It's because I'm Canadian - we're just nice. We channel all of our rage into Canada Geese. It's why they're so dang mean. 😜

That's an option that I'm offering for this year - partly based on feedback and partly because of the bizarre, COVID year(s) that's occurred. I've had a few parents concerned about Honors Chem grades and the difficult year and I thought this would be an option to help mitigate that. That's what was behind my reasoning for that.

Yeah - I did think about that. Do you think going back and offering past families an updated grade report with a new course title ("Advanced Honors Chemistry") is something I should do? Would that help?

I thought about that. I do feel like any change I make now will mean that folks that have taken the class in past will have "missed out" on something. But I don't want that to stop me from making changes going forward - know what I mean? I do think that there was too big of a gap between my reg Chem and the Honors Chem and wanted to fill that gap. It's the naming of the courses that's tripping me up. I could email my past parents with the changes and offer to reissue grade reports with the new name. Would it make that much difference, though? Would colleges really care if a course is named "Honors Chemistry" or "Advanced Honors Chemistry"? Being from Canada, I have a hard time thinking through how these things play out in the States. What do you guys think?

Awesome! Thank you! It's always important to gather with people who share one's particular weirdness. And, in my case, teach and share that weirdness. 😄

I think that the "Chemistry with Honors Chemistry option" would actually be good for most students - even ones who want to go into life or health sciences. I'd say that (and I do say this in the description on my website :)) the current Honors Chem (aka Advanced Honors Chemistry) is more meant for students who are aiming for chemistry/physics/chemical engineering majors in university. So some STEM majors should be ok with not taking the Adv Honors Chem. But food for thought!

Yeah - I think organic chem and biochem require a special kind of weirdness to enjoy. I seem to have that weirdness in spades. 😉 😄

It's more the parents/student that would decide if the student is feeling overwhelmed by the workload - if so, then they can contact me to make the transfer. "Too hard" might mean different things for different people so I like to leave it up to the parent/student to decide if it's too overwhelming. 🙂 I've loved having both your boys as students! 🙂

I'm reviving my own thread. 🙂 I think I've decided what I would like to do regarding the split streaming. I think it makes more sense to keep my current Honors Chemistry course the way it is and rename it "Advanced Honors Chemistry". I'll then modify my current Chemistry course with extra questions on all the assignments/tests/exams (with a few additional topics) and rename that course "Chemistry with Honors Chemistry option". That course will function similar to Derek Owens' courses where students can decide for themselves during the first chapter or two if they would like to do the extra questions/topics or not. If they choose not to do them, they will receive a grade for "Chemistry". If they choose to do them (and they'll need to do all of the extra questions throughout the whole course for it to "count"), they will receive a grade for "Honors Chemistry". If they choose to do my current honors chem course (which will be renamed "Advanced Honors Chemistry"), that's a different course registration and they'd receive a grade for "Advanced Honors Chemistry". As always, students will have the option to transfer if they find the course they start in is too overwhelming/demanding. If a student starts in "Advanced Honors Chemistry" but is overwhelmed, they can transfer to "Chemistry with Honors Chemistry option" and choose to either do the Honors option or not. If a student starts in "Chemistry with Honors Chemistry option" but decides the Honors option is too much, they can simply stop doing the Honors questions. I've not finalized this decision yet (I'm waiting for a reply from the folks at PAH to see how they would like to handle this for my course through their program). What do people think? Does this sound workable? Is it too confusing?

Dd just finished her 3rd year of uni - piano performance/composition double major. Her electives have been things like human bio, org chem, biochem, etc. She wrote the MCAT in March for the first time and got a 504 but wants to write it again to maximize her score. She's chosen to extend her undergrad degree to 5 years so she can do a couple of multi-year senior projects with two of her professors so she has lots of time to retake the MCAT. She'll probably begin applying to med schools in fall of her last year of undergrad.

You're welcome. 🙂 I think there are a few courses/curricula listed at the very beginning of the Regular Chemistry post that are very basic - Chemistry Power Basics, Friendly Chemistry, Fascinating Chemistry. There is also the Conceptual Chemistry textbook by John Suchocki. As a chem teacher/instructor, there is a certain amount of content and a certain level of mathematical content that I would want to see in a chemistry course before I'd be comfortable labeling as high school chemistry (assuming we're talking about a neurotypical high school student and not a special needs student) but I know that there are varying thoughts on that amongst homeschoolers. 🙂 Hope that helps!

