Can we talk about science philosophies?

[Aspasia]

I am having the hardest time choosing a science program. I've narrowed it down to three, but I think that my decision could be made if I could just refine my philosophy of science education.

 

So, how do you think science should be taught? Some programs seem to rely a lot on reading and narration, others involve less reading and more experiments/demonstrations. Of course either style can be supplemented with more of the other, but I'm talking about the main thrust.

 

What topics do you think should be covered in early elementary science? Some programs seem to cover very basic information, but in a way that seems to emphasize retention. Others seem to go more in depth, perhaps with less emphasis on retention and more on exposure.

 

What would you say is the goal of early elementary science education?

 

Anything else?

 

I know there aren't any "right" or "wrong" answers to these questions. I'm just hoping that hearing some thoughts from other people might help me figure out how I feel about them so I can make a decision.

[regentrude]

In elementary science education, my goals would be to wake curiosity about natural phenomena, to practice the skill of careful observation, to instill that natural phenomena have rational explanations (although sometimes, we do not fully understand how everything works). I would aim for exposure, not retention or in-depth study.

I would focus on the world surrounding  the child and begin with nature study, observe plants, animals, rock formations, bodies of water, stars and moon, weather. I would use a lot of non-fiction books for the age group, visit nature centers, science museums, planetariums, watch some documentaries (most are better for the middle grades).

I would not use textbooks or worksheets or any "program". I would use designed "experiments" and hands-on activities only if the child really enjoyed doing those. I feel that in elementary science education there is often too much emphasis on the "scientific method" in contrived activities, and too little emphasis on observation, casual experimentation, and forming questions naturally.

 

In the middle grades, I would do similar things, with more reading, more theoretical understanding, but still mostly textbook free and with the goal of creating a broad knowledge base.. By the beginning of high school, the student would have a good background knowledge about a variety of scientific phenomena, and then we will study the core sciences in a systematic manner.

 

 

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

Bernard Nebel's Building Foundations of Scientific Understanding does this very well K-8.

[8filltheheart]

You are correct; there is no right answer. There is a wrong answer, though.

 

Elementary science should about instilling awe and wonder and understanding the interconnectedness of the world around us. But, it shouldn't give the illusion that science is a series of random entertaining tricks. Nor should it be something children dread or see as a burden to study.

 

Finding what nurtures your family to find the first is the correct answer.

[Aspasia]

In elementary science education, my goals would be to wake curiosity about natural phenomena, to practice the skill of careful observation, to instill that natural phenomena have rational explanations (although sometimes, we do not fully understand how everything works). I would aim for exposure, not retention or in-depth study.

I would focus on the world surrounding the child and begin with nature study, observe plants, animals, rock formations, bodies of water, stars and moon, weather. I would use a lot of non-fiction books for the age group, visit nature centers, science museums, planetariums, watch some documentaries (most are better for the middle grades).

I would not use textbooks or worksheets or any "program". I would use designed "experiments" and hands-on activities only if the child really enjoyed doing those. I feel that in elementary science education there is often too much emphasis on the "scientific method" in contrived activities, and too little emphasis on observation, casual experimentation, and forming questions naturally.

 

In the middle grades, I would do similar things, with more reading, more theoretical understanding, but still mostly textbook free and with the goal of creating a broad knowledge base.. By the beginning of high school, the student would have a good background knowledge about a variety of scientific phenomena, and then we will study the core sciences in a systematic manner.

I love this. And thanks to comments like this that I've read over the years, this idea is how I started out this school year, which is why I didn't buy any program. The problem for me is that nothing is really getting done. Sure, dd plays outside and observes plants and bugs, and she's interested in weather and whatnot. But I just haven't been good about nurturing it. In my perfect world, when she started expressing interest in a certain nature topic, I would help her get books about it and I would find cool places to go where we could learn more about it. But alas, I'm just not living in that world right now. So in the last couple weeks, I have started thinking it might just be worth it to buy a program, so that SOMETHING could get done, you know? Apparently, I need some sort of direction.

 

I'm so frustrated right now, because I can't seem to accomplish this science thing the way my mind has idealized it. Maybe I should put all the money I'm willing to spend on a science program toward building our own library of books about nature topics? Sometimes we get to the library weekly, and then other times we'll go three weeks or more. But if I just had a ton of books to turn to, perhaps I'd be better at "doing science" the way I want to...

[Aspasia]

Bernard Nebel's Building Foundations of Scientific Understanding does this very well K-8.

I've heard this, but I've also heard that BFSU is kind of hard to use/implement. How do you use it?

[ThatHomeschoolDad]

I've heard this, but I've also heard that BFSU is kind of hard to use/implement. How do you use it?

 

We've done it since K (now 7th), and it did take a while for me to get into a groove.  Now I make PowerPoints for each chapter so I can weave in video and graphics.  Since the chapters are written with a classroom setting in mind, you do have to pre-read and sort of shape the presentation into what you need for working with one or two kids.  The vast majority of supplies are supermarket-level stuff like iodine and vinegar.  We bought graduated cylinders and eyedroppers a few years ago, plus a decent beam scale and microscope.  This fall I had to get dialysis tubing, and a small pen laser is on my list for spring, but that's about it.

 

I have yet to see any program that is as thorough -- you definitely get out of it what you put in, and it's scale-able.  We never do every activity at the end of each chapter, and there are topics with which DD is already very familiar, so those we go over those in less detail, usually with DD pulling up some site where she learned some details four months ago.  I think Dr. Nebel still runs a Yahoo group where users can ask him questions, which is pretty nifty, and something you won't find with most publishers.

[8filltheheart]

. Maybe I should put all the money I'm willing to spend on a science program toward building our own library of books about nature topics? Sometimes we get to the library weekly, and then other times we'll go three weeks or more. But if I just had a ton of books to turn to, perhaps I'd be better at "doing science" the way I want to...

