|
|
Perhaps you’ve wondered why it’s taking so long for us to begin adding content to this site in the form of textbook and resource reviews. There are several reasons, of course, but one has to do with my desire to build the appropriate infrastructure so that our content (which I dream will be extensive one day) can be sorted and browsed easily and powerfully by visitors. Such an infrastructure involves creating pages that are highly organized and pieced together from content stored as specific data fields rather than as one large body of free-form text.
The Subject-Topic index that we’ve discussed recently is an example of just two of the data fields for which specific values would need to be applied to each review (web page). These data fields are called “Custom Fields” in WordPress, the content management system (CMS) that we are using. As I have perused and studied lots of different resources over the last year, I have been thinking a lot about what “chunks” of content might be stored as as values in custom fields. Of course, each review will contain a block of free-form paragraph text, but lots of useful parameters can be captured in data fields.
So, without further adieu, here is my full list of proposed custom fields. Data fields whose code names are followed by an asterisk have a defined list of values. Proposed values for these predefined lists are numbered 1-5 if they represent a rating (1=worst, 5=best). Proposed predefined values that are lettered are neutral (A is not better than D).
Proposed meta-data to collect for resources that we review.
Data Field
(code name) |
Description/Value-list |
Snippet
(snippet) |
A meta-description (less than 240 characters) for the review, based on the reviewer’s Intro-Summary paragraph. |
Citation
(text_citation) |
Complete and properly formed citation for the item; substitutes for dynamically generated citation from component custom fields (see next several rows) until those are fully populated and built into the page template. |
Title
(text_title ) |
Title of the book or resource |
Series title
(text_title_of_series) |
Title of the book or resource series |
Author(s)
(text_author) |
Names of authors; (Last name, Initials); separate multiple by semicolon |
Publisher
(text_publisher ) |
Name of the publisher [= pub_name] |
Location
(text_pub_city) |
City and state of publisher |
Edition
(text_edition) |
Edition of the book reviewed |
ISBN
(text_ISBN) |
International Standard Book Number(s); separate multiple by semicolon |
Medium
(text_media_form) |
Format of the primary content being reviewed: (textbook, book, article, speech, lecture, sermon, short video, motion picture, television program, software program, website). Is it possible to develop a formal list? |
Supplied as
(text_media_supplied) |
Primary forms in which content is available: (book, file download, streaming, CD, DVD, satellite feed, website). Is it possible to develop a formal list? |
Accessories
(text_media_accessories) |
Format of accessories to the primary content being reviewed: (workbook, lab book, study guide, CD-ROM, DVD, etc.). Is it possible to develop a formal list? |
Length
(text_length ) |
Number of pages (book) or time (CD or DVD) |
No. of lessons
(text_number_lessons) |
Number of lessons (i.e., assuming a normal daily class period) |
Questions?
(text_questions_YN*) |
Does the text include problems, review questions, or discussion questions of some kind? |
Answer keys?
(text_answers_YN*) |
Are answer keys included or available (Y/N)? |
Solution keys?
(text_solutions_YN*) |
Are solutions to problems included or available (Y/N)? |
Test banks?
(text_quizzes_YN*) |
Are quiz- or test-banks provided for the teacher (Y/N)? |
Teacher guides?
(text_teach_guides_YN*) |
Are guides or resources available for the teacher (Y/N)? |
Price
(text_price) |
Approximate list price of the book or resource |
Subject
(subject_main*) |
Main science subject |
Topic(s)
(subject_topic) |
List of specific topics within the subject (most important for books about or a few topics only, e.g., magnetism) |
Curriculum intent
(curric_type) |
Classifies how comprehensive the resource is as a learning tool for the given subject or topic:
- A. Complete = comprehensive (includes text, exercises, laboratory materials, etc.)
- B. Core content = core text only (e.g., no lab or supporting exercises, etc.)
- C. Lab component = primarily only lab activities or exercises (e.g., no core text)
- D. Supplementary = intended as extra help for a particular subject
|
Curriculum duration
(curric_duration) |
Length of time the curriculum is designed for: (year, semester, month, week, day) |
Target setting
(target_setting*) |
As stated by the author or apparent from style, this describes the main schooling context for which the text was written: (Homeschool, School classroom, Small group, Individual self-study) |
Target audience and purpose
(target_audience*) |
As stated by the author or apparent from style, this describes the main audience for which the text was written:
- A. Christian-Developmental (help Christians develop a Christian worldview)
- B. Christian-General Apologetic (help Christians establish a defensible Christian theology)
- C. Christian-Indoctrinal (teach Christians what to believe)
- D. Secular-Evangelistic (promote Christianity to secular audience)
- E. Secular-Nonreligious (unconcerned with religious aspects)
- F. Secular-Relativistic (all religions equal)
- G. Secular-Antagonistic (against Christianity, religion and theism)
- H. Blank
|
Target grade
(grade_target) |
The target grade level, assuming a traditional sequence of subjects: (K-2, 3-5, 6-8, 9-10, 11-12) |
Target range
(grade_range) |
The lowest and highest grade-levels for which the text might be applicable. |
Christian?