I'd probably go with an environmental geology book of some kind. Aqueous chemistry as a stand-alone subject would be too broad and I think would get you bogged down in areas that won't be important. My Enviro Geo textbook from uni is VERY dated (I think I took the course in '93 or '94) but if you start with an up-to-date Enviro Geo textbook, it would give you a good background and you could use the resource list in the back of the book to find more specialized texts. That would be my thought. 🙂

Are you looking to go further in chemistry? If you loved OChem, you can't do better than the Klein textbook: https://www.wiley.com/en-am/Klein's+Organic+Chemistry%2C+3rd+Edition%2C+Global+Edition-p-9781119451051 I'd also suggest getting these two books: https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Organic+Chemistry+as+a+Second+Language%3A+First+Semester+Topics%2C+5th+Edition-p-9781119493488 https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Organic+Chemistry+as+a+Second+Language%3A+Second+Semester+Topics%2C+5th+Edition-p-9781119493822 Klein is a MONSTER of a book (it's HUGE) but it will take you through a TON of OChem. 🙂

Thank you for the links, lewelma!! There are some fantastic questions on those exams - I would love to be teaching a course that preps students for those!! I've been digging into botany lately. And the chemistry of art compounds. SO MUCH TO LEARN!!!! 😄 It is relevant - at least, I think it is. 🙂 As a learner, it's always important to understand why we're learning something and how we feel about learning it. So if I'm understanding you correctly, you want the most effective and efficient way to learn chemistry and physics that will give you enough of a background to teach those subjects to your daughter. You dislike learning by watching (even actively watching) lecture videos. You prefer to learn by working problems. You prefer to learn by reading. You prefer to learn through Socratic questioning by an expert. If I put all of that together, you're best bet is to take a good intro textbook for the subject, read each chapter and have someone assist in guiding you through the materials, and then work all the problems at the end of each chapter to reinforce the learning and to help you to internalize the material. The challenge questions at the end of the chapters in Chang "General Chemistry" are very good for helping the student to make connections. If you want the expert guide to go along with the textbook, you'll need to hire a chemistry tutor. You can do the same with a good intro physics textbook and a physics tutor. That, to me, would be the most effective and efficient way for you to go about it within the guidelines of how you like to learn. 🙂 What do you think of that idea?

Ah - I understand. 🙂 Let me ask you this - how do you feel about chemistry as a discipline? How do you feel about it as a subject to learn? But they're all related - that's one of the most beautiful parts of science! 🙂 I love that we have a biologist, a chemist, a physicist, and some geologists and engineers all coming together to discuss science and science education. It makes my brain so very, very happy. 🙂 I. LOVE. THIS. QUESTION. 🙂 I did a quick think and a quick sketch and I think I have the identities for W, X, and Y. W must be an acid chloride: X would be an amide: And Y would be the carboxylic acid: Organic chemistry is such a beautiful, beautiful subject. It's just all intricate little puzzles to solve. 🙂 (I hope I'm right on the identities of the molecules. I'll need to eat my hat if I'm not. ;))

I'm more curious what your definition is - or what you thought mine is. 🙂 I'm only a chemist, not a mathematician. Your definition (or thoughts on a definition) will probably be far more illuminating than mine would be. 🙂

I definitely use some Socratic questioning when teaching. 🙂 When I was going through my ed courses to become a teacher, there was a lot of interest and talk about using the discovery method and Socratic questioning to teach chemistry as opposed to the "sage on the stage" method of traditional lectures. I think an experienced teacher will use a multitude of methods depending on the topic, time constraints, and the students they have in front of them. Curious - what's your definition of a "math question"? Just wondering how your definition differs from what you think mine is. 🙂

I did say "may need to take another course". 🙂 It's certainly possible that a student will "get" all the connections the first time around. The best way to have the greatest possibility of that happening in chemistry is have an expert guide along with well written materials (and for the student to be well into the formal operational stage of reasoning - that's VITAL for understanding the abstract nature of chemistry). If the written materials (whether that be a traditional textbook or something else) contained explanations of all the connections to be made between concepts, then I suppose you wouldn't need the expert guide. I've not yet come across any one resource, though, that I felt had that. If there was, I suppose it would put me out of a job. 😉 To the bold - not in chemistry (in my opinion :)). I think you might be looking for something that doesn't exist. 🙂 You can't learn chemistry by solely doing problems - there's too much non-math content that needs to be learned before you can begin the mathematical aspects of chemistry. If by "problems", you're including non-math questions, then I think you're talking about learning a subject through Socratic questioning. You absolutely need an expert guide to learn by that method. I think that's probably the method your grandmother used to teach you math, yes? And the method you're using with your daughter? It's possible to teach chemistry exclusively through Socratic questioning but because it's not time-effective or feasible for use with a whole classroom of students (who are all at different levels and stages), I don't know of a curriculum or resource that's been developed for purchase that would do that. You would need to hire a tutor (à la the kind of tutor that wealthy families would have hired for their sons to be taught at home - an expert in the subject who would be dedicated to teaching you one-on-one). 🙂

When my math-y friend shared that with me, I had to share the following back with him. 😉 😄 And the other version with a little more text on the right hand side...

