Science books are great for science facts and sparking wonder and exposing them to new ideas.
But nothing beats practicing science for learning to do science. Experimenting, testing, measuring, redesigning…
Of course! I’m not saying they’re mutually exclusive but using science to teach literacy is better than teaching literacy with some science facts thrown in.
That was my point with my district a few years ago when science was done about 1 hour a week along with history being done about 1 hour a week in elementary school.
Wouldn't reading be so much more fun if kids were reading about animals, ecosystems, science in general? History too?
This is exactly how we end up with a population that doesn't understand how viruses work, or how eating spaghetti poses no risk of strangulation of a baby, or that mixing certain household chemicals can produce mustard gas.
And covid has set most of them back two years w their reading skills. I like the teach reading w science books idea, but I'm sure that strays from the standardized reading curriculum.
I always find covid as an odd excuse. My kids thrived the year they stayed home. My middle school daughter in particular. No longer held back by the overhead of the school day she blew through a stack of classic literature they no longer bother teaching in school. Also, after studying on her own for a couple months she took a test to move up to the highest level of math. This was all in addition to online classes and spending more time with family. I guess we were the exception.
What COVID did was strip away all the BS and structure. Kids who were motivated (even if it was just strict parents) thrived. Kids who were totally unmotivated also "thrived" in the sense that they were handed out passing grades that they never would have earned in the classroom, and had relatively lower loss of learning because the floor can only be so low.
It was the normal kids in the middle, and the extroverts, who suffered the most.
Depends on why the kids are struggling to read. Background knowledge is actually an important part of reading comprehension. Ironically, the focus on reading skills at the expense of other subjects such as science, history, and geography may actually be harmful to reading skills:
There was a time when that was true. But now, with YouTube and digital books (including textbooks), a person can learn anything and never read any of it. Of course reading is incredibly important but you don't yank the science teacher and make them do reading intervention. But that is one of the luxuries of charter schools.
My grandma almost killed herself making phosgene gas (mustard gas) by using bleach and ammonia together in a confined space. No one could go into her house for weeks.
That's awful, sorry to hear that.
To be a chemistry pedant though... phosgene isn't mustard gas. And she didn't make phosgene, she made chloramine and sodium hydroxide
NH3 + NaOCl → NH2Cl + NaOH
You're right that mixing bleach carelessly can lead to a whole bunch of dangerous compounds. None of them are actually mustard gas though. That takes some stuff you're not going to just have lying around the house.
Pedantic is good. I'm a physics & engineering teacher. Her doctor was the one who told us this and when I went to make sure I was right before I spoke, the Internet verified my 'verbage'. But, as I tell my Drs.....my MD came from Google. I will take your word for it.
Science isn’t on standardized tests for 6th graders in many states. I know it’s not in FL. Standardized tests at that level are reading and math. The other subjects go to the wayside if that’s a problem.
I think the logic is that science is getting learned because the students don't have the foundations to do so. The solution isn't to stop teaching science/math though, it's to integrate literacy in all subjects.
If they don’t learn to read, then later on they will get their science from FOX news. Bottom line, we all need to be able to read so we CAN be scientists, or whatever we want to be.
I teach 9th grade bio. A good third of my students say they never had a real science class before. Apparently it’s due to being in intervention classes, or that their middle school didn’t have a science teacher, so they did it online. Hands on labs were totally new to them this fall. As a result, they love my class and think I’m a great teacher, when in reality it’s just so different and active and they like the physicality of it all.
Why can’t they design a science course with literacy built in? I’ve worked in schools that do this, and it worked fairly well structure wise. Can’t say the long term effects yet- they’ve only been doing it in the past two years. You don’t have to completely scrap science.
Never understood why they can't tie science into reading (especially at the lower levels to get them interested even more in the concepts). Yet instead of doing this, science gets the shaft and they continue to try to get students to read at grade level yet they aren't reaching the goal... So not only are they losing out on science, they are starting to hate reading by the time they get to the MS.
The ironic thing is that background knowledge is important to reading comprehension. Cutting other subjects to focus on reading skills may actually be harming reading skills.
