I need a science intervention/reorganization

[redsquirrel]

Help!

 

I is a sad squirrel. My son told me that he just can't stand CPO Earth and Space. This is a kid who is very agreeable and loves science. He rarely complains. We picked it out together and it seemed like it was a great choice, but he is not happy. I think he likes the hands on parts, but the experiments can run to the tedious. There is lots of doing something a bunch of times and taking averages. And often the 'something' just isn't that interesting. And there is a lot of reading and writing. I have been having him read the chapters and then answering the questions at the end of each section. It is about 10-15 questions that are from the reading.

 

What we liked about CPO: it is secular in worldview. That is a big one here. It is rigorous. My kid likes a challenge, or at least that is what he says. He generally doesn't shy from something just because it is a challenge. But, this doesn't always feel rigorous, it feels grind-y. It has lots of experiments. He really likes experiments but prefers a 'ta-dah' factor that just isn't always going to happen.

 

Here is what I am considering:

Mixing in some Nebel. Instead of doing the CPO unit on maps, we did it from BFSU2 and I am planning to continue with the next lessons in BFSU 3. Unfortunately, all of the Earth and Space topics covered by Nebel have already been covered by CPO this year. I guess I could go back and redo them using the BFSU method.

 

I could continue with CPO, doing the experiments as laid out (using all the materials I BOUGHT FOR THE YEAR ahem) and stop having him write out all those answers to the sections. I could just have him read and do a narration one day and another day read and do an outline.

 

I think he really likes discussion and 'lecture' such as it is. Both Nebel and CPO have helpers for lecture and discussion and I have been trying hard to do it more often. But, it can feel so easy to say "read the section, answer the questions and call science done" on non-experiment days. :blushing:

 

Or, is this a moment where I have to tell him, 'Sorry, kid, but this is what science is for these years. It is averaging, it is weighing and measuring, it is looking for small changes."

 

I have a smart and creative kid who generally likes school when it doesn't feel like busywork. It makes me sad to see him sort of slump when I tell him to do science. And I have to say that I like CPO. It is well laid out, it uses great vocabulary for this age. It is broken down into doable pieces, I like the experiments. It has a lot to offer and I honestly don't want to toss it. I just need to make this better for him.

[lewelma]

Do a long science fair project.

 

He likes hands on, he likes a challenge, but he wants an experiment that is interesting to him. Well, that is a science fair project. He will learn more about real science in 8 weeks, than in a whole year of any other curriculum.

 

Ruth in NZ

[Coffeemama]

I hear you! CPO is not going over quite as well as I had hoped. To make things better, this is what we've done so far...(but I'm hoping others will add to this discussion):bigear:

 

Some experiments get done with Dad at night. Just having a different person, who is not very involved with our day-to-day work helps to change things up and... shhhhh....sometimes we don't write out the whole lab and just discuss.

The other thing that has helped is mixing up the way non-lab days go. Some days she reads and writes out all of the questions, other days she'll read on her own, then we discuss the answers and some days I'll read to her (and discuss as we go) then she'll write out the answers on her own. My DD is much happier with science when we do part of it together.

 

Although my original intent was for everything but the labs to be independent, I have found it she still needs some interaction to keep science enjoyable. I guess we are taking baby steps toward independent learning from a text. HTH:001_smile:

[elegantlion]

We had similar issues with text based science. Ds adores science, but hated every text we encountered. I believe that taking your child's opinion on curriculum is important.

 

Can you ask what might help him accept CPO. About that age my ds started to be able to tell me why something wasn't working and what might make it more palatable. And believe me he is never short of an opinion or three.

 

I would rather scale back or tweak than possibly kill the love of a subject with a bad curriculum choice.

 

The only curriculum we found that was well received was Ellen McHenry's The Elements. Beyond that we read real books on science.

 

He did read without complain the Exploring the World of Biology, I have the chemistry to use as well. However, those were not secular.

[8filltheheart]

We had similar issues with text based science. Ds adores science, but hated every text we encountered. I believe that taking your child's opinion on curriculum is important.

