The Story of the World but for science?

[hi.im.em]

Hi all,

I am designing a STEM focused curriculum and would like to use something like SOTW but with a science bent for my spine, learning about the history as we go. Any ideas? So far I've collected books called 'primitive technology' and 'Caveman chemistry' but they are for the teacher. I really like them though so if you have any suggestions for my own reading that'd be helpful (I am a lit major so it's a bit new). 

[HomeAgain]

This past time we went through, we used Hakim's Story of Science series along with Potentially Catastrophic Science as an activity spine.

[8filltheheart]

Science in Ancient Rome

Science in Ancient Egypt

Pyramid

Cathedral

Castle

[EKS]

Something to think about...

The story or stories of science aren't necessarily best told through the lens of history, particularly not a strictly chronological lens. 

The history of science is actually a pretty sophisticated subject.  It is really hard to do it justice with people who don't have a good grasp of science to begin with--which is anyone who hasn't really learned high school level physics, chemistry, and biology.  And even then, what science is goes well beyond the accumulation of facts about the world.  The story of science is really about a change in how people approach elucidating those facts.  The scientific process--using data and reason, and not intuition and narrative, to learn about the world--was a transformative invention, but it's something that children (and many adults) aren't prepared to understand.  The study of this transformation is in the realm of the philosophy of science, and really goes hand in hand with science's history.

That said, I think that there is a need for something that is like Story of the World, but for science.--something that uses story as a device to introduce kids to scientific principles.  I've seen some things like this, but the stories aren't compelling and the science is usually patched together (or they use history as the organizing framework, which is a mistake).  Something like SOTW for science would use a combination of story and explanation to introduce kids to all of science over, say, four years of elementary school, and get to all of the principles that should be covered before middle school (or even high school).  It would present these principles in a way reinforces the understanding of  the organizing principles of the physical world.  That is a tall order.  Perhaps someone has already done it but I have not seen it.

[philomama]

Not a curriculum or at all comprehensive, but we have loved the "small friends books". Each deals with a different symbiotic relationship between micro and macro organisms. They all start off with a story, in which the characters are micro-organisms (e.g. bacteria and fungal spores in the soil communicating via chemical signals, breaking down phosphorus in the soil, connecting to tree roots and transferring nutrients). The second part of the book delves into the "science behind the story".

[SilverMoon]

We used lots of the Science in Ancient ____ books in elementary too.

Build Your Library level 8 (roughly 8th grade) uses the Hakim science books if you're looking for ideas. Fwiw those books and that level are super eurocentric; if you want more than western civ science you'll want to supplement. 

[TheAttachedMama]

About the closest thing I have found is Quark Chronicles.  All of my kids really enjoyed these books, and I found they were much better than anything else I have personally read.   The problem is they only cover topics in Biology.  (They have been saying they will publish the other books for >7 years now.)

Most of the other resources listed in this thread are FANTASTIC books IMHO---(especially the Hakim books!!!)---but they don't really cover science.  They are more history books focused on science----or telling the story of science.  I think they are excellent books to read, but they really aren't a science curriculum.

Quark is not perfect though.  Unlike SOTW, the chapters are really long.  (Especially for a read aloud.). So you most likely will have to divide them.   And to really make the curriculum shine, I suggest that you also add in a lot of living science books from the library.  (Similar to how SOTW suggests for history.)    I used the Quark chapter as my "springboard" to other topics.   Then I would supplement with other library books on the topic.   AND, in order to actually plan this out, I had to purchase the guides that go with them which I didn't even use as intended.  I found it really difficult to plan out my curriculum based on the TOC of the Quark books alone.  The vocabulary in the guides helped me to actually see what topic were being taught without having to pre-read all of the books.  

Edited March 21 by TheAttachedMama

[Wheres Toto]

I agree that the Hakim books aren't really a science curriculum.  I run a science center and did a history of science class a few years ago.  I used the Hakim books as a base but really it just served as a very basic outline.  They have very few actual science experiments or even demonstrations, and were very physics heavy IMO.    

I'm teaching this class again next year but leaving behind the Hakim books.  I'm shooting for a science class that relates to a bit of history, not a history class with some references to science.  

[Terabith]

Back when I was in elementary school, I checked a book out of the library over and over and over called The Story of Science.  It was probably 400 pages and written in the 60s probably, and it was about the history of science, but it was crystal clear that science is not so much a body of knowledge but an approach to approaching the world, and that THAT was the true story of science and how our approach to understanding the world has changed.  It was absolutely amazing and riveting in its storytelling approach, but also has really shaped my understanding of the world to a huge extent, and I'm incredibly grateful to it, because it taught me at an incredibly early age that 1) science doesn't ever really teach us what we know; it shows us what we haven't disproven YET, and 2) that what we think we know is always changing, because we discover more and things we thought we know get disproven.  I have looked for it often as an adult, but the title is so common, and it's so old, I've never had success finding it, but I'm convinced the world would be better if everyone had read and studied it in school.