(text_author_Xn_YN*) |
Is the author a Christian (Y/N)? |
Evangelical?
(view_Xn_evang_YN*) |
Is the author an Evangelical (Y/N)? |
Self identification
(view_Xn_self_describe) |
Authors will be allowed to write a brief (140 character) description of their religious belief and denominational affiliation, etc. This would be displayed as a quotation. |
Church affinity
(view_Xn_church_affinity) |
Stated or apparent church or denominational persuasion of the Christian author |
Theology
(view_Xn_theol*) |
The Christian author’s stated or apparent theological disposition:
- A. Calvinist
- B. Reformed
- C. Fundamentalist
- D. Pentecostal
- E. Arminian/Open theist
- F. Process theist
- G. Other (state)
|
Origins
(view_Xn_origins*) |
The Christian author’s stated or apparent view of origins:
- A. YEC (young-earth creationist)
- B. OEC (old-earth creationist)
- C. PC/IDM (progressive creationist or intelligent design movement)
- D. EC (evolutionary creationist)
- E. TE (theistic evolutionist)
- F. Unknown, not apparent or not relevant
|
Bible-Science
(view_Xn_bible_sci*) |
The author’s stated or apparent view of authority of scriptural revelation (with regard to science):
- A. Literal (scientifically authoritative in its plain reading)
- B. Concordant (even scientifically, when interpreted correctly)
- C. Accommodated (not intended to be scientifically authoritative)
If this category is applied to secular authors, too, then also add:
- D. Human insight (contains valid thoughts about metaphysics but no miraculous history)
- E. Irrelevant (contains no particular value or divine truth, i.e., no special revelation)
- F. Unknown, not apparent or not relevant
|
Self Identification
(view_secular_self_describe) |
Authors will be allowed to write a brief (140 character) description of their religious belief and denominational affiliation, etc. This would be displayed as a quotation. |
Science-Religion
(view_sci-relig*) |
Author’s stated or apparent view of the compatibility of science and Christian theism:
- A. Argues against it
- B. Assumes not compatible
- C. Has no specific comment or opinion
- D. Respects and honors the possibility
- E. Promotes compatibility
|
Denomination affiliation
(affil_denom) |
Formal denominational affiliation of the author, either by virtue of the publisher or expressly stated. |
Institution affiliation
(affil_institut) |
Institution of the author (college or organization). |
Department affiliation
(affil_dept) |
Department of the author |
Amount of religious content
(rate_relig_amt*) |
(0-5) Amount of religious content in the text: 0 = none; 1 = very little mention; 5 = prominent throughout |
Quality of religious content
(rate_relig_quality*) |
(0-5) Quality of the religious content that is present: 0 = absent; 1 = very poor; 5 = excellent |
Conformity to consensus science
(rate_sci_consensus*) |
(1-5) Conformity to well-established, consensus (mainstream) science:
- 1 = extremely skeptical of many well-established things or extremely strident and progressive about new theories (i.e. extreme either way is bad)
- 5 = very well grounded and fairly characterizes where questions remain.
|
Scientific accuracy
(rate_sci_accuracy*) |
(1-5) Accuracy of the scientific content and explanations:
- 1 = lots of gross errors and imprecise explanations
- 5 = very high level of accuracy and clarity for the target age
|
Completeness (per benchmarks)
(rate_sci_comprehensive*) |
(1-5) Comprehensiveness, with respect to topics considered, as assessed against a basic list of national benchmarks and standards: 1 = very incomplete; 5 = comprehensive |
Homeschool usability
(rate_homeschool_usability*) |
(1-5) Overall assessment of the ease-of-use and adaptability to the homeschooling situation (mostly for resources, not official curricula), whether or not that was the target setting. This rating summarizes the overall effects of several other categories: 1 = way too expensive or not adaptable or practical for homeschool use 5 = excellent and affordable for homeschool use. |
Overall rating
(rate_overall_rating*) |
(1-5) Reviewer’s overall rating: 1 = very poor; 5 = highly recommended |
Reviewer name
(reviewer_name) |
Name of the ASA member reviewer |
Link to Reviewer’s bio.
(reviewer_pageID) |
Link to a dedicated page describing the qualifications and other short biographical information about the reviewer. |
I’m fairly confident that this basic structure and list of custom fields is adequate for the task. As I said, I’ve put a lot of thought into it, so it would take a lot to convince me to rethink the entire thing. And I don’t wish to quibble over minutia, either. We can refine wording later (for example, we could change “consensus” science to “mainstream” science). In fact, I envision creating a “glossary” to define and explain what we mean by certain terms and descriptions. (For example, evolutionary creationism (EC) has come to mean something slightly different from traditional theistic evolution (TE). The latter includes Deists, the former does not.)
Even so, I might have overlooked something. Is there a category of information that you think would be important to collect so that it can become the basis for sorting, filtering and comparing reviews?
In the last post, Drafting a subject-topic index, I presented a heavily pruned draft of a subject-topic index. In this post I provide a longer, unpruned version. I believe our goal is to arrive at a list that is somewhere in between these two extremes.