 

Can you ask what might help him accept CPO. About that age my ds started to be able to tell me why something wasn't working and what might make it more palatable. And believe me he is never short of an opinion or three.

 

I would rather scale back or tweak than possibly kill the love of a subject with a bad curriculum choice.

 

The only curriculum we found that was well received was Ellen McHenry's The Elements. Beyond that we read real books on science.

 

He did read without complain the Exploring the World of Biology, I have the chemistry to use as well. However, those were not secular.

 

:iagree: at 11, there is no need to spend so much time writing out lab reports and doing labs they don't enjoy or spending huge amts of time writing out answers to questions. I wouldn't want to create the illusion that science is nothing more than a sequence of "ta-das," but neither should the love of it be quenched under drudgery.

 

I have never seen the book. Would it be possible to replace all those Q & A's w/ researching the topics more deeply and writing about what he finds in his research? Or discussing the answers w/you vs. writing everything out?

 

If you are willing to let go to CPO, there are lots of engaging ways to study science and still provide them the foundation that they need.

[mcconnellboys]

I bought CPO to look at for use, but ended up using the lessons from this website as my "spine" for science studies. It also includes activity/labs, tests, etc.:

 

http://msnucleus.org/membership/index.html

 

I also used this site as the basis for an outside class I taught:

 

http://volcano.oregonstate.edu/cones-eruptions-and-pyroclasts

 

Lesson plans are under "Learn More." This one also includes some activity/lab work and tests.

[Halcyon]

I have CPO Life Science for 5th, but I too don't know if it will be a fit. It DOES seem a bit...dull...and textbook-y, and I too have wrestled with the same thoughts as you: maybe this is just the way it is now that you've reached the middle grades, kiddo. OTOH, I so don't want to see his enthusiasm squelched. Right now, we're using BFSU and inquiry-based science (well, I am TRYING to be inquiry based, working on it) and it's going well. Not a lot of formal lab reports but lots of playing around, experimenting and "testing" ideas.

 

I will be listening in to hear what others have to say.

[babysparkler]

It is nice to know that we are not alone in feeling disappointed with CPO Earth & Space. My kids are not "science-lovers" so they are needing something that is more interesting/exciting... and I am needing something more self-directed. I would love some recommendations as well!

[redsquirrel]

We talked more today. There are things about CPO that he does like. He likes reading the book and he likes talking about the readings. He would like less of the writing it all out because it feels useless to him. Most of the questions are answered directly in the text. Often he is not even reading the text first, just going straight to the questions and then looking back through the text for the answers. No wonder it feels stupid. If I want him to read it and understand it, we would do better to discuss. The questions are there for teachers to ensure the students read the text.

 

So, he would rather he read from the text and then we discuss it. He does like the experiments and doesn't even really mind the averaging. We will also add in BFSU where applicable. I think that adds in a richness that he has been missing.

[Matryoshka]

We did CPO Earth (no space, California edition) last year. My girls liked CPO Biology fine (done in 6th) and are actually loving CPO's Physics: A First Course this year (8th), but CPO Earth was a dud. I thought it might be because I had them do it in 7th and it was just not challenging? But maybe it's just their weakest text. They complained quite a bit about CPO Earth, and I was really worried about doing the Physics this year, but it's been a huge hit, even with my math-averse dd. Go figure.

 

Anyhow, so I'm thinking of skipping CPO Earth with my youngest when it's her turn. Have you looked at the stuff at jason.org? It's free, and I thought it might stand in for Earth Science, or you could use parts as a supplement...

 

Another tip to tweak the CPO if you decide to keep using it - skip the section reviews and use the skill sheets (free on the CPO website) instead. I was having my kids do the end-of-chapter assessments, which took forever. I'm not sure if this would be as effective with the Earth Science as it has been with the Physics this year (the skill sheets online didn't line up with the California Edition, so it didn't work as quite as well for me). For the Physics, at least, my kids are getting better understanding and retention with the Skill Sheets - but that may partly have to do with the amount of math involved in Physics.

