Countdown to School: a closer look at the first science units

I like Donna Young's handy outlines for Apologia Science, and especially the vocabulary bookmarks (see "Bookmarks for Lesson Plan #2).  But I realized that, for the first few weeks, especially having an every-other-day science class, it would work better to figure out our own schedule.  So Donna Young gets the credit for the original of this plan, and Dr. Jay Wile gets the credit for  the actual content of General Science (I added the part about lab safety rules); but the rest of it is a Mama Squirrel plan.

This should take us partway into October.  "Days" refer to the first day we do science, the second day we do science, and so on (not the first day of school, second day of school).  After that, we will probably just use Donna Young's schedule for the rest of the term.

Science Outline, Weeks 1-6, using Modules 1-3 of Exploring Creation with General Science, 1st Edition.

Day	Assignments and Experiments
1	Read the beginning of the book, notes and introduction. Read handouts for lab safety (school and home). Creatively present the importance of using equipment and materials safely.  Your choice of format: comic, poster, song, drama script.  Due in two days. ***Vocabulary: Learn these terms: science, papyrus, spontaneous generation, counter-example, hypothesis, theory, scientific law, experimental variable, control, blind studies, double-blind studies, subjective/objective data; any other vocabulary listed on the bookmarks for Modules 1-3.  Use drills and games on Quizlet.com to practice vocabulary (whenever appropriate).
2	Read textbook pages 1-3, The First Inklings of Science. Read pages 4-8, True science begins to emerge. Be able to identify (briefly) significant events / people in science history.  Make a timeline to illustrate this, as you study the chapter.  You may want to just keep notes now, then set up the timeline later.  It must be done neatly, on good paper, and not just in pencil.  Illustrations or cutouts will make it more visually effective.
3	Know the acceptable format for lab reports for this class.  Carry out the simple experiments from these chapters, as practice for later lab work.  Experiment 1.1: Density in Nature. Experiment 1.2: Atomic motion
4	(Pages) 8-12 Three other notable Greek scientists 12-16 Be able to tell what happened to science during the Dark Ages. What changed this situation? Experiment 1.3: a chemical reaction
5	16-19 Science begins to pick up speed again 19-23 The Renaissance Experiment 1.4: mapping the paths of the planets (optional)
6	23-25 The Era of Newton 25-26 The Enlightenment and the industrial revolution
7	27-29 The rest of the 19th century 29-31 Modern science 31 Summing it up.   Homework: do the study questions for module 1.
8	Write test for module 1.  Completed timeline to be handed in with test.
9	Module 2: Read Introduction;  What science is not. Experiment 2.1: how weight affects speed Experiment 2.2: more about weight and speed
10	Read 40-44 : The Scientific Method.  Be able to describe the scientific method verbally or with a diagram.  What is it used for?  Why is it important?  Experiment 2.3: the broken flashlight
11	Read 45-48 Failures of the scientific method Read 49-55 The Limitations of science; Science and Christianity.  Homework: do the study questions for module 2.
12	Write test for module 2
13	Experiment 3.1: a floating egg? Experiment 3.2: which boat will move? Experiment 3.3: what does soap do to water?, part 1 Experiment 3.4: what does soap do to water, part 2
14	Complete lab reports for experiments done previously. Read pages 59-69, From Introduction; stop at “Recognizing experimental variables when they are not obvious.”  Do the “On Your Own” questions.
15	Read 70-73, Recognizing experimental variables when they are not obvious Read 73-76, Interpreting the results of experiments: study  the chart in fig. 1.1 Homework: do the study questions for module 3.
16	Write test for module 3.

Countdown to school: Grade 7 Science Plans

It's three weeks till school starts; for us, anyway.  I know some of you start school next Monday, some of you started this week, and some of you never stopped.  But we still have three weeks.

Since I had been looking at the World Book Typical Course of Study for 7th Grade Language and Math, I figured I might as well check out the Science topics as well.  I remember Mary Pride going through some of these lists, or something like them, in one of her books, and pointing out where there can be a lot of overlap and repetition between the grades, along with a few politically-correct or twaddly topics.  However, when I looked at the lists for 6th, 7th, and 8th grade, and compared them with the two Apologia textbooks we have for middle school (General Science and Physical Science), I was a bit startled at how closely they lined up. General Science covers World Book topics such as microbes, algae and fungi, food for growth and energy, the cell, rocks, soil and minerals, weathering and erosion, the scientific method, and laboratory techniques (lab reports are required all through the book).  Physical Science includes chapters on climate and weather, atmosphere, electricity, and Newton's laws.   In fact, about the only major things missing would be a unit on chemistry (elements and compounds), maybe a space or astronomy unit, an oceans unit (which would be covered by The Sea Around Us if you had done Ambleside Online Year 6), and maybe some work on ecosystems, conservation, ecology and the environment.

Now obviously using the Apologia books is not the only way to cover those topics.  And when you say a textbook "covers" a topic, that can mean all kinds of things.  For instance, General Science has a chapter title that includes Paleontology, which might lead you to believe you're going to be discussing dinosaurs. Actually dinosaurs per se are mentioned about twice in the whole book.  Lots of fossils, studied in an age-of-the-earth context, but very little discussion of dinosaur life.  Just saying.  Also, the way that a Christian-based book "covers" a topic such as geology might be a little different from the way that a mainstream book handles it.  But since we do have the two books (plus some resources for the missing units), and I was planning on using them over the next two years anyway, the lists just reinforced that plan.

What I did change, while looking both at the lists and the textbooks, was the earlier plan to cover only half the General Science book this year.  Instead, we'll spend six weeks on the first three modules, which are an introduction to science history and the scientific method; skip Module 4, Simple Machines, since we've done lots of that before; and spend the rest of terms 1 and 2 on the Geology and Life Science modules, but saving most of the human-body chapters for next year.  The third term will be based on the DK Science Explorer bind-up volume we have (and other resources), using the sections on Matter and Chemistry (there's a lot of overlap in content).

