No science experiments

[sweetpea3829]

To be clear, I don't hate all "demonstrations".  We've mixed baking soda and vinegar.  Just this week we did an activity with the stove and pots and steam to learn about condensation.  We did the magnifying glass with sunlight to catch paper on fire.  etc.

 

I just don't like the idea that science lessons have to have a hands-on component.  I'd like to think there are many way to learn.  and I do think many "experiments" are silly.  We've done some really time-consuming, pointless ones in the past.  

 

 

This.  LOL!  Honestly, it really depends on the topic.  Today, we did a "demonstration" if you will.  We observed water in its three states.  We observed ice melting at room temperature and then we applied heat and watched it melt even faster.  Then we watched it turn to water vapor.  We talked about how the higher temperature causes this (and briefly...why).  

 

That was it.  I used phrases such as, "So-and-so...what do you PREDICT will happen when we apply heat?"  "What was our outcome?"  "What can we conclude about temperature and the physical state of water?"

 

 

Eventually, they will remember those terms, and use them as they grow in their knowledge and ability.  That's the goal, right?

 

Now...compare all of this to history projects and crafts.  OY VEY!  I'm just not that kind of mom...lol.  Yeah...making a mummified chicken is pretty cool but....how is it going to help my kids learn important historical information?  It isn't.  

 

At this point, with history...we are doing a timeline and maps.  That's pretty much it.  

[8filltheheart]

Perhaps, but a child is learning that you can mix certain substances together to create fizzing/bubbles. If a child never sees/experiences these very basic reactions (and understand why they happen), how can he/she be expected to make reasonable guesses to what might happen during true experiments. Every experience is a peg to hang future learning upon.

 

Seems like everyone wants to put the cart before the horse these days.

It doesn't take formal experiments for kids to make those observations. Cooking is chemistry. Cleaning copper and silver is chemistry. Playing on a teeter totter is physics. Playing with pulleys is physics. Building a dam in a creek, digging a tide pool, finding a neglected toy that has rusted....

 

In the fall we took the kids and our grandkids to the beach for the afternoon. My grandson, barely 2, discovered that some things float and others sink. The girls had given him a bucket of water. He was throwing shells in the bucket. Then he picked up a small piece of driftwood and threw it in. When it popped back to the surface, he stopped in his tracks. You could see the gears spinning a mile a minute. He picked it out of the water and examined it. He threw it back in. He started being discerning about what he picked up. He would look at them and watch what happened when he threw them in. He started dancing in circles at certain times. It was clear to me that was when it did what in his mind he had predicted.

 

Science is every where. It is not Friday afternoons from 2-4. :)

[desertflower]

I respect that every kid learns differently.  My kids are young, and since my oldest is kinesthetic and visual, I think hands on demonstrations are great for him.  Yes, science and math is everywhere, but for me I have to do some research to tell my son why oil doesn't mix with water.  Or why some things float and others don't.  I can't just wing it.  I'm afraid I'm going to use the wrong words, and teach them something wrong.  Ever seen NCIS?  I'm like Ziva on that show.  She gets her words in the phrases in the wrong places.  My dh says that I have my own definitions.  It's a good think he loves me.  :)

 

I also think it's a good approach for some kids.  For my son, it's another way of learning.  Touching.  Seeing.  He also summarizes what I say, like he's trying to decipher in his head what I just said.  He's been this way since he was about 3. 

 

Every time we do a demonstration, I explain to him what is happening and why.  I don't have them write anything.  I have started having him draw a picture.  Someone had mentioned lapbooks.  That sounds great too.  On another thread, someone mentioned taking pictures.  I would like to start that too. 

 

I also allow them to mix freely in an infant tub (and the rest of the kitchen lol).  I have water, color tablets, baking soda, mentos, corn meal, flour, and vinegar.  They can spend at least 2 hours mixing.  We do play outside as well.  They get muddy.  We take nature walks as well.  We did go to the beach, but it's too far now. 