I LOVE geology. The few spots I had for electives while studying chemistry were filled with geology courses. 🙂 You're going to have such fun!!!

Yes to all! 🙂 Chemistry is the weirdest of the main sciences and the most difficult parts of intro bio and intro physics courses are usually where those subjects interact/cross-over into chemistry (biochemistry and quantum mechanics). It's like chemistry doesn't WANT to be understood. 😜 Chang's "Chemistry" book is his book written for AP Chemistry students. "General Chemistry" is his book written for college students (non-major). The two books are similar but "Chemistry" is a bigger book with more topics covered and a bit more depth in some common topics. I really like Chang's books for both Honors Chem and AP Chem. 🙂 I think you'll like his clean writing style. I think you could slog your way through a textbook without an expert guide but I also think you'd miss a lot of the connections (which, if I'm understanding you, is what you're after). If students are going to use my pre-recorded lectures properly, it would be as interactive as one could get without having a one-on-one personal chem tutor sitting by their side. 🙂 You scan the chapter in the textbook first and then sit down with the lecture video, lecture handouts (or blank paper) and pen and calculator in hand. You listen to the recorded lecture, taking notes all the while, and pause the lecture anytime you need to mull something over. You can also back the lecture up if you need to listen to something again. After I go over the theory (usually the first half of each lecture), I then work examples. The student should pause the lecture after I've explained the question, try to work the example themselves, and then un-pause to watch me work it to check their work against mine. If they got it wrong, pause again to figure out why. Back up and watch again if needed. Continue on doing that for each lecture. I completely agree - just sitting and watching/listening to a lecture on chemistry (or pretty much any science) without interacting like I described above is probably: (a) boring as heck and (b) not going to help the student really LEARN the subject. Active listening is always going to give better learning than passive listening. Ah - gotcha. You learn the models from learning the theory and making connections between the ideas. As to how you do that, I think having an expert guide is the most effective and efficient way of achieving that goal. Yes, yes, yes. 🙂 Because as Regentrude says below - the "beginning" of chemistry (i.e. the atom) is probably the most complicated and abstract topic in chemistry. If we were to begin chemistry instruction with quantum mechanics, we'd never be able to teach any chemistry in high school. Which would be a darn shame. 😉 🙂 Very true - where chemistry intersects physics (E/M, quantum mechanics) is where physics gets weird (but extremely interesting :)). I was probably just thinking of kinematics when I was thinking of "seeing" physics. 🙂 And yes - we've had some good discussions about this. I'm just coming up to the 3/4 point in my Honors Chem course with my students and we're doing dynamic equilibrium. It's finally the point in the course where I can tie together thermodynamics, kinetics, and that idea of most chemical reactions existing in a state of equilibrium (as opposed to having a start/middle/end type of linear progression which is what is "looks" like most reactions are doing). And this idea starts to explain all kinds of things like solubility, strong/weak acids and bases, percent yield - all things that we did months ago but couldn't really be explained well until now. It's taken until almost the last quarter of the course for me to be able to make those connections for the students. And they're pretty abstract connections so it might not even sink in for them right away. They may need to take another chem course before all the disparate pieces start to come together.

