Poll: Do You Teach Earth Science/Astronomy in HS?

[Crimson Wife]

I'm working on updating my logic stage plan for my DD and I'm trying to figure out about Earth Science/Astronomy. Back when I was going through high school in the '90's, the honors track for high school did not include Earth Science/Astronomy. We may do an online or B&M HS and the schools that we're considering do not have Earth Science/Astronomy in their sequence either.

 

Do your high school students take Earth Science/Astronomy?

 

ETA: The reason I'm thinking about the high school sequence when updating my logic stage plan is because if it's going to be the terminal course in Earth Science/Astronomy, I'm considering using a high school level text; that, in turn, would most likely require switching the order of the logic stage sciences.

Edited September 4, 2011 by Crimson Wife

[EKS]

My son took astronomy in 9th grade because he specifically asked to do so. If he hadn't asked, I wouldn't have thought to do it.

[regentrude]

We covered both in Middle school. We will not use astronomy/Earth science to fulfill a high school science requirement.

DD is only mildly interested. She sat in on astronomy college lectures in Middle school. I do not think she will choose to study more astronomy in high school.

DS is very interested and may take astronomy as an elective in high school - but we are not there yet.

[Amy in CO]

My dd took Earth Science with a Geology focus last year because she was interested in it.

 

My sons are more interested in chemistry and physics, so I don't plan on them taking Earth Science, but that may change.

[Sahamamama]

Here is an interesting article about science sequences:

 

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:cg6_wFgQ1msJ:www.slapt.org/resources/physics_first/Inverting_the_sci_sequence.pdf+high+school+science+sequence&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShtBq_SZ2U8_zADg9KVzumexQ5zbtvSj7RdfIfqrwQwSWITk712nggDll-ywseWDXnSD8e3pDlOhBLbOpHUEdmLuHCcjD6oKkQw5Wfg1k-H1Ps8tx5CMxLcVt9kBTditGZSLMUN&sig=AHIEtbSxJqYPpUKPuVOTy9tHKRxkJRGngw

[Aquinas Academy]

We're doing bio, chem, and physics in 9th-11th grades. In 12th I'll let my children decide what science they want to do, either a more advanced level of the three they've studied or something else, such as astromony.

[Crimson Wife]

Here is an interesting article about science sequences:

 

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:cg6_wFgQ1msJ:www.slapt.org/resources/physics_first/Inverting_the_sci_sequence.pdf+high+school+science+sequence&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShtBq_SZ2U8_zADg9KVzumexQ5zbtvSj7RdfIfqrwQwSWITk712nggDll-ywseWDXnSD8e3pDlOhBLbOpHUEdmLuHCcjD6oKkQw5Wfg1k-H1Ps8tx5CMxLcVt9kBTditGZSLMUN&sig=AHIEtbSxJqYPpUKPuVOTy9tHKRxkJRGngw

 

Interesting link, but isn't calculus typically a co-requisite for physics? Hardly any students are taking calculus before 11th.

[Jenny in Florida]

My daughter did a course we called Astronomy on her transcript. It came in between Biology and Chemistry. She used an introductory college text.

 

My son did the FLVS Earth-Space Science course (honors track) last year, and it will go on his high school transcript.

 

So, different versions, but they will both end up with something like that on their transcripts.

[Carrie12345]

My ds was going to do so this year, but our plans changed at the last minute. He does want a real focus on Astronomy and Meteorology, (he's considering Meteorology as a potential career) so I am on the hunt for resources and working on fitting it in to his course sequence.

[8filltheheart]

Only my 15 yos has studied astronomy, none of my other older kids. No one has studied earth science.

 

My ds thinks he wants to pursue a phD in astrophysics. He is currently taking his second astronomy course. However, he has taken astronomy as a 2nd science each yr. His transcript will have physics, chem, AP chem, (what he has finished or is currently taking), as well as AP physics, and biology (his jr and sr yrs) He will have at least the 2 astronomy courses, but he may have 3rd and 4th. :tongue_smilie:

 

FWIW, I have a dd that will probably take Cornell's ornithology course simultaneously with another high school science. I will not have her take it in place of a traditional one.