 

At this age, I don't think it's necessary to do the scientific method formally, but nothing wrong to mention it.  I also believe in reading science books.  For my household, it's easier to do a demonstration than read because my 2 year old wants to tag along and will close the book if she isn't interested in it.  She will do a demonstration with us though.  That's another reason why we do "experiments".  :)

 

How will they turn out?  I don't know.  I will say though my son goes around talking about molecules, addition, chess, and star wars.  ;) 

 

The other day he was the last one to finish lunch, and he said to me, "Anything divided by itself is one."  I wanted to do a happy dance.  I have not taught him that.  I asked where did he learn that from and he pointed to his head.  I then asked him if daddy taught him that and he said no.  (Confirmed this with dad.)  He said that he was looking at the white board and poof he just said it.  (On the white board I had something for my 4 1/2 year old.  Something you would see on education unboxed just drawn out).  I don't know.  I must be doing something right.  lol   I'm not going to wait around for another miracle to happen though, so hopefully I'm doing what's best for my child.

 

I think when there are a little older I may do what lewelma suggested to do in another thread.  I think it'll be a good fit for him.  However, at this point in time demonstrations or experiments is a different approach of learning for them (at least for my son).

[8filltheheart]

I respect that every kid learns differently.  My kids are young, and since my oldest is kinesthetic and visual, I think hands on demonstrations are great for him.  Yes, science and math is everywhere, but for me I have to do some research to tell my son why oil doesn't mix with water.  Or why some things float and others don't.  I can't just wing it.  I'm afraid I'm going to use the wrong words, and teach them something wrong.  Ever seen NCIS?  I'm like Ziva on that show.  She gets her words in the phrases in the wrong places.  My dh says that I have my own definitions.  It's a good think he loves me.  :)

 

I also think it's a good approach for some kids.  For my son, it's another way of learning.  Touching.  Seeing.  He also summarizes what I say, like he's trying to decipher in his head what I just said.  He's been this way since he was about 3. 

 

Every time we do a demonstration, I explain to him what is happening and why.  I don't have them write anything.  I have started having him draw a picture.  Someone had mentioned lapbooks.  That sounds great too.  On another thread, someone mentioned taking pictures.  I would like to start that too. 

 

I also allow them to mix freely in an infant tub (and the rest of the kitchen lol).  I have water, color tablets, baking soda, mentos, corn meal, flour, and vinegar.  They can spend at least 2 hours mixing.  We do play outside as well.  They get muddy.  We take nature walks as well.  We did go to the beach, but it's too far now. 

 

At this age, I don't think it's necessary to do the scientific method formally, but nothing wrong to mention it.  I also believe in reading science books.  For my household, it's easier to do a demonstration than read because my 2 year old wants to tag along and will close the book if she isn't interested in it.  She will do a demonstration with us though.  That's another reason why we do "experiments".  :)

 

How will they turn out?  I don't know.  I will say though my son goes around talking about molecules, addition, chess, and star wars.  ;)

 

The other day he was the last one to finish lunch, and he said to me, "Anything divided by itself is one."  I wanted to do a happy dance.  I have not taught him that.  I asked where did he learn that from and he pointed to his head.  I then asked him if daddy taught him that and he said no.  (Confirmed this with dad.)  He said that he was looking at the white board and poof he just said it.  (On the white board I had something for my 4 1/2 year old.  Something you would see on education unboxed just drawn out).  I don't know.  I must be doing something right.  lol   I'm not going to wait around for another miracle to happen though, so hopefully I'm doing what's best for my child.

 

I think when there are a little older I may do what lewelma suggested to do in another thread.  I think it'll be a good fit for him.  However, at this point in time demonstrations or experiments is a different approach of learning for them (at least for my son).

 

Desert Flower,

 

What you are doing sounds perfect for you as a teacher and for what you believe your son needs.  I hope you don't feel the need to justify to anyone why you do demonstrations with your children.  

 

There have been posters over the yrs that have stated rather emphatically that kids not doing formal science write-ups or studying science topics in a systematic way are being done a disservice and are not being properly educated in science.  That is simply not our experience.  

[Chrysalis Academy]

It doesn't take formal experiments for kids to make those observations. Cooking is chemistry. Cleaning copper and silver is chemistry. Playing on a teeter totter is physics. Playing with pulleys is physics. Building a dam in a creek, digging a tide pool, finding a neglected toy that has rusted....

 

In the fall we took the kids and our grandkids to the beach for the afternoon. My grandson, barely 2, discovered that some things float and others sink. The girls had given him a bucket of water. He was throwing shells in the bucket. Then he picked up a small piece of driftwood and threw it in. When it popped back to the surface, he stopped in his tracks. You could see the gears spinning a mile a minute. He picked it out of the water and examined it. He threw it back in. He started being discerning about what he picked up. He would look at them and watch what happened when he threw them in. He started dancing in circles at certain times. It was clear to me that was when it did what in his mind he had predicted.