[8filltheheart]

I agree @Terabith. I personally love books like Pyramid bc they demonstrate how man has used what was observed to advance understanding, control, and create. Reading about how water was used as a level for building the pyramids is science. It is learning about how to think and process scientifically.

For elementary age kids (this question is posted on the k8 forum), I personally prefer to approach science as being founded on observational skills and affirming that we don't know everything today just as they didn't know everything then.  We read about science topics in terms of the world, not in terms of textbook summations and definitions. It is more about learning how to think than memorizing.

I wait until they are ready for high school level science with the required math skills to use textbooks. It has been a good approach for my kids. They have never been "behind" or "unprepared" for upper level science bc high school texts are taught at an introductory level.

Ironically, I think our approach has enabled my kids to be good researchers bc they don't equate science with exciting "labs." Kids who decide to pursue science bc they loved the hands on science labs that they did in school are going to find that science research is not that.

[hi.im.em]

18 hours ago, Terabith said:

Back when I was in elementary school, I checked a book out of the library over and over and over called The Story of Science.  It was probably 400 pages and written in the 60s probably, and it was about the history of science, but it was crystal clear that science is not so much a body of knowledge but an approach to approaching the world, and that THAT was the true story of science and how our approach to understanding the world has changed.  It was absolutely amazing and riveting in its storytelling approach, but also has really shaped my understanding of the world to a huge extent, and I'm incredibly grateful to it, because it taught me at an incredibly early age that 1) science doesn't ever really teach us what we know; it shows us what we haven't disproven YET, and 2) that what we think we know is always changing, because we discover more and things we thought we know get disproven.  I have looked for it often as an adult, but the title is so common, and it's so old, I've never had success finding it, but I'm convinced the world would be better if everyone had read and studied it in school.

Let us know if you ever find it!

[hi.im.em]

7 hours ago, 8filltheheart said:

I agree @Terabith. I personally love books like Pyramid bc they demonstrate how man has used what was observed to advance understanding, control, and create. Reading about how water was used as a level for building the pyramids is science. It is learning about how to think and process scientifically.

For elementary age kids (this question is posted on the k8 forum), I personally prefer to approach science as being founded on observational skills and affirming that we don't know everything today just as they didn't know everything then.  We read about science topics in terms of the world, not in terms of textbook summations and definitions. It is more about learning how to think than memorizing.

I wait until they are ready for high school level science with the required math skills to use textbooks. It has been a good approach for my kids. They have never been "behind" or "unprepared" for upper level science bc high school texts are taught at an introductory level.

Ironically, I think our approach has enabled my kids to be good researchers bc they don't equate science with exciting "labs." Kids who decide to pursue science bc they loved the hands on science labs that they did in school are going to find that science research is not that.

I feel the same way about my approach to science, but also feel a bit unmoored by the idea of creating a living books curriculum from scratch. I want something to hang it on you know? The Pyramids and Castle books are just the sort of thing I want to use... maybe it doesn't matter if the order is a bit more haphazard. I have purchased the Nobel curriculum book 'science through inquiry' or something but it just seems a bit much for the elementary years and also has no sense of 'cover this, then this'.

[8filltheheart]

1 hour ago, hi.im.em said:

I feel the same way about my approach to science, but also feel a bit unmoored by the idea of creating a living books curriculum from scratch. I want something to hang it on you know? The Pyramids and Castle books are just the sort of thing I want to use... maybe it doesn't matter if the order is a bit more haphazard. I have purchased the Nobel curriculum book 'science through inquiry' or something but it just seems a bit much for the elementary years and also has no sense of 'cover this, then this'.

I have never controlled the order of science topics. I have let them study whatever they want. As long as it is science related, they pick and read. FWIW, amg my adult kids who graduated with this approach I have a chemE, physics (earned his master's and then got a job offer he couldn't turn down), and an atmospheric science major (graduating in May and going to grad school). All were top students. The elementary "science experiments" approach is absolutely unnecessary.

[Rosie_0801]

Have you seen 'Mathematicians Are People Too?'

There are two volumes. They are biographies for kids.

[JessinTX]

Sassafras Science might be kind of in the vein of what you are looking for. Science organized around a narrative story - although the story is a tiny bit hokey IMHO. Geared toward younger kids. You didn't say your age range. 

The same publisher also has their "Classical Science" line which doesn't have the narrative arc tying it together, and uses more non-fiction picture books and simple science encyclopedias as a base. 

Blossom & Root is also fully living book based, but doesn't have that SOTW style spine tying it all together. 

[smfmommy]

Beautiful Feet has a history of science curriculum.  Master Books sells a set of books titled Exploring the World of Chemistry/Biology/Medicine/Physics.  They cover the topic in a historic timeline way.  Berean Builders has an elementary science series that is history based.  None of these are secular though.