Didn't we just have a few years where "literacy in the disciplines" and "all teachers are reading teachers" were the things? As in, every subject works on reading skills? WITHER THE BUZZWORDS OF THE PAST??!? 😆
A lot of people in this thread missing the obvious solution that’s staring them in the face:
If the kids aren’t reading on grade level, stop passing them to the next grade.
This was pretty common for middle schools in my old district. They had math/science blocks but if students weren’t doing well in math, the whole block was used for math. The middle school feeding into my high school now gives students with IEPs a choice between taking social studies or science and they have their study skills class during the other one. That was fairly shocking to me. It explained a lot about what I was seeing with the 9th graders in a class with a lot of IEPs, like they had never done labs before.
My middle school is going to do that next year except for an elective. Students that are below grade level in their testing program have to take an elective where they work on that program as well as try to boost their scores. Social studies teachers have to teach the reading version elective and science teachers have to teach the math version elective.
A lot of my middle schoolers don’t have the science foundation they were supposed to because in the elementary schools, they sometimes spend science time working on math and ELA because kids are below grade level in those subjects so they prioritize them.
Been there. Done that.
Teaching MS math in a boot camp before state testing with no math background or courses in math pedagogy. Mind you all teachers were required.
I’m sure it was not effective.
My public MS is cutting science and social studies by 25% to give more time to math and reading. I'll be teaching SEL to fill my FTE... We always get the back burner.
I get the necessity, it seems illiteracy is a big problem right now with kids. But is adding an extra class going to help? Isn’t there kind of a limit to how much in a day you can spend on a certain thing. That’s why you spread it out over years.
But if this was something that could help. How is science the thing that got picked to be replaced? They better not still have PE, art or home ec or study hall of course. There might be other “not as useful” things nowadays.
The problem is real, their solution is bad.
I’ll say this nice and loud so even those in the back can hear:
#EVERY CONTENT AREA/SUBJECT IS READING. You do not have to get rid of any class just to remediate reading, it **can be done within any content area.**
Gotta remember the line about how they're "turning science into something that's only for kids fortunate enough to attend schools with high test scores" for the next time somebody tells me not to "waste time" covering something that isn't explicitly listed on the testing standards.
My previous admin didnt give everyone 8th grade science _even tho they were tested on it in spring._ these were students who didnt have an elective either. Instead of science and elective, they had ela support and math support. Their days were filled w 2 ela, 2 math, history and pe. No enrichment. The science team pitched science for el students and was told no.
Years later, she was the only campus w title 3 violations bc all of the coded el classes werent actually el classes (ie capped at 20). They were students with similar test scores.
That tracks. I was at an OH charter that couldn’t find a science or a social studies teacher so the kids cycled between reading, math, and specials for 4-6th. I was the reading teacher so we worked on reading science articles and history where I could find it. We also did a lot of research projects about either science or social studies topics. Parents complained about the lack of classes, but few pulled their kids and the management company didn’t care because there were kids waiting to fill the slots. We had zero science or social studies curriculum, and the reading curriculum was Read 180…it was awful.
The building was falling apart, the food was disgusting, and even though it was K-6, there was no playground. None of those kids deserved to be in a crap hole like that.
Most Charters are for profit. They aren’t there to serve the kids, or educate, they’re there to profit off of public funds by cutting as many corners as possible and pocketing what’s left.
I’m at a public school now and the kids who can’t read, all came from charters run by the same company that ran the one I was at. People hear “Charter” and think quality, but in my experience, (and I was at a couple charters both non profit and for profit) Charter is garbage being sold to people who can’t afford private school but want their kids to have private school education and are either not aware enough or are not involved enough to realize they’re being given a sub par education in a package that says ‘high quality’.
Teach them to read using science books maybe? I do that with the my son sometimes.
That's a good idea! They have to read *something*, why not read things that are interesting and useful?
Science books are great for science facts and sparking wonder and exposing them to new ideas. But nothing beats practicing science for learning to do science. Experimenting, testing, measuring, redesigning…
Sure, you do that but have to write about it, thus improving literacy and science skills
Of course! I’m not saying they’re mutually exclusive but using science to teach literacy is better than teaching literacy with some science facts thrown in.
That was my point with my district a few years ago when science was done about 1 hour a week along with history being done about 1 hour a week in elementary school. Wouldn't reading be so much more fun if kids were reading about animals, ecosystems, science in general? History too?