That is what I did and the way we have been doing science for almost 2 decades. :)

[regentrude]

I'm so frustrated right now, because I can't seem to accomplish this science thing the way my mind has idealized it. Maybe I should put all the money I'm willing to spend on a science program toward building our own library of books about nature topics? Sometimes we get to the library weekly, and then other times we'll go three weeks or more. But if I just had a ton of books to turn to, perhaps I'd be better at "doing science" the way I want to...

 

Your DD is still very young. Don't beat yourself up over not "getting something accomplished". Playing and observing bugs and plants is fine. And you also  have little ones, so maybe this is not the time to visit science centers and whatnot. NOT a problem.

 

I think starting your own library is a great idea! Kids reread books over again, and then there are younger siblings. So, starting a collection of nature books is a great investment.

I suggest that you do include simple field guides for plants and birds in your area, so she can easily look up and identify some she sees.

 

[EmilyGF]

I think mom's own level of scientific literacy plays a big role in how science should be taught.

 

If mom can comfortably talk about most scientific topics off the cuff, then a super-laid back approach to science could easily be more thorough than most science programs. If mom is scared stiff of science, a more well-thought-out approach to science is called for. I do think a living book based approach to science is most likely the "best" way to have retention, but many "living" science books are not living at all.

 

I feel like I do a horrible job of teaching science since I just check out random science books and rarely discuss them, but we just had science day at cub scouts and realized our son knew more about science than any other kid present - and they all go to pricey private schools and have well-educated parents. We just talk about how the world works and how to think about data as if it is the most natural thing on earth.

 

Emily

[Kevin'sMom]

Has your daughter expressed interest in any particular area of science? My son, 10, is interested in space, so that is where we started. There are many top quality sites devoted to this subject; I'm sure you have seen them. I like the Hubbell site, which has a link to Amazing Space.  I teach "hard" science; that is, evolution, not "intelligent design" or any variation of it. Because I majored in biology and nursing and eventually taught both subjects at the college level, I lean toward biology, myself. I bought a nice microscope last month, but we haven't used it yet. I have the K-12 science books and workbooks for fourth grade, but they are way too easy, I think, plus the Harcourt Brace books, and Glencoe Science. What I am planning to do for spring is adding a biology component, probably starting at the cell level; we'll see how this works out.

 

I am interested in what you decide on this. I taught my son all last summer, then we did one last semester in public school, where I afterschooled him in areas that were seriously neglected there. Science was definitely not taught...they were still planting seeds in fourth grade. So, finally, I decided to just homeschool him altogether, and science was a big reason.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[ajfries]

My kiddos are the same ages as yours. I bought Elemental Science but haven't really given it a fair chance.  Instead, I've been putting together unit studies based on what the kids are interested in. First we learned how to classify animals (that was during their Wild Kratts phase) and now we're learning about the human body. But I'm not consistent with it and I hate that.

[Hunter]

 I feel that in elementary science education there is often too much emphasis on the "scientific method" in contrived activities, and too little emphasis on observation, casual experimentation, and forming questions naturally.

 

 

:iagree:

 

BUT...

 

Sometimes I will use a curriculum that is unnecessary and developmentally inappropriate just because it will get DONE.

 

Basically I pick something I WANT to use and will get DONE.

 

I just don't stress over science. None of my students will ever go directly into a 4 year selective college without first attending a junior college, so… I have more room to be a screw up, I guess.

 

The most important things for higher level science success are:

 

1- Be able to READ

2- Be able to do math

3- Not be so burnt out that they no longer are curious

 

I've done the contrived. I've done the casual. Mostly, now, I do what I WANT to do and is EASY to do.

[Soror]

We've mostly done a hodge podge here and ds has more knowledge than his peers and enjoys science. For the most part I used library books and lots of discussions and time in nature. I tried BFSU and Core Knowledge for a bit a couple of years but didn't keep w/ them. This year we have done the most formal science so far. We finished The Elements by McHenry and now we are using Noeo Physics II but I'm tweaking it heavily and adding library books, internet clips/links and videos/documentaries.

 

Why cannot you just schedule a time and then explore whatever interests you at the time? Go take a walk and see what you find, start collections, look things up, try to find things. We did so many walks at that age and a lot of time we just left w/ the intent to find something cool. I did some guided nature studies as well w/ Harmony Art Mom- I did some free and bought some of her guides. She has a ton of awesome info on her site. Following her challenges will get you plenty of science, especially at this age. Our nature walks were one of our favorite parts of schooling, right up there w/ reading aloud reminiscing now I wish we were doing more still!

 

I bought a lot of the Let's Read and Find Out Series, various field guides and Dk and Usborne Encyclopedias. I still need to greatly expand my library though, especially as my son has gotten older I don't have enough for him on his level. I bought Noeo to give me a boost and a frame to work with then when we do a lesson I just do a quick search on youtube to see what I can find and look through the Usborne internet links. He loves doing the little activities.  I fretted over what to do but this is working great w/ little prep time. It is even better when I can get to the library as we will go and check out a ton of science videos, books and magazines and then he will just read them on his own but we are doing decently even when we cannot make it. 

 

Also, you don't have to wait for them to have a burning interest you can just pick something to study about, if you are excited then often they will be as well. Dh introduced ds to rocketry and of course he thinks that is super cool. As long as you are there and engaged they usually are as well, of course sometimes when you are tired and w/ little ones it is hard to do that but taking nature walks is something great to do for everyone.

[dbmamaz]

I started homeschooling when my youngest was in first grade.  He read some science on time4learning, we did a book about animals by getting pictures books from the library,and then took our book to the zoo.  By 2nd grade we started trying curriculum, but he hated them all.  We finally ended up with him just reading books about science.  He prefers that over experiments and over worksheets.  He excitedly tells me what he's learned.