 

Science is every where. It is not Friday afternoons from 2-4. :)

 

Yep.  :001_wub:

[desertflower]

Ah. I see. Every family is different.

[Rosie_0801]

It doesn't take formal experiments for kids to make those observations. 

 

And isn't it wonderful to watch? :)

 

Baby discovers he has hands. Woah. Cool thing!

Toddler studies currents by tipping water bottles, paying particular attention to the bottles with dents in them.

Preschooler works out which rocks will make decent splashes in the dam and which ones aren't worth the effort.

Preschooler also plans ahead and will pick up any big rocks he sees on the way to the dam...

[lewelma]

 I'd be honored to help raise funds for the time/money investment such a worthy but epic undertaking would require. :hurray:

Wow! Thanks for this. When I have time....

 

 

 

Thank you so much for sharing. This helps immensely. It seems like most of the straightforward observational experiments are related to nature and mesh well with biology or earth science. Did you try to steer them toward a chemistry themed experiment in third grade? Or a physics experiment in fourth grade?

 

Well, I just lost a huge post. Sigh.  off to retype it.... Good thing I type very fast!...

 

Yes, I did investigations in chemistry and physics with my primary children.  I just though you only wanted to see what could be done with the little ones. 

 

In third grade for chemistry, my older wanted to know how to make the best silly putty.  So we went on the internet and got a basic recipe.  It requires only 3 ingredients: glue, borax, and corn starch.  So over the period of a few weeks, he made up lots of different batches with different quantities of the ingredients, or different glues, I think he even left out the corn starch once.  He recorded what he put in each and then color coded them with food dye.  He tested them for how high they could bounce and how stretchy they were.  And then had lots of fun analyzing and graphing the results.  This is by far the best real chemistry investigation I have ever run across.  And because there are 3 variables, the interactions can be quite complex if you want to study them. 

 

My younger, wanted to figure out how to make natural paint, so he studied what are the strongest binders and how to find all the different colours from nature.  He looked at milk, egg, and casein for binders, and both dyes and pigments from organic and inorganic sources for the colours.  I wrote up a very detailed description of what we did and all our struggles in this thread.

 

For physics, my younger wanted to know how to make a bow out of bamboo that would shoot arrows the furthest.  He did this project with a neighbourhood friend. They had been making bows all year, when we decided to actually test which one was the best.  They evaluated both length and diameter, and later found out that flexibility was also important.  They were able to design a methodology to allow for consistent shooting between bows.  They used a spring scale to stabilize the force and a very large protractor to keep the angle consistent.

 

For physics, my older in 4th grade wanted to study the aerodynamics of kites.  So he made his own kite and then once it was flying, he altered the bridal angle and some other variable I can't remember and watched how it affected the flight.  I ran across this description that I wrote up a few years ago. 

 

x-post: My son did a science fair project on kites and the aerodynamics of flight at age 10. I am not a physicist and I will tell you I did not have a clue. But, ok I will give it a go. 4 weeks later, we still did not have a flying kite, the science fair was in 6 weeks, and we had not even started the experimental part of altering different parts of the bridal and flight height etc. What was wrong? We tried everything it seemed - changing the materials of the kite, changing the way we launched it, changing what wind speed we flew it at, every single thing we could think of. And of course the kite kept breaking when it would crash instead of fly. So we had to reconstruct it over and over and over. And I kept saying the the Wright brothers took 4 years of long hard work and their own money to get an airplane to fly (my son had just done a report on them, which sparked his interest in this project). The lessons every day seemed to be about persistence. Edison tried 2000 different filaments before he got a working light bulb. Persistence. And I kept thinking, how are we going to get this done in time? Then, we just happened to run across the issue of the wind shadow. The height of a tree will disrupt the air flow across a field for 10 times the height of the tree. The field we were using was HUGE, but long in the wrong direction for the regular wind direction so that all of it was in a wind shadow. The kite would not fly because the wind was turbulent. We changed fields. The kite flew. WOW! What a lesson to a budding scientist. I don't think he will ever forget it.

 

++++

 

Now, I know this is a thread about not doing science experiments, so it seems a bit odd for me to be posting all this stuff here.  But sometimes what people really don't like about science experiments is the weekly goofy-easy or impossible-to-replicate types.  And I just want to offer that there is another way to do hands-on science with your kids that is fun and educational!

