Which Homeschool Science Curriculum Should You Use?

One of the most common questions I’m asked by other homeschooling parents is which science curriculum our family uses. Today I’ll share my reasons behind the shocking answer to that question: we don’t use a science curriculum!;

Science Education’s Fatal Flaw

My philosophy on teaching science to my own children is based on my experiences teaching science in lots of different capacities. I’ve taught private school classes for elementary, middle, and high school students; I’ve taught freshman university courses; and I’ve taught as a guest teacher in public elementary schools. I’ve also pored over dozens of science curricula designed for homeschoolers. I’ve even read the current research and attended seminars on science education.

Throughout all of those years of learning about and teaching science, I’ve noticed one fatal flaw in every science curriculum I’ve reviewed: They all approach the subject with the assumption that every student is destined to become a scientist. 

So much of science education, even for small children, is based around the idea that the goal of science education is to train up an army of little scientists, destined to tackle the mysteries of life, clipboard in hand, lab reports at the ready. While this approach does appeal to some learners, it’s just not for everyone.

One thing that I’ve noticed about people who dislike science is that they don’t actually dislike science. They dislike science experiments and lab work, and they equate those things with science. In the early days of education, science education for younger kids involved a blend of going outside to look at nature, and learning some general principles of science from a book. Lab work wasn’t started until much later, often in the university. 

But in modern times, any science curriculum for first graders is considered substandard if it doesn’t include a lab report for them to fill out. I’ve seen firsthand that this approach does much more harm than good. We end up with students who know how to fill out a data sheet, but that have lost all interest in scientific inquiry.

This is one of the biggest mysteries to me about science education. Nobody believes that the only way to appreciate Shakespeare is to write really long plays. Equally ludicrous is the idea that the only way to really understand the lessons of the Battle of Hastings is to grab a sword and challenge an army of Frenchmen to a battle to the death.

But for some reason, many people think that the only way people can ever hope to learn science is to painstakingly recreate every important science experiment that’s taken place over the past 400 years.

What Science Literacy Means to Ask Science

Many organizations involved in developing science curricula have a common goal: to build a scientifically literate society. But what does it mean to be scientifically literate? According to a study published in the Journal of Research in Science Teaching, nobody can even agree on what it means to be scientifically literate, or even how to measure it.

According to a study published in the Journal of Research in Science Teaching, nobody can even agree on what it means to be scientifically literate, or even how to measure it.

As we worry about “falling behind” in science, we continue to pour additional efforts into STEM education initiatives (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). However, as well known educationalist, Sir Ken Robinson has pointed out, schools are so concerned about science and mathematics, that they sometimes pursue those goals at the exclusion over all other subjects, especially the arts. Have a young daughter that’s interested in science? That’s great! Have one interested in art and drama? The assumption is that a STEM initiative has failed somewhere.

The trouble is that most people designing science programs are scientists. And just like your English Lit teacher would love it if every student who passed through their doors abandoned everything in favor of a lifelong study of the masters of literature, we scientists love it when our students fall in love with science and go on to a career in science themselves. But a world filled with nothing with scientists is not what I view as the ideal society. 

Instead I dream of a world where every farmer understands the science of farming, every chef understands the science of baking, and every artist understands the science of color theory. That is my view of scientific literacy.

So Where Does that Leave Us

So how do these thoughts shape how my wife and I teach science to our 5 kids? I can best explain with a real example. 

Some time ago, I noticed one of my daughters watching a pigeon intently as it hopped around the bird feeder we had built a few months earlier. As I watched her, I thought, “Now’s my chance to teach some science!” 

So I suggested that she make a real experiment of it. Get some record keeping equipment, take a survey of the times of day various species came to the feeder. Maybe take note of the weather conditions so that we could test for correlations between temperature and feeding activity. If we were really lucky, we might even be able gather enough data to make a graph, then I could teach her regression analysis!

The dutiful child that she is, she started on the project, though I could quickly tell her heart wasn’t really in it. A few days later I saw her sitting by the window again, watching another bird at work. Noticing she lacked her clipboard, temperature charts, and other data collection tools, I asked if she had finished with the project already. 

She shook her head and said, “No, I just sort of lost interest. I just like watching the birds. Isn’t that wagtail funny?”

See also: How to Be a Birdwatcher?

The astute reader will realize that we had arrived at a crossroad. I could have easily attempted to push my daughter back along the path of lab reports, sat by her side as we made notes on temperature/species correlations, attempting to answer questions she had no interest in, and driven the wonder and joy of science right out of her.

Instead, I sat down and asked her to tell me about the wagtail. So she told me what she knew, what she observed about it, and how it compared to other birds (turns out you could pick it out easily because of how it bobbed its tail). This was science at its most pure. My daughters can identify most birds in northern Europe from a few yards away. I have a PhD in genetics, taught biology for several years, and still couldn’t have told you the difference between a crow and a mockingbird.

I was a scientist, but my daughter was becoming scientifically literate.

Conclusion

So instead of following any one curriculum, we allow the world to be our curriculum. When our kids showed an interest in weather, we provided them with resources for studying that. When their interest shifted to birds, we picked up some bird guides and joined the local birdwatching club. 

Instead of forcing them to recreate experiments to prove things they’re not interested in, we try to teach them how to ask the right questions about what they are interested in, and how to find the answers for themselves.

If you liked today’s episode, you can become a fan of Ask Science on Facebook or follow me on Twitter, where I’m @QDTeinstein. If you have a question that you’d like to see on a future episode, send me an email at everydayeinstein@quickanddirtytips.com.

Pigeon image, G.OZCAN at Flickr. CC BY—SA 2.0.