 

You arent teaching a mom . . . you're teaching a kid.  Find out what makes her engage (and what you can get done).  For a while we focused on science over the summer when we were doing less history.

 

but . . . dont get frustrated.  There is plenty of time.

[jar7709]

Agreeing and echoing pps. DH and I have a science bent, and it is not difficult for me to use BFSU more or less off the cuff, though it is requiring more prep time on my part as we move up the levels. Which is fine with me. At the same time, the kids do a lot of interest-led science: much of the time they don't even know that's what they're doing, they just know they are checking out some cool bugs they found or reading an interesting book. Combined with that tendency and osmosis, I suspect that's actually where my kids are getting most of their science learning. For us, BFSU is the scaffolding, filling gaps and cementing foundational principles, and imo is our best way for these elementary years. (Following the BFSU sequence-- middle school and above-- I imagine we'll move to a more textbook approach in preparation for college science.)

 

I know other families, however, where the parents are less comfortable with science in general, or with interweaving strands of science, or just plain don't like the format of BFSU, so they prefer the more "one thing at a time" approach of the 4-year cycle or a more traditional textbook. If that's how that family needs to operate to produce science-literate children, I'm all for it, because that's what's important to me on a macro level after having taught some entry-level community college science courses. I recognize not everyone will have a career in science or engineering, and that's fine. But I do think the effort to have some basic understanding of science is important to a successful life, in general, and is often sadly underplayed. Luckily if your oldest is 6, there's still lots of time!

 

Regarding the original question--imo memorization of science facts does not actually help understanding of the whys and cause/effect. To get to the latter place, I think there's more than one path. Whichever method the children will respond to is probably a safe bet. My kids prefer good books, a lot of hands-on materials, field trips, and meaningful discussion. Other kids might prefer elaborate projects, or a textbook and worksheets.

 

One other question I would ask the OP or any other parent trying to decide the direction they want to take...are YOU interested in science? If science is not "getting done", is that because of your schedule, or insecurity, or some other reason? Maybe if you can unpack the reasons why it doesn't "get done", you can find a method to make it happen. If the reason turns out to be largely because of the homeschooling parent's own discomfort with the topic, I think it might not be too hard to turn that around by a little self-education. Maybe watch some NDT videos or read something by Mary Roach and get inspired. :D Enthusiasm is contagious.

[EmilyGF]

Bucolic,

 

If I weren't a scientist by training, having taken a year of geology, a year of biology, a year of chemistry plus lab, four years of physics, four years of math, etc etc, I would use Nancy Larson Science. (I never took astronomy, but my hubby made up for that.) I would not use a "self-teaching" curriculum but something that involved parent-child discussions.

 

Using RightStart Math has taught me *so* much about teaching math and the somewhat scripted plans are thorough. I think using such a well written science curriculum would teach one about teaching science in the same way.

 

Emily

[Dana]

.  I think Dr. Nebel still runs a Yahoo group where users can ask him questions, which is pretty nifty, and something you won't find with most publishers.

 

He does.

A number of users have also posted files to it that can help. There are two yahoo groups.

K5science@yahoogroups.com

BFSU2@yahoogroups.com

 

Dr Nebel posts in response to questions.

 

I haven't used BFSU, but I do read the yahoo groups and I'm impressed by him.

 

[EmilyGF]

I think implementing Nebel is a ton of work.

 

My husband read the book and thought it was poorly written and annoyingly wordy.

 

I could never use it, but friends of mine do.

 

Emily

[Crimson Wife]

Reading TWTM really resonated with me. Not the way that SWB recommends doing science but rather the 4 year science cycle. At the high school level and beyond, each science course has a core focus even if it doesn't neatly fit into pure bio/chem/physics/geology/astronomy/etc. disciplines. The whole "let's just study a bunch of random topics" approach to elementary science is unappealing to me and reading TWTM made me realize that.

 

Because of Science Olympiad, I ended up doing only 3/4 of a semester of chemistry with DS this year and the rest I will pick up with him after the regional meet in March (we HS through the summer). He did at least get through Ellen McHenry's "The Elements".

[Soror]

The whole "let's just study a bunch of random topics" approach to elementary science is unappealing to me and reading TWTM made me realize that.

 

The WTM approach resonated to me as well because I like everything neat and orderly but in implementation I haven't found it to meet my goals and vision for our own hs. I think there are many paths to a great education, as the various success stories of the board illustrate.

 

Also, I was thinking more Emily (iirc) mentioned upthread about how that she feels her son has done well b/c she has been able to share her knowledge w/ them. I think it does certainly help to be at least science knowledgeable but I think however at the level that the OP is talking about nearly anyone has enough knowledge to share and if you cannot answer a question you can look it up. Dh is much more knowledgeable than I am about science so he usually gives ds lots more in-depth than I can but for the earlier years I could usually provide what he wanted to know.

[EmilyGF]

I don't think it is my science knowledge per se, but that I see the world as scientific situations that use scientific thought patterns.

 

For example, we do order of magnitude calculations walking down the street. One of them was "How many Priuses are in our city?" We gathered data (counted the number of priuses on our block), made estimates of figures we didn't know (exactly how many households were on our block vs in our city), scaled things up, and estimated our confidence interval.

 

Another example would be discussing friction while lighting a match for the candle at our table.

 

Is this science? Not really, but every *good* scientist does this sort of order of magnitude calculation before beginning anything.

 

I think "good", systematic science doesn't need to be started before 4-5 grade *at the earliest* and that the best science intertwines all disciplines simultaneously - ie Bio M/W, Chem T/Th, Ph M/F, Earth Science F. That is what I experienced in Europe and I think it makes a lot more sense than one year of Bio in 9th grade (with 9th grade level skills) etc.

