It is a fact that most physicists have something akin to an allergy to to anything social in nature.
Oxymoron is that (Keep in mind) science is and progresses via social enterprise i.e scientists debate, disagree, agree and share opinions
How this affects didactics
1. Physists consider their method the superiority that would soon or later be borroeed in other sciences or even believe everything is physics (extreme physical is) so they want to give didactics a physics flavor angle i.e operationalism in aims (use words that have technical connotations like define,evaluate, prove) and avoid normal language because physics is not based on typicalnlogic and causual language is a barrier to exploration and high cognitive discoveries /expositions
2. They sabotage important didactics findings that are social in nature i.e Biggs principle of cindtructive alignment between design, assesment and teaching which is a pillar of didactics akin to Newton's 2nd law in mechanics
3. They omit or greatly undermine conceptual questions in tests, limit them to 5%, historical questions that hone skills of scientists i.e how a theory emerged, what was debates and deep learning
Physics didactics can be surely enriched by aspects of basic sociophysics, econophysics and psychophysics Philippos Afxentiou This would surely enlarge the bigger picture of physical science, with respect to social science and humanities. My own approach, the natural science of human society and mind (e.g. physics of social systems) is very close to your idea of social nature inspired teaching.