Teaching Science at Home - (Gr. 9-12)

/Home/Academics (by Subjects) for Homeschool Studies/Science for Homeschool Studies/Science Lesson Plans for Homeschool Students

Homeschool Science Suggestions
ROCK Meeting Supplement
by Teresa Gallagher (

Homeschool Science Suggestions
Introduction

Because I have a science background and teach homeschool science everyone keeps asking me what we do. I have been trying to use the Classical Schooling method of teaching in a logical, orderly progression, as described in "The Well Trained Mind". The authors of that popular book are not scientists, and I find their approach to the sciences to be rather scattered, so I've been adapting as I go along.

This information is geared toward kids under age 15 or so. Once they older, they are generally either in high school or can take college science classes.

I like child-lead activities, because I think kids learn more. I try to incorporate that whenever possible, generally by encouraging open-ended projects within a specific realm of study. For example, when learning about microbes, we'll grab some jars, collect some samples in a pond or wherever, and just explore what's in them.

I try to teach practical knowledge, not just theoretical. I try to focus on things that people should know even if they do not go into the sciences, because most people do not go into the sciences. How to make simple machines more efficient, for example (like levers), or what type of rocks and minerals go into the products we see around the house.

Textbooks: I haven't reviewed any curriculum. I instinctively shy away from them because textbooks were the reason I really didn't like science in high school (or just about any other subject). The American Association for the Advancement of Science has an article called The Trouble With Textbooks, so maybe my instincts are right.

The Scientific Method (yawn): I do NOT grind in the familiar "hypothesis-observation-conclusion". This is not heart of science and is actually an over-simplification of how scientists really do things. Kids generally don't like it, nor do they like extensive recordkeeping, which is as much fun as doing your taxes. The same with lab write-ups. Kids can get really uptight about all that writing (especially the boys), and it can distract them from the learning process. Leave it for high school and college. The heart of science is curiosity and critical (skeptical) thinking. For more info on the scientific method, Wikipedia has a interesting article.

Experiments: It's been my experience that many of the so-called science "experiments" found in books and on websites are primarily an exercise in following directions. These aren't experiments, they're recipes. Ick. There are exceptions, of course. But I think you could spend an awful lot of time and energy doing these "experiments" and not really learn very much. Be careful!

Order of Teaching: Schools have traditionally started with earth and life sciences and left physics and chemistry for later. There is a movement by scientists to reverse that on the grounds that physics and chemistry are the "root" sciences upon which the other sciences are built upon. Indeed, it is hard to talk about the chemical composition and crystal structure of minerals when a child has no chemistry background.

Science & Critical Thinking: Even though I don't like the rigid hypothesis-observation-conclusion type of instruction before high school, I do think it is extremely important that kids learn about the relationship between science and critical thinking. The biggest problem is with the media and their strong tendency to report every study and quote each scientist as if to say, "The Experts have Spoken! Here is the Answer!" The Science Channel is especially guilty. They are constantly taking a quote from one scientist and blowing up that quote as if it were fact (with exciting music in the background), when I know perfectly well a bunch of competing scientists are throwing rotten produce at the TV in disgust. Be a critic. When you see a "science" show on TV or read about a study, feel free to openly express your skepticism with questions like, "How do they know that?" or "How was that study designed?" Then you'll be thinking like a real scientist, and teaching your child to think that way as well. Because, trust me, that's what the scientists do to each other (probably the biggest highlight in any scientist's life is proving another scientist wrong).

Science is like the stock market. Two steps forward, one step back. Invest in the long-term, but be skeptical of recent "advances" in knowledge. In the short-term, science often heads off in the wrong direction. There is, however, a strong tendency to self-correct, primarily due to scientists' love of proving other scientists wrong. Kids should learn this.

Evolution: According to a Newsweek poll, 99.85% of Americans with backgrounds in the Earth and Life Sciences (like myself) believe that evolution is a fact and the Earth is 4 or 5 billion years old. Only 700 out of 480,000 scientists in these fields believe that Creationism is a valid theory. There is no controversy about evolution vs creationism in the scientific community, in fact "Creationism" is not even considered an alternative theory. Creationists have not published one single peer-reviewed paper. Most scientist are NOT atheists, nor are we liberal socialists conspiring with the United Nations to hand the nation over to the gays. We don't sit around in back rooms and alleyways secretly trying to figure out how prove there is no God (because most scientists DO believe in God). We view evolution as a fact because we are familiar with hundreds of thousands of pieces of evidence in many fields of study, collected over many years, verified repeatedly, that all independently point toward evolution and an ancient Earth. Most people have not seen this overwhelming mountain of evidence and are not aware that it exists. Creationists claim it does not exist. It does.

Most Christians in the world do not see a conflict between evolution and the Bible, including the highly conservative Catholic Pope. A British survey of Catholic and Protestant clergyman found that 97% do not believe the world was created in six days. Creationism is a uniquely American phenomenon that is most prominent with those who have the least education, especially high school dropouts. Note that Americans also have the lowest science scores in the West. We are being laughed at.

Science books with a so-called "Christian" perspective will likely make many statements that the vast majority of scientists would strongly disagree with. This is learning science from theologans, which makes as much sense as learning religion from scientists.

"Trust Us, We're Experts". This is the name of a great book I have by Rampton and Stauber. It's for adults, but what you learn in it you can teach to kids, and I think it's very important stuff. The authors do a great job of outlining the amazing tactics that are used by special interest groups, especially corporations: Hire a scientist, create a fake public-interest group (which often writes letters-to-the-editor or takes out ads in newspapers), and package your viewpoint as if it were objective science by some outside group. Verrrry tricky stuff! They show how a special interest group can always find a handful of scientists to poke holes in prevailing dogma, no matter what the subject (not mentioned in the book, but a favorite tactic by Creationists). They make it sound like lots of scientists disagree, when it's only a few. Remember the scientists on hire by the tobacco companies who said smoking wasn't hazardous?

This book makes a big deal about how scientists are funded, and it's a good thing. A lot of scientific studies are now being paid for by industrial concerns, which did not used to be the case. It doesn't take a scientist to see the conflict of interest there.