 

Emily

[Aspasia]

One other question I would ask the OP or any other parent trying to decide the direction they want to take...are YOU interested in science? If science is not "getting done", is that because of your schedule, or insecurity, or some other reason? Maybe if you can unpack the reasons why it doesn't "get done", you can find a method to make it happen. If the reason turns out to be largely because of the homeschooling parent's own discomfort with the topic, I think it might not be too hard to turn that around by a little self-education. Maybe watch some NDT videos or read something by Mary Roach and get inspired. :D Enthusiasm is contagious.

I am definitely interested in science, particularly nature. I imagine that's part of why dd is such a little nature lover. Other than that, I wouldn't say I'm a heavily science-oriented person. But I'm certainly not intimidated by it or uncomfortable with it.

 

I think the reason it doesn't "get done" is that I'm still stuck in certain ideas about education in general. I like the idea of laying out plans and moving through topics "logically". And if my plans don't work out (because kids happen), then I throw up my hands and sort of quit for awhile. Then when I come back, I decide I need a NEW plan. I need to be comfortable letting go of plans. I need to find a way to feel like my kid is learning EVEN IF I didn't carefully coordinate the books, videos, and activities. I think I'm getting better at it, but I have a long way to go. I also have a deep need for output--"proof" that my kid learned something. That could be a nature journal or notebooking pages or pictures of projects or whatever, but I find myself sort of needing that in order to be convinced that we actually did something.

 

So when I take all of this together--my need for a plan, my need for output, the sheer exhaustion of a life with lots of littles and a husband who works long hours and travels a lot--well, that's when I start to feel that forking out the cash for something all-inclusive (like Nancy Larson) doesn't sound so bad and might be worth the money.

 

BUT I can also see how doing this the way 8 Fill and regentrude mentioned doesn't have to be stressful or demanding. I just have adjust my ideas about education.

[regentrude]

I think the reason it doesn't "get done" is that I'm still stuck in certain ideas about education in general. I like the idea of laying out plans and moving through topics "logically". And if my plans don't work out (because kids happen), then I throw up my hands and sort of quit for awhile. Then when I come back, I decide I need a NEW plan. I need to be comfortable letting go of plans. I need to find a way to feel like my kid is learning EVEN IF I didn't carefully coordinate the books, videos, and activities. I think I'm getting better at it, but I have a long way to go.

 

They are learning, as long as they have time and resources available.

Maybe it will help you to know that in other countries, 6 year olds are not even enrolled in school, and that formal academics at a very young age are a US idiosynchrasy. Elsewhere, 5 and 6 year olds learn through play and not worksheets or carefully coordinated programs.

Aside from the three Rs, I would not worry about any systematic coverage of the "content subjects" in the elementary grades.

I would plan for enough nature time, have some resources on hand, and the trust that it will be OK. Because it will.

 

[jar7709]

So, perhaps an adjustment of what "get done" or "output" means to you? I face that worry sometimes too...When I realize my kid wouldn't know what to do with a worksheet or whatever. Then I go watch them play with blocks, or record them explaining black holes, or ask them about a book they just read, or look at a labeled drawing of a bird in their journals, and I feel better. :D I try to make a point of noting those things in my own journal or their "school file" so I can look back, which helps me keep things in perspective.

[Walking-Iris]

I tried for the longest time to get science done with just read alouds and following interests. I have a collection of various experiment books we would dip in and out of. But I didn't like the way it felt disjointed. My oldest was learning, but it felt so incidental at times. 

 

I finally started researching curriculum. I went with RS4K, and it was okay, but I wasn't overly impressed with how much it cost in relation to how thin the books were. 

 

I love RSO materials now. Other than a grammar stage physics not being available (yet?) Pandia Press follows the WTM science rotation, which I find helpful in planning. It's tremendously useful to keep all my kids on the same page in a science topic, but to then adjust for ability level. It just seems exhausting to try to keep up with three (or more) different science strands and interests. 

 

I appreciate that RSO is scheduled out for me weekly, and yet they are so full that I don't worry about the things we can't get to. I prefer science to be more doing rather than reading about. We certainly read and enjoy our science library books and watching documentaries, but I prefer the doing! :) I need the hand holding to have those activities laid out in some form of sequential order. 

 

I also didn't want a ton of worksheets, busywork coloring pages, and so on. I prefer the main lesson, a project or two, extra read alouds and documentaries, and ongoing discussions. The student sheets resemble lab reports. I think as far as output, lab reports, nature journals/sketchbooks, and written narrations or summaries are better than fill in the blank style worksheets. 

[Rosie_0801]

Have you tried nature journalling? My 6yo loves it. While she's not imaginative to think to draw in it on her own, she's happy to do so when prompted and most visitors are treated to an entire rendition of her work.  :001_wub:

[Heidi]

I have science and nature books at home. Once a week I have them read on any topic they want for at least 15 min, then write a good paragraph about what they learned in their nature journal, along with an illustration. I will buy kits or books on topics they are interested in. They spend a lot of time outside too. I'm compelled to do it this way bc of how busy I already am and it forces me to prioritize my time. For me, science is last when it come to how I will spend my teaching time in elementary.

As a child I spent a great deal of time playing in the woods and I loved nature because of it. I want to encourage my kids to have that same sense if wonder. So I keep the tv turned off, I don't buy a lot of toys, and I have a list of chores posted on the wall. This usually keeps the kids outside ;)

 

Formal science can wait until high school, and as someone else pointed out a while ago, those are all introductory level. A love of nature and a solid foundation in math is, what I've read, the best preparation for high school science.

[Library Momma]

I was a STEM major and I did just as much scientific writing as I did lab work.  I think sometimes people start with scientific facts and them move on to the mathematics and experiments related to science without fully incorporating the writing aspect.  By 5th grade (middle school at the latest) children should have a good handle on writing lab result reports and doing article reviews.