Another thing I want to emphasize this year is getting out and letting Dollygirl have some fun being homeschooled.  Really.  Sometimes you just forget what's out there, or don't realize your kids have never gotten to do such and such.  Recently I downloaded Bucket List Learning, by Kimberlee Wilkes (when it was free--now it's not).  It was a reminder that sometimes you can actually cover a lot of lengthy school objectives through real-life experiences, field trips, community happenings.  In our own area, we are privileged to have an earth-sciences museum that not only provides school tours and talks, but also has a "rock garden"--not the kind you might have with flowers, but a "garden" of unusual geological specimens to walk through.  So obviously this is the year for us to make at least a couple of visits there.  Also there's a conservation area and nature centre within a short drive, that of course also offers school programs (for homeschoolers too) and places to just walk through the woods or look at pond life.  As the Bucket List book points out, once you start listing the stuff that's available (noon hour concerts! homeschool days at the museum! an archaeological site!), you can get carried away.

I'm looking forward to science...and I'm hoping that Dollygirl will get good things from this year's studies.

Countdown to school: looking at science with Ruth Beechick

It's three weeks till school starts.

I'm looking at the chapter on "Science and Health" in Ruth Beechick's You CAN Teach Your Child Successfully, Grades 4-8.  Ruth Beechick, if you're too young to remember, is one of the homeschool grandmas of "common sense learning."  She teaches a very conservative view of young-earth Creation, but even those who disagree with that may find she makes some good points in this chapter.

"This last point is the second fallacy of the 'strict textbook' thinking.  For high success we must take into account the way people learn.  The textbook style of science learning is traditional in our schools, and research is showing that as students progress through the grades they like science less and less, until after grade 12 only 10% still give 'attention' to science.  The other 90% are considered scientifically illiterate."

Ouch.

Dr. Beechick doesn't give footnotes or sources for her statistics, but I'd guess that current research (twenty years later, since she says she was writing in 1993) would probably back up the general idea of what's she's saying.

"Research into the causes has shown that students, especially in high school, perceive books and teachers as 'knowing' science and as 'answer givers.'  This progressively turns off students' own curiosity, motivation, and interest in the subject....So as teacher, you do not have to be an 'answer giver.'  That should take pressure off practically all of us, since only a few science professionals probably feel qualified to take that role."

She also makes this important point:

"Is it science that will improve the lot of mankind?  Will science literacy for all citizens lead to better decisions?....The world may need better scientists and a nation may need citizens who are scientifically literate, but far more do we need leaders and citizens in the moral and religious realms.  With that we would make better use of our science knowledge."

She refers to a project that was in progress at that time:  the NRC (National Research Council) national science education standards of 1996.  Writing in 1993, Dr. Beechick considered it "the greatest effort ever toward reaching a national consensus on what children should learn in school science."  The basic idea sounded good: get students more interested, more involved, give them more ownership over their science learning, let them design their own science experiments, let them think about the "why" of science. I do not know what she said about the NRC standards afterwards:  it turned out to be one of the "outcomes-based" educational initiatives of the '90's that left homeschoolers and other educators either scratching their heads in bewilderment or pulling their hair in frustration (Plutarch might say eating their fingers).  In other words, the same stuff happened to science teaching in the American public schools as happened to math and English.

How does knowing all that help us, or not help us?

Well, we can still take what Dr. Beechick felt was good about the move towards a more human, maybe more holistic understanding of science, even if its public-school application turned out to be a turkey.  While recognizing the limits and the dangers of worshipping science, she wanted her students to finish school at least "liking science." ("How much does he care?")  She seemed to like the idea of including the philosophy, history and sociology of science in the curriculum, along with the more facts-based material.  You can sprout beans, study volcanoes, melt and freeze things all you want in science class, but there has to be a reason behind it.

Next time I'll post about what the science plans are for the fall.  (Hint: it involved the World Book Typical Course of Study.  Another hint: it turned out to be more or less what we were already doing.)

Countdown to school: The Universe and Everything

"Section III: The Knowledge of the Universe:  Science and Geography; Mathematics; Physical Development and Handicrafts"   ~~ Charlotte Mason, Toward a Philosophy of Education

It's three weeks till school starts.

What do homeschool parents worry most about in finding the right kind of science curriculum?

If they're Christians, the answer might be that they want something that glorifies God; sometimes that just means they want something that gives at least some credence to creationism.

But aside from that, there's often a concern that in whatever we're doing, we might "miss something."  Or do it "wrong." The public worries of the public schools (and the media in general) include the never-ending fuss over whether children are getting enough science, the right kind of science, up-to-date science.  Tiny little kids have as many science objectives as the big ones.  The biggest guns aimed at homeschoolers (besides the religious issues) come from the high school level:  You Can't Do Lab Science.  Not at home, not without a trained teacher, not without the books and equipment, at least not without filling your kitchen with rat cages and bottles of chemicals that a ditzy homeschooler might mistake for nutmeg and vinegar.  Science, all the cute videos and chemistry kits aside, has become very much a domain of the initiated.

A sub-worry is finding an effective teaching style for our circumstances and our children.  Yes, hands-on is good, but does that mean that books are no good?  Field trips are good, if you have the places to go and can get there.  Experts, ditto.  You-tube and other videos, good to a point but can be overused.  Does it have to be planned out, formally taught, with lots of objectives, right from the start?  The Apprentice's elementary-level science curriculum was kind of osmosis-style, "relaxed homeschooling," and included a large amount of help from Ms. Frizzle; we didn't use a textbook or even a really formal plan for science until middle school.

There's always a worry, too, that if something just seems like fun...maybe it's not learning.  That can be quite true: for instance, we used to visit the Toronto Science Centre when we were kids, but I cannot tell you if we really learned much science while we were there.  The exhibits were "neat" and "cool," there was the big static ball that made people's hair stand up on end, there were anatomical models and lots of buttons to push, but our visits were really for entertainment, not education.  The same can go for what someone called "zip, pop, bang" science experiments.  Do the effects of dropping pepper in a plateful of soapy water make as much of an impression on our children as we think?  Is it really worth building a whole papier-mache volcano just to let it splurt baking soda and vinegar all over the place?