 

I don't mind the alternative studies, but I am not willing to replace them.

[FaithManor]

DD had a credit of astronomy in 9th grade...she doubled up with biology.

 

I had not seen a "high school" astronomy text that I thought was worthy. So we used my sister's freshman college level astronomy book which was very good. We have a 10" telescope so we were able to include labs/experiences and she did some time lapse photography/video of the the mooon.

 

Our youngest will probably take more astronomy than that. We'll be using MIT opencourseware for those.

 

I've never taught earth science per se. But, ds will have an MIT introduction to geology course next year. That will be new for us.

 

Faith

[anne1456]

In our state (NY) Earth science is the standard 9th grade science class. Advanced students take it in 8th grade, but still get high school credit for it. I think it is pretty boring, so I cover it in middle school.

[angela in ohio]

We did it in middle school, and we won't return to it in high school as a rule.

 

My oldest dd is interested in astronomy, so she will probably take a course at the CC in the next year or so if she has time. If not, she can take it when she goes to college. Neither of them have any interest in geology.

 

We have a telescope and a million books on astronomy. I think they have probably learned more with those (after a nice base coat in our earth & space science course) on their own than they would have learned in a high school course. :001_smile:

[regentrude]

Interesting link, but isn't calculus typically a co-requisite for physics? Hardly any students are taking calculus before 11th.

 

I can't access the article... but you can teach algebra based physics (which can not accomplish everything calc based physics can, but quite a lot) - that's how we start the high school science series - physics first.

[8filltheheart]

I think they have probably learned more with those (after a nice base coat in our earth & space science course) on their own than they would have learned in a high school course. :001_smile:

 

I wanted to add that we are using college textbooks, not high school ones. They have been very accessible to him as a young high school student. We have been using the ones in Berkeley's sequence.

http://astro.berkeley.edu/academics/courses/

 

(It looks like they have changed textbooks from last yr. The Cosmos was the first textbook he used and now he is using The Cosmic Perspective: The Solar System.)

[Brenda in MA]

Interesting link, but isn't calculus typically a co-requisite for physics? Hardly any students are taking calculus before 11th.

 

From my experience, there are three "levels" of physics taught.

 

The first is Conceptual Physics (the one mentioned in the article), which requires only an understanding of basic algebra. Most of the text is centered around explaining the concepts and questioning the student on those concepts. Very few calculations are required. As the article states, this course would be usable by 9th graders who have taken Algebra in 8th grade or who are taking it in 9th grade.

 

The second level would be an algebra/trig-based course. This type of course is probably what you're thinking of as a "typical" high school course. It generally requires the completion of Algebra 2 and at least some trig.

 

The third level would be college physics that is calculus-based. For this type of course, the student would need to have taken (or possibly be taking) calculus at the same time as the physics course. Most students do not take this as their first physics course. Very few high schools even offer this level of physics course.

 

My first son used the "typical" sequence of science -- he took Earth Science in 8th, Biology in 9th, Chemistry in 10th, Physics (alg/trig) in 11th, and then Chem at the CC in 12th. He has since gone on to take calc-based Physics in college. He did well in all of these courses, but the higher-level ones have not come easily for him.

 

In contrast, I'm using an inverted sequence for his brother. He's taken Conceptual Physics in 8th, Chemistry in 9th, and Biology in 10th. I can tell already that he has a much better grasp of the concepts underlying the Biology than his brother did. Since he seems to like physics, it is likely that he'll take another physics course in high school and also possibly another chemistry course. He'll have some "room" in his schedule to fill in with science topics that he enjoys.