[Spring Flower]

 

 

I love RSO materials now. Other than a grammar stage physics not being available (yet?) Pandia Press follows the WTM science rotation, which I find helpful in planning. It's tremendously useful to keep all my kids on the same page in a science topic, but to then adjust for ability level. It just seems exhausting to try to keep up with three (or more) different science strands and interests. 

 

I appreciate that RSO is scheduled out for me weekly, and yet they are so full that I don't worry about the things we can't get to. I prefer science to be more doing rather than reading about. We certainly read and enjoy our science library books and watching documentaries, but I prefer the doing! :) I need the hand holding to have those activities laid out in some form of sequential order. 

 

I also didn't want a ton of worksheets, busywork coloring pages, and so on. I prefer the main lesson, a project or two, extra read alouds and documentaries, and ongoing discussions. The student sheets resemble lab reports. I think as far as output, lab reports, nature journals/sketchbooks, and written narrations or summaries are better than fill in the blank style worksheets. 

 

Thank you for recommending this. This sounds like something we would be interested in.

[8filltheheart]

I was a STEM major and I did just as much scientific writing as I did lab work.  I think sometimes people start with scientific facts and them move on to the mathematics and experiments related to science without fully incorporating the writing aspect.  By 5th grade (middle school at the latest) children should have a good handle on writing lab result reports and doing article reviews.

 

This is not our experience at all.   My kids don't write lab reports until high school.  They do, however, write plenty of science reports in elementary/middle school and science research papers in high school.   My kids have had zero problems succeeding in upper level science.

[Chrysalis Academy]

My 2nd grader watches science videos & cartoons - everything from The Way Things Work videos to Bill Nye to Magic Schoolbus.  Last year she watched a lot of Cat in the Hat and Wild Kratts.  It's amazing how much she's learned from all that!

 

I keep sciency books at her reading level in her book box - lots of Magic Schoolbus, and other good NF books from the library.

 

She loves doing hands-on activities, but it's hard for me to fit that in, honestly, and if I have to choose between doing an activity with her and doing one with my 6th grader, I pick the latter, b/c I have all the time in the world to do science with my little one, while I'm feeling a little more time-pressed with my older.  She loves rocks & minerals, and collects them, luckily her grandfather is a geologist so they collect and classify and discuss rocks whenever he visits.  She got a T&K crystal kit for Xmas and is so excited to work on it!

 

She actually gets a ton out of tagging along with her big sister.  I don't insist, but I welcome her, and she has been choosing to hang out while we read Zaccaro's Ten Things and Hakim's Story of Science.  It's pretty amazing what she picks up on and connects with the other things she's learning.

 

Is this my ideal of how to teach science in 2nd grade?  No way.  We "should" be doing a science fair project, and more hands-on activities, and more systematic investigation of topics . . . but this is what is getting done.  And I'm pretty much at peace with that for now.

 

ETA:  So is this based on a "science teaching philosophy?"  It is not.  The philosophy it embodies is "relax, have fun with school, don't worry about covering everything in 2nd grade, there is plenty of time, and DON"T FEEL GUILTY for doing what it takes to make things work!"  Sometimes that's all the philosophy I can handle!  ;)  :D

[Mrs Twain]

The educational philosophy that has the best evidence is Core Knowledge. Not that you have to use any specific Core Knowledge materials, but you can use the core knowledge principles and apply them to a curriculum/curricula you buy or one you make up yourself. Build up a core knowledge of science in a systematic and logical progression, starting in early elementary. This background knowledge will improve their general reading comprehension and facilitate understanding of higher level science courses in high school.

 

The main programs I use to build core knowledge for my kids are BFSU, Studies Weekly newspapers, and CC memory work (explaining the background of the memory work using the CC science cards and a science encyclopedia).

 

As supplements, I find library books that go along wih something we are currently studying. For example, dh just finished an excellent kids' book about the weather for bedtime reading. Next he will read them a book about astronomy and constellations. I check out lots of animal books for my youngest child.

 

In addition, my kids frequently watch Zula Patrol on PBS. BFSU has gotten much easier to teach because of the background science knowledge my kids have gained from Zula Patrol.

 

I also have my younger kids make two science lapbooks per year on subjects about which their knowledge is lacking.

 

Regarding BFSU, I spend two weeks (one day per week) per lesson for volume 1, and three weeks (one day per week) per lesson for volume 2. I am taking 2-3 years to finish each volume. If you break it down into small sections like this, it becomes much easier to teach. I also make copywork of the main science principles from each lesson. My kids copy these and draw a picture demonstrating each one. They file this into a science notebook, which makes reviewing past lessons easy.

[Roadrunner]

We just finished BFSU volume 1 and I couldn't be happier with our accomplishment. Since my kids are so close in age, I teach them together. For each lesson (in addition to discussion and experiments), we jot down small summaries and draw illustrations for the concept. We plan on spending at least two years on volume 2 and I will supplement it with reading (especially for my older boy) and videos. Oh, DS 8 loves Horrible Science books as well.

If I were more comfortable with science, I would have probably avoided a program altogether, but I like knowing that a guide is leading the blind.

[Korrale]

I have spent a lot of time thinking about science and dabbling. I used to love the idea of a 3 or 4 year cycle. But at the end of the day what works best for us is an integrated science program that scaffolds and is reading heavy.

 

The program thus far that fits this is BFSU.

I read the content. Write down the applicable vocabulary to learn. I am a big believer in vocabulary being essential footing for science. And then go to the library for books on the subject. And I supplement with science shows from discovery streaming, library DVDs or even YouTube.

We don't do much with experiments, but that will come in time. We do have lots of discussions throughout the week. At the end of the week I have him dictate what he knows.

 

I don't have many postings but below is how we do science. And it works well. Even more so when BFSU is out guide.

http://littlemanlogic.wordpress.com/category/science/

[Korrale]

Grr. Apparently each time I try to post the website goes offline.

 

So here is the quick of it... For the 3rd time.