And where does "nature study" fit in?

What is the science, and why is it, that we're really trying to teach?  Maybe the "why" should direct the "what" and "how."

More in the next post.

Countdown to School: Gifted kids, all kids, need to learn (Book comments)

It's still (officially) four weeks till school starts.

Dollygirl was at the public library Saturday morning getting her summer reading passport checked off, and I had a few minutes to get some "teacher books."  That branch library, for some reason, has a terrific number of school/homeschool books (in the 370's, if you're browsing in Dewey Decimal).  I took out four; two I'd read before, two I hadn't.  One I had read was Home Learning Year by Year by Rebecca Rupp.  I've borrowed this several times from our homeschool library and still think it's amazing that Ms. Rupp was able to pack all that she did into one little paperback.  Having had "scope and sequences" on my mind lately, I enjoy the way she hauls those learning objectives out and then puts them in their place...cuts them down to size, when necessary, and makes them practical for homeschoolers.

The other more-or-less familiar book was Teaching Gifted Kids in the Regular Classroom, by Susan Winebrenner.  I used to have the 1992 edition; this is the "newer" 2001 revision.  Mrs. Winebrenner does have a newer book, Teaching Gifted Kids in Today's Classroom, which I think is the reason there won't be another update of the Regular Classroom.  Maybe the library will get a copy of the new book. Anyway, this is not a homeschool book; the focus is on how to make learning meaningful for the one or two gifted students in a class.  As homeschoolers, we have an extra option: if the grade-level book's too easy, we can skip it and go to the next level right away, without wasting time coming up with enrichment activities.

Oh, but that's why I like this book: not for a wealth of enrichment activities, because it's not a "cookbook," it doesn't have idea after idea that you can just pull out and use; it has a few suggestions, but you really have to do your own thinking about how you would use them with a particular topic or book.  No, the part I really like is the introduction, especially the section "Teaching vs. Learning."  That's where public-school-gifted-teacher meets Charlotte Mason.  "Of all the students you are teaching in a given class, which group do you think will probably learn the least this year?"  The extremely gifted ones, natch.  "How does this happen?  Mostly it's because of something with which we are all too familiar: the scope-and-sequence monster.  Each year, we are given a certain slice of a student's entire school curriculum to teach, and we feel intense pressure and responsibility to teach everything assigned to our grade or subject to all our students."

Then, this:  "A teacher's responsibility is not to teach the content.  A teacher's responsibility is to teach the students, and to make sure that all students learn new content every day."

So the big question that homeschooling parents, with gifted children or not, need to ask about any book, unit, activity, field trip, or experiment, is--is this going to contribute to their learning?  I don't mean in some definitely measurable way, something we can immediately test by dousing them with vocabulary sheets or hooking them up to some "you learned this today" computer; but in a larger sense.  This does not preclude periods of "productive daydreaming," or spending a whole week just building "something."  A lot of learning can go on during those times.  But in the work we assign to them, the academic activities we design--will they learn something new today?

How do we present a chapter of new material?  Do they already know this stuff, and need to either skip it or work with it in a new way (enrichment)?  Do they need a hands-on or creative presentation of the material, or will the chapter in the book be enough?  Will they benefit from doing a critical or creative followup assignment, something special or open-ended; or would it be enough, this time, just to narrate?

How do you as a teacher or teaching parent react to lists of suggestions for either "fun activities" (those that Mary Pride calls classroom clutter, those that offer little real learning), or more challenging, serious extension activities? How do you differentiate them?  (Mary Pride's book Schoolproof offers an excellent list of criteria for figuring that out.)  How do your students react to lists of suggested activities:  do they chomp at the bit to get started, or do you get a "do we have to?" response? (Do I have to build a castle out of boxes?  No you don't, and that saves us having to find a place to put it afterwards.)

Part of Dr. Winebrenner's thinking here relates specifically to the needs of highly gifted students, and perhaps that changes "nice to do this extra thing" to "this is where the real learning is going to happen." It means offering more, or maybe even offering less: some students might be happy to take off with something on their own, and not need you to tell them how to learn it or what to do about it; they might just need a little guidance, or some materials.  It's not just about making learning more fun; it's more about taking all children's learning, and their need to learn, seriously.  If you think of even young gifted students as able to work on a different level, ask different kinds of questions, then even for homeschoolers, the idea is not just skipping over what they "know," but adding new dimensions wherever practical.

I don't know that Susan Winebrenner's book would be required reading for most homeschoolers, although some of her reproducible forms (especially in the 2001 edition) might be useful for planning and keeping records.  But if you are a) teaching what the Equuschick calls a Busybrain, or b) just wanting to think through how discoveries in gifted teaching might apply to other children, then you might like to check it out.

Quote for the day: So close you could almost touch the seashells

"Near Arundel," by Copley Fielding (not the painting described, but nice anyway)

"As it happened, my attention was caught by hearing two gentlemen close to me discuss a beautiful sketch by Copley Fielding, if I recollect rightly, which hung on the wall--a wild waste of tidal sands, with here and there a line of stake-nets fluttering in the wind--a grey shroud of rain sweeping up from the westward, through which low red cliffs glowed dimly in the rays of the setting sun--a train of horses and cattle splashing slowly through shallow desolate pools and creeks, their wet, red, and black hides glittering in one long line of level light.

"They seemed thoroughly conversant with art: and as I listened to their criticisms, I learnt more in five minutes about the characteristics of  really true and good pictures, and about the perfection to which our unrivalled English landscape-painters have attained, than I ever did from all the books and criticisms which I had read....The tragedy, the art of the picture, the simple, dreary grandeur of the scenery, took possession of me; and I stood gazing a long time, and fancying myself pacing the sands, and wondering whether there were shells upon it--I had often longed for once only in my life to pick up shells..."  ~~ Charles Kingsley, Alton Locke

Countdown to School: Interview with Dollygirl

Today we interview Dollygirl, who will be starting Grade 7 in September.  Please note that I did not censor her comments about math class!  Well, it's a new school year, Dollygirl...

