Another Elemental Science question. Did you like it?

[BatmansWife]

I recently started hearing a few comments that ES is "light" and that some people didn't like it. I'd like to hear if you liked ES or not. The why you did or didn't like it would be nice too. :001_smile:

[ByGrace3]

I do think it is light, but I still like it.. I think it can be what you make of it. For us it gets done, introduces topics, and allows room for work on skill subjects like narration. My kids like the notebooking, and love the experiments when we get to them...

[winoelle]

We didn't like it. We tried the Chemistry and got about 1/2 way through. A lot of the work felt like busywork, it was really boring and my daughter was retaining nothing from it. I was really disappointed because I wanted to love it and was excited to try it.

[TarynB]

I think you really should look in depth at one of the generous samples on the Elemental Science website to see if it will work for your DC. I looked at it a couple of times briefly when DS was younger but I dismissed ES, thinking that I wouldn't like it. When I finally looked at it again in detail, I realized it would be a good fit for my DS (even if it didn't fit MY preferences at first.)

One of the best lessons I've learned in selecting homeschool curriculum is: Don't dismiss a program because of negative reviews by someone who 1 - may have used it in a way in which it was not intended to be used, or 2 - tried to use it with DC whose learning style is incompatible with the way a program was written, or 3 - realized after purchasing it that the basic philosophy of the curriculum doesn't agree with their own personal teaching philosophy. It isn't fair to the curriculum or to future potential users to give a blanket negative review for those reasons, IMO. Those are just situations where it wasn't a good fit. Negative reviews that are due to things like poor layout, disorganized, factual errors, confusing, etc., ARE very helpful, however. You have to understand the reason behind the negative review.

I come to the boards to learn what's out there, then I have to do the next step and research it for myself.

That said, science is my DS10's favorite subject and he likes ES a lot. (He hasn't liked every science curriculum we've tried.) He enjoys reading encyclopedias, doing hands-on science activities IF he can learn something from it, but not if it just repeats something he's already been taught (that's a waste of time to him), and then writing about it WTM-style. His retention of the ES material is excellent. He doesn't like crafts or coloring and is all about efficiency, very no-nonsense. One person's busywork is the meat of the program to someone else and quantity of time spent does not equal rigor.

I do not feel that ES is light, at least at the logic level. It all depends on how you use it. (We didn't use it in young elementary. IMO, science at the young elementary stage should be light anyway. By light, I mean low levels of output, not low input, by the way.) Logic level ES includes reading, narrations, outlining, vocabulary, memory work, labeling diagrams, discussion questions, experiments/demos, a science fair project, and tests. NOT light, IMO.

For us, the best qualities of ES are that it is organized, open and go, very flexible, and based on well-respected/known encyclopedias like Usborne, Kingfisher and DK (vs. a book by a single author or just a few authors' biased viewpoints, and who may know very little about actually teaching science). If your DC are reluctant writers, just do those sections verbally. ES makes it extremely easy to skip specific assignments or output requirements that you don't like and just use what you do like.

If your DC have similar preferences to my DS, then ES will probably work for your DC. If your DC prefer doing crafts and experiments every single day, or prefer reading wordy narratives (vs. brief just-the-facts), then ES will probably not be a good fit.

[elizabeth rose]

well I love it. Every day you are reading a 2 page spread in the science encyclopedia (this is for earth science), and doing a short narration. In addition, there are atleast one experiment a week and an ongoing project. for example yesterday we made a tornado in a bottle, tomorrow we are starting our volcanos. Each week has a theme. This week it is wild weather. In addition, I will add in Bill Nye science videos when I can find them on the topic, and we watch brainpop videos on each subject if they have them. My 4th grader does longer narrations from a different science encyclopedia or library book in a composition book. At the end of each week is a quiz, oh there is vocab too. This is light??? What else are we meant to be doing lol? I mean, there is only so much time in a day, right?

