If you had an advenced 7th grader who wants to study Biology

[thowell]

what would you use? She is doing an 8th grade physical science this year in 6th grade so, next year she wants to move into Biology (but I am not sure). I am pretty certain this child will go on to have a science oriented career so I certainly don't want to hold her back. I just don't want things to be over her head either. To make it harder for you all I will need something either from a Christian pov or neutral. Any suggestions?

[Donna T.]

My 7th grader is using BJU Science 7. He is advanced in Science, especially in Biology, and he really likes it.

[Carol in Cal.]

Around here a lot of kids do Freshman Biology in 8th grade.

The default curriculum is Prentiss Hall, but the YEC's often use Apologia.

[regentrude]

My DD took biology when she was in 7th grade, using Campbell/Reece Concepts and Connections. (Sorry, I have no information about Christian texts.)

[Capt_Uhura]

Check out this link - it's already planned out for you! :001_smile: http://quarksandquirks.wordpress.com/biology-hs-level/

[angela in ohio]

My middle did BJU's Biology in 7th grade last year. It was a lot of work, but she did fine. A motivated student with excellent reading and study skills should do fine in it.

[thowell]

Thanks for the suggestions. I like the look of Prentice Hall but it isn't YE is it more neutral? I will look at Apologia again, I know we didn't like the lower levels but maybe the higher levels are better.

[Melissa B]

ETA: Oops, Sorry, that class will teach evolution. So that won't work for you.

 

Being in Florida, you can always use Florida Virtual School. The classes are free. You can sign up for the high school classes in jr. high.

Edited August 31, 2011 by Melissa B

[laughing lioness]

When my now 17 yo was in Jr. High he read Apologia's Biology. He re-took it as a lab class 2 years ago. I was surprised at how much he had retained from his earlier reading.

[ChrissySC]

I would do Apologia Biology in 7th, and for HS credit do Prentice Hall or BJU myself. :) I did not like the hum-drum of Apologia general and physical science.

[angela in ohio]

Checking to be sure I understand it correct:

did she/he BJU Life Science (7th) or BJU Biology (10th) in 7th?

Did you teach it yourself?

 

Thanks!

 

She did Biology. Yes, I taught it myself, but we did use the DIVE DVDs.

[angela in ohio]

Good to know :)

I'm hesitating what to do after BJU 6th

It seemed to me everbody use online or BJU DVD/harddisk and that's no option here. But DIVE is available at CBD, I will take a look at that.

 

Thanks!

 

You will want to do Life Science before Biology. She did Life Science in 6th grade, so moving on to Biology was the next step. The Life Science provides a great foundation. There isn't a DIVE for Life Science, but it is a lot easier to teach then Bio! :001_smile:

[SailorMom]

My son, 8th, is doing Freshman biology right now. We have a text that can be used for honors if needed.

It is the "Dragonfly" book (Florida edition is a parrot)

Anyway - it is the Miller-Levine biology book - and biologists give it stellar reviews. It has excellent scope, great labs right in the text (although we are supplementing), and I was able to find it for about $15, and the teacher's manual for $40 (both used).

[thowell]

My son, 8th, is doing Freshman biology right now. We have a text that can be used for honors if needed.

It is the "Dragonfly" book (Florida edition is a parrot)

Anyway - it is the Miller-Levine biology book - and biologists give it stellar reviews. It has excellent scope, great labs right in the text (although we are supplementing), and I was able to find it for about $15, and the teacher's manual for $40 (both used).

 

I appreciate the suggestion but I looked over this and it definitely would not work for us. I need something to at least be neutral if it isn't Christian and this is definitely not. Thanks anyway!

[thowell]

I would do Apologia Biology in 7th, and for HS credit do Prentice Hall or BJU myself. :) I did not like the hum-drum of Apologia general and physical science.

 

I think this is what I am leaning towards with Apologia and then BJU in HS. I have to look at BJU a little more. Thanks!