[Halcyon]

We talked more today. There are things about CPO that he does like. He likes reading the book and he likes talking about the readings. He would like less of the writing it all out because it feels useless to him. Most of the questions are answered directly in the text. Often he is not even reading the text first, just going straight to the questions and then looking back through the text for the answers. No wonder it feels stupid. If I want him to read it and understand it, we would do better to discuss. The questions are there for teachers to ensure the students read the text.

 

So, he would rather he read from the text and then we discuss it. He does like the experiments and doesn't even really mind the averaging. We will also add in BFSU where applicable. I think that adds in a richness that he has been missing.

 

 

This is very helpful!

[Halcyon]

Have you looked at the stuff at jason.org? It's free, and I thought it might stand in for Earth Science, or you could use parts as a supplement...

 

This looks fun--thank youU!

[Capt_Uhura]

I vote for skipping the writing! Just do the discussion at this age! If you want a record, have him write a summary or research something more deeply from that chapter.

[Lily_Grace]

I vote for skipping the writing! Just do the discussion at this age! If you want a record, have him write a summary or research something more deeply from that chapter.

 

:iagree:

 

We don't use CPO, but have found some ways to make science more exciting here. Most of the experiments I've found for this age group are illustration experiments - they show what the book is trying to say. We do that first, and then I'll have the Kid do more research on the topic and create discovery-experiments that work on the same principle. Like, yesterday the experiment in his book was was to make a parachute that showed the principle of air resistance. Most kids have played with parachutes by this age! So after he demonstrated it, I had him research it further and create a parachute that would safely drop an egg from the second story of our house into the backyard. All of his research is recorded in his notebook for one large project at the end. I'm finding that in middle school, it's not enough to just regurgitate what the book says in either written or experiment form. They need the opportunities to take what the book says and play with it or apply it in new ways and THEN write it down.

[EKS]

I don't specifically know about CPO's earth science activities, but in general I've found that science programs try to make kids "think like a scientist" by forcing them to come up "hypotheses" and having them do multiple runs of the same "experiment".

 

The problem is that most kids see right through this. Just about every canned "experiment" suggested by any science program is not really an experiment because the outcome is known. Telling kids to come up with a "hypothesis" is generally ridiculous because either (a) they already know the outcome of the "experiment" because it is obvious or (b) they have no clue about the outcome and they are making a wild guess. A real hypothesis in the scientific sense is *not* a guess. It is an *educated guess* which is totally different. Unfortunately, unless a program is doing a really good job, most kids don't have the background to make an educated guess.

 

As for repeating things over and over, repeatability is extremely important in real science. But, frankly, canned activities are not real science. If your child were to do a real experiment, then it would be important to do whatever it is several times to make sure that the outcome is repeatable. But forcing a kid to do multiple measurements in a canned activity has the potential to make a kid think that science is pointless and beyond tedious.

 

My suggestion would be to modify the "experiments" and turn them into demonstrations--with your son helping of course. If there are some that really are experiments--meaning that he comes up with what to test and how to test it, then by all means, take a more formal approach. But with the canned activities, it is better (IMO) to admit they're canned and not try to make them more than they are. So do the activity once, without writing down any more than necessary, and if you have the expected outcome, call it good.

[redsquirrel]

I don't specifically know about CPO's earth science activities, but in general I've found that science programs try to make kids "think like a scientist" by forcing them to come up "hypotheses" and having them do multiple runs of the same "experiment".

 

The problem is that most kids see right through this. Just about every canned "experiment" suggested by any science program is not really an experiment because the outcome is known. Telling kids to come up with a "hypothesis" is generally ridiculous because either (a) they already know the outcome of the "experiment" because it is obvious or (b) they have no clue about the outcome and they are making a wild guess. A real hypothesis in the scientific sense is *not* a guess. It is an *educated guess* which is totally different. Unfortunately, unless a program is doing a really good job, most kids don't have the background to make an educated guess.