 

Ruth in NZ

[lewelma]

As I see it there are at least 5 reasons to do experimentations with your kids:

 

1) To show kids who just don't understand it, until they see it with their own eyes. Some things are just unbelievable, other things they just never have seen before.

2) To teach kids how to use lab equipment (microscope) or standard methodologies (transects)

3) To teach kids about the scientific method and how science actually functions

4) To train kids to think logically, to organise their ideas, to keep track of the details, to remain persistent when the going gets tough.

5) To make observations and connections about nature and their world

 

The reason why some people have no need for experimentation before high school is that the above 5 things don't apply to their kids and school structure.

 

1) Their kids do not need to see it to believe it

2 &3) You can definitely wait until high school to teach lab equipment and scientific method

4) Some homeschooers train their kids to think logically etc by using other subjects

5) Some kids just notice nature and their world by being in it and don't need that kind of experience to be formalized

 

Now if your kid is a see it to believe it kind of kid, or a kinestetic learner, you might really need to do demonstrations, experiments, and nature walks.  In fact you might need youtube for some chemistry reactions you are not likely to do in your house!  Or perhaps your kids are just the kind that never notice anything, and you feel like formalizing the observation process might help them to sit up and take notice. These are the types of homeschoolers who you find will always do hands-on science, because their kids really need it.

 

Some of us who do hand-on work, like me, prefer to use science to teach logic, organization, writing, graphing, presentation skills.  My kids don't *need* their scientific investigations;  I could have used another subject to develop these skills.  But for our family, it has been a wonderful way to train them in needed life and academic skills, and we have enjoyed it.

 

Now one reason that you might want to do scientific experiments in middle school, is to teach the scientific method before you get to high school.  This is just a way to pull stuff out of the busy high school years.  My nephew's schools in Virginia and most schools here do this by having the kids in 7th and 8th grade do a science fair project - aka a scientific investigation.  You don't have to do this, of course, but many schools do. And so do I.  I think that this also applies to learning how to use scientific equipment, you are fine to leave it to high school, but if you do it earlier, you just have less to do in high school.

 

My point here is that there is a reason why there are some very successful high school and college kids who never did any scientific experimentation until highschool.  Many kids (but definitely not all) don't *have* to do it to make sense of science.  But there are some compelling reasons to consider hands-on work if you have the time and energy to pursue it.

 

Hope this clears up some confusion.

 

Ruth in NZ

[desertflower]

And isn't it wonderful to watch? :)

 

Baby discovers he has hands. Woah. Cool thing!

Toddler studies currents by tipping water bottles, paying particular attention to the bottles with dents in them.

Preschooler works out which rocks will make decent splashes in the dam and which ones aren't worth the effort.

Preschooler also plans ahead and will pick up any big rocks he sees on the way to the dam...

Yes. I love those moments. with my first child I took pictures of almost every first thing. First time putting toe in mouth, first time hold bottle, first time crawled and then laid down to sleep.....because I guess crawling was too tiring. Lol

[desertflower]

For me Ruth, 1, 4, 5 are reasons why we do experiments at this age. I like to see the amazement expression on his face.

[SparklyUnicorn]

Perhaps, but a child is learning that you can mix certain substances together to create fizzing/bubbles. If a child never sees/experiences these very basic reactions (and understand why they happen), how can he/she be expected to make reasonable guesses to what might happen during true experiments. Every experience is a peg to hang future learning upon.

 

Seems like everyone wants to put the cart before the horse these days.

 

Except it can also be done in 2 minutes rather than the several days it takes to make a volcano. 

[pitterpatter]

Oh, lol! You make that kind of volcano. We just made a little one out of Play-Doh. Took just a couple of minutes. Hah!

 

Except it can also be done in 2 minutes rather than the several days it takes to make a volcano. 

 

[SparklyUnicorn]

Oh, lol! You make that kind of volcano. We just made a little one out of Play-Doh. Took just a couple of minutes. Hah!

 

We made paper mache models and painted them.  I refuse to do another one.  Although my kids are not into that anymore thankfully.

[pitterpatter]

Oh, sure. But, I don't let DD sit around and play with most things we use for chemistry. Plus, she doesn't get the whys during her day-to-day observations. Yeah, she can easily see that a rock sinks and a leaf floats, but she's not understanding the science behind it...not gaining the proper vocabulary to go with it. Why did the toy rust? Having studied that, DD will happily explain to you that it's due to an oxidation reaction. Don't know what an oxidation reaction is...she'll explain that to you to. :) DD learns well by linking an activity with a scientific explanation. It helps her remember the lesson and material learned. Sure, she could learn by rote, but that's not going to be as effective for her in the long run.