[Chez J]

You will want to do Life Science before Biology. She did Life Science in 6th grade, so moving on to Biology was the next step. The Life Science provides a great foundation. There isn't a DIVE for Life Science, but it is a lot easier to teach then Bio! :001_smile:

 

How does Apologia General work for preparing a student for BJU Biology?

[Crimson Wife]

Thanks for the suggestions. I like the look of Prentice Hall but it isn't YE is it more neutral?

 

At least in the middle school book (Science Explorer Focus on Life Science), the evolution-related material is segregated into a few clearly labeled chapters. The high school book appears the same from the TOC but I haven't actually seen the book to know for sure.

 

It would be easy to skip the chapters on evolution if they don't fit your worldview. PH knows that evolution is a "hot button" issue and that schools in certain places would want to side-step it.

 

I would recommend asking about it on the High School board.

[angela in ohio]

How does Apologia General work for preparing a student for BJU Biology?

 

My oldest did Apologia General in 6th, so I have vague memories of it only. :D We switched to BJU after that. I think it had a life science component, so that would work, I would think.

[SailorMom]

I appreciate the suggestion but I looked over this and it definitely would not work for us. I need something to at least be neutral if it isn't Christian and this is definitely not. Thanks anyway!

 

Sorry - this sometimes confuses me. I look for "creationist" or something mentioning not including evolution.

I just know a lot of Christians who teach evolution, I guess :)

I figured it was neutral as it didn't really have an anti-Christian bias - and never puts down Creationism - it just doesn't include creationism.

[thowell]

Sorry - this sometimes confuses me. I look for "creationist" or something mentioning not including evolution.

I just know a lot of Christians who teach evolution, I guess :)

I figured it was neutral as it didn't really have an anti-Christian bias - and never puts down Creationism - it just doesn't include creationism.

 

Well, I will give it another look maybe I glanced over it to quickly. However, it seemed to me to really focus on the theory of evolution and based it teachings around that. It is one thing to use something that presents both sides or that just doesn't discuss this issue at all but when I have something that is mwntioning evolution and the earth being billions over years old through out the text it is just to much work for me to pick all that out. I do teach my children about evolution very well. I feel you can't know how to defend your beliefs if you don't understand what others believe in. But I will look again. Thanks for the suggestions.

[thowell]

My oldest did Apologia General in 6th, so I have vague memories of it only. :D We switched to BJU after that. I think it had a life science component, so that would work, I would think.

 

Do you mean the BJU had the life science or Apologia?

[thowell]

http://www.the101series.com/

 

has anyone used this?

[Melissa in CA]

Do you mean the BJU had the life science or Apologia?

 

Not Angela, but I'm pretty sure she meant that Apologia's General has a life science unit.

 

Personally, I would go with BJU's Life Science and then BJU's Biology. You could easily teach the Life Science yourself...just be sure to get the TE's. And you can get a lab set from...(that wonderful online science store I can't for the life of me remember).:lol: My ds has learned tons with BJU and it's not a regurgitation curriculum...he often has to really think when it comes to quizzes and tests. You have to know the material well. Studying is a must...or least it was for my ds.

[Chris in VA]

Have you seen Science Shepherd's Life Science course? I am thinking of getting it for dd in 7th. Wish I could see it! LOL--there's a pretty good sample on the website. If you want a lab component, they recommend another supplemental book that looks interesting.

Dd is thinking of becoming an ornithologist or field biology/research person. :D So, science will become important. I liked the look of this curriculum for Jr. Hi.

[EKS]

I don't know what you mean by neutral, but I would use Miller and Levine.

[thowell]

Have you seen Science Shepherd's Life Science course? I am thinking of getting it for dd in 7th. Wish I could see it! LOL--there's a pretty good sample on the website. If you want a lab component, they recommend another supplemental book that looks interesting.

Dd is thinking of becoming an ornithologist or field biology/research person. :D So, science will become important. I liked the look of this curriculum for Jr. Hi.

 

 

This looks great! Thanks

[WishboneDawn]

I appreciate the suggestion but I looked over this and it definitely would not work for us. I need something to at least be neutral if it isn't Christian and this is definitely not. Thanks anyway!