(The interview questions are from Teaching Gifted Kids in the Regular Classrom, by Susan Winebrenner.)

Imagine that you're going to take a trip to another planet or solar system.  You'll be gone for 15 years.  List 10 things you will take with you to do in your spare time. 

1. Kit Kittredge (American Girl doll)

2. Samantha Parkington (American Girl doll)

3. My iPod Touch

4. Pencil

5. Sketch book

6. A dog

7. A laptop

8. A book

9. Another book

10. And another book :)

I'm assuming that you can't bring people.

What are your favourite magazines or Web sites? 

I like the American Girl magazine, and National Geographic Kids. And for websites I like Doll Diaries, Blogger, Club Penguin, Webkinz, Bearville, and a lot more!

What is your favourite activity or subject at school?  Your least favourite?  Why?

 I love reading. But I hate math. Math is so boring, too hard, and too confusing. I love reading because I'm a bookworm! :)

Imagine that someday you will write a book.  What do you think it will be about? 

Dolls coming to life and saying I'm their leader!

Describe some things that would be present in a perfect world.   

Everything would be free. And better quality. 

Describe an invention you would create to make the world a better place. 

A new doll!

What questions do you think I should ask you that I haven't already asked? 

DOLL TRIVIA!

Thanks, Dollygirl!

(Bookworm Bug image found here.)

Countdown to School: Interview with The Apprentice

What are you studying at university?

I am in a research-based science program, with a specialization in math. This will effectively give me a double degree in science and math. This program has a strong focus on conducting research, reading and analyzing papers, presentation and scientific writing, and pedagogy (teaching).

Do you think of yourself as a "math person?"  Do you see the world mathematically?

I don't actually see myself as that much of a math person. Although I was one of the stronger math students at my high school, I've met an awful lot of people at university who are more talented in math than I am. Not that I don't have good math skills, but when you talk to these people about a problem, or see their proofs, you realize that it's more than just algorithms, it's more like learning a language. You can memorize vocabulary lists and learn grammar, but constructing speech itself is more of an art. I know how to order a beer in French, but I certainly can't write poetry.

What got you interested in pursuing post-secondary mathematics?

My short answer is that I wanted to do physics but I'm better at math, so I decided to go at it from the maths side. The first two years of my program, regardless of your specialization, have mandatory full-year math courses. The program tried hard to show how this math could be applied to other branches of science, but to many of my classmates it didn't even feel like part of science, just an annoying course to get through. As I've taken more and more math courses, I've found them linking together and applying to other disciplines. I've always found math useful and relevant. I feel like my degree is really just in research science, but when I was able to pick a focus I wanted to have a tool that would be useful in any of my scientific aspirations.

Would you like to be a math teacher?  Why or why not?

I would absolutely love to be a math teacher. I spent a lot of time in high school acting as a math tutor at the school's math help centre, and I also peer tutored a math class. After physics lessons I often found myself surrounded by students wanting me to run over the problems (I loved doing that but it meant I never got my own homework done...). At this point I feel like I may end up in something similar to teaching or perhaps administration. Ontario teaching jobs are very hard to come by no matter how good you are. While I'd prefer to teach on the undergraduate level anyway, this generally requires a PhD. I'm not sure at this point that I would want to pursue that much school. However, I am keeping learning and pedagogy in my sights, this year I am taking a child development course and hope to focus an individual project on the effectiveness of various mathematics teaching methods.

What were some of your early math experiences?  Do you think they were important to your later interest in math?

The earliest math experience I can remember is learning addition and subtraction on a homemade scale constructed from string and yogurt cups. ("This piece weighs five. The piece on the other side weighs two. What do we need to add to make them balance?") Later achievements involved hopping back and forth on a number line, and learning fractions through cooking. I think these experiences were really important, especially watching my parents use things like fractions in everyday life. Learning things like the fact that you can fill the half-teaspoon measure halfway full to get a quarter-teaspoon without dirtying two spoons (or with my dad, if you pour out half a bottle of engine oil, that's 500 mL) have always reminded me how useful math is in real life. Learning that numbers and electricity could be connected in small electronics led to an interest in physics.

Was there a time you did not feel "good at math," or that you disliked it?

There are always times that I don't feel good at math. The problem is that until you get really really specialized, everything has to stay connected. It may not always be clear that eventually two concepts will merge together, so if something seems kind of pointless at the time and you just learn the bare minimum, it can come back to haunt you. I'm sure I disliked it at various times in elementary school. What I've found in tutoring others is if they're really not getting it, you need to take a step back and try a completely different direction or explanation. A lot of students I found just needed a reason for what they were doing to understand (e.g. trig gives you ratios between angles and sides of a triangle, so if you don't know one of them, you can find it). This really frustrated me at one point when I was tutoring students in the "lower" academic stream. Those students might have been there because English wasn't their first language, because they had a learning disability, or sometimes even because they just didn't like school. But none of them were stupid. I had a supervising teacher actually stop me mid-explanation and tell me that I couldn't give a student the logic behind a concept, I should just teach them the algorithm for doing it, because they weren't capable of understanding. No wonder they didn't think they were good at math.

What parts (types) of mathematics do you enjoy studying most, and which ones not so much?

I really like working with mathematical computer programs and understanding how they work. I did a research project on this last year looking at molecular electronics using several programs. Really the part of math I don't like is certain testable things that you only have to know for a course, but later you would just look up or use the computer to solve. I understand that you need to know the process, and I'm interested in knowing the process, but I tend to make computational errors by hand which can slow me down or give the wrong result.

If you were teaching your twelve-year-old self, what would you do do make math a good subject?

If I was teaching my younger self, I'd have lots of practice and worksheets because practice makes things much easier. But I'd also have experiments where you can collect real numerical data and apply the concepts to that, so you can see how they're used and they become relevant.