 

Of all the courses we've done in homeschooling, Conceptual Physics was one of his favorites (and mine, too). I heard about it on these forums and decided to give it a try, and I'm so glad that I did. After going through that course with my ds, I have to say that I think every high schooler should take it. The concepts it teaches are so fundamental to so many areas. I, myself, have a science background and took many upper level science courses in college, but I still learned a lot from Conceptual Physics. Somehow, forcing a student to think about the concepts without worrying about how to do the math really helps to cement the basics, at least that's what I've found.

 

Best wishes to you as you plan your students' science courses!

Brenda

[elegantlion]

We're doing bio, chem, and physics in 9th-11th grades. In 12th I'll let my children decide what science they want to do, either a more advanced level of the three they've studied or something else, such as astromony.

 

This is our plan as well.

[EKS]

 

I don't mind the alternative studies, but I am not willing to replace them.

 

Yes, same here. My son also took meteorology last year, which is a part of earth science now that I think about it. He is taking biology this year at home and will take chemistry and physics at the community college.

[Murphy101]

Yes.

Geology and astronomy are just as valid a science as biology or chemistry or physics.

 

I have one son who is currently torn between being a geologist or a military explosives expert.:D

 

All of them seem fascinated by astronomy.

 

I see no reason why I wouldn't put such studies on their transcript and I certainly don't think it means they are getting a lesser education for it.

 

Btw, TTC has wonderful introduction to astronomy and introduction to geology courses.

[OLG]

We did an astronomy course in senior year but no earth science (that was middle school). Sequence was Chemistry, Biology, Physics although ds also did a summer atmospheric physics course at a university and the Cornell Bird Bio course. PErsonally, I think Astronomy is a great science for a student interested in it but f not, there is plenty of work remaining in sciences.

[melmichigan]

For our school district Earth Science is a middle school course so we are doing it this year but using a high school text and lots of supplements to make it worthwhile. We did high school Physical Science last year using a combo of Physical Science and Conceptual Physics so we won't do more physics until late in the rotation, any astronomy will be elective.

[regentrude]

I see no reason why I wouldn't put such studies on their transcript and I certainly don't think it means they are getting a lesser education for it.

.

 

They are wonderful courses. I just want to point out that some universities explicitly require that the four year science requirement be fulfilled by physics, chemistry, biology and one of these three at a higher level, and that they will not accept astronomy or Earth science towards this requirement. They can still be electives, of course.

[Crimson Wife]

For our school district Earth Science is a middle school course so we are doing it this year but using a high school text and lots of supplements to make it worthwhile.

 

Which text are you using?

[Kareni]

I voted other.

 

My daughter did Physical Science in 9th and Chemistry in 10th. In 11th grade, she began augmenting her at-home studies with some classes at the local community college. There she took three quarters of Geology as well as a quarter of Environmental Science. She considered taking Astronomy but found these other classes more to her inclination. (She's currently minoring in Geology at college.)

 

Regards,

Kareni

[Tullia]

We covered earth science in middle school and focused on biology, chemistry and physics (non-calculus based) during high school. Our course choices as reflected by the transcript were based on college entrance requirements. My son continued to study earth science during high school, but he pursued his interests mostly as a hobby. He used a variety of resources; Teaching Company, college textbooks, online open coursework, etc. If I'd taken the time to document his work, especially in meteorology, I believe it would have qualified as an elective. He had plenty of electives and core courses, though, so I didn't bother.

[KAR120C]

I didn't have Earth/Environmental in my plans, especially since DS is extremely science-oriented and wants to be an engineer.... I was going for the solid Biology/Chemistry/Physics/AP-something-or-two-or-three plan... But it sneaked in there anyway. Three years of science fair projects have ended up leaning that way (with a definite engineering approach and "flavor" but earth-environment subject matter), and then this year he got an opportunity for a field ecology project that has turned into three...

 

We're still doing Physics this year, but now we have this Field Ecology thing too, that might go on a couple years and probably ends up as a credit (or two) somewhere, and possibly the AP Environment test if I add a couple readings.