 

You won't find anything not Christian that's neutral. I'd even venture to say you won't find anything neutral as even texts that claim neutrality are taking a stance a secular biologist would not condone. The idea that there IS a neutral position is a wholly creationist/ID one.

 

I don't say this to start a debate but simply so you can narrow down your choices.

[melmichigan]

You won't find anything not Christian that's neutral. I'd even venture to say you won't find anything neutral as even texts that claim neutrality are taking a stance a secular biologist would not condone. The idea that there IS a neutral position is a wholly creationist/ID one.

 

I don't say this to start a debate but simply so you can narrow down your choices.

 

:iagree: You will need to stick with Christian publishers to get what you want.

[SailorMom]

I don't know - I think "neutral" could be either A) a cretionist text that doesn't bash evolution, or B) a secular text that doesn't bash creationism.

 

(Keep in mind I'm not a Christian, so ignore me if you'd rather :) ) My whole issue with the non-secular texts is that they don't offer any information on the other current theories (at least not the ones I've seen).

 

For a non-sciency kid this is probably no big deal - but when you're talking about a sciency-advanced kid - even if you don't agree, they probably need exposed. Especially if a scientific field is in their future. I think as long as the text simply states its position, and doesn't insult creationism, it can be constructive and should ( imho ) be considered neutral.

 

I mean - "neutral" in the sense that the usage in this thread doesn't seem neutral.... I'm not trying to be controversial - and I'd never tell someone else what curriruclum to use - just saying "neutral" is a confusing word to use :) I suppose it would be great to actually find a truly neutral text that simply explains both sides without any bias - but good luck with that!

[thowell]

I don't know - I think "neutral" could be either A) a cretionist text that doesn't bash evolution, or B) a secular text that doesn't bash creationism.

 

(Keep in mind I'm not a Christian, so ignore me if you'd rather :) ) My whole issue with the non-secular texts is that they don't offer any information on the other current theories (at least not the ones I've seen).

 

For a non-sciency kid this is probably no big deal - but when you're talking about a sciency-advanced kid - even if you don't agree, they probably need exposed. Especially if a scientific field is in their future. I think as long as the text simply states its position, and doesn't insult creationism, it can be constructive and should ( imho ) be considered neutral.

 

I mean - "neutral" in the sense that the usage in this thread doesn't seem neutral.... I'm not trying to be controversial - and I'd never tell someone else what curriruclum to use - just saying "neutral" is a confusing word to use :) I suppose it would be great to actually find a truly neutral text that simply explains both sides without any bias - but good luck with that!

 

Yep, that is pretty much what I am looking for. The Impossible!!! Since I know she will most likely go into a science career, which will mean more science in college, I do want her to be educated in all areas. I have to admit that this year we are using Abeka and I do find it lacking in the areas of what she would need for testing. Something that states the facts without opinions. I am not sure this exist so if I can't find anything close to it I will use a Christian text and make sure she is educated on the other views. Thanks for the help!

[WishboneDawn]

I don't know - I think "neutral" could be either A) a cretionist text that doesn't bash evolution, or B) a secular text that doesn't bash creationism.

 

(Keep in mind I'm not a Christian, so ignore me if you'd rather :) ) My whole issue with the non-secular texts is that they don't offer any information on the other current theories (at least not the ones I've seen).

 

For a non-sciency kid this is probably no big deal - but when you're talking about a sciency-advanced kid - even if you don't agree, they probably need exposed. Especially if a scientific field is in their future. I think as long as the text simply states its position, and doesn't insult creationism, it can be constructive and should ( imho ) be considered neutral.

 

I mean - "neutral" in the sense that the usage in this thread doesn't seem neutral.... I'm not trying to be controversial - and I'd never tell someone else what curriruclum to use - just saying "neutral" is a confusing word to use :) I suppose it would be great to actually find a truly neutral text that simply explains both sides without any bias - but good luck with that!

