Teachin'Mine Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 ... to have the lab component? Isn't the "usual requirement" 3 sciences with two of them being labs? If so, and the student has at least two other lab sciences, is it okay to skip the biology labs? Obviously this would be for a student not interested in the medical field. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellie Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 If there's no lab, it isn't biology; it's life science. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkateLeft Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 Hmm. If the student is planning on pursuing any STEM related career, then I'd say the labs are essential. Personally, I agree with Ellie, and would consider a biology course without any labs to be "life science" rather than "biology." Even video labs or virtual labs would be preferable to no labs. I also think biology is probably the easiest high school course to pair with a lab component, and biology lab materials are easier to acquire than most other high school sciences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenny in Florida Posted July 27, 2012 Share Posted July 27, 2012 I also think biology is probably the easiest high school course to pair with a lab component, and biology lab materials are easier to acquire than most other high school sciences. I have to agree. Since we don't do animal stuff here, we focused primarily on botany stuff when my daughter did biology. And many materials for those are cheap or free. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corraleno Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 I disagree that Biology w/o labs = Life Science. Many colleges offer Intro Bio courses for nonmajors where the lab is optional; it's still a biology course. That said... I agree that bio is the easiest science to add labs. There are even free virtual labs available online, so it would be a shame to leave out labs entirely. Here are a few links to free lab resources: Some free virtual labs & dissections here Links to LOTS of free virtual dissections There are a few bio-related interactive/simulations here This site offers 12 full bio labs online. It's not totally free, but there is a free 1-day trial, maybe you could get a few done in a day. ;) They sell the whole package for only $40, or individual labs for $7. Jackie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom22ns Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 If there's no lab, it isn't biology; it's life science. :iagree: I also think it is probably the easiest year of labs in high school science. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CupOCoffee Posted July 29, 2012 Share Posted July 29, 2012 I disagree that Biology w/o labs = Life Science. Many colleges offer Intro Bio courses for nonmajors where the lab is optional; it's still a biology course. That said... I agree that bio is the easiest science to add labs. There are even free virtual labs available online, so it would be a shame to leave out labs entirely. Here are a few links to free lab resources: Some free virtual labs & dissections here Links to LOTS of free virtual dissections There are a few bio-related interactive/simulations here This site offers 12 full bio labs online. It's not totally free, but there is a free 1-day trial, maybe you could get a few done in a day. ;) They sell the whole package for only $40, or individual labs for $7. Jackie So, if virtual labs are better than no labs, what would be a normal set of Biology labs? Just looking for a list of what would constitute a years worth of labs. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted July 30, 2012 Author Share Posted July 30, 2012 Thank you Ellie, Sharon, Jackie, Jenny and Debbie for your thoughts on this. I guess that for some what constitutes labs is broader than what makes a biology course biology. Interesting. I look at biology as a subset of life sciences and, like Jackie, consider a high school or college biology text being completed as a biology course sans lab. Good question CuoOCoffee! According to Wiki, here's a list, including biology, of fields of study included in life sciences. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_sciences Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gwen in VA Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 If there's no lab, it isn't biology; it's life science. I disagree completely! None of my kids have done bio labs. (I said I wouldn't do bio labs when my oldest was in K, and I stuck to my guns!) Two have taken the bio SAT-2 and done very well. All have scored well on both the AP chem and the chem SAT-2, so it was VERY evident that my kids could "do" science. (Two took AP Physics B their senior year, so the AP score from that didn't factor into college admissions.) My kids have gotten into many tier-1 schools. Two of them went into science/engineering. BTW, dd1 didn't do chemistry labs either -- her many acceptances and generous merit aid was offered with her only taking one lab class! And I have a friend IRL who didn't have her kids do any labs ever, and one graduated from Swarthmore, one from Williams, and one from Vassar. Her kids, like mine, did science AP's and SAT-2's. I do think bio labs are nice, and I am in favor of them. I am merely saying that a student