 

I think when they are little vocabulary is essential to teach as it gives them some legs to stand on with higher level science. I used to hate having to stop and check definitions as I was reading my text books when I was in High school. The exploring and the observations that we did in primary school didn't adequately prepare me.

 

I have dabbled with quite a few science curriculums and at the end of the day I prefer science to be integrated and scaffolding. BFSU does this better than any other program that I have seen. Personally I want to be lazy and I wish someone were able to make a simplified full, BFSU plan. Something where I didn't have to supplement with books so much. But maybe that would take our fun from us.

I read the content. I make notes of the vocabulary. We read lots of books about the subject of the week. We just add these books to my sons free reading and our reading together time. And we watch lots of shows from discovery streaming, library DVDs, Peter Weatherall and YouTube. We have lots of discussion, often when we go for walks. And at the end of the week I ask my son to dictate to me a little "essay" about what he knows.

It doesn't take much time out of our day.

 

I wish I kept up with posts more. But this is how we do science. Please note my son was 3 at the time. And because he was so little he didn't get much out of experiments. But those will be added in time.

http://littlemanlogic.wordpress.com/category/science/

[nicholsonhomeschool]

My guys (8 and 10) love the science magazine, Odyssey.  

[Above The Rowan]

This thread is giving me some great info - our science curric is the last one I've been humming and hawing about. 

I'm not a science-y  minded kinda person, so I need something to hold my hand along the way. 

 

I see some really great science stuff out there for homeschoolers but why does it all have to look so... I dunno what the word is I'm looking for. Childish? The fonts kill me. I have to really work at it to look past how goofy the fonts tend to be in order to see the content in the samples. I know it seems nitpicky but it has been driving me bonkers. 

[Ellie]

I think there should be lots of exposure to science-y things, such that when the dc are 13ish and they begin a more formal, structured study, they will say, "Yes! We get to do science!" instead of  "Oh, man...we gotta do science again?!"

[MomatHWTK]

I am not a 'science' person per se, but did ok in those subjects in school.  With my littles we started with just observing the world.  Most of our interactions with the physical world are going to involve science- why we sleep, how grass grows, why it rains.  My children have a fabulous advantage in their grandmother who loves the outdoors and takes them all over her little country place finding things.  She has taken it upon herself to look things up and get books to supplement as the kids get older.  So they have books to identify insects, birds, etc.  She will research cocoons that she finds and even lets them watch her dissect critters who've died. (Ewwww!)  They study bird nests and learn the seasons and animal patterns by being able to study in the same location year after year. 

 

Absent the opportunity to have your own little nature center, you might consider checking your local resources.  Several of our local parks put on regular nature-themed programs.  There is at least one museum in the area that covers nature topics and we have a zoo that also features a botanical garden.  Oh- and our local art museum also has a hands-on science section for kids. 

 

As the children have gotten older I've used books for independent reading, online resources such as live webcams, Coursera courses, Netflix streaming documentaries, Learning.com resources,The Happy Scientist, and Plato Science (for my oldest a year or so ago).  We also read through Leaves and Flowers (open source book) for awhile but I don't always get to that.  For this coming semester we have been watching a Coursera course, I've got Astronomy and DNA materials from The Great Courses that I might use and for our group studies I'm going to give Fascinating Education a try.  Bear in mind though that my oldest is 13.  At 6 I think a lot of "Well, lets see what our books says about..." and "Let's try it and see what happens..." is best.  :)

[lewelma]

Bucolic, I know I am late to the party but I have been sick, sick, sick. 

 

I am a scientist and a science educator, and have written extensively on this board on the philosophy of teaching science.  I have also helped many people develop a detailed plan that will actually work for them.  I too like to have some sort of output, but at age 6 you can keep a list of: books she read, books you read to her, documentaries she has watched, and discussions you have had.  Then add to the lists: photos of her observing nature/star watching/digging for worms/whatever with a description (written by you) of what you were doing, videos of her 'presentations' about what she has learned, and the 2 pieces of science writing (or whatever) that she has done for the year.  Then you make up a nice portfolio and decorate it, and feel very good about yourself.  Do NOT sacrifice the joy for documentation!

 

Your main goal is to encourage her love for science. Never loose sight of the goal. Never. 

 

Last year when we were supposed to make our disaster recovery plan, I collected all my major science posts. Some are good for younger and some for older students.  Hope they are of interest to you and others.  I'm happy to answer questions and even help you make a plan that will work for you as the teacher and for your students.

 

Philosophy of teaching science

These first 2 threads were really interactive, make sure you read to the end of the first one as it heated up again. The 3rd thread is worth your time to give you the very big picture of goals for science.

Science...again...someone shoot me now:  http://forums.welltr....=263107&page=9

Evaluating usefulness of lab work, and identifying the goals of science education http://forums.welltr....d.php?t=425932

Developing Advanced Reading Skills: http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/467812-developing-advanced-reading-skills/

 

Plans for other people (this will help you think about your own goals and needs as a teacher in addition to what your student needs)

Systematic and Interest led at the same time: post 65 http://forums.welltr....=361740&page=7

Using bigfoot documentaries to seriously study pseudoscience post 21 in http://forums.welltr...ge-science-and/
Learning physics and chemistry under the umbrella of astronomy: http://forums.welltr...astronomy-help/

Creating a plan for your student. post 22 http://forums.welltr....=414500&page=3 and post 2 http://forums.welltr....d.php?t=416977
What questions to ask yourself and your students to arrive at a plan: posts 4, 13,14,18, 23 - 27 http://forums.welltr...e/#entry4513402; all posts in: http://forums.welltr.../#entry4436605; all posts in http://forums.welltr...h/#entry4431909 (for some reason it is reverting to the last post, just go to post #1)
Studying biology and earth science by way of gorillas and snakes post 16 in http://forums.welltr...ge-science-and/
Mixed ages for earth sci, chemistry, and physics. Reading focused. http://forums.welltr...p-with-science/