 

It doesn't take formal experiments for kids to make those observations. Cooking is chemistry. Cleaning copper and silver is chemistry. Playing on a teeter totter is physics. Playing with pulleys is physics. Building a dam in a creek, digging a tide pool, finding a neglected toy that has rusted....

In the fall we took the kids and our grandkids to the beach for the afternoon. My grandson, barely 2, discovered that some things float and others sink. The girls had given him a bucket of water. He was throwing shells in the bucket. Then he picked up a small piece of driftwood and threw it in. When it popped back to the surface, he stopped in his tracks. You could see the gears spinning a mile a minute. He picked it out of the water and examined it. He threw it back in. He started being discerning about what he picked up. He would look at them and watch what happened when he threw them in. He started dancing in circles at certain times. It was clear to me that was when it did what in his mind he had predicted.

Science is every where. It is not Friday afternoons from 2-4. :)

 

[pitterpatter]

Well, at least you didn't have to do art too that week. Tie in Mount Vesuvius and make it a history lesson as well. That's a triple crown right there! :P

 

We made paper mache models and painted them.  I refuse to do another one.  Although my kids are not into that anymore thankfully.

 

[KeriJ]

Oh, sure. But, I don't let DD sit around and play with most things we use for chemistry. Plus, she doesn't get the whys during her day-to-day observations. Yeah, she can easily see that a rock sinks and a leaf floats, but she's not understanding the science behind it...not gaining the proper vocabulary to go with it. Why did the toy rust? Having studied that, DD will happily explain to you that it's due to an oxidation reaction. Don't know what an oxidation reaction is...she'll explain that to you to. :) DD learns well by linking an activity with a scientific explanation. It helps her remember the lesson and material learned. Sure, she could learn by rote, but that's not going to be as effective for her in the long run.

 

I agree, but for us, we read about oxidation in a science lesson and then observe the rusty toy later.  I don't have to gather a bunch of stuff to create a simulation of it.  That's what I mean about not doing experiments.  We learn about something in "science class", (not by rote, just by reading about it) and then observe it in real life.  I don't have to buy an expensive lab kit for "hands-on" experience.  This is all I'm saying.

[KeriJ]

And maybe it's just the expensive middle school lab kits that I'm balking at, since looking at middle school science programs is what started this topic for me.  All of the logic stage programs seem to have kits that cost hundreds of dollars.  Even TWTM talks about hands-on being very important for logic stage science.  I'm just wondering if there are other ways to truly learn science without pricey equipment.  (We still read, write, discuss, sketch, label, watch documentaries, etc.)

[8filltheheart]

Oh, sure. But, I don't let DD sit around and play with most things we use for chemistry. Plus, she doesn't get the whys during her day-to-day observations. Yeah, she can easily see that a rock sinks and a leaf floats, but she's not understanding the science behind it...not gaining the proper vocabulary to go with it. Why did the toy rust? Having studied that, DD will happily explain to you that it's due to an oxidation reaction. Don't know what an oxidation reaction is...she'll explain that to you to. :) DD learns well by linking an activity with a scientific explanation. It helps her remember the lesson and material learned. Sure, she could learn by rote, but that's not going to be as effective for her in the long run.

Your attitude is that they have to have all of the explanations in elementary school via demonstrations and explanations. My attitude is that they don't. They observe. They know that leaving a metal toy out in the rain means it will rust. When they read books when they are in elementary school, they read about why things happen. When they study chemistry when they are older, they learn the process of oxidation and can explain it mathematically/chemically. You can definitely be proud of the fact that your 7 yr old understands oxidation. But, that does not mean that when she is older that she will be a better or more advanced scientist than kids who aren't using textbooks and doing demonstrations at her age.

 

Your post reminds me of this thread: http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/242778-long-read-science-content-help-your-input-needed/ :) Thankfully, we get to control our own homeschools.

 

From my perspective, I have btdt multiple times over. A child who never studied formal physics, chemistry, astronomy, geology, etc and spent 3rd-7th grade reading 30-45 mins/day from science books had 11 science credits when he graduated from high school: 3 college-level self-studied astronomy courses, 5 college physics courses taken at the university (through 300 level physics), high school chem, AP chem, and bio. His first formal science course was a high school physics in 8th grade. As a college freshman, at the end of this yr he only needs 2 more physics classes to complete the physics portion of his degree.