 

As for repeating things over and over, repeatability is extremely important in real science. But, frankly, canned activities are not real science. If your child were to do a real experiment, then it would be important to do whatever it is several times to make sure that the outcome is repeatable. But forcing a kid to do multiple measurements in a canned activity has the potential to make a kid think that science is pointless and beyond tedious.

 

My suggestion would be to modify the "experiments" and turn them into demonstrations--with your son helping of course. If there are some that really are experiments--meaning that he comes up with what to test and how to test it, then by all means, take a more formal approach. But with the canned activities, it is better (IMO) to admit they're canned and not try to make them more than they are. So do the activity once, without writing down any more than necessary, and if you have the expected outcome, call it good.

 

I do not think that CPO has that type of approach. It doesn't require my son to come up with a hypothesis before we start an experiment or anything like that. It is things like "how do we know this/find this out/do this? Well scientists investigate it this way way, among others. Now you do it and see what you get. " The next lesson there is a reading about that particular subject. It doesn't feel canned. It feels tedious at times. So do the readings. That said, it is a whole lot better than some of the other texts I looked at.

 

I did ask him if he wanted to try a science fair type project. We don't have access to a science fair so it may have sounded underwhelming. I think I made a strategic error by suggesting he start a 6 week science project on the same day he started rehearsals for Oliver. He had just got his score and script and was feeling a bit pressured. He just looked at me like I was nuts. I may bring it up again after the show is done.

[lewelma]

I think I made a strategic error by suggesting he start a 6 week science project on the same day he started rehearsals for Oliver. He had just got his score and script and was feeling a bit pressured. He just looked at me like I was nuts.

 

:lol:

[Coffeemama]

I do not think that CPO has that type of approach. It doesn't require my son to come up with a hypothesis before we start an experiment or anything like that. It is things like "how do we know this/find this out/do this? Well scientists investigate it this way way, among others. Now you do it and see what you get. " The next lesson there is a reading about that particular subject. It doesn't feel canned. It feels tedious at times. So do the readings. That said, it is a whole lot better than some of the other texts I looked at.

 

I did ask him if he wanted to try a science fair type project. We don't have access to a science fair so it may have sounded underwhelming. I think I made a strategic error by suggesting he start a 6 week science project on the same day he started rehearsals for Oliver. He had just got his score and script and was feeling a bit pressured. He just looked at me like I was nuts. I may bring it up again after the show is done.

 

 

If he finds it underwhelming due to not having a fair to participate in, you could have him look into entering a science contest, like the Discoverery Education one sponsored by 3M. It is specifically for middle school kids.

[momto2Cs]

I looked in the abbreviations sticky and couldn't find it ... Could someone please tell me what BFSU is?

 

Building Foundations of Scientific Understanding, by Dr. B. Nebel. There are 3 volumes in the series.

[redsquirrel]

I want to follow up in case anyone finds this on their quest for info about CPO.

 

I stopped making my son write out all the answers to the section and chapter questions. I assign the reading and then we go over the questions orally. Things got better right away. He is doing WWS and a writing heavy history program so I think it was just too much. It made science feel much less drudge-y. We are enjoying the discussions. I tell my son to teach me about what he read and he seems to enjoy that. I can tell that he is understanding the readings.

 

I am also making better use of the teacher manual and the many handouts available on the CPO website.

[swimmermom3]

Thank you for the update; I am glad things are going so much better. Regular writing assignments are fairly demanding these days, so my son is happy to answer most assessment type questions orally. Discussion appears to be more profitable and permanent in our household than study guides or assessment questions. Enjoy your year!

[woolybear]

I want to follow up in case anyone finds this on their quest for info about CPO.

 

I stopped making my son write out all the answers to the section and chapter questions. I assign the reading and then we go over the questions orally. Things got better right away. He is doing WWS and a writing heavy history program so I think it was just too much. It made science feel much less drudge-y. We are enjoying the discussions. I tell my son to teach me about what he read and he seems to enjoy that. I can tell that he is understanding the readings.

 

I am also making better use of the teacher manual and the many handouts available on the CPO website.

 

:thumbup: