simplification? I think your position is needlessly absolutist. I don't think my teachers ever taught me 'junk', just a (useful) simplification/model of reality.
Of course, if one does not expect any further learning in the field, a lie to children may be acceptable.