 

I guess I am left wondering......how was his education inhibited by not spending time watching demonstrations with me explaining to him what he was observing. He observed, made his own guesses, asked questions (which obviously when asked were answered), and through reading made connections to his own observations.

 

He is not alone, just my most recent graduate. His older brother is a chemical engineer--same educational experience. His older sister has a degree in an Allied Health field--same educational experience. Their educations have left them solidly prepared for high school level science, college level science, and their careers. Just b/c you don't approve, doesn't mean it doesn't work. :)

[mom31257]

I think science experiments are very over-rated. Scientists in labs conducting research is totally needed, of course, but that's not what school science experiments are usually doing. They are demonstrating concepts. I can read and understand something by just visualizing it in my head. 

 

Dd did very few science experiments until high school. She's had 2 years of labs once every other week. She learned all of her science before that through reading and discussing. The labs she did do were from the Apologia books and were fine but not enlightening. She scored a 35 on the science section of her ACT. She is an excellent reader and has wonderful critical thinking and logic skills. Those matter much more in science. 

 

 

[mom31257]

Ds has had a few experiments here and there because of co-op. He'll be doing the every other week thing starting this year because of the co-op. I wouldn't find it necessary, though. 

 

 

 

[desertflower]

It's obviously different for everyone. :) Here's another proof in 8's defense. My dh. He was raised in ps and didn't have any formal science until hs. He read a lot. To this day he reads everything. Also, he only made 2 B's his whole life and he has his masters. He could have went to medical school, but then we would have never met. ;)

 

I think the key things are critical thinking, loving to read and the love of learning. (I know not a grammatically correct sentence.) Lol

[pitterpatter]

Never said that she would. I hate the demonstrations/experiments. She loves them. That's why we do them. She thinks they're fun and she learns from them. That's it. I have no complex argument behind my reasoning. Would I rather just read books? You betcha. My life would be simpler. (I personally also hate facilitating art and history projects.) If I'm going to go through the trouble and expense of completing them, though, I'm going to provide some meat to go with them.

 

While DD enjoys science, I'm not sure she'll go on to become a scientist of any sort. She also loves literature and history. She may never go on to take advanced-level science courses in college. In the end, the science she gets at home, plus whatever the basic science classes she takes in college might be it for her. I'm just a mom trying to provide an education that's fun and fruitful for my daughter.

 

My apologies, OP...my posts weren't helpful to you at all. I got distracted by what others were posting. You are looking for suggestions on how to incorporate more reading, writing, sketching, videos, etc. into your lessons. I hope someone can provide that for you. I would love to find an all-in-one curriculum that included these things in an engaging way. Perhaps I could cut back a little on our lab days then. We switched to a block system this year, so we have three six-week blocks where we study science every day. Conducting demonstrations/experiments every single day is a little much for me. We're studying chemistry this year. It's a tough one to come up with any sort of curriculum for a seven-year-old. Text can be confusing and dry...the demonstrations/experiments have made it palatable.

 

 

Your attitude is that they have to have all of the explanations in elementary school via demonstrations and explanations. My attitude is that they don't. They observe. They know that leaving a metal toy out in the rain means it will rust. When they read books when they are in elementary school, they read about why things happen. When they study chemistry when they are older, they learn the process of oxidation and can explain it mathematically/chemically. You can definitely be proud of the fact that your 7 yr old understands oxidation. But, that does not mean that when she is older that she will be a better or more advanced scientist than kids who aren't using textbooks and doing demonstrations at her age.

Your post reminds me of this thread: http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/242778-long-read-science-content-help-your-input-needed/ :) Thankfully, we get to control our own homeschools.

From my perspective, I have btdt multiple times over. A child who never studied formal physics, chemistry, astronomy, geology, etc and spent 3rd-7th grade reading 30-45 mins/day from science books had 11 science credits when he graduated from high school: 3 college-level self-studied astronomy courses, 5 college physics courses taken at the university (through 300 level physics), high school chem, AP chem, and bio. His first formal science course was a high school physics in 8th grade. As a college freshman, at the end of this yr he only needs 2 more physics classes to complete the physics portion of his degree.

I guess I am left wondering......how was his education inhibited by not spending time watching demonstrations with me explaining to him what he was observing. He observed, made his own guesses, asked questions (which obviously when asked were answered), and through reading made connections to his own observations.