 

I tend to think neutrality would mean a text that would treat both creationism and evolution as equally valid theories. You won't find that in any good secular text simply because any hypothesis that posits a supernatural creator is something outside the realm of traditional science. It simply can't assume something outside the realm of the natural world as a cause and I'd avoid any secular text that did.

[Crimson Wife]

I tend to think neutrality would mean a text that would treat both creationism and evolution as equally valid theories. You won't find that in any good secular text simply because any hypothesis that posits a supernatural creator is something outside the realm of traditional science. It simply can't assume something outside the realm of the natural world as a cause and I'd avoid any secular text that did.

 

A text that teaches Creationism isn't "neutral", even if it gives equal space to evolution. "Balanced" perhaps, but not neutral.

 

"Neutral" texts sidestep the whole origins debate and just stick to facts about which everyone can agree.

[regentrude]

I don't know - I think "neutral" could be either A) a cretionist text that doesn't bash evolution, or B) a secular text that doesn't bash creationism.

 

I don't know anything about A) - but there are plenty of B): secular texts that don't bash creationism. None of the standard biology texts like Campbell bashes creationism - it simply does not get mentioned at all. Because creation by God is a question OUTSIDE the realm of science, can not be answered by science methods, and hence does not belong into a science text.

[regentrude]

Something that states the facts without opinions.

 

That is what a basic secular biology text like Campbell does. It is ALL about facts. There is no room for opinions in a science text.

[Crimson Wife]

That is what a basic secular biology text like Campbell does. It is ALL about facts. There is no room for opinions in a science text.

 

I like the Campbell book in general, but it does present certain controversial things as "facts" rather than qualifying them as what most scientists believe given the current empirical evidence. It is not a "fact" that the universe is around 4.5 billion years old. That *IS* what most scientists believe the age of the universe to be given the current empirical evidence (and FWIW I happen to agree with them). However, we must be careful to not overstate the case by presenting opinions (even ones with evidence that appears to support them) as "facts".

[WishboneDawn]

A text that teaches Creationism isn't "neutral", even if it gives equal space to evolution. "Balanced" perhaps, but not neutral.

 

"Neutral" texts sidestep the whole origins debate and just stick to facts about which everyone can agree.

 

I think I'd call that a "neutered" text rather then "neutral". :D

[regentrude]

I like the Campbell book in general, but it does present certain controversial things as "facts" rather than qualifying them as what most scientists believe given the current empirical evidence. It is not a "fact" that the universe is around 4.5 billion years old. That *IS* what most scientists believe the age of the universe to be given the current empirical evidence (and FWIW I happen to agree with them). However, we must be careful to not overstate the case by presenting opinions (even ones with evidence that appears to support them) as "facts".

 

You raise a very interesting point - what WOULD you define as "fact"?

Most people would consider it a "fact" that things fall down because the Earth attracts them via gravity. Gravity is, however, only a theory believed by most scientists; nobody understands WHY objects have mass at all. All we know is that Newton's theory of gravity explains what we observe, and that predictions using this theory agree with observation.

So, is gravity a fact?

[Melanie]

I don't know what you mean by neutral, but I would use Miller and Levine.

 

This is what my 7th grader is using this year.

[WishboneDawn]

You raise a very interesting point - what WOULD you define as "fact"?

Most people would consider it a "fact" that things fall down because the Earth attracts them via gravity. Gravity is, however, only a theory believed by most scientists; nobody understands WHY objects have mass at all. All we know is that Newton's theory of gravity explains what we observe, and that predictions using this theory agree with observation.

So, is gravity a fact?

 

You're talking about the difference between laws and theories. The Law of Gravity is what happens when the apples drops - the obsevation or "fact". The theory is the why and how of that.

 

You've got a good point I think. Science that's "just" the facts isn't really science. It's just tossing an apple around all day. :)

[SailorMom]

Gracity is certianly a fact - but the theory of what exactly gravity is is actually still debated at some levels :)

I stick with a warp in time-space, but some would disagree.

 

Anyway-

Perhaps two books is what will have to be used? Miller and Levine do a good job on it, imho, and maybe teaching that side by side as a comparison while using a Christian text would work??