Jump to content

Menu

First year homeschooling ... 8th grade science quandary


Recommended Posts

I am planning to begin homeschooling DS13 for 8th grade.  Part of my general plan is to tread lightly until the end of December, so he can "deschool" and reignite the love for learning he once had, and we would generally keep a year-round schedule.

 

Planning for science is proving a bit tricky.  He loves science, and is good with math, but his 7th grade math so far has barely grazed pre-algebra.  I am planning to continue pre-algebra with AOPS (we dabbled a bit last summer, finishing only chapter 1), then start AOPS Intro to Algebra whenever we finish Pre-A.

 

I thought we'd start science by reading mass market books, possibly with a slight focus on neuroscience, especially the arguments for and against the notion of "teenage brain"; otherwise, I'd just point him to our bookshelves and let him select whatever interests him.  I also have the Teaching Company's Joy of Science and Great Ideas of Classical Physics DVDs, which I thought would satisfy his "big picture" craving.  ETA:  I am also planning to get some TOPS kits that he selected.

 

Also lurking in my mind, however, is Hewitt's Conceptual Physics. DS seems to be a STEM-oriented guy, and if we are to get all the way to calc-based physics by the end of high school, he'd have to at least start Hewitt mid-8th grade, and it may take us into the beginning of his freshman year to finish.

 

All of that leads up to ....

 

I recently read a thread about "rigorous texts for high school science" and lewelma's "Physics for Poets" thread.  Ruth's plan provides some general guidance for my loose first-semester 8th grade notion, and of course the rigorous texts tug at what I am ultimately aiming for.

 

Can the two approaches be reconciled?  Can I proceed in this mixed fashion for 8th grade, or would I be driving DS toward burnout if we start slow and then drive hard to make up for lost time? 

 

Perhaps more importantly, does he need to get all the way through Algebra I before even starting Hewitt, or can they be done concurrently?

 

Thanks in advance for any input.  I realize no one can read the tea leaves with precision, but I'd love to know your thoughts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I recently read a thread about "rigorous texts for high school science" and lewelma's "Physics for Poets" thread.  Ruth's plan provides some general guidance for my loose first-semester 8th grade notion, and of course the rigorous texts tug at what I am ultimately aiming for.

 

Can the two approaches be reconciled?  Can I proceed in this mixed fashion for 8th grade, or would I be driving DS toward burnout if we start slow and then drive hard to make up for lost time?

 

No need to drive hard to make up for lost time.  Just call this 8th grade class "physical science." Half of the year can use books and and half of the year can use a textbook.  Just reduce the amount you expect him to cover in the textbook to an appropriate number of chapters for the months he will be using it. 

 

Alternatively, if he is currently unable to digest the material in a textbook because it is too difficult for him, then consider running the two approaches simultaneously throughout the year.  Let him work independently on reading through the books, and then, in addition, sit with him on the sofa for 30 minutes 4x per week and teach him how to fully read, use, and study a textbook.  This would be time well spent before hitting highschool.

 

Ruth in NZ

 

ETA: just rereading your post.  Not sure what other physics you have planned, but my ds moved from The Way Things Work to Knight's College Physics (which is algebra based) without any trouble.  So I your son would not have to *finish* Hewitts before doing an algebra based physics class like Giancoli or Knight, especially because he would reading other conceptual physics books besides Hewitts during the year. Just make sure you hit all the different topics (mechanics, electromagnetism, light/sound, modern) using whatever resources you use.  Some kids do go straight from conceptual physics to Calculus based physics, but I don't think it is particularly common.  Clearly it would depend on your child's strengths and interests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps more importantly, does he need to get all the way through Algebra I before even starting Hewitt, or can they be done concurrently?

 

 

My understanding is that Hewitt Conceptual Physics is, well, conceptual so does not require algebra.  But hopefully someone else will chime in.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Also lurking in my mind, however, is Hewitt's Conceptual Physics. DS seems to be a STEM-oriented guy, and if we are to get all the way to calc-based physics by the end of high school, he'd have to at least start Hewitt mid-8th grade, and it may take us into the beginning of his freshman year to finish.

 

I do not understand the bolded. OK, so he is STEM interested and plans to get through calculus based physics by the end of high school. What does that have to do with finishing Hewitt's Conceptual Physics? For a student with his inclination, I would skip Conceptual physics entirely and simply plan for an algebra based physics course in high school, or even plan on doing only calculus based physics which does not require a prior algebra based course.