 

So yes, my kid is doing Earth science (of a kind), but not at the expense of anything else.

[texasmel]

We are including a year of Earth and Space Science as part of our high school program. In the state of Texas, their *Distinguished Achievement Program (the highest) graduation requirements are listed as follows :

 

Four credits:

• Biology, AP Biology, or IB Biology

• Chemistry, AP Chemistry, or IB Chemistry

• Physics, AP Physics, or IB Physics

• After successful completion of a biology course, a chemistry course, and a physics course, the fourth credit may be selected from any of the following:

 Aquatic Science

 Astronomy

 Earth and Space Science

 Environmental Systems

 AP Biology

 AP Chemistry

 AP Physics B

 AP Physics C

 AP Environmental Science

 IB Biology

 IB Chemistry

 IB Physics

 IB Environmental Systems

 Scientific Research and Design (CTE)

 Anatomy and Physiology (CTE)

 Engineering Design and Problem Solving (CTE)

 Medical Microbiology (CTE)

 Pathophysiology (CTE)

 Advanced Animal Science (CTE)

 Advanced Biotechnology (CTE)

 Advanced Plant and Soil Science (CTE)

 Food Science (CTE)

 Forensic Science (CTE)

 

However, as previously mentioned - you should check with your university for admission requirements.

[Melanie]

We did not do any formal science prior to 9th grade, so yes, we are studying geology and astronomy. This is my son's plan for high school science and math:

 

9th: Geology, precalculus

10th: Astronomy, calculus

11th: Physics, biology (at local CC), calculus

12th: Physics, chemistry (at local CC)

 

We use introductory college texts and Teaching Company lectures.

[lakerks]

Absolutely!

 

Ds took geology in 9th grade. If time/interest permits, he'll probably do a semester of meteorology and/or a semester of astronomy in 12th. I'm not arguing that the earth sciences should replace biology/chemistry/physics; however, they shouldn't be neglected either.

 

Geology and astronomy are just as valid a science as biology or chemistry or physics.

 

I see no reason why I wouldn't put such studies on their transcript and I certainly don't think it means they are getting a lesser education for it.

 

Btw, TTC has wonderful introduction to astronomy and introduction to geology courses.

 

:iagree:

 

Done well, Earth Science can be an interesting and worthwhile lab course. I like TTC "How the Earth Works" taught by Michael E. Wysession, and I supplement with Prentice Hall Earth Science for labs.

 

Additionally, I like this quote:

 

"One very important part of the study of how the earth works is the interdisciplinary nature of it. Earth science is not for the faint of heart - this is not "rocks for jocks." In a modern-day university earth science department lecture, you are as likely to hear about the biological DNA of rock-chewing bacteria, the physics of the magnetic field of Jupiter, or the chemistry of ozone reactions in the atmosphere as you are likely to hear about more traditional topics of "geology." This is because the divisions between the different sciences are entirely artificial. Nature does not know about biology, physics, and chemistry; there is only Nature, and all of the sciences are involved in it. This is nowhere more true than in the study of a planet and how it works." (How the Earth Works Course Guidebook, pg. 2, TTC.)

[Murphy101]

We did not do any formal science prior to 9th grade, so yes, we are studying geology and astronomy. This is my son's plan for high school science and math:

 

9th: Geology, precalculus

10th: Astronomy, calculus

11th: Physics, biology (at local CC), calculus

12th: Physics, chemistry (at local CC)

 

We use introductory college texts and Teaching Company lectures.

 

 

I like the look of that set up!

Absolutely!

 

Ds took geology in 9th grade. If time/interest permits, he'll probably do a semester of meteorology and/or a semester of astronomy in 12th. I'm not arguing that the earth sciences should replace biology/chemistry/physics; however, they shouldn't be neglected either.

 

:iagree:

 

Done well, Earth Science can be an interesting and worthwhile lab course. I like TTC "How the Earth Works" taught by Michael E. Wysession, and I supplement with Prentice Hall Earth Science for labs.

