Thinking of ditching Apologia Zoology 3--what else should I consider?

[brett_ashley]

I'm chair of the school board at a Christian, classical, university-model school (where the students are schooled at school two days per week and homeschooled three days per week).

 

Our fourth graders do zoology and it's wildly popular--a course that the kids look forward to and enjoy.  We have historically used Apologia Land Animals of the Sixth Day, but I am increasingly uncomfortable with the tone.  Our official position is that people who love Jesus disagree on the age of the earth, and this book is decidedly not in tune with that position.  

 

I like the way the book is ordered by taxonomic order, and the content itself is interesting.  Just need some more dynamic lab exercises and less preaching ("You and I know better than that!") when referring to scientific theory.  The vast majority of our parents are likely Young Earth Creationists, but we are trying to foster an environment where we ask tough questions about our faith and the world.  Reading Apologia I feel like it absolutely discourages asking hard questions about macroevolution and the age of earth. 

 

What should our curricula team be looking at?  These are advanced 4th graders and we need a year-long unit.  

 

• Not interested in Sassafras.
• Some people like Answers in Genesis, but I really can't imagine Ken Ham less preachy than Apologia?  
• We do try and follow some Charlotte Mason principles, but we are probably too short on time this year to come up with our own curriculum based on real books.  We are working on getting a classroom animal rotation.

[Sahamamama]

 

I'm chair of the school board at a Christian, classical, university-model school (where the students are schooled at school two days per week and homeschooled three days per week).

 

Our fourth graders do zoology and it's wildly popular--a course that the kids look forward to and enjoy.  We have historically used Apologia Land Animals of the Sixth Day, but I am increasingly uncomfortable with the tone.  Our official position is that people who love Jesus disagree on the age of the earth, and this book is decidedly not in tune with that position.  

 

I like the way the book is ordered by taxonomic order, and the content itself is interesting.  Just need some more dynamic lab exercises and less preaching ("You and I know better than that!") when referring to scientific theory.  The vast majority of our parents are likely Young Earth Creationists, but we are trying to foster an environment where we ask tough questions about our faith and the world.  Reading Apologia I feel like it absolutely discourages asking hard questions about macroevolution and the age of earth. 

 

What should our curricula team be looking at?  These are advanced 4th graders and we need a year-long unit.  

 

• Not interested in Sassafras.
• Some people like Answers in Genesis, but I really can't imagine Ken Ham less preachy than Apologia?  
• We do try and follow some Charlotte Mason principles, but we are probably too short on time this year to come up with our own curriculum based on real books.  We are working on getting a classroom animal rotation.

 

 

I can't think of anything, actually.

 

If you can't find exactly what you're looking for ready-made, perhaps it would be more profitable to focus on developing the course itself by changing out a few things. If you like the order in which the content is presented and the reading level of the text is ideal, but you would like (1) a different tone or approach to inquiry/asking questions, and (2) more dynamic lab exercises, then it might be easier to add those in, rather than start over from scratch.

 

For the situation with the tone of the book (I tend to agree with you -- it's too much opinion-spouting for a science book, and we are [tentative, not dogmatic] YECs), one approach might be to simply downplay the issue of origins altogether. Let the parents decide for themselves what they want to say to their children at home. You might even skip those sentences and phrases, if you're reading the text aloud in class. I would go through the book with a highlighter and mark all those sentences, then leave them out in class discussions and reading. You might (as a board) want to address this with your policy -- that parents provide the religious instruction (at home, at church), while the school provides the science instruction. So, you would downplay (ignore, not comment on, not read aloud) the religiously-toned statements in the book. Just act like it's not there. (I know, I know). ;)

 

An opposite approach might be to address the issue head-on. Have the teacher(s) bring in some other resources that do have the tone you want, as a way of providing some alternative perspectives (without, hopefully, offending the majority of the parents who are YEC). I don't think I'd do much of this, actually, since the focus of the course probably ought to be on ANIMALS, rather than ORIGINS. ??? But as a board, you'd have to decide what you want the emphasis to be for your 4th graders. Personally, with that age group and the number of YEC families you have, I'd steer clear of origins discussions (in class, not at home) and focus on learning about the animals. I do think there is a way to do this, even using the text in question.