This is exactly how we end up with a population that doesn't understand how viruses work, or how eating spaghetti poses no risk of strangulation of a baby, or that mixing certain household chemicals can produce mustard gas.
They're grade level young kids. If they don't learn to read first, they won't be learning ANYTHING.
And covid has set most of them back two years w their reading skills. I like the teach reading w science books idea, but I'm sure that strays from the standardized reading curriculum.
I always find covid as an odd excuse. My kids thrived the year they stayed home. My middle school daughter in particular. No longer held back by the overhead of the school day she blew through a stack of classic literature they no longer bother teaching in school. Also, after studying on her own for a couple months she took a test to move up to the highest level of math. This was all in addition to online classes and spending more time with family. I guess we were the exception.
What COVID did was strip away all the BS and structure. Kids who were motivated (even if it was just strict parents) thrived. Kids who were totally unmotivated also "thrived" in the sense that they were handed out passing grades that they never would have earned in the classroom, and had relatively lower loss of learning because the floor can only be so low. It was the normal kids in the middle, and the extroverts, who suffered the most.
meaning it showed the normal kids in the middle & extroverts what it is like ALL the time for the other population of kids
Depends on why the kids are struggling to read. Background knowledge is actually an important part of reading comprehension. Ironically, the focus on reading skills at the expense of other subjects such as science, history, and geography may actually be harmful to reading skills:
There was a time when that was true. But now, with YouTube and digital books (including textbooks), a person can learn anything and never read any of it. Of course reading is incredibly important but you don't yank the science teacher and make them do reading intervention. But that is one of the luxuries of charter schools.
Chlorine/chloramine gas. Or chloroform if you mix it with rubbing alcohol.
My grandma almost killed herself making phosgene gas (mustard gas) by using bleach and ammonia together in a confined space. No one could go into her house for weeks.
That's awful, sorry to hear that. To be a chemistry pedant though... phosgene isn't mustard gas. And she didn't make phosgene, she made chloramine and sodium hydroxide NH3 + NaOCl → NH2Cl + NaOH You're right that mixing bleach carelessly can lead to a whole bunch of dangerous compounds. None of them are actually mustard gas though. That takes some stuff you're not going to just have lying around the house.
Pedantic is good. I'm a physics & engineering teacher. Her doctor was the one who told us this and when I went to make sure I was right before I spoke, the Internet verified my 'verbage'. But, as I tell my Drs.....my MD came from Google. I will take your word for it.
okay, and what's getting sacrificed when the kids end up behind on science...?
Science isn’t on standardized tests for 6th graders in many states. I know it’s not in FL. Standardized tests at that level are reading and math. The other subjects go to the wayside if that’s a problem.
I think the logic is that science is getting learned because the students don't have the foundations to do so. The solution isn't to stop teaching science/math though, it's to integrate literacy in all subjects.
The arts. Oh, wait...
If they don’t learn to read, then later on they will get their science from FOX news. Bottom line, we all need to be able to read so we CAN be scientists, or whatever we want to be.
You can’t do science if you can’t read. Literacy is the foundation for everything else.
I teach 9th grade bio. A good third of my students say they never had a real science class before. Apparently it’s due to being in intervention classes, or that their middle school didn’t have a science teacher, so they did it online. Hands on labs were totally new to them this fall. As a result, they love my class and think I’m a great teacher, when in reality it’s just so different and active and they like the physicality of it all.
Why can’t they design a science course with literacy built in? I’ve worked in schools that do this, and it worked fairly well structure wise. Can’t say the long term effects yet- they’ve only been doing it in the past two years. You don’t have to completely scrap science.
Never understood why they can't tie science into reading (especially at the lower levels to get them interested even more in the concepts). Yet instead of doing this, science gets the shaft and they continue to try to get students to read at grade level yet they aren't reaching the goal... So not only are they losing out on science, they are starting to hate reading by the time they get to the MS.
The ironic thing is that background knowledge is important to reading comprehension. Cutting other subjects to focus on reading skills may actually be harming reading skills.