can have a rigorous bio background and get into a top-notch college without bio labs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingiguana Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 I'm not sure why people think biology and life sciences are two different things. They're just different words for the same concept. The wikipedia article doesn't say their different things (or that one is a subset of the other), they just list a bunch of wikipedia articles that relate to life sciences, and then say: "The following is an incomplete list of life science fields, as well as topics of study in the life sciences, in which several entries coincide with, are included in, or overlap with other entries.." Notice the word "overlap". Every ten years or so, many college biology departments start debating whether to call themselves life sciences, or biology, and whether to change the botany department to something like plant biology. Some of them do change. It causes a big upheaval in changing stationery and whatnot -- and then a couple decades later they end up changing it back. It all seems like a lot of wasted time, and it really has no bearing on whether they offer labs or not. On the question of whether one *needs* labs, well, no, you really don't. They're very nice for a well rounded education, and they're not that hard to do. You just have to pick labs that are doable and not get hung up on synthesizing DNA or some such thing. But you can still learn biology without labs. The truth is, though, I think it might be of more use for students who are *not* going into biology to have labs. The ones going into biology will get those labs when they get to college. For everyone else, it might be their last chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted July 30, 2012 Author Share Posted July 30, 2012 (edited) I'm not sure why people think biology and life sciences are two different things. They're just different words for the same concept. The wikipedia article doesn't say their different things (or that one is a subset of the other), they just list a bunch of wikipedia articles that relate to life sciences, and then say: "The following is an incomplete list of life science fields, as well as topics of study in the life sciences, in which several entries coincide with, are included in, or overlap with other entries.." Notice the word "overlap". I was saying that I consider it a subset of life sciences which I consider a broader term for several areas of study. After writing what I had written, I googled and found the wiki article. I do consider biology, botany, etc. to be included in life sciences much in the same way I consider physics and chemistry as part of physical sciences. Every ten years or so, many college biology departments start debating whether to call themselves life sciences, or biology, and whether to change the botany department to something like plant biology. Some of them do change. It causes a big upheaval in changing stationery and whatnot -- and then a couple decades later they end up changing it back. It all seems like a lot of wasted time, and it really has no bearing on whether they offer labs or not. On the question of whether one *needs* labs, well, no, you really don't. They're very nice for a well rounded education, and they're not that hard to do. You just have to pick labs that are doable and not get hung up on synthesizing DNA or some such thing. But you can still learn biology without labs. The truth is, though, I think it might be of more use for students who are *not* going into biology to have labs. The ones going into biology will get those labs when they get to college. For everyone else, it might be their last chance. I think the suggestion that a biology course without labs should be labeled as life science instead comes from that being the title of many middle school courses which are much more broad and "superficial" than a high school biology course. But as Gwen's experience shows, a student can become very knowledgeable in biology without having done labs. Edited July 30, 2012 by Teachin'Mine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted July 30, 2012 Author Share Posted July 30, 2012 I disagree completely! None of my kids have done bio labs. (I said I wouldn't do bio labs when my oldest was in K, and I stuck to my guns!) Two have taken the bio SAT-2 and done very well. All have scored well on both the AP chem and the chem SAT-2, so it was VERY evident that my kids could "do" science. (Two took AP Physics B their senior year, so the AP score from that didn't factor into college admissions.) My kids have gotten into many tier-1 schools. Two of them went into science/engineering. BTW, dd1 didn't do chemistry labs either -- her many acceptances and generous merit aid was offered with her only taking one lab class! And I have a friend IRL who didn't have her kids do any labs ever, and one graduated from Swarthmore, one from Williams, and one from Vassar. Her kids, like mine, did science AP's and SAT-2's. I do think bio labs are nice, and I am in favor of them. I am merely saying that a student can have a rigorous bio background and get into a top-notch college without bio labs. Thank you! Admittedly, that was what I was hoping to hear from someone. :tongue_smilie::001_smile: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.