 

As for more dynamic labs, you might have your leadership and/or teaching team sit down with the book, the list of lessons (highlighting especially those lessons where you feel the labs are lacking), and brainstorm and/or research to figure out what better lab exercises you could insert in those slots. Teachers do this all the time -- find the best exercise to teach the main concepts of the lessons. Or, skip the "lab exercises" altogether and do some other, more engaging activity to cement the concepts.

 

If you work on the syllabus from year to year, it would be possible to gradually build that course up to having a different, more inclusive tone, if you incorporate some materials from different viewpoints and insert better labs.

 

Of course, if you find another text that is suitable, that may be the easier way to go. These are just some ideas in case you can't find that perfect text. HTH.

[Ellie]

What about Cornerstone Curriculum? It's going to be young earth, but it doesn't have the tone that Apologia does (which is one reason that although ITA with Apologia's position, I can't use it. :-p)

[sweetpea3829]

I don't have any suggestions but I wanted to add some solidarity, lol. As YEC leaning Christians, I personally could not stand Fulbright's narrative tone in the Apologia books.

 

 

Edited to correct wrong name of author...lol.  

Edited March 8, 2016 by Sweetpea3829

[Sahamamama]

Fulbright.

 

We do use it (as assigned independent reading [listening along with the CDs], not as our science course), but we also discuss our (mostly YEC, but not dismissively so) views on origins (to some extent), apart from the text itself. We have discussed the tone of the book, and I think my girls mostly bypass that aspect of it. After they have done their listening/reading, they always just discuss the scientific content (they're doing Flying Creatures & Swimming Creatures in tandem this year). I never hear much feedback about the religious content, so I do speak from experience that -- if properly coached -- students are able to mostly tune it out and just move on from there. The remaining content and writing style are suitable for this age range, and it is an easy (for me! ;)) way to get some general knowledge into them without me having to read and read and read (I do plenty of that, though).

 

What I tell my girls is that we just do not know, but that their father and I believe X, Y, and Z. I also tell them that as they get older, and examine things for themselves, they may agree or disagree with what we think, or they may come to their own perspective, but should continue to ask questions, and should respect other viewpoints.

 

And my strong preference is to do Bible study during Bible study, and Science during Science! I think this separate but equal approach makes both studies stronger, whereas trying to blend it all into a "we know better" ;) science-sermon is a disservice to both fields of study.

 

Sort of like, I use one pair of glasses for reading, sewing, etc. And I use another set of glasses for driving, walking, etc. Old eyes. ;)

 

I approach Bible study through the eyes of faith. I am seeking Truth and Wisdom (in relation to the Supernatural).

 

I approach Science through the eyes of objective inquiry (as much as possible). I am seeking Knowledge and Understanding of the Natural World.

 

Same person, using different approaches to try to "see." If that makes sense.

 

Edited to add: I do think, however, that if you are using a text entitled, "Land Animals of the Sixth Day," then you ought to expect it to be YEC, and generally materials that are YEC are dogmatically so. I haven't seen any that are toned down from Apologia; most are more adamant than that! HTH.

Edited March 8, 2016 by Sahamamama

[Holly]

Christian Kids Explore might be another option to consider.  We aren't very far into our first book (Earth & Space), but so far it's been pretty neutral.  With plate tectonics, it talked about what the Bible actually says and how the theory could fit in with the Scriptures.  

[KrissiK]

I can't really help you. Dh is an Old Earth Creationist and would really prefer that our science is from that perspective. But we use Apologia because I really like it. And I have looked, but cannot find a curriculum that is written from an OE perspective, although I admit to not having done and exhaustive search. Personally, I have not taken a stand on YE or OE. I was raised YE, but after marrying DH, decided I cannot be dogmatic. There are things with OE I disagree with, too. Anyhow, I was going to suggest, since you really like the format of Apologia, can you just include a unit somewhere that discusses OE?