 

Additionally, I like this quote:

 

"One very important part of the study of how the earth works is the interdisciplinary nature of it. Earth science is not for the faint of heart - this is not "rocks for jocks." In a modern-day university earth science department lecture, you are as likely to hear about the biological DNA of rock-chewing bacteria, the physics of the magnetic field of Jupiter, or the chemistry of ozone reactions in the atmosphere as you are likely to hear about more traditional topics of "geology." This is because the divisions between the different sciences are entirely artificial. Nature does not know about biology, physics, and chemistry; there is only Nature, and all of the sciences are involved in it. This is nowhere more true than in the study of a planet and how it works." (How the Earth Works Course Guidebook, pg. 2, TTC.)

 

 

*I* can't wait to start with him on this one for just this reason. I find it fascinating. Oh and out of curiosity we looked up degree requirements for a bachelors in geology - it has some pretty intense classes. Absolutely not just rocks for jocks or some "easy" science. Feel the same about astronomy. I have no idea where this obsession with the bio/chem/phys compartmentalizing of science to the near exclusion and even snubbing of other sciences comes from, but I think it rather saddening.

[Hsmomto4]

We do, but only because I want my children to have a clear Creationist view of the subjects.

[Cindyg]

We are doing BJUP's Space and Earth Science in the 8th grade. (It's an 8th grade class.) We are reading Apologia's Astronomy book along with it, though it's an elementary-level book.

 

So the answer to the poll question is no.

[regentrude]

I have no idea where this obsession with the bio/chem/phys compartmentalizing of science to the near exclusion and even snubbing of other sciences comes from, but I think it rather saddening.

 

I think one reason is that, in order to do Earth science and Astronomy well, one has to have the background in the basic sciences. Unless one understands about forces and potential energy, it is impossible to really understand planetary motion, the behavior of comets, etc. I bet there is a lot of chemistry (composition) and physics (mechanical properties) knowledge required to do understand geology. One needs to know about fluid dynamics to understand meteorology, about Coriolis forces and non-inertial reference frames to understand hurricanes etc.

So, it would make a lot of sense to do a rigorous Earth science and astronomy AFTER the basic sciences have been studied to lay a foundation.

[Murphy101]

I think one reason is that, in order to do Earth science and Astronomy well, one has to have the background in the basic sciences. Unless one understands about forces and potential energy, it is impossible to really understand planetary motion, the behavior of comets, etc. I bet there is a lot of chemistry (composition) and physics (mechanical properties) knowledge required to do understand geology. One needs to know about fluid dynamics to understand meteorology, about Coriolis forces and non-inertial reference frames to understand hurricanes etc.

So, it would make a lot of sense to do a rigorous Earth science and astronomy AFTER the basic sciences have been studied to lay a foundation.

 

Hmmmm.

Idk.

Why can't they just learn it as they go? Certainly that is easy enough in any high school level class.

It seems the carrot method doesn't work too well. Just get through bio/chem/physics and if by some miracle you are still interested THEN you can have rigorous astronomy?

 

To me that's like telling a kid they can't do carpentry until they have completed geometry.

 

More likely, and it seems to be a lot of what I see around me in the schools, is a whole lot of students that just decide to not bother at all. It sounds like a sure fire way to kill enthusiasm before it even gets much chance to bloom.

 

Btw, I'm not anti bio/chem/physics. I just don't think that yellow brick road has to be the only road that leads to Oz.:)

[8filltheheart]

Hmmmm.

Idk.

Why can't they just learn it as they go? Certainly that is easy enough in any high school level class.

It seems the carrot method doesn't work too well. Just get through bio/chem/physics and if by some miracle you are still interested THEN you can have rigorous astronomy?

 

To me that's like telling a kid they can't do carpentry until they have completed geometry.

 

More likely, and it seems to be a lot of what I see around me in the schools, is a whole lot of students that just decide to not bother at all. It sounds like a sure fire way to kill enthusiasm before it even gets much chance to bloom.

 

Btw, I'm not anti bio/chem/physics. I just don't think that yellow brick road has to be the only road that leads to Oz.:)

 

Astronomy really is physics. W/o at least a fundamental understanding of physics, you will be missing a lot of information. Ds has already taken alg/trig based physics and has watched 4 or 5 TC series lectures on physics. He loves physics. Yet, he will tell me that he is doesn't fully grasp some of the concepts being discussed b/c he hasn't studied calculus. One of the reasons he is so excited about learning cal this yr is so that he can apply it to the physics in his astronomy books. :tongue_smilie:

 

Anyway, before ds became so intensely interested in astronomy, I had no idea how physics-based astronomy is.

[swimmermom3]

From my experience, there are three "levels" of physics taught.

 

The first is Conceptual Physics (the one mentioned in the article), which requires only an understanding of basic algebra. Most of the text is centered around explaining the concepts and questioning the student on those concepts. Very few calculations are required. As the article states, this course would be usable by 9th graders who have taken Algebra in 8th grade or who are taking it in 9th grade.

 

The second level would be an algebra/trig-based course. This type of course is probably what you're thinking of as a "typical" high school course. It generally requires the completion of Algebra 2 and at least some trig.

 

The third level would be college physics that is calculus-based. For this type of course, the student would need to have taken (or possibly be taking) calculus at the same time as the physics course. Most students do not take this as their first physics course. Very few high schools even offer this level of physics course.

 

My first son used the "typical" sequence of science -- he took Earth Science in 8th, Biology in 9th, Chemistry in 10th, Physics (alg/trig) in 11th, and then Chem at the CC in 12th. He has since gone on to take calc-based Physics in college. He did well in all of these courses, but the higher-level ones have not come easily for him.

 

In contrast, I'm using an inverted sequence for his brother. He's taken Conceptual Physics in 8th, Chemistry in 9th, and Biology in 10th. I can tell already that he has a much better grasp of the concepts underlying the Biology than his brother did. Since he seems to like physics, it is likely that he'll take another physics course in high school and also possibly another chemistry course. He'll have some "room" in his schedule to fill in with science topics that he enjoys.

 

Of all the courses we've done in homeschooling, Conceptual Physics was one of his favorites (and mine, too). I heard about it on these forums and decided to give it a try, and I'm so glad that I did. After going through that course with my ds, I have to say that I think every high schooler should take it. The concepts it teaches are so fundamental to so many areas. I, myself, have a science background and took many upper level science courses in college, but I still learned a lot from Conceptual Physics. Somehow, forcing a student to think about the concepts without worrying about how to do the math really helps to cement the basics, at least that's what I've found.

 

Best wishes to you as you plan your students' science courses!

Brenda

 

I purchased the Conceptual Physics text as a supplement to Rainbow Science's physics section. We ended up spending more time with that text than Rainbow Sciene's. I mentioned our experience to a swim dad who is a high school physics teacher. After talking to my son, he recommended the following plan of action based on my son's interests: Conceptual Physics, Chemistry, Biology, AP Human Anatomy and Physiology. As it turns out, he has been working with their district to change to the inverse schedule. It was a really interesting conversation, but that could probably also be in part due to the fact that he spent many years in that funny, 5-sided building before returning to teaching. He was definitely of the mind that conceptual physics for all high school students would increase their scientific literacy and their performance in later science classes.

[Murphy101]

Astronomy really is physics. W/o at least a fundamental understanding of physics, you will be missing a lot of information. Ds has already taken alg/trig based physics and has watched 4 or 5 TC series lectures on physics. He loves physics. Yet, he will tell me that he is doesn't fully grasp some of the concepts being discussed b/c he hasn't studied calculus. One of the reasons he is so excited about learning cal this yr is so that he can apply it to the physics in his astronomy books. :tongue_smilie:

 

Anyway, before ds became so intensely interested in astronomy, I had no idea how physics-based astronomy is.

 

I know that.

 

But you actually illustrate my point. It's seeing the connection to the astronomy that excites him.

 

I don't expect most high schoolers to *fully* grasp ANY of these sciences. They are in high school. It's okay to not fully grasp some of the concepts. That's why they will continue to take these subjects at a higher level in college - there are many concepts yet to be grasped.

[8filltheheart]

I know that.

 

But you actually illustrate my point. It's seeing the connection to the astronomy that excites him.

 

I don't expect most high schoolers to *fully* grasp ANY of these sciences. They are in high school. It's okay to not fully grasp some of the concepts. That's why they will continue to take these subjects at a higher level in college - there are many concepts yet to be grasped.

 

I do see your pt here. I can't accurately assess its validity though. If ds hadn't had physics first or didn't have the really strong math skills that he does and had been attempting astronomy w/o them, would he still have been as fascinated by it or might he have lost interest in it b/c he couldn't connect w/it on the same level.

 

I don't have a clue.

[regentrude]

Why can't they just learn it as they go? Certainly that is easy enough in any high school level class.

It seems the carrot method doesn't work too well. Just get through bio/chem/physics and if by some miracle you are still interested THEN you can have rigorous astronomy?

 

It was our experience that the things you CAN do in astronomy without physics can easily be done in Middle school. The next level must wait until the student had physics.

So, I am not saying kids should not study astronomy - I just do not see the niche where you could make a "high school level" astronomy class that is more than a "Middle school level " astronomy class, without physics. You can not do more than a qualitative description of phenomena. THAT, a younger interested student can understand without problem.

 

And the reason you can not learn as you go is rather simple: because each concept that is used relies on several other concepts. You can't suddenly understand angular momentum (which you'll need for astro) if you have not studied linear momentum. You can not use Newton's gravitational force and potential if you have not studied simpler forces and potentials.

It would be like saying you don't need to progress in order in math - you can simply learn what calculus you need as you need it, without bothering to go through algebra first.

[Chris in VA]

We did a light astronomy class, paring it with a physical geography course for one credit. We used Astronomy Today, and chose not to make it heavily math/physics oriented. I felt justified in giving it .5 credit. I do think a typical "earth science" course is Jr Hi.

We were rather light on science--9th was Apologia Bio, 10th was Astronomy/Physical Geo, 11th was Apologia Chem, and 12 was one semester of Environmental Science using Miller/Levine.

As ds wasn't going into a science career, we felt it was fine.

 

Dd will be a different story--she wants to be an ornithologist...:D But she's only 11.

[regentrude]

. I have no idea where this obsession with the bio/chem/phys compartmentalizing of science to the near exclusion and even snubbing of other sciences comes from, but I think it rather saddening.

 

Another thought (I discussed this with DH and it was he who pointed it out):

physics, chemistry and biology are TOOLS to use in other fields.

Astronomy is great to know, and should certainly be taught for general knowledge - but is not used as a tool for anything else.

So, that would be another motivation to do the basic sciences first, because these are used as prerequisites for further studies.

[mom31257]

Interesting link, but isn't calculus typically a co-requisite for physics? Hardly any students are taking calculus before 11th.

 

I had Physics at the same time I took Algebra 2 and didn't have any trouble. I do have a math degree, so math was my thing! This was my sequence in the college-prep track in my high school (a long time ago!).

 

9th-Algebra 1/Biology

10th-Geometry/Chemistry

11th-Algebra 2/Physics

12th-Advanced Math (Pre-Calc)/ both Advanced Biology and Advanced Chemistry

 

I don't know what our 4th science will be yet, but dd is doing Dive Integrated Chemistry & Physics this year, will do Biology in 10th, and will do Chemistry in 11th. She is not a math lover, so I don't think Physics will be her 4th science. If Astronomy will count for her 4th, I think I'd love to have her do that in her senior year.