I see Conceptual Physics as a good option either for strong science students in the middle grades or for weak science students for high school. I would not feel a need to "fit it in" at this point in time for a student who is intending to pursue rigorous science studies in high school.

I would de-school, have fun with your informal neuro science and not plan for the Hewitt to be finished. If he goes through parts of it, great. But don't stress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ohhhhh!  Oops!  :o   I haven't actually seen Hewitt yet; I just saw that so many people use it and love it, and it has such a good reputation here - I assumed it was an algebra-based text.  It is great news that we can take our time (while steadily learning the math) and then move to Knight freshman year!  I may get a copy of Hewitt anyway, just for reference, because one can never have too many books, IMO.  ;)

 

8Fill:  Thanks.  I am keeping several elective slots open in my general high school plan just in case.  At this point, there's no telling how he'd want to fill them!

 

Many, many thanks, Ruth and Regentrude, for your help. 

 

So, on the algebra question - should DS finish all of algebra I before starting Knight?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with Regentrude above.  Conceptual Physics is not at all necessary in order to take either algebra-based or calculus-based physics later in high school.  The same concepts will be taught.

 

I would definitely recommend you do interest-led science for 8th grade and let your ds get the love of learning back. If he is STEM oriented, this will set him up well to really enjoy his high school science courses.

 

Then in high school, just start in on the big 3 sciences (bio, chem, physics) and let your ds's math level drive the sequence.  No math is needed for bio.  Algebra 1 is needed for chem.  Alg 1 & 2 (plus some basic trig) is needed for algebra-based physics, and calculus (can be concurrent) is needed for calc-based physics.  When it's time for physics, choose either algebra-based or calculus-based depending on where your ds is in math at that time--that is, don't plan to do both algebra and calc-based in high school.  They would be absolute repeats of each other just using different math to solve the problems!  (Ask me how I know...  :tongue_smilie: ) Then your ds will have time to do a 4th science, or a more advanced level of bio or chem if he chooses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, on the algebra question - should DS finish all of algebra I before starting Knight?

 

Before Knight as in College Physics? Yes, he should. He needs to be absolutely comfortable solving linear equations, systems of linear equations, and quadratics.

He also needs some geometry (mainly right triangles and circles), so that he can do a one hour crash course in the necessary trigonometry and it makes sense.

It would be good if the algebra program is rigorous enough to include logarithms and exponentials which will be needed in one chapter (ch. 23), but if that is not the case, the section on RC circuits can be omitted without problem.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before Knight as in College Physics? Yes, he should. He needs to be absolutely comfortable solving linear equations, systems of linear equations, and quadratics.

He also needs some geometry (mainly right triangles and circles), so that he can do a one hour crash course in the necessary trigonometry and it makes sense.

It would be good if the algebra program is rigorous enough to include logarithms and exponentials which will be needed in one chapter (ch. 23), but if that is not the case, the section on RC circuits can be omitted without problem.
 

 

Great info.  Thank you so much!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with Regentrude above.  Conceptual Physics is not at all necessary in order to take either algebra-based or calculus-based physics later in high school.  The same concepts will be taught.

 

I would definitely recommend you do interest-led science for 8th grade and let your ds get the love of learning back. If he is STEM oriented, this will set him up well to really enjoy his high school science courses.

 

Then in high school, just start in on the big 3 sciences (bio, chem, physics) and let your ds's math level drive the sequence.  No math is needed for bio.  Algebra 1 is needed for chem.  Alg 1 & 2 (plus some basic trig) is needed for algebra-based physics, and calculus (can be concurrent) is needed for calc-based physics.  When it's time for physics, choose either algebra-based or calculus-based depending on where your ds is in math at that time--that is, don't plan to do both algebra and calc-based in high school.  They would be absolute repeats of each other just using different math to solve the problems!  (Ask me how I know...  :tongue_smilie: ) Then your ds will have time to do a 4th science, or a more advanced level of bio or chem if he chooses.

 

Thank you! 

 

So ... is it completely obvious I studied English & philosophy instead of science?  :p

 

You all have made me feel so much better.  I was in a bit of a tizzy with my "relax but hurry up" thinking!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When it's time for physics, choose either algebra-based or calculus-based depending on where your ds is in math at that time--that is, don't plan to do both algebra and calc-based in high school.  They would be absolute repeats of each other just using different math to solve the problems! 