[Sahamamama]

What about Cornerstone Curriculum? It's going to be young earth, but it doesn't have the tone that Apologia does (which is one reason that although ITA with Apologia's position, I can't use it. :-p)

 

I never heard of this, Ellie, thanks for posting the link! I'm going to check it out, because I would like something to use for the next few years that is more of reasoning approach. I've never liked the "cookbook" approach -- gathering materials for some weak "lab" that tells you the conclusion before you do the work (blah) -- and I think my girls are going to grow past the textbook approach (though they like it, probably because it's easy). LOL. But the reasoning approach would likely require more from them and make them have to think. Thanks for posting!

 

[SilverMoon]

.

Edited January 17, 2023 by SilverMoon

[Openhearted]

Another option is Memoria Press Mammals. It is a year long course I think. It says it's for 3rd grade, but it could probably be modified. I think it looks interesting. I'm not sure about young earth or not. The website has a sample.

http://www.memoriapress.com/curriculum/science/mammals-lessons-world-animals

[SoCal_Bear]

I was thinking Noeo as more neutral on the YE perspective while still being Christian.

 

Real Science for Kids in more neutral but Christian friendly.

 

Although I quite like Dr. Wile's new science series, it may not work super well in your setting. Even though he is YE, he is neutral on that in the textbooks but still very much a Christian curricula.

[Momto6inIN]

Mr. Q has a good life science and earth science, and the experiments and lab sheets (you can download these from the site) are great. I'm not a fan of Mr. Q physical science and chemistry, but the life and earth are good.

 

Dr. Wile's Science in the Beginning series is great to give a creationist perspective while not being dogmatic about the age of the earth, but you're not going to be spending a long time on zoology with him. It skips around a lot more from subject to subject.

 

I am also YEC and can't stand Apologia's tone. I am using God's Design from AiG next year instead. I really don't like Ken Ham all that much really, but I think the tone is more ... sporadic, maybe? easier to edit on the fly? ... than Apologia. Anyway, that's my plan. Edit as I go any tone I don't like, because I think the program is solid.

[cbollin]

I never heard of this, Ellie, thanks for posting the link! I'm going to check it out, because I would like something to use for the next few years that is more of reasoning approach. I've never liked the "cookbook" approach -- gathering materials for some weak "lab" that tells you the conclusion before you do the work (blah) -- and I think my girls are going to grow past the textbook approach (though they like it, probably because it's easy). LOL. But the reasoning approach would likely require more from them and make them have to think. Thanks for posting!

 

 

More than a decade ago we used the stuff that Ellie linked to.   It was a miss in our science household.  I thought it would be great from reading about it and seeing it in person at convention.  Brought it home to use with our oldest in 2nd/3rd grade. ** 

My dh holds a phd in chemistry and he wanted to do science at home.   I can remember it was the first time he spoke up and said something about anything I had picked to use.  As an adult, he asked "please can we stop using this before our children hate science?"   It's losing the fun and joy of science at the wrong stage of learning. 

 

So, we stopped those books.  I sold them to someone long long ago...    and these days our oldest is STEM major.  She learned to think.

 

I know my dh's opinion may not be well liked.  But he didn't mind the idea of cookbook first, then let them play around and try new things.  He wasn't really developing his own stuff (non cookbook) until much later in schooling.

 

But I wanted to share our experience with that product.  Hope it goes better for others than it did for us.

 

 

and hugs to OP.  I'm adding my agreement that Fulbright's tone and attitude in her books is a turn off.  However, we liked the other aspects of the book enough that we could just gloss over it.  Sometimes I've even exaggerate her attitude with melodrama and then say "I hope she didn't intend it to sound like that."  

 

My point is that we downplayed that aspect in the fulbright books.  Yes, it irked us too.  My dh really was irked on it as even though he leans YE, he did not want that attitude presented about others. 

 

You asked on God's design series from AiG.  I haven't seen the most current version of those to know if the tone has changed from 2nd edition much.  But surprisingly in the Animal Kingdom book it wasn't as strong as Fulbright.  sure, it was YE, but the attitude wasn't there that I remember.  I'm not sure however, how the zoology book of fulbright (which I didn't use.. I used her botany and astronomy) compares to AiG animal kingdom in terms of co-op and year long and having enough material.   We had fun with AiG animal kingdom at home but used World of Animals to supplement.  (just look at mfw's ex1850 page for what I'm talking about there....)