[Peregrine]

We have Elemental Science's Intro to Science. I can't decide if I like it or not. Part of me loves that it relies so heavily on library books. I like using living books anyway. But, my library doesn't have half of the suggestions. It's worked out fine, but it takes some time to gather everything and prep, not including the experiments and written work. Some of the activities and concepts seem either repetitive or needlessly time-consuming to me, so I ended up taking 4 related weeks' themes and combining them into a monthly unit. We get all the library books in the first week, and start reading, then do the experiments and written work throughout rest the month. So, I guess I'm not using it like it's intended. But I couldn't find another way to get it done. It irks me a little because what I'm paying for is the organization and structure and I don't love the organization! I could see it working for some but it doesn't fit with my teaching style. DS5, on the other hand, love it!

 

At any rate, we've tabled it until next year because science wasn't a requirement for us this year. We'll complete Intro next year and go from there. I haven't decided yet whether we'll be buying more Elemental Science books after this.

[FairProspects]

No, we did not like it. Science is a lot more about doing than reading and coloring here. And it was way too many demonstrations instead of inquiry-based science.

 

I realize that it aligns perfectly with what WTM says that science should be in the grammar stage (we did not try any logic stage programs), but really classical education is known for being weak on science, and for my natural scientist kids who are constantly devising and conducting their own projects and experiments, I would rather take advice from scientists, and most of them recommend hands-on doing and messing around in the younger years.

[JMDRAD]

I like the program. Neither of my girls are very interesting in science stuff. They both would rather read than do projects. It was a pretty good fit for us. We floundered around this year because I had both girls doing chemistry. It was a bit much for my first grader. I really should have picked an easier area for them. Next year we are doing the Biology. My older girl will do the Logic stage and my younger will do the grammar stage. I think it will be a great fit for both of them.

[christielee7278]

We love it! It's just enough for us. Not so heavy that it doesn't get done but not so light that they aren't learning. I use YouTube for Bill Nye videos when I can find them, and we take advantage of the Usborne links. We have yet to add additional library books, haven't felt the need.

Mostly, I'm excited to find a science program that we actually DO!

[sewingmama]

Love it here. So far it's my favourite curriculum we are using. I'm only using the Intro but its a great fit for my kids who haven't had much science exposure beyond reading. Science is their favourite subject and they ask for it everyday. I like that it includes Nature Study so I have some idea what to DO when we go out to look at nature lol.

 

On science day , as soon as DH comes in the door from work the kids are running and competing to tell him what they did for science -it's the only subject he gets an account of lol.

 

I like that it is simple enough for my kids to understand. I like the book suggestions. My kids love the experiments and I love that the stuff is easy to obtain and cheap. So far it fits us well and as the kids get older I will reassess their needs.

 

I keep reading in posts over and over that science in the early years is considered "gravy" and although I don't agree with that I am not that interested in making science rigorous for the early years - just fun.

[Punchie]

We love ES Biology in our house as well. I was worried that it would be too "light", but then I kept telling myself that DD is 6 and in 1st grade and that it doesn't need to be in-depth. It needs to be fun and engaging. DD loves to read, and she does retain a decent amount of what we cover. I will admit that I am horrible about doing the science experiments, and we started the lapbook but haven't touched it in a couple of months, but even with just the reading and videos, it's a winner.

 

Once we've completed Biology, I intend to go back and do all of the experiments and complete the lapbook. I figure it will be a good review for DD and might help jam some more pegs into her maleable little brain.

 

Just a note, I've had to hunt for a lot of the videos we've watched since the only video list I've found on the ES Yahoo! group is for Discovery Education Streaming (which we don't have).

[SFM]

We like it but I do think it is "light". I just use it as a springboard into more research and/or experiments. We use it more as a guideline and for the price it works for us.

[TarynB]

No, we did not like it. Science is a lot more about doing than reading and coloring here. And it was way too many demonstrations instead of inquiry-based science.

 

I realize that it aligns perfectly with what WTM says that science should be in the grammar stage (we did not try any logic stage programs), but really classical education is known for being weak on science, and for my natural scientist kids who are constantly devising and conducting their own projects and experiments, I would rather take advice from scientists, and most of them recommend hands-on doing and messing around in the younger years.

