Jump to content

Menu

Quarks & Quirks Biology: strong biology? good/bad idea to supplement?


Recommended Posts

I'm looking at Quarks & Quirks biology, and after reading what I could find on the board it seems like a good option for biology but I notice that it is sometimes (at least once, for sure) supplemented with some cellular stuff (McHenry's Cells, Cartoon Guide to Genetics were two mentioned in this post; I'd thought that Carbon Chemistry might be good to add or to do across the summer beforehand). 

I really like the spine Q&Q uses (Exploring the Way Life Works:  The Science of Biology (Mahlon Hoagland, Bert Dodson, Judy Hauck) and the The Nature of Life: Readings in Biology  from the Great Books foundation, but would want to beef those up for a biology credit, so I was delighted to see that she adds in sections from Campbell's Biology:  Concepts and Connections and a variety of online resources + schedules labs and tests.  I like the idea of cementing in the cellular and genetic elements if that really adds to the student's understanding, but am a bit worried about adding things and making the course too heavy. 

Any BTDT on this course?  and on supplementing?  Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We sort of used Quarks and Quirks Biology, but mostly ended up only using the one spine, Hoagland's Exploring the Way Life Works: The Science of Biology.  We did use some of the links and videos and  experiments.  It was fine.  I don't have a STEM kid.  The textbook is good, although I have been frequently informed it is outdated, but I don't think it is inaccurate, so I'm okay with not the latest and greatest in that field.  It was very visual and engaging, which is what we needed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, perkybunch said:

We sort of used Quarks and Quirks Biology, but mostly ended up only using the one spine, Hoagland's Exploring the Way Life Works: The Science of Biology.  We did use some of the links and videos and  experiments.  It was fine.  I don't have a STEM kid.  The textbook is good, although I have been frequently informed it is outdated, but I don't think it is inaccurate, so I'm okay with not the latest and greatest in that field.  It was very visual and engaging, which is what we needed.

Thanks!  This is very helpful.  Do you remember why you set the Campbell readings aside? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, perkybunch said:

It was just too much.  The Hoagland book was plenty.  We didn't need to do two textbooks.  We did all of the Hoagland one.

Thanks again.  This is making me think we might follow her schedule for Hoagland and then add in the McHenry stuff + maybe Cartoon Book of Genetics.  It will be nice not to spend $$ on the other book if it isn't a terrific addition to the course. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...