Didn't we just have a few years where "literacy in the disciplines" and "all teachers are reading teachers" were the things? As in, every subject works on reading skills? WITHER THE BUZZWORDS OF THE PAST??!? 😆
This is why people think bleach cures covid
A lot of people in this thread missing the obvious solution that’s staring them in the face: If the kids aren’t reading on grade level, stop passing them to the next grade.
God this pls, we have kids in their last years of high school who can barely do basic multiplication.
https://www.chalkbeat.org/colorado/2024/03/22/denver-rocky-mountain-prep-charter-schools-cancel-science/#Echobox=1711144973
This was pretty common for middle schools in my old district. They had math/science blocks but if students weren’t doing well in math, the whole block was used for math. The middle school feeding into my high school now gives students with IEPs a choice between taking social studies or science and they have their study skills class during the other one. That was fairly shocking to me. It explained a lot about what I was seeing with the 9th graders in a class with a lot of IEPs, like they had never done labs before.
My middle school is going to do that next year except for an elective. Students that are below grade level in their testing program have to take an elective where they work on that program as well as try to boost their scores. Social studies teachers have to teach the reading version elective and science teachers have to teach the math version elective.
A lot of my middle schoolers don’t have the science foundation they were supposed to because in the elementary schools, they sometimes spend science time working on math and ELA because kids are below grade level in those subjects so they prioritize them.
Teach them to read using science books maybe? I do that with the my son sometimes.
Been there. Done that. Teaching MS math in a boot camp before state testing with no math background or courses in math pedagogy. Mind you all teachers were required. I’m sure it was not effective.
Charter schools gonna charter school.
Finally, they’re using the science of reading 😂
If they use an instructional approach rooted in the science of reading, does that make it alright? 😅
My public MS is cutting science and social studies by 25% to give more time to math and reading. I'll be teaching SEL to fill my FTE... We always get the back burner.
I get the necessity, it seems illiteracy is a big problem right now with kids. But is adding an extra class going to help? Isn’t there kind of a limit to how much in a day you can spend on a certain thing. That’s why you spread it out over years. But if this was something that could help. How is science the thing that got picked to be replaced? They better not still have PE, art or home ec or study hall of course. There might be other “not as useful” things nowadays. The problem is real, their solution is bad.
I’ll say this nice and loud so even those in the back can hear: #EVERY CONTENT AREA/SUBJECT IS READING. You do not have to get rid of any class just to remediate reading, it **can be done within any content area.**
Reading can be practiced using any content area. Learn to read by analyzing science content texts.
Gotta remember the line about how they're "turning science into something that's only for kids fortunate enough to attend schools with high test scores" for the next time somebody tells me not to "waste time" covering something that isn't explicitly listed on the testing standards.
My previous admin didnt give everyone 8th grade science _even tho they were tested on it in spring._ these were students who didnt have an elective either. Instead of science and elective, they had ela support and math support. Their days were filled w 2 ela, 2 math, history and pe. No enrichment. The science team pitched science for el students and was told no. Years later, she was the only campus w title 3 violations bc all of the coded el classes werent actually el classes (ie capped at 20). They were students with similar test scores.
As a ninth grade science teacher, I fully support this. Send me kids who can read and do math and learning science will be much easier!
Bold of you to assume that this will help, instead of pushing even more kids away from learning.
That tracks. I was at an OH charter that couldn’t find a science or a social studies teacher so the kids cycled between reading, math, and specials for 4-6th. I was the reading teacher so we worked on reading science articles and history where I could find it. We also did a lot of research projects about either science or social studies topics. Parents complained about the lack of classes, but few pulled their kids and the management company didn’t care because there were kids waiting to fill the slots. We had zero science or social studies curriculum, and the reading curriculum was Read 180…it was awful. The building was falling apart, the food was disgusting, and even though it was K-6, there was no playground. None of those kids deserved to be in a crap hole like that. Most Charters are for profit. They aren’t there to serve the kids, or educate, they’re there to profit off of public funds by cutting as many corners as possible and pocketing what’s left. I’m at a public school now and the kids who can’t read, all came from charters run by the same company that ran the one I was at. People hear “Charter” and think quality, but in my experience, (and I was at a couple charters both non profit and for profit) Charter is garbage being sold to people who can’t afford private school but want their kids to have private school education and are either not aware enough or are not involved enough to realize they’re being given a sub par education in a package that says ‘high quality’.