Any other thoughts?

One of the best math resources I've come across is Khan Academy.  I'd highly recommend it for high school level math (it has other grades too including some university). The conceptual teaching is excellent and there are lots of practice questions too. You can earn points for watching the videos and doing questions, which I loved when I was a kid and still enjoy.  (We didn't use Khan Academy; I just liked playing games and getting points.)

Thanks, Apprentice!

Countdown to School: Middle School Math, Part Three (or, "Trust my navigation"*)

Part One of the math posts is here.

Part Two is here.

"Finally, in a world that is already too utilitarian, too unpoetical, too competitive, analytical and computer-driven, why and how should a "human curriculum" promote mathematics?  And what kind of mathematics?  Where do our middle-schoolers, somewhere in the transition between elementary mathematics and senior-high algebra and geometry, fit into that vision?  Those are the questions.  Stay tuned for an attempt at some answers." ~~ Part Two

I used that word "attempt" advisedly, because I do not have enough knowledge of what's out there to separate the "CM-friendly" curricula from the rest.  Yes, we've tried a few math books and resources over the years, and there are a few middle-school possibilities in the cupboard; but I can't give an opinion, say, on the Life of Fred series, or Math-U-See, because I've never used them.  So this post is just about what's on Dollygirl's "math map" for this year.

The Deputy Headmistress posted a story recently about a family trip where the GPS was giving them trouble; it would announce that it was time to "turn right" without warning, and the driver had to make a lot of sudden sharp turns.  I feel like my math GPS has been doing the same thing recently!  Sometimes those turns turn out to be a good thing, even if you could have used a bit more preparation.

PLAN A:  With the thought that we should both keep the math curriculum "simple" and "straightforward" this year, as well as getting Dollygirl accustomed to using a math textbook and working more independently, I planned that we would start the year by finishing the Key to Percents workbook series she had been using last spring, and then move into our somewhat-vintage copy of Saxon Algebra 1/2 (a conglomeration of arithmetic review, pre-algebra, and a bit of geometry and business math).  Based on previous experience, I didn't expect that Dollygirl would be getting through a lesson every day, but I thought that two lessons a week would be about right, and that would also give us an extra day to write Saxon tests (every few lessons) and also work on old grade 7 Gauss contests.  It's really not a bad plan.

A MONKEY WRENCH IN THE WORKS:  The trouble I'm having with Saxon, without even having started the year yet, is not so much those legendary long practice sets.  I think Dollygirl could actually benefit from the consistent review in those.  It's two other things:  the way the lessons are explained (awful), and the sequence in which things are introduced (all over the place).  I tend to side with Charlotte Mason in thinking that, although arithmetic skills like fractions come into play in algebra, you do need to understand that algebra is a separate kind of math, a "game" with its own rules; and that geometry is also a separate topic, although you can use both algebra and arithmetic to solve geometry questions, and when you do high school algebra you need to know coordinate geometry. Yes, the topics intertwine, but making a mishmash out of them too soon may not be the best approach for those of us who need to keep that math road map in front of us.  Those who drive by instinct may have time for sightseeing, but the rest of us need to keep the routes straight.

PLAN A and a Half:  The World Book Typical Course of Study seemed to cut things down to a reasonable amount in the language arts area; I decided to check out the 7th Grade Math.  Again, crazily enough, I think World Book provides a pretty good list of skills for this year!  The really crazy part is that those are the topics covered in the Saxon book too.  Only Mr. Saxon does them in an order that makes sense only if you already know what makes sense.  The Bible verse "Parents (math teachers), do not exasperate your children (students)" comes to mind.

PLAN B:  I have decided to give Plan B a chance, and if it doesn't work out, or we've had enough of it after a short time, we'll go back to Plan A.  Plan B is to proceed with Key to Percents through September, as planned; and then to work through three short, friendly math books that I downloaded to the e-book reader when they were offered as freebies.  The three books seem to complement each other and don't have too much overlap (otherwise I would use only one or two of them).  If they go too fast on any of the important topics, we'll slow down and use other resources (books or online sites) to do some extra exploring.

The books are:

Discovering Mathematical Thought: Growing the Math Side of the Brain, by Hal Torrance.  The value of observation, and the creative side of problem solving.  Topics include probability, proportion, estimation. 

Beat Algebra Before It Beats You, by Hal Torrance.  This is not a book about doing algebra; it's a review of topics such as composite numbers and multiples, fractions, percentage, exponents, etc., that you need to have solid before starting algebra.

College Math Concepts for Middle School Students:  A Stress-Free Approach to Broad Math Understanding, by Hal Torrance.  Another run through number patterns, basic arithmetic review, integers, and estimation (he loves estimation).  There are also lessons towards the end on mean, median and mode, simple probability, and geometric reasoning; we might leave those for later in the year.

And by that time, I think Dollygirl will be ready to tackle the first chapter of Skill in Algebra on TheMathPage.com.  There's also a chapter of "younger" algebra activities in the book How Math Works.  If the Torrance books, or the extra work we need to do to get through them, require the full year, then algebra can wait till Grade Eight.

Will we get to any real geometry this year?  Or have time to do much with measurement?  How many mountains (or highways) can we climb up (or drive down) in one school year?  The answer is: I don't know.  It's a new journey; I can plan the trip, but I can't give you the report until we're actually on the way.

*"Movin' Right Along," from The Muppet Movie.  See Part One.

Countdown to School: Middle School Math, Part Two (or, Getting there is half the fun; come share it with me.*)

Part One is here.

First, a bit of Charlotte Mason catechism.

Why was Charlotte Mason disappointed in the results of her early teaching experiences?

"The children, no doubt, 'got on'––a little; but each one of them had the makings in her of a noble character, of a fine mind, and where was the lever to lift each of these little worlds?"

Why didn't Charlotte Mason think much of just plugging away at long arithmetic problems (among other things)?

"If education is to secure the step-by-step progress of the individual and the race, it must mean something over and above the daily plodding at small tasks which goes by the name."

