the first two labs are about measurement and error.
And you miscopied a value.
I think that's a pass, with flying colors!!
It is bad that they didn't give you the correct prerequisites
I had taken all the required prerequisites,
at that school. The vast majority of students were electrical engineers, though. I think there were a few assumptions being made...
There seems, in the USA, to be a serious disconnection between what you study at high-school and what you read at university. I "did" physics at high-school, and basic electronics, circuit design, assembling components etc. was covered, as well as electrical theory.
OK, physics was theoretical. Electomagnetism, mechanics, optics... what you're describing seems to be an electronics course. I knew (know?) how these things work, but that doesn't mean I could read a schematic or design a telescope. Not without a fair bit more research/training.
How do people get on degree-level courses in the first place, without having studied the subject to a reasonable level at school? For example, I don't think they'd even let you into a maths degree at UNSW or Sydney Uni if you hadn't scored well in "four-unit" maths at high-school, or equivalent.
OK, I read that syllabus. I am shamed, but not surprised. In the US, that's university level work, not high school - you're lucky to get some elementary calculus in high school, let alone enough to understand conics, and no one really works with complex numbers beyond "These things exist as solutions to the quadratic formula, but you'll never need them, so forget about them after the test, OK?"
Our education system sucks at incredibly basic levels, and in college we try desperately to make up for it. And we often fail. Then the rest of the world wonders why we have science deniers and illiterate politicians...
oops, sorry, veered off into a rant there for a moment.