 

So would you say that you specifically disliked Elemental Science as a curriculum, or do the methods employed by Elemental Science go against your philosophy of how science should be taught? Those are two different things.

 

I would have loved it if my DS was the type of kid who likes to mess around and do projects on his own. But I've accepted the reality that he's not wired that way. Yet I don't think anyone who knows him IRL would say our homeschool isn't strong on science or that he's not learning enough science, LOL. I'm biased, but I'd say he's quite advanced for his age in science. ES does teach the scientific method (question/hypothesis/procedure/results/conclusion), which I think is what you mean by inquiry-based. The structure of ES has been great for DS, plenty rigorous the way we do it, and enjoyable for him. Again, it all just boils down to the student's learning style and the teacher's philosophy whether or not ES, and other programs like it, will be a good fit.

[FairProspects]

So would you say that you specifically disliked Elemental Science as a curriculum, or do the methods employed by Elemental Science go against your philosophy of how science should be taught? Those are two different things.

 

I would have loved it if my DS was the type of kid who likes to mess around and do projects on his own. But I've accepted the reality that he's not wired that way. Yet I don't think anyone who knows him IRL would say our homeschool isn't strong on science or that he's not learning enough science, LOL. I'm biased, but I'd say he's quite advanced for his age in science. ES does teach the scientific method (question/hypothesis/procedure/results/conclusion), which I think is what you mean by inquiry-based. The structure of ES has been great for DS, plenty rigorous the way we do it, and enjoyable for him. Again, it all just boils down to the student's learning style and the teacher's philosophy whether or not ES, and other programs like it, will be a good fit.

 

 

Both. We disliked it as a curriculum because my boys did not like reading/coloring about science and because the methods go against how I feel science should be taught at the younger ages, JMHO. Both are reasons to dislike a curriculum.

 

ES does NOT use the scientific method in the younger levels (like I said before, we did not try the logic stage versions, and I made no claims about these or their content). I actually emailed the author about this very inquiry-based question and she said that she was trying to follow WTM methods of science for the grammar stage which suggest that the child does not have enough info about science to successfully predict the outcome of an experiment or make hypotheses, therefore the experiments were demonstrations rather than experiments. I respectfully disagree with this assertion and my boys were getting bored when they already knew the outcome of a demonstration before we had even completed it, so we went in another direction for science. I simply answered the OP's question, that no, we did not like it, and I tried to explain why. YMMV.

[hsmom27]

We didn't like it. My kids found reading the encyclopedia spreads boring and they really hated narrating and notebooking about it. Interestingly, we're now using Mr Q's science and they do add a lot of notebooking on their own. I think they find the way he talks about the subject more interesting and they like the humor. Also there are 2 hands on activities a week that they enjoy. I also add in a Let's Read and Find Out type book each week. I guess ultimately it was the readings they disliked and they want to make their own notebook pages instead of using a pre-made one. We only made it through a few weeks. It was only $16, but it was still $16 I wish I could get back. :)

[TarynB]

Both. We disliked it as a curriculum at the levels we used and the methods go against how I feel science should be taught at the younger ages, JMHO.

 

ES does NOT use the scientific method in the younger levels (like I said before, we did not try the logic stage versions, and I made no claims about these or their content). I actually emailed the author about this very question and she said that she was trying to follow WTM methods of science for the grammar stage which suggest that the child does not have enough info about science to successfully predict the outcome of an experiment or make hypotheses, therefore the experiments were demonstrations rather than experiments. I respectfully disagree with this assertion and so we went in another direction for science. I simply answered the OP's question, that no, we did not like it, and I tried to explain why. YMMV.

 

Thank you for clarifying. It is helpful for me and other readers to know if someone is giving a particular curriculum a negative review because of 1 - specific problems with the curriculum (ie., poor layout, disorganized, factually incorrect, confusing, etc.) or 2 - the curriculum's basic approach isn't in agreement with the reviewer's philosophy of teaching. I learn the most from negative reviews but sometimes I need to dig deeper to understand the root problem.