What should be done during lessons?

"This is the sort of thing that the children should go through, more or less, in every lesson––a tracing of effect from cause, or of cause from effect; a comparing of things to find out wherein they are alike, and wherein they differ; a conclusion as to causes or consequences from certain premises."

How is teaching math like French?

"Supposing, for instance, that by good teaching you secure the child's attention to the verb avoir, he will remember it; that is to say, some infinitely slight growth of brain tissue will record and retain that one French verb. But one verb is nothing; you want the child to learn French, and for this you must not only fix his attention upon each new lesson, but each must be so linked into the last that it is impossible for him to recall one without the other following in its train. The physical effect of such a method appears to be that each new growth of the brain tissue is, so to speak, laid upon the last; that is, to put it figuratively, a certain tract of the brain may be conceived of as being overlaid with French."

What was that again?

"Every Lesson must recall the Last.––Let every lesson gain the child's entire attention, and let each new lesson be so interlaced with the last that the one must recall the other; that again, recalls the one before it, and so on to the beginning."

Second, those who want to teach Charlotte Mason-style math should read "You don't need a composition program," a post at Higher Up and Further In.  The subject is different, the principles are much the same.  Not expecting more than is reasonable for a child's age, either in attention span or final output (hour-long grade one math, anyone?).  Trusting the process through many weeks or months or years of faithful narration, copywork, and dictation from worthy books, and without undue interference (also known as classroom clutter or busywork).

Now ineffective and even harmful curriculums do exist in math, as well as in English and other subjects. We've run into a couple of them ourselves.  The Deputy Headmistress recently mentioned a book that her teenager asked her to read aloud because she was having difficulty, but even reading it aloud could not make a good book out of a poor one, and they agreed to drop it.  There is an important, but obviously difficult, distinction between needing to persevere with something, even when it's difficult or doesn't seem immediately rewarding, and deciding to modify it or even let it go.

And the testimonies of those who have "taught math Charlotte Mason-style," especially in the upper years when we all seem to turn to the same few textbook publishers, are fewer and farther between than those whose children have become excellent readers and writers.  That is a fact.  However, lack of recognition doesn't mean it doesn't exist.  What of the way of the will and the way of the reason; the three instruments of education (environment, habit, living ideas)?  What of students' ability to visualize, as they do in their spelling, their picture study, their narrations?  What about simply having more doors opened?  What about "not how much does he know, but how much does he care?"

Finally, in a world that is already too utilitarian, too unpoetical, too competitive, analytical and computer-driven, why and how should a "human curriculum" promote mathematics?  And what kind of mathematics?  Where do our middle-schoolers, somewhere in the transition between elementary mathematics and senior-high algebra and geometry, fit into that vision?

Those are the questions.  Stay tuned for an attempt at some answers.

Part Three is here.

Countdown to School: Movin' Right Along with Middle School Math

It's four weeks till school starts.

I've been thinking about math, teaching math, blogging about math, e-grouping about math, for...well, over fifteen years, anyway.  I taught the Apprentice math through the ninth grade level.  I wasn't as involved in Ponytails' middle school math--Mr. Fixit was in charge of that.  But now I'm back at that point with Dollygirl, and I still wonder if we've gotten it "right."

Oh, it's not that I can't teach integers and scalene triangles.  It's not the mathematics, at this level, that's the issue.  It's getting the perspective on it right.  Charlotte Mason talked about learning as allowing students to see a vista spread before them, a beautiful landscape; letting them travel through "pleasant paths."  Some traditional math methods have been more like dropping the learner partway up a mountain, where all he can see is the rock right in front of him, and expecting him to enjoy the climb...to where, he hasn't been told. Some math experiences could also be compared to driving with someone who's blocking the windshield with a roadmap.

Which makes me think of Kermit and Fozzie's road trip in The Muppet Movie.  ("Turn left at the fork in the road.")

Part Two is here.

Part Three is here.

Catching up with Ambleside Online: things are happening

For those of you who follow the Ambleside Online curriculum and happenings:  do you realize that it's been a year already since the AO Forum went live? I'm honestly trying to figure out where that year went.

But there's been more happening at AO, and I wanted to give a heads-up to those who haven't checked out the website lately. First, Year 12 is finally posted and official.  Then there are more and more "new" Parents' Review articles being typed and added all the time,  mostly from Volume 2--that is, not Charlotte Mason's "Volume 2," but Volume 2 of the magazine, from 1891-1892.

Finally, there are some new Plutarch studies: Cicero, Demosthenes, and Coriolanus.  Maybe more to come there too.

Fresco:  Vincenzo Foppa's Young Cicero Reading. c.1464, found in this very helpful article about Cicero and Archimedes' tomb at Three Pipe Problem. 

Countdown to School: Middle School Language Arts, Part Three

Part One is here.
Part Two is here.  (Link Fixed!)

When I was fulminating in the last post against slightly pretentious textbook assignments, there was one other issue I meant to point out: that those are often not "English" assignments anyway, or at least not literature. I've noticed this ever since I sat down with the Apprentice to study eleventh-grade writing rubrics, and found that all the sample essays were all about Issues, like gun control.  So if the point of that textbook is to deepen understanding and appreciation of literature, the culminating question could become something like "How does literature connect the human family?"

That, I could happily live with.  Science of relations?

The problem is that Language Arts isn't necessarily Literature.  It's more of a dumping ground for everything from literary genres to newspaper studies to "graphic texts" (i.e. pictures?), and from skills in "conferencing" to knowledge of "language conventions" (putting periods after sentences) and short story structure.  Not to mention that, if we did talk about Literature, we might be forced to pin down one particular Literature (while excluding another), or one form of Literature (excluding graphic novels or some non-book format), or even have a good old university-style argument over whether Literature exists at all.  It's easier to make it Language Arts, call it Sam and be done, as the Hillbilly Housewife used to say.