Hey BaW folks! Sorry - I've been absent for a number of weeks again. Things got crazy and I've been skimming the BaW threads instead of reading and then I feel like a fake if I post without having read through. So I didn't post. 🙂 I've been listening to The Count of Monte Cristo through Audible - this version: https://www.audible.ca/pd/The-Count-of-Monte-Cristo-Audiobook/B0723274L7?ref=a_library_t_c5_libItem_&pf_rd_p=a00014e8-d2ee-472f-a5f3-837e4e395ee4&pf_rd_r=ND0EWF77NDQZQA7VG1MJ I'm really liking the narration. I've been listening and colouring 🙂 and I've made it to Chapter 26 which I think might put me ahead of schedule. I'm not very literary-ally (I just made up that word ;P) knowledgeable so I don't really have any insightful comments. The narrator of the audiobook does a great job of making the characters individual and different from one another so that's helpful to me in keeping them all straight. Oh - and I was watching a new YouTube video from a favourite channel of mine where they do little skits on how the different enneagram types of personalities would react to different scenarios and one of the gals made a passing mention of Monte Cristo and the Chateau d'If and I was so proud that I knew what she referred to in her comment! I'm actually on track to finish 52 books this year (although my most recent is a reread and I'm not sure if that counts). Nothing I've read yet this year has really been a stand-out for me but I've got a few on the go and more in line to start that look promising. 🙂 Books read in 2021 8. (Reread) My Theodosia by Anya Seton *Historical fiction (18th/19th century America) 7. The Coming of the Wolf by Elizabeth Chadwick *Historical fiction (11th century England/France) 6. I Remember You by Yrsa Sigurðardóttir *Horror 5. Emily Davis (Fairacre #8) by Miss Read *Fiction (audiobook) With this book, I’ve finished the entire Fairacre series. 🙂 4. A Peaceful Retirement (Fairacre #20) by Miss Read *Fiction 3. Farewell to Fairacre (Fairacre #19) by Miss Read *Fiction 2. Miss Clare Remembers (Fairacre #4) by Miss Read *Fiction (audiobook) 1. Changes at Fairacre (Fairacre #18) by Miss Read *Fiction

I love this, lewelma. 🙂 You are so very wise, lewelma, and you've said (more eloquently than I could) what I was coming here to type out. 🙂 Chemistry is a whole different beast than math or physics. I was talking a bit about students struggling when they try to "intuit" chemistry here: and then again here: When I teach chemistry, I try to give my students the "why" behind everything that I can. And lewelma is so right - chemistry can't be taught linearly like physics can. There just isn't a good starting point where I won't have to occasionally say "You just have to believe me for right now. We'll talk about why this particular thing works the way it does later on when you have more background knowledge." If you want to get a good grounding in chemistry, @Not_a_Number, so that you can connect the math with the theory I think you'll need to have an expert to guide you through. 🙂 @regentrude talked about having an expert instructor being able to provide you with the right problems at the right time - I think that's very important. I think the textbook that I use for my Honor Chem course is a really good book - it's "General Chemistry: The Essential Concepts" by Raymond Chang. https://www.amazon.com/General-Chemistry-Raymond-Chang-Dr/dp/0073402753/ref=dp_ob_title_bk I think, though, that it would be helpful for you to have someone guide you through the book and give you all the extra details and connections that the book may gloss over. 🙂 At the risk of promoting my own courses here (which I do try very hard not to do - I try to keep it to asking folks about things like split streams or course labeling issues, etc.), you might want to take a look at my parent-graded version of Honors Chem. You'd have access to all my pre-recorded video lectures, assignments, test, and exams (along with worked answer keys) for 1 year. You could use all of that material to help to guide you through the Chang textbook. I agree with lewelma - chemistry labs are NOT going to be a good way for you to learn chemistry. 🙂 Chem labs (unless they are very carefully chosen and a lot of work is put in by the instructor to help students to make theory/lab connections) often make chemistry MORE confusing for students. What you see happening during a chemical reaction (the "macro" level) is very often NOT what is happening at the atomic/molecular level - the concept of equilibrium is a very typical example of this. I have complicated feelings about chemistry labs for high school level chemistry. 😉 🙂 If you have any chemistry questions, Not_a_Number, I'd be happy to answer them for you. 🙂

Starting a new thread is a good idea. 🙂 I don't have any hands-on experience with the curriculum so starting a new thread will hopefully get folks to chime in who have used the curriculum. 🙂

Yes! I brush my Pyr/Akbash dogs in spring/summer to remove the undercoat but do NOT shave them. I've had people look at me askance in summertime and pointedly ask me when I'm going to shave them so the poor doggies won't be so hot. I've tried explaining the whole double-coat/pink skin/don't shave thing but I'm not sure any of them believed me. My older guy who has arthritis in his hips is LOVING the -30C temps. It's dry, dry, dry when it's this cold and he's running around outside like a puppy. They have a warm enclosed straw bale shelter built inside the garage with two stacked dog beds each laid on top of insulated pallets (so off the floor). I've crawled in there with them and it's toasty. And where are they when it's -30C? Laying outside in the snow, sleeping/on guard. Crazy pups. 🙂