Science, history and social studies for early grades

[Guest 4boys]

Am I the only one NOT doing a formal curriculum in science, history and social studies for the very early grades? Seems that I've noticed a lot of people begin these things in kindergarten or grade 1 and I was planning on leaving them alone (aside from reading books and just living life) until at least Gr. 2. Is it really necessary to start these core subjects so early? Or is it just a personal preference?

[Stacy in NJ]

I don't think formal history or science is necessary in the early grades. I would even say, not until around grades 4 or 5. Kids get so much out of just reading together and discussions that something more formal is overkill, IMO. Libraries, museums, state parks, enviornmental centers, and zoos offer all kinds of programs for fun learning and hands-on stuff.

[Targhee]

We are not doing formal history or social studies, and even the science we're doing is not typical for WTMers. We did some geog for K and 1st - this was through reading picture books, doing a limited number of activities, and actually using maps. I am using a program called Moving Beyond the Page, which is interdisciplinary, for my 6yo and tag-along 3yo. It has what would be called "social studies" in it, along with language, math, and science.

 

I think it is too easy to become compartmentalized in HSing, having a curriculum for reading, one for writing, one for spelling, one for grammar, one for history, one for geography, one for literature, one for foregin language, one for nature study, one for "hard" science... you get my point. On top of that, there is a general sense of requisite repitition of material in all subjects in order to achieve a well-educated student (4 repeating years of history, 4 repeating years of literature, 4 repeating years of science, etc.). All of this results in (IMO) too much instruction and not enough construction of knowledge, and henceforth too much curriculum and not enough learning.

 

So in answer to your question, no you are not the only one not using curricula for these. And, it's just fine (better, IMO) that you don't. Have fun! ;)

[Karen in CO]

I don't think there is any benefit in doing formal science in the younger grades. I am probably too much of a science geek, but I don't consider learning the names of animals science. I don't think kids can actually "do science" until they have some better math skills and writing skills.

 

I do read lots of books about science - living books that bring topics to life. I let the kids follow their interests and investigate things as deeply as they want. I also present topics and do fun science experiments with the philosophy that kids this age learn by doing. I want my kids to learn to be intrigued about things, question why things work the way they do and learn about the world around them, but to me that is basic education, not just "science."

 

For history, I do kind of "do history." We start with creation stories and work through history in an orderly fashion. But I focus on the stories of history. I don't care if my dc know the rulers Egypt while in grammar school. It is enough for me that they know that civilization started in a rich agricultural region when nomads first stopped roaming and started farming. My dd loves history, she loves the stories of people long ago. We have a very rich heritage of stories, myths and legends that can fill a kid's imagination. While she is listening to stories of heroes of the past, she is gaining a great vocabulary and learning lessons about the struggle of humanity.

[Closeacademy]

Our focus is on math and phonics or spelling, grammar and Latin. And of course penmanship and begining composition.

 

History, science and social studies can all be learned in the early years through reading good books together or doing unit studies/lapbooks together. I find that we read a lot of folk and fairy tales from other countries and this will lead to discussions about how the people are dressed in the books and their houses, etc.

 

My oldest does like for me to read to her from Story of the World but it is not something that I require that we do.:001_smile:

[Trivium Academy]

Am I the only one NOT doing a formal curriculum in science, history and social studies for the very early grades? Seems that I've noticed a lot of people begin these things in kindergarten or grade 1 and I was planning on leaving them alone (aside from reading books and just living life) until at least Gr. 2. Is it really necessary to start these core subjects so early? Or is it just a personal preference?

 

 

I don't know what you mean by formal?

 

We read nonfiction, fiction, poetry and literature in both history and science. For history we do it in chronological sequence as laid out by WTM although we use Tapestry of Grace.

 

We have worksheets in science but those are mostly activities. I don't use tests or quizzes (other than math), there are no comprehension questions, just narrations either verbal, written or drawn. My children color and make crafts/experiments for history and science.

 

We are not formal according to public school standards but we do have structure so I'm not sure if that fits in with your definition of formal?

 

I see history and science at the early ages as an introduction best told through stories and hands-on fun.

[Lori D.]

No textbooks or a formal curriculum for science or history here until 9th grade!

 

Lots of library books, videos, documentaries, science kits, historical ficiton, and hands-on activities worked great here in both keeping the love of learning alive, making connections, and in learning. (Both boys have always scored off-the-chart on science on annual national testing!)

 

We use the chronlogical history and ideas from the science rotation in the WTM only as a VERY general guideline for topics to cover, taking lots of time for bunny trails along the way! Worked great here, and we've made a lot of fun memories! : ) Warmest regards, Lori D.

[Mommamia]

I'm glad you wrote this post! I've been trying to wrap my head around what to do for science and history for K/1 and have finally found peace with my decision......we are just going to read a lot of books within those subjects. No curriculum here. Maybe add in a fun experiment.

 

We do have to report to our state though and they do require history,geo and science:tongue_smilie:. I will just list what we will cover in our fun books(lets read and find out about etc).

 

You are not alone;)

[starlashine]

I have to because there are subjects required to be taught in my state, and I think it is important to explore these things in the early years.

[sagira]

I'm skipping History in K, but doing a smidgen of basic geography with world and maps (just 13 fun lessons) and science with Dr. Nebel's K-2 curriculum. Low-key, gentle but thorough introduction to science.

 

I wish I could totally relax, but my personality doesn't allow it :D

[Christine]

I guess I would fall under the "formal" category. . .

 

I have a K & 1 this year (though I'm seriously hoping to keep them together).

 

We will be doing daily reading from SOTW -- that will be the extent of our history / social studies.

 

For science we are going to do the Young Scientist Club kits.

 

Part of the reason *why* is because they expect to. They have bigger brothers that have all these subjects. Partly, it's to give them a "gentle" introduction. It's also in part due to our county reviewer, as it's a requirement. (But, even if he wasn't in the picture, I'd still do it.)

 

I do want to say this though. With my older set I was very, umm, "on top it", or all about being "advanced" or "above the curve". (For example, I would have had a full history / science program with my older set in place in 1st grade) With my younger set, I find myself much more relaxed. In fact, I find myself on these boards frequently suggesting people don't need to rush this or that. So much learning can take place without "formal instruction", and a lot of that is "foundational" (like learning to love to discover).