But one book that Charlotte Mason did include, at the middle school level, was H.E. Marshall's History of Literature for Boys and Girls (sometimes called for Young People).   That is, English literature, with a bit of Scottish and Welsh and Irish thrown in, up to about the turn of the last century.  Obviously that's not a complete "history of literature" for those of us outside the UK in 2013.  However, it's there.  It's included in the curriculum, it's a subject, Literature.  Ironically, that outdated book throws out a few ideas that might connect with the question of the "human family."

“In the Listening Time”: “Has there ever been a time when no stories were told? Has there ever been a people who did not care to listen? I think not.  When we were little, before we could read for ourselves, did we not gather eagerly round father or mother, friend or nurse, at the promise of a story?”

“The Story of the Cattle Raid of Cooley”: “Our earliest literature was history and poetry. Indeed, we might say poetry only, for in those far-off times history was always poetry, it being only through the songs of the bards and minstrels that history was known. And when I say history I do not mean history as we know it. It was then merely the gallant tale of some hero's deeds listened to because it was a gallant tale.”

So Language Arts is not just Literature; but it should recognize Literature in both its historical and its imaginative/human senses, and our Grade 7 Language Arts will contain not only this history of literature, but as much actual literature as we can manage.  "Literature" to talk about, and literature to read.

Then reading skills, with an introduction to Mortimer J. Adler and his marking-up and "X-Raying" of books.  I happen to be very fond of How to Read a Book, and I think we will read even a bit more of it than Ambleside Online recommends for Year Seven. (One extra but unfortunate reason for that is that...like it or not...Dollygirl may be going off to public high school in Grade Nine, like her sisters; so if we want to get through Adler, middle school may be our only chance.)

And since both Northrop Frye and H.E. Marshall agree that poetry is foundational, we will work through The Grammar of Poetry, by Matt Whitling. I have nothing against Shel Silverstein and Jane Yolen (typical poets from the above-mentioned grade seven textbook), but I find the inclusion of more challenging poets such as George Herbert a delightful bonus.  This will be our first time actually working through this one, because we did not own a copy until recently.

And then there are the speaking and listening skills, and the written assignments.  An online search for "creative narration ideas" will provide many suggestions.  For more critical assignments, I've found ideas such as writing about the use of metaphor and symbolism in a book or play; comparing two characters; discussing themes; writing about the effects of a character's decision; going deeper into the historical time period of a book (a crossover assignment with history).

Do grade seven students need to be specifically taught to do these assignments?  Yes and no. The resources (such as the handbook Write Source 2000) are there to give general format, tips and examples for things like research papers; but the students' ability to work with the books or scripts,  put their thoughts together coherently, and say something worth listening to or reading--that has to be part of the bigger picture, what it's all about in the first place.  I can help Dollygirl revise a piece of writing, I can show her how writers use symbol and metaphor (meaning she can too!), but without a structure of living books and ideas underneath, the rest becomes just interior decorating.  (There's a metaphor.)

Does it matter if the assignments are done on paper or as a podcast? I'm still on the fence about that.  One thing the textbook said did make sense, although I think it could be abused:  that the students should choose a variety of formats for assignments throughout the year (not always a poster, an essay, or a stop-motion video), and that they should choose formats that fit their learning styles or abilities.  For some learners, a project done only as a long essay might be so difficult that they quit and don't learn anything; obviously, length and difficulty of the topics have to be considered.  But even for reluctant writers, shorter written assignments might be appropriate.  I also like the idea I saw mentioned somewhere (I've seen it in more than one place) about putting together a "portfolio" of work about one longer novel or play.  For Ivanhoe, you might have an essay, some written narrations, a character sketch, an illustration, a "wanted" poster for runaway serfs, or whatever.  The student might be required to have a certain number of pieces of work in the porfolio, but be given a choice about which ones.

And here's a bonus:  a Grade Seven assignment I came up with all on my own.

NOVEL:  Ivanhoe
Beverly Cleary, the author of the Ramona series, once recalled: "When I was a child, a relative gave me Ivanhoe to grow into. I was so disappointed that I still have not grown into it."  As a response to this quote, do one of the following:  1.  Write a letter to Beverly Cleary, attempting to get her to change her mind.  2.  Write this event as a scene from a story.  Does your character change her mind about the book, or not?

I'm finally satisfied with our plan for Language Arts.  It may not be as thematically exciting as the grade seven textbook, and it doesn't have as many "graphic texts," but I think it's going to work.

Countdown to School: Middle School Language Arts, Part Two

So what are "we" talking about, when we talk about Language Arts at this level?  What am I talking about, meaning what Dollygirl should learn this year?  Is it literature?  Is it grammar?  Is it that thing called Communication, which can either be one of the most important concepts ever, or just a weasel word for dumbed-down English?  If Charlotte Mason didn't label anything as "Language Arts," is that because almost everything in her curriculum involved language, reading, oral and written skills?  How do we stay true to CM, but also stay current, without turning everything into a podcast?

"To try to teach literature by starting with the applied use of words, or 'effective communication', as it's often called, then gradually work into literature through the more documentary forms of prose fiction and finally into poetry, seems to me a futile procedure. If literature is to be properly taught, we have to start at its centre, which is poetry, then work outwards to literary prose, then outwards from there to the applied languages of business and professions and ordinary life."--Northrop Frye, The Educated Imagination

So no, I'm not talking especially about grammar.  That's over to one side, almost a separate subject.  Like arithmetic practice when you also have bigger math ideas to focus on.  (Mathematics, as one math history book we used to have showed us, is like a great big tree with a lot of branches, and arithmetic is just one branch.  But that's another post.)

And it's not about spelling, at least not now, not for us.  Dollygirl did some work with All About Spelling a few years ago, and that helped her out a lot.  Now when I dictate paragraphs to her, prepared or unprepared, she usually does so well that it's hard to stump her.  Her handwriting is another story; so I've been having her do dictation on the computer.

But handwriting isn't the biggest part of Language Arts either.  Yes, it's a question, especially these days when I've read that many schools don't even teach cursive writing (can you imagine?), and especially when Dollygirl still does have some issues with cursive, but it's not the core.