[5Wizards]

We've used ES Intro. to Science for Kindergarten as well as Logic Stage Biology. Both have been hits in my home. I'm not sure if I'll use a grammar stage program from ES ever, but I may give it a try during the summer sometime just to see if my kids and I like it.

[BatmansWife]

Thank you everyone! It was really helpful to see all these opinions. Although, in the end...it really didn't help much at all, did it? :lol: And, by that I mean there's probably an equal amount of people who like it and those that don't (I didn't count it up or graph it at all :D ). But, it was good to see the reasons.

 

I spent a lot of time yesterday doing research online...and looking at the stuff I have already here on my shelves and I came up with a plan that actually goes all the way to high school (let's just hope I'll like it and won't want to change it along the way). :001_smile: Oh, and this plan doesn't include ES...I decided against it (but mostly because I already own so much...why get more?).

:leaving:

[celticadea]

so out of curiosity.... what's your plan?

[BatmansWife]

so out of curiosity.... what's your plan?

 

 

Well, I have a lot of stuff here from schooling since oldest dd was in K. Some of it I've used, some I haven't (and then I forget that I have it!). So, we are using RSO Life this year for 3rd (and I just started the free Mr. Q Life Science....just reading the chapters with dd...nothing with the parents manual or experiments). I already have RSO Earth & Space that we'll use next year for 4th (I like to get the RSO kits from HTT to make things easier). I also already have Real Science 4 Kids Chem 1, Biology 1, Physics 1 with workbooks and combined teachers manual. I've had this for quite awhile....and now I see they changed things a bit and this is now for grades 5 - 8. So, for 5th we'll probably still do RSO Chem with RS4K Chem 1. 6th we'd do the new RSO Biology 2 (which is supposed to come out this month) with RS4K Biology 1. 7th would be RS4K Physics 1 and I'd get RS4K Astronomy 1. 8th would be RS4K Geology 1 and RS4K Chem 2. HTT also has a kit for RS4K chem/biology/physics 1 that I'd get. So, that's what I'm thinking. Sounds a bit crazy...but I think it will work out fine. BTW...I also have Apologia Astronomy, Botany, and Zoology 1 on the shelf. I forgot I had those :blushing: . I'll probably just use those as read alouds to fit in with the other science. So, is this clear as mud?

 

So...um, yeah...I guess it was silly to consider getting another science. :001_rolleyes:

[elizabeth rose]

No, we did not like it. Science is a lot more about doing than reading and coloring here. And it was way too many demonstrations instead of inquiry-based science.

 

I realize that it aligns perfectly with what WTM says that science should be in the grammar stage (we did not try any logic stage programs), but really classical education is known for being weak on science, and for my natural scientist kids who are constantly devising and conducting their own projects and experiments, I would rather take advice from scientists, and most of them recommend hands-on doing and messing around in the younger years.

 

 

Hi, do you mind sharing what inquiry based science would look like on a daily basis? I would love to see how it actually works . I'm curious. Do you use a different science program?

[FairProspects]

The disclaimer is that I am not a scientist or an expert in science education. I just have a science-loving kid, and so I try to stay ahead of him. :laugh:

 

Right now we are doing science fair projects, so ds has design criteria that he is working with daily. The inquiry part is that he does not know whether his design will work or not, and he has to test it out. And when it doesn't work, he has to figure out why that might be, alter the design, add new parts, and try again, as well as record his efforts, trials, and successes. To me that is different from watching a demonstration of how golf balls float through different atmospheres (air, water, & oil) or something, where some kids can guess the outcome & explain why even before it has happened.

 

We are not using a science program right now, but we have liked GEMS units, Intellego units, and Supercharged Science in the past, and we'll be going back to a GEMS unit after the science fair. Science does not have to be intense in the grammar years and for some kids reading & writing about science is just fine. For other kids that approach may not work, and they may want to test things out with their hands themselves or work within a different philosophy of science.

[elizabeth rose]

thanks so much, that makes a lot of sense!