I'm all for teaching evolution in science classes, and all for teaching creationism as an example of what science is not. However, I am not so sure that evolution and the scientific method needs to be introduced in grades K-5 at all.
This proposal on change.org suggests just that. I realize that understanding of evolution is at a dismally low level in the US, but I just don't think that means that it is important to teach the difference between fact, theory, and law in science to children who are less than 10 years old. But, I know nothing of pedagogy, so I'd like to hear what experienced teachers of elementary school children have to say about this. Anyone?
Grades K-5: Kids in elementary schools will be introduced to basic concepts, including Evolution, the scientific method, Biology, Geology, Astronomy, and many basic experiments and labs. They will be taught the basics of Evolution, and what “Facts”, “Theories”, and “Laws” mean in Science.
_(cropped).jpg)
You teach the young ones what you think they can absorb, and they are certainly able to understand the differences between facts, theories and laws.
ReplyDeleteI think it's important to help the kids understand cause and effect in evolution...it is rather counter-intuitive.
How many adults think "giraffes grew longer necks"?
And "teach creationism as an example of what science is not." THAT I would save until the students are much older.
You teach the young ones what you think they can absorb,
ReplyDeleteIsn't there anyone out there with some solid knowledge about what children can absorb at what age?
How many adults think "giraffes grew longer necks"?
They didn't? Did they begin with much longer necks?
But seriously, I think as many as those who think black people are tanned.
Isn't there anyone out there with some solid knowledge about what children can absorb at what age?
ReplyDeleteShort answer: no.
It would certainly make educators jobs easier if there was solid data on that topic.
My experience such as it is, is that kids can learn what they are interested in if it is given to them in the right sized chunks.
Surely you have been observing just that with your kids?
Cailte, yes, I would say that's my experience. But then you could ask if you can get most children interested in evolution that early. And perhaps our experience that they can learn what they are interested in is contingent on the depth of what you introduce. I am quite sure they wouldn't be able to handle much of mathematics no matter how you go about it, for instance.
ReplyDeleteSure but the mathematics isn't necassary to understand the basic concepts, which is all they are talking about. They mean the really basic stuff as well, take a look at a math or science syllabus for K+ and you will see what I mean.
ReplyDeleteNo, I suppose that's right. Do you know of a place where I could see what the science/evolution syllabus would look like for K-5? (The proposal on the site doesn't appear there anymore.)
ReplyDeleteGah haven't checked back for a while.. but.. finding the syllabus or curriculum documents in the US seems to be a complete nightmare.
ReplyDeleteIn Australia they are public documents (yay transperancy).
You can find the National Curriculum (for Australia) for Science which is in development here: http://www.acara.edu.au/verve/_resources/Australian_Curriculum_-_Science.pdf
You can find the state of Queensland's current Science "Curriculum" here: http://www.qsa.qld.edu.au/p-9/7297.html
That should give you some ideas as Australia is not that a-typical for western countries.
Thanks for sharing. I read the pdf on the general science curriculum, and was pleased to see the focus in broad and much about evidence. And does include elements of evolution, as far as I can discern.
ReplyDelete