So what are we back to?  Reading.  Writing.  Reading what?  Writing what, and how?  Even the Ambleside Online "Language Arts Scope and Sequence" isn't extensive at this level:  it's basically grammar, narration, dictation, and copywork, with a note that if you have to set something aside at this stage, you should keep the dictation going instead of the copywork.  One key is that "narration" covers a great deal of ground.  Another is that, looking at either Ambleside Online's booklist for the year, or any of the original PUS programmes, there's a high level of reading competence assumed, and not a lot of hand-holding.  Again, maybe that's what it all comes down to:  Charlotte Mason didn't talk much about Language Arts per se, because they were just doing it.  As Mortimer J. Adler says in the first chapter of How to Read a Book, the assumption used to be that you read because you wanted to learn.  Reading and learning were almost synonymous...and sometimes reading to learn meant freedom or even outright rebellion.

Maybe that's still the truth.

The textbook I looked at has a great deal of emphasis on "critical thinking," but from a "self-expression" kind of viewpoint.  What do you think about this or that issue?  The culminating project--which can be done in several ways, from a formal essay to a photo-essay--is about one's own view of the "global family" or  "human family."  Not that I have anything against the big questions, the big ideas--the normative questions, themes of heroism and so on are, what's the word I want, imperative, indispensable, vital.  But there's more than one issue there that I trip over.  Not only that that theme risks becoming a bit one-worldish and political...some people would just think that "the human family" is a nice, peaceful, inclusive thing to think about.  Could even be part of a Christian textbook.  No, it's, first of all, that overemphasis again on the centrality, almost the infallibility, of the seventh-graders' viewpoint on how the world works; not that I don't think seventh-graders can think, but, for Pete's sake, they're twelve- and thirteen-year-olds, with both bigger and smaller concerns...and while allowing them to pontificate on the global family may turn their attention somewhat away from their own issues...and this is the thing I'm stretching for, so stick with me...I don't think the material that's being given to them (in school, in this book, in the contemporary, public-school approach to Language Arts and education as a whole) is going to speak much to the bigger ones.

If you're going to ask the big questions, you had better provide a means to at least look for the big answers. And I don't think a seventh-grade language textbook is going to be the place to find them, at least not on its own.

Important Postscript:

I was going to say, "stay tuned for Part Three" and leave it at that, but something funny (and suggestive, as CM would say) happened. We are having some tree work done this morning in the Treehouse yard. (Aftermath of the quite violent storms last month.) One of the tree guys said that he had planned to put a bolt into one of the trees, but he couldn't do it this morning, because his drill was broken. Mr. Fixit told him to hold on. He disappeared into the workshop and came back with his late grandpa's 1950's brace and bit. The tree guy was very impressed.  "Do you know how hard it is to find good equipment like this?" Grandpa left us many of the tools we need. We just have to know how to use them. And provide sufficient amounts of material (mind-food) to make it worthwhile.

Image from OldToolHeaven.com.

Countdown to School: Middle School Language Arts, Part One

Part Two is here.
Part Three is here.

It's five weeks till school, and this week I'm working on Language Arts, that school subject that didn't exist for Charlotte Mason.

I have a seventh grader this year.  We're up to "middle school."  It's time to graduate our methods from the elementary level, to do more, ask more, think in new ways.  But still, what's core is reading and writing--right?

I look at the provincial standards for grade seven Language curriculum--the headings are Reading, Writing, Listening/Speaking, and Media; but the actual requirements are pretty nebulous.  Do we even mean the same things by Reading and Writing?

Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

I look at the publisher's website for a popular public school Grade 7 language textbook.  The units are cool, there's lots of media awareness, some neat poems and stories; somebody has obviously put lots of thought and work into this book.  Maybe that's the problem--the teachers are having more fun than the students. When I try to apply that outline to the amount of reading we have planned, I run into trouble:  are we overloading, or are they underloading?  There's something else that troubles me about it. When the "preview" to the first poem in the book is longer than the poem itself, there's something wrong.  Didn't Charlotte say, somewhere, that we package things up so neatly that nothing can possibly get lost...but that nothing else can get in?

Well, there's one thing I do like about the textbook, kind of.  Dividing up the year into half-term units makes sense, and having a few smaller writing assignments plus one larger project planned for each unit would also work.  I find a teacher's grade 7 webpage divided into similar groupings, but using "real books," and his approach is to assign one "critical" and one "creative" assignment for each.  Yes, we could do that too; not for every book on the list, but for the major ones.

Browsing the grade 7 lists, I come across one of the last places I would have looked for help:  the World Book Typical Course of Study, that's been reprinted all over the Internet for years.  Can someone explain why a short list like this is closer to our CM plans than any current government outline?  It certainly wasn't designed with Charlotte Mason or homeschooling in mind...but maybe it's just older.

• Improving reading skills--yep, Mr. Adler is covering that.
• Literary terms--yep, we're doing The Grammar of Poetry.
• Novels, short stories, plays--yep.
• Myths, legends, ballads--Age of Fable.  Sigurd of the Volsungs.
• Types of poetry--see number 2.
• Biography and autobiography--got it covered.
• Planning and producing dramatizations
• Speech activities--like narrating?
• Listening skills--you have to listen before you can narrate.
• Refining dictionary skills
• Spelling
• Parts of speech--that would be Easy Grammar Plus.
• Person, number, gender of nouns and pronouns
• Punctuation of conversation
• Clauses and phrases
• Compound sentences
• Writing descriptions, reports, journals, and letters--yes, all good things to write.
• Note taking and outlining--Mr. Adler talks about that too.
• Extending reference skills: atlases, directories, encyclopedias, periodicals, on-line information services, CD-ROMs, and other electronic reference material
• Library organization

Thank you, World Book.  That makes me feel a whole lot better.

Stay tuned for Part Two, or, when Language Arts starts to make more sense.

Linked from the Charlotte Mason Blog Carnival: Citizenship at The Common Room.