 

Investigations (We do lab work only once per year, in one 6-10 week project - I fold in language arts and math to make it like 'project based learning', or a unit study)

Scientific investigations with my 9 and 12 year old: http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/463952-scientific-investigations-with-my-12-and-9-year-old/

Running scientific investigations (week by week for 10 weeks): posts 1 to 60 http://forums.welltr....d.php?t=361740

Shorter examples of scientific investigations: post 47, 48, 54, an 61, 65, 66 (and others on this thread) on http://forums.welltr....=263107&page=5
Easy biology projects http://forums.welltr...e/#entry4459162

 

Other large posts of mine

Physics for Poets: my approach to a living books approach to physics: http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/492610-physics-for-poets-my-attempt-at-a-living-books-approach-to-physics/

Answering questions about evolution http://forums.welltr...-and-grow-fins/

 

Misc
Resources I use: post 62 and 64 http://forums.welltr....=361740&page=7

Goals of scientific education: post 83 http://forums.welltr....=263107&page=9
What output is required: post 2 and 9 http://forums.welltr....d.php?t=412041 and post 8 http://forums.welltr....d.php?t=416977
Protecting your student from misinformation about how the scientific method works: post 90 http://forums.welltr....=263107&page=9
 

 

Hope that helps!

 

Ruth in NZ

[Aspasia]

Wow! Thank you so much, lewelma! I'm so looking forward to reading through those threads. Awesome, awesome, awesome!

[ScoutTN]

Thank you, Ruth for your many thoughtful, descriptive threads!!

I am learning so much. You really should write a book!

 

On the other hand, I am discouraged, because as a totally non-science (or math) person, I don't think I can ever provide this kind of excellent science background for my kids. I don't know enough - basic information, about science tools and techniques, about scientific method any of it. Overwhleming. My mind is just not trained in this way. But I certainly can do better than I have to this point, thanks to you. I love these boards!

 

I can work at this level with verbal subjects. History, literature, Latin, theology. But not math or science.

My DD doesn't seem to be leaning toward science, but DS is an unknown yet. Dh is an art/math person.

 

Just curious. Can non-scientifically minded parents really homeschool a science oriented student at the logic and rhetoric levels? Anyone here done it?

 

[lewelma]

Thank you, Ruth for your many thoughtful, descriptive threads!!

I am learning so much. You really should write a book!

 

On the other hand, I am discouraged, because as a totally non-science (or math) person, I don't think I can ever provide this kind of excellent science background for my kids. I don't know enough - basic information, about science tools and techniques, about scientific method any of it. Overwhleming. My mind is just not trained in this way. But I certainly can do better than I have to this point, thanks to you. I love these boards!

 

I can work at this level with verbal subjects. History, literature, Latin, theology. But not math or science.

My DD doesn't seem to be leaning toward science, but DS is an unknown yet. Dh is an art/math person.

 

Just curious. Can non-scientifically minded parents really homeschool a science oriented student at the logic and rhetoric levels? Anyone here done it?

 

Don't be discouraged!  Your children are young and you will grow/learn with them. I totally think you can get through middle school science/math regardless of background.  You simply learn with your kids.  They are young so just start now.  I had to do this with teaching writing, I just put it in my mind that I would educate *myself* by reading as many books as I could on what good writing looks like and what different ways it can be taught.  (here is my thread describing this process I went through http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/348864-my-evaluation-of-numerous-writing-curricula/ ).  Come high school, you either continue to learn with them (because you are now at the middle school level also) or you outsource.  There are heaps of homeschoolers who outsource high school math and science (and writing!)

 

Up to 8th grade, all you have to do is read to them, discuss complex topics, teach them to read science books independently, and go outside and ask questions and look for answers (either on the internet or by personal observation). It is really not hard to get a book out of the library on the moon phases, read it together, and then go out and observe and document the moon over a month.  I think that people expect there is just so much more to it.  Forget scientific method, and just go ask some questions and find some answers.  For example, 'Where is the best place to put my garden?' This is a scientific question, and could even be so for middle school.  You find out what you need to look for by reading books (light, soil, worms, etc) then you collect the data for a month (how many hours of light, how well drained is the soil, how many worms in 1 bucket full etc) you do this in a couple of different places and determine where the best place is.  Then you write it up. Come 8th grade, get a textbook and teach your student how to study from it.

 

I also want you to realize that even if you are a STEM person like myself, science is so specific that you can be completely unprepared to teach the material in highschool that your student is passionate about it.  I am a biologist and statistician, my older son wants to be a theoretical mathematician and physicist.  This is like chalk and cheese.  I know *nothing* about theoretical math (also called pure math), so I learned with him last year (number theory, combinatorics, proof writing), but it was just too much, so this year I am outsourcing.  This is from a person who has done 7 university classes in statistics.  But this is not math.  So I am still in the same boat as you-- I personally cannot teach the material he wants to learn in highschool. As for physics, I can't remember a. single. thing. about physics from university, so I am working a month ahead of my boy.  I consider this retraining, and am spending 7 hours per week studying.  Physics and biology are both sciences but really they are very very different disciplines.  IMHO, homeschooling *is* hard work, and you either learn the material yourself or you outsource.  Either approach is fine.  My point is that even STEM people cannot teach *all* highschool STEM classes. 

 

If I can learn to teach writing, you can learn to teach science.  You just have to make a plan and stick to it.  It is a rare individual who is true generalist; for those high school subjects we are the weakest at, most of us have to either retrain, outsource, or facilitate independent learning.

 

Ruth in NZ

 

[ScoutTN]

Thanks for the encouragement, Ruth! 

I am taking notes on these threads and thinking, thinking, thinking. As it is the beginning of a new semester, we will be ditching our curriculum ( that I find tedious and dull and which isn't getting done) and charting a new course.