He is not alone, just my most recent graduate. His older brother is a chemical engineer--same educational experience. His older sister has a degree in an Allied Health field--same educational experience. Their educations have left them solidly prepared for high school level science, college level science, and their careers. Just b/c you don't approve, doesn't mean it doesn't work. :)

 

[desertflower]

Yes, my apologies OP.  I think I was getting confused between this thread and 2 other ones. 

[Wildiris]

I just noticed a post where 8FillTheHeart mentioned she detested pre-planned science experiments before high school, and I know that this has been discussed here before. (I can't find it at the moment)  But I'd love to discuss this more.  

 

Some people are adamant that science lessons aren't science lessons without hands-on experiments.  Others focus on reading, writing, sketching, videos etc. without many experiments or lab reports.

 

I'd love to hear more from the 2nd group. :)

 

Science is not my strong skill set. With my DD, now a graduating senior, I did very few hands on science experiments/activities with her K-8. I handed her Snap Circuits and she built all the projects on her own. We live far from town so she understands gravity feed water and how to start a siphon. We have a garden and animals. We've slaughtered and butchered animals together. My youngest DD just watched and assisted in the birth of baby goats.

 

For transcript purposes, I sent my oldest DD to a summer high school lab biology class. It was her first experience in a classroom, and her first experience with a lab science. She did not feel less skilled than her class peers, and her ability to read, take notes, and write well are part of what earned her an A in the class.

 

Since it was a lab bio class for freshmen/sophomores, the formatting of lab notes was covered so all students understood expectations. 

 

What has served my DD well throughout high school is her ability to write well, and her ability to take notes on her reading and discussing her reading. DD has gone to a private online high school for three year and done very well.

 

I am following the same path with my youngest DD-grade 6. My thinking is a student needs background knowledge to help them make sense of the world around them, so we read, write, and discuss. If we have the materials to do a lab, we do the lab. I am thinking a dissection lab next year might be a good experience, but I don't push labs. 

[KeriJ]

I think all of the replies have been helpful.  I just wanted a good discussions. :)

[MerryAtHope]

When my kids were little, we occasionally did science "activities." You know, growing beans, floating a needle on top of water to show surface tension, things like that. We did nowhere near all that was suggested--maybe a couple per year, if the kids were interested and I was inclined. I got one of Sonlight's "Discover and Do" DVDs one year and let them watch that when I had a sick day, and called it school :-). It didn't inspire them to do one single experiment, but they did think it was fun to watch. 

 

I certainly did no lab reports or extensive science worksheets etc... in grade school. I think the role of science at that age is to build an interest in various science topics, in observing the world around them. I wanted my kids to have an awe of creation, it's intricacies and varieties--and an awe of our Creator. We did nature walks, maybe a couple of times a year. I sometimes wished I was more regular, but we're townies. We did keep the birdfeeder stocked and had lots of fun with that and with the humingbird feeder. We also went to a local children's museum several times and did a couple of classes there, went on field trips to places like a maple syrup farm etc... 

 

My husband is more science-minded and he probably did some things along the way to inspire interest just because he has ongoing interests in many science and technology fields--he'd be the one to get excited or enthused about something and talk about it--but there weren't structured lessons or lots of "experiments" going on.

 

When my dd got older, she developed an interest in science, which I discovered somewhat accidentally. Basically, I made the tough decision, her 5th grade year, to not teach science. Life happened in a big way...and science just didn't make the cut of things I had energy left for. So I decided to "unschool science," in a loosely structured way. I told my dd she could pick her books (I gave her some choices to start from). And that she could do whatever she wanted for science as long as she spent 30 minutes a day. She could read, journal, nature journal in the back yard, do experiments--but she had to find supplies or figure it out on her own, or put things on a list ahead of time--no last minute scrambles.

 

She discovered a love of science, has done science fairs ever since with all kinds of projects (hot air balloons, made a model hovercraft, solar panels, made a cell city out of clay, researched the human voice--this year she's doing a project on the brain.) 

 

Her love of science obviously came from her father! Certainly not from anything I did. (Once I realized that she learned more science when I stopped teaching her, I decided my job was simply to coach and ask questions. If she could teach it to me, she knew it well.) It didn't come from me spending years doing tedious experiments/activities/demonstrations. It didn't come from serious textbook science courses (she didn't use a science text book until she hit high school). 

 

And obviously, my lack of doing experiments didn't deter her! When she was ready and able...she pursued. 

 

Do what you can...don't sweat what you can't. 