 

 

edit: ** at that long ago convention the author of that program told me that his book 1 was to be used at that age. I don't know what he recommends these days on those levels.

Edited March 9, 2016 by cbollin

[Ellie]

More than a decade ago we used the stuff that Ellie linked to.   It was a miss in our science household.  I thought it would be great from reading about it and seeing it in person at convention.  Brought it home to use with our oldest in 2nd/3rd grade. ** 

My dh holds a phd in chemistry and he wanted to do science at home.   I can remember it was the first time he spoke up and said something about anything I had picked to use.  As an adult, he asked "please can we stop using this before our children hate science?"   It's losing the fun and joy of science at the wrong stage of learning. 

 

So, we stopped those books.  I sold them to someone long long ago...    and these days our oldest is STEM major.  She learned to think.

 

I know my dh's opinion may not be well liked.  But he didn't mind the idea of cookbook first, then let them play around and try new things.  He wasn't really developing his own stuff (non cookbook) until much later in schooling.

 

But I wanted to share our experience with that product.  Hope it goes better for others than it did for us.

 

 

 

Yeah, we had that same reaction with other stuff that most people like, lol. We hsed in the 80s, when Dr. Moore was very influential, and he strongly recommended Winston Grammar. It was the biggest fail of anything we ever used, lol.

[Holly]

I am also YEC and can't stand Apologia's tone. I am using God's Design from AiG next year instead. I really don't like Ken Ham all that much really, but I think the tone is more ... sporadic, maybe? easier to edit on the fly? ... than Apologia. Anyway, that's my plan. Edit as I go any tone I don't like, because I think the program is solid.

 

We've only done the AIG Animals book and I had a NB at the time, so maybe I'm mis-remembering, but it seems like most of the YE/anti-evolution information was included in between chapters.  They were optional readings that weren't part of the main lesson.  It would be very easy to skip over if it was an issue.

Edited March 9, 2016 by Holly

[Momto6inIN]

We've only done the AIG Animals book and I had a NB at the time, so maybe I'm mis-remembering, but it seems like most of the YE/anti-evolution information was included in between chapters.  They were optional readings that weren't part of the main lesson.  It would be very easy to skip over if it was an issue.

 

This was my impression as well. Of course I haven't read every page yet, so I may be surprised when I actually start doing the lessons with her, but I'm hoping you're right and it's easy to gloss over the rude condescending parts.

[2_girls_mommy]

The year I ended up subbing long term in elem science at co-op (main teacher moved!) they were in Apologia Flying Animals.  I didn't want to use the text, so we used the journals.  We did the experiments in class and watched related videos of creatures, read the supplemental books from the extra reading in the journals, learned to draw the creatures into the notebooks, and went over the definitions.

 

At home, I never used the text with my dd.  We read from supplemental books on the topics.  I don't know if that is an option, to use the journals and just assign the kids to study and write about the topics at home or not, but it worked well for us.  Some used the text, others did as I did.

 

[Tiramisu]

I love the Apologia books, especially because they have sparked a great interest in science in my kids.

 

But I understand your problem with the Land Animals book. I had some questions about that one, too, and when I used it in a coop, one father came in very irate with the choice of book. It was uncomfortable because I was new at the coop, hadn't used the book before, and was just following in the footsteps of a previous science teacher. The rest of the families with kids in the class didn't have a problem, so I just continued on. However, I skipped some sections in the readings I assigned because of my own questions about some of the Creation Confirmations. 

 

 

 

[cintinative]

Christian Kids Explore might be another option to consider.  We aren't very far into our first book (Earth & Space), but so far it's been pretty neutral.  With plate tectonics, it talked about what the Bible actually says and how the theory could fit in with the Scriptures.  

 

Agree with this. I am not sure how it would work in a school setting but we did CKE Earth and Space as well. She talks about how there are different ideas about how old the earth is, etc. but doesn't make a comment as to "and this is the right view . . ." She just leaves it up to the reader.  I really appreciated that since my husband was against us using something that taught young earth exclusively.  Also it covered the topics I wanted. I did have to supplement with my kids, but that was not a problem at all. Lots of books to choose from for that.