 

I have pretty much assumed from the beginning that we would outsource high school math and science. That is freeing, for sure. I just want mt kids to be prepared when we get to that point. I am studying now just to be able to teach pre-algebra in a few years!

 

The distinctions you have made between demos and real experiments and exploratory learning and whiz-bang stuff are very helpful. The incorpaoration of writing into science is also something I haven't really considered before.  Also the fact that not all scientists actually do experiments. As I'm sure you can tell my own science eduation was weak (despite the fact that I attended a prestigious prep school and a competitive university!) and I am often learning with my kids. 

 

8Fillthe Heart,

Your posts are very encouraging to me too! Thanks for describing how you have done science with your kids.  Good to hear from someone who has actually done it that a non-scientist can homeschool science-loving kids! I want my kids to be free to pursue what interests them and not have my limitations limit them.

 

 

[8filltheheart]

 

On the other hand, I am discouraged, because as a totally non-science (or math) person, I don't think I can ever provide this kind of excellent science background for my kids. I don't know enough - basic information, about science tools and techniques, about scientific method any of it. Overwhleming. My mind is just not trained in this way. But I certainly can do better than I have to this point, thanks to you. I love these boards!

 

I can work at this level with verbal subjects. History, literature, Latin, theology. But not math or science.

My DD doesn't seem to be leaning toward science, but DS is an unknown yet. Dh is an art/math person.

 

Just curious. Can non-scientifically minded parents really homeschool a science oriented student at the logic and rhetoric levels? Anyone here done it?

 

I want to assure you that it can be done.   Ruth's posts totally overwhelm me and I am getting to graduate my 4th homeschooler!    I would literally wilt under that kind of science pressure.  No kidding.  

 

My oldest is a chemical engineer and our sr wants to be a physicist and has already completed cal-based physics 1&2, mechanics, and is taking modern physics this semester.  So it definitely can be done by parents who are not scientifically minded, b/c I am not.  (I am not an expert at anything.   I just love teaching my kids and am good at finding resources.  ;) )

 

FWIW, my kids don't do experiments or use textbooks or take tests or master scientific method or use science tools during elementary and middle school.   They spend every day reading 45-60 mins from trade topic books (meaning whole books written by a single author devoted to a single topic found in the typical library science section) vs. textbooks.   They write science reports when they are younger and science research papers when they are older.   And then.....they just feet first into high school level science whenever they are ready for high school level science (that may be beofre 9th or in 9th.   It just depends on the student.)   They spend lots of free time doing their own science-y things--everything from birding, their own weather forecasting attempts, to massive astronomy research projects.  

 

Once they do hit high school science, we do use science textbooks.   They have the background, the vocabulary, and the understanding they need to be successful b/c they have had a very science literary experience to build upon.   It has worked well here.

[lewelma]

I have pretty much assumed from the beginning that we would outsource high school math and science. That is freeing, for sure. I just want mt kids to be prepared when we get to that point.

 

Below is my personal opinion about what the goals of elementary and middle school science should be.  Which pieces specifically do you think you will struggle with as the teacher?  Because once you can narrow down what you *can* teach already and what you need to learn how to teach, your worry will be reduced because you can make a plan.

 

Elementary level goals

 

Content: Interest driven. There are no requirements for content in elementary

 

Skills

1) Reading: able to read nonfiction at increased difficulty over time

2) Output: able to summarize what has been learned, verbally or in writing

3) Observation: ability to see what is actually there, not what you expect to see

4) Math: at grade level

 

Attitudes

1) Curiosity: "wanting to understand the world"(Regentrude). Including the desire to find answers either through books, observation, or tinkering

2) Enthusiasm towards science (or at least a positive attitude)

 

Middle School level goals

 

Content: Broad overview of biology, earth science, chemistry, physics (this can be systematic or interest driven). High school science is easier if it is not the first time the material has been encountered.

 

Skills (students who already possess these skills by 9th grade will be set to succeed in high school science):

1) Reading: Ability to read difficult text. Ability to interpret graphs, charts, and diagrams.

2) Writing: Ability to write succinct answers to "short-answer" questions including evaluate, interpret, integrate, compare and contrast, critique, etc.

3) Math: at grade level. Including the ability to identify and draw appropriate graphs for the data

4) Logical thinking and problem solving capability

5) Study skills, reading a textbook, organization skills, time management, note taking

6) Scientific Method: general understanding of how experiments are replicated and controlled, how hypotheses are are accepted or rejected (this does not need to be a detailed understanding, although it could be if you want to spend the time doing it in middle school to save some time in highschool)

[8filltheheart]

 

8Fillthe Heart,

Your posts are very encouraging to me too! Thanks for describing how you have done science with your kids.  Good to hear from someone who has actually done it that a non-scientist can homeschool science-loving kids! I want my kids to be free to pursue what interests them and not have my limitations limit them.

 

:)  you must have posted while I was typing.  Glad I can help!

 

[lewelma]

Ruth's posts totally overwhelm me and I am getting to graduate my 4th homeschooler!    I would literally wilt under that kind of science pressure.  No kidding. 

 

sniff.  Certain not my goal to overwhelm people.  yikes!

 

8 and I actually do things in a very similar way except in May and June. :001_smile:  My kids just read read read.

[8filltheheart]

sniff.  Certain not my goal to overwhelm people.  yikes!

 

8 and I actually do things in a very similar way except in May and June. :001_smile:  My kids just read read read.

 

Don't take it the wrong way, Ruth.!!  Lots of people absolutely LOVE what you describe.   I am just not a science experiment person.   Nor can I imagine devoting that much time to any single subject for any single child.   I live in a different reality being pulled in a lot of different directions by different children for far less intense studies.  ;)   My kids have to take their passions and deal with them on their own.   :)