[Minerva]

Hey Keri,

 

I have written extensively on this topic on this thread:

 

Science activities: setting goals and evaluating the usefulness of activities.

 

We read, read, read and watch documentaries for 8 months of the year; however, we also do 6 week scientific investigation.  This allows me to avoid the weekly run around looking for supplies, and allows me to avoid those useless experiments that drive everyone nuts because the answer is either obvious or the outcome is not what you are told will happen.

 

Before you throw out all experimentation, read some of my thoughts in the thread, and figure out what you really dislike and what you actually want to teach your kids.

 

Ruth in NZ

This is totally revolutionary to me. Thank you! I am off to read the other thread. 

[KrissiK]

I used to teach jr. High science. And I loved it. We did a lot of hands-on activities, not true experiments and it was great. It really was. Now that I'm homeschooling... we do nothing hands-on. My kids are a nightmare. For some reason, it's different in a classroom environment. I agree that using activities teaching science makes things more real. We studied Newton's Laws and put them into practice launching rockets we made with 2-L soda bottles filled partially with water and then pumped up the rest of the way with air. And we did altitude calculations.... The whole thing. It was great. Lot more interesting than just doing the work on paper. But, hands-on stuff just doesn't work with my kids. They fight. They don't listen. Anything fun or interesting we try to do just degenerates into a fight. So, we just check boxes and get our work done.

[Ad astra]

I don't think science experiments are a must for every student, but I do believe the experiments and hands-on activities definitely enrich science learning and are as important as, or more so than, the field trips to science museum, zoo or aquarium at young ages. I still vividly and pleasantly remember some of the projects we did in the science class at elementary & middle school in my home country, such as making a sun clock, dissecting a frog and building electric circuits. We also did a lot of reading and writing reports on science topics, watched documentaries, visited science institutes and attended science fairs regularly. Although we did more reading and test prep with few experiments in high school, I believe those early laboratory experiences are what fostered a love of science for me and motivated me to major in electric & electronic engineering at college and become an engineer. But I don't know yet how difficult it is to carry it out and make it happen at home as my kids are still little.

[mama27]

I just noticed a post where 8FillTheHeart mentioned she detested pre-planned science experiments before high school, and I know that this has been discussed here before. (I can't find it at the moment)  But I'd love to discuss this more.  

 

Some people are adamant that science lessons aren't science lessons without hands-on experiments.  Others focus on reading, writing, sketching, videos etc. without many experiments or lab reports.

 

I'd love to hear more from the 2nd group. :)

 

I used to do all those "experiments" with my oldest 3 kids, then we adopted 4 younger kids and they are just more high maintenance kids and really only learn things if THEY are interested in it. I was talking about this to one of my older daughters one day and she told me that she never enjoyed that stuff either she just went along with it because basically she is more compliant. :glare:

 

So I don't do them anymore. Right now I have one high schooler and I have bought her a cd from one of those popular high school biology courses (I can't recall the name and I'm too lazy to get up and look at it. lol) She can do that next year along with the biology book. And if she chooses to do something else ON HER OWN, fine. If not, that's fine too. She will be going to a local CC after she graduates or possibly dual enrollso why should I go through all that when she will do it there?

 

I have recently accepted the fact that I can only do so much and for YEARS I have tried to be Mrs. Perfect Homeschool Mom and failed. Every week for years I have been stressed because I have tried to do things that I just can't do with the kids I have.

 

So our science will now be things of THEIR choosing, for the most part. I will make them watch certain dvds, read certain books, draw things, talk about things. But the focus is going to be letting them (hopefully) enjoy what they are learning about.

[mama27]

I used to teach jr. High science. And I loved it. We did a lot of hands-on activities, not true experiments and it was great. It really was. Now that I'm homeschooling... we do nothing hands-on. My kids are a nightmare. For some reason, it's different in a classroom environment. I agree that using activities teaching science makes things more real. We studied Newton's Laws and put them into practice launching rockets we made with 2-L soda bottles filled partially with water and then pumped up the rest of the way with air. And we did altitude calculations.... The whole thing. It was great. Lot more interesting than just doing the work on paper. But, hands-on stuff just doesn't work with my kids. They fight. They don't listen. Anything fun or interesting we try to do just degenerates into a fight. So, we just check boxes and get our work done.

 

 

Sounds like my kids. I've done these things with them for years and tried to make it fun and interesting and all that and they didn't even learn anything from it anyway. For years.