 

I would like to disagree on this - it will depend entirely on the materials you use whether it is an "absolute repeat" or whether you can get a new quality and new insights and not just "different math". I  teaching both algebra and calculus based courses.

 

First of all, many students benefit from having had a good algebra based physics course before calculus based physics. If you outsource the calc based course, you'll end in a pretty fast moving course. My students who had algebra based physics before do not tend to complain about boredom.

And oh, I can only dream of tecahing a calc based course where I know the students will have had a solid algebra based course - I could do so much cool stuff! If I could be sure of my student's level of preparation - fabulous, I could save time on basic boring stuff and focus on cool concepts you can not do without calculus. There is nothing you can teach about Maxwell's equations without calculus - you're stuck doing boring circuits for electricity. You can't really derive and analyze potential energy functions without calculus. Plus, the time not needed for basics (like force problems) can be spent on cool phenomena like rotating reference frames and Coriolis force, air resistance and terminal velocity, all kinds of oscillation phenomena... nope, no "absolute repeat".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to disagree on this - it will depend entirely on the materials you use whether it is an "absolute repeat" or whether you can get a new quality and new insights and not just "different math". I  teaching both algebra and calculus based courses.

 

First of all, many students benefit from having had a good algebra based physics course before calculus based physics. If you outsource the calc based course, you'll end in a pretty fast moving course. My students who had algebra based physics before do not tend to complain about boredom.

And oh, I can only dream of tecahing a calc based course where I know the students will have had a solid algebra based course - I could do so much cool stuff! If I could be sure of my student's level of preparation - fabulous, I could save time on basic boring stuff and focus on cool concepts you can not do without calculus. There is nothing you can teach about Maxwell's equations without calculus - you're stuck doing boring circuits for electricity. You can't really derive and analyze potential energy functions without calculus. Plus, the time not needed for basics (like force problems) can be spent on cool phenomena like rotating reference frames and Coriolis force, air resistance and terminal velocity, all kinds of oscillation phenomena... nope, no "absolute repeat".

 

I do plan to outsource calc physics (for obvious reasons, I'm sure!).  I also think that having at least a couple years between the two courses would necessitate some review before really digging in.

 

And wow, when the time comes for that higher level course, what a thrill it will be if DS's teacher has even half the passion you do, Regentrude! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to disagree on this - it will depend entirely on the materials you use whether it is an "absolute repeat" or whether you can get a new quality and new insights and not just "different math". I  teaching both algebra and calculus based courses.

 

First of all, many students benefit from having had a good algebra based physics course before calculus based physics. If you outsource the calc based course, you'll end in a pretty fast moving course. My students who had algebra based physics before do not tend to complain about boredom.

And oh, I can only dream of tecahing a calc based course where I know the students will have had a solid algebra based course - I could do so much cool stuff! If I could be sure of my student's level of preparation - fabulous, I could save time on basic boring stuff and focus on cool concepts you can not do without calculus. There is nothing you can teach about Maxwell's equations without calculus - you're stuck doing boring circuits for electricity. You can't really derive and analyze potential energy functions without calculus. Plus, the time not needed for basics (like force problems) can be spent on cool phenomena like rotating reference frames and Coriolis force, air resistance and terminal velocity, all kinds of oscillation phenomena... nope, no "absolute repeat".

 

Thank you so much for this clarification, Regentrude.   :)

 

In my post I was just thinking about my ds's high school experience, where he did both Apologia physics books in 10th grade--the equivalent of AP Physics B. He loved it, aced the SAT2 in physics that year, and then in 12th grade went on to do AP Physics C: Mechanics through Stanford's EPGY program. He did not enjoy the AP course at all--partly because of the organization (it has since been revamped), but also because he felt that it was all the same stuff as Apologia, just using calculus instead of algebra.  It was his comment that there was nothing new, and he was disappointed and bored. Unfortunately, that experience rather killed his interest in physics for a time and he wouldn't even consider taking calc-based physics when he went to college, which was sad as I'm sure the courses at his university would have gotten into very cool stuff! He did later take a physics lab course to meet a lab science requirement (he's a Comp Sci major), and enjoyed that immensely--so I was happy about that.

 

Anyway, I just wouldn't want someone who loves physics to repeat my ds's particular path at the high school level and get turned off to physics before college. Maybe the answer is to not do AP after algebra-based physics, but to instead go on to calc-based using a college text...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...