This index came from several sources. First topics were found from syllabuses and curricula. State standards were were briefly examined. The Earth Science topics came from the Table of Contents of a couple of textbooks. A few other items were examined. In general, the list is best suited for high school courses as it came from their requirements.
I worked on the list as an outline. The pruned outline of the last post was kept at two levels. In this outline, the matter section the outline is six levels deep. Level 1 is bold, level two is plain, level three is italics, level four is asterisked, level five is hyphenated, and level six is plain again.
The subjects of ‘Technology and Applied Science’, ‘Science as Study’, ‘Science and Christianity’ have not been repeated for this post.
Some of these levels are more natural than others. This raises questions of how to treat natural subtopics. For instance, should the ‘Sun’ be a topic called ‘Solar System: the Sun’?
I could use feedback. Thanks.
–Patrick
The Outline
Astronomy
The Cosmos
Galaxies and Stars
The Solar System
Discovery and exploration
Sun
Planets (Inner planets and Outer planets)
* Mercury
* Venus
* Mars
* Jupiter
* Saturn
* Uranus
* Neptune
Asteroid belt
Dwarf Planets
Comets
Kuiper belt
Earth Science
Earth’s Properties, Structure, Composition
Seasons
Solar intensity
Latitude
Structure and Composition of the Earth’s Interior
The Earth’s surface
Plate Tectonics
* Earthquakes
* Volcanoes
Minerals and Rocks
* Igneous Rocks
* Sedimentary Rocks
* Metamorphic Rocks
* Rock Cycle
Soil and Soil Dynamics
* Weathering and Formation of Soil
* Erosion and Deposition
* Soil Conservation
Earth’s Envelope
The Atmosphere
Atmospheric composition
Atmospheric Layers
Energy in the Atmosphere
Air Movement
The Hydrosphere
Oceans
Freshwater
Ice Masses
Water Cycle
Weather and Climate
Atmospheric Water
Changing Weather
Storms
Weather Forecasting
Climate Patterns
World Climates
Climate Change
Earth’s History
Origin and Development of the Earth and Its Envelopes
Eras and Periods of Geologic Time
Fossils Record
Earth’s Resources and their use
The Earth’s Energy
*Energy Consumption
- Fossil Fuel Resources and Use
- Formation of coal, oil, and natural gas
- Extraction/purification methods
- World reserves and global demand
* Nuclear Energy
* Hydroelectric Power
- Dams
- Flood control
* Pollution
- Soil, air, water, noise, light
* Agriculture
* Forestry
* Mining
Ecosystems
Ecosystem Structure
* Biological populations and communities
* Ecological niches
* Interactions among species
* Keystone species
* Species diversity and edge effects
* Major terrestrial and aquatic biomes
Energy Flow
* Photosynthesis and cellular respiration
* Food webs and trophic levels
* Ecological pyramids
Ecosystem Diversity
* Biodiversity
* Natural selection; evolution
* Ecosystem services
Ecosystem Change
* Climate shifts
* Species movement
* Ecological succession
Biogeochemical Cycles
* Carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur, water
Physics
Classical Mechanics
Motion
* Velocity, Speed
* Acceleration
* Linear Motion
* Projectile Motion
* Circular Motion
* Spring-Mass Oscillators
Newton’s Laws
* Newton’s First Law
* Newton’s Second Law
* Newton’s Third Law
Energy
* Conservation of Energy
* Kinetic Energy
* Potential Energy (Gravitational)
Forces in Nature
* Gravity
* Newton’s Universal Law of Gravity
* Electrical Forces
Momentum
* Conservation of Momentum
Fluid Mechanics
* Hydrostatic pressure
* Buoyancy
* Fluid flow continuity
* Bernoulli’s equation
Matter (see chemistry)
Heat and Thermodynamics (see chemistry)
Waves
Wave Description
* Transverse, Longitudinal
* Wavelength
* Frequency
* Wave speed
Wave motion (including sound)
* Traveling waves
* Wave propagation
* Standing waves
* Superposition
Types of Waves
* Electromagnetic waves
* Light waves
* Sound waves
* Water Waves
Physical optics
* Interference and diffraction
* Dispersion of light and the electromagnetic spectrum
Optics (Geometric)
* Reflection and refraction
* Mirrors
* Lenses
Electricity and Magnetism
* Electrostatics (Static electricity)
-Electric Charge
Coulomb’s law
-Electric field and electric potential (including point charges)
-Gauss’s law
-Fields and potentials of other charge distributions
* Conductors and Insulators
-Electrostatics with conductors
-Capacitors
Capacitance
Parallel plate
Spherical and cylindrical
-Dielectrics
* Electric circuits
-Electric Current
-Electric Resistance
-Electric Voltage
-Electric Power (Watts)
-Ohm’s law
-Transistors
* Magnetism
-Magnetic Fields
* Electromagnetism
-Electromagnetic induction (including Faraday’s law and Lenz’s law)
-Inductance
-Maxwell’s equations
Non-Newtonian Physics
Special Relativity
* Mass–energy equivalence
General Relativity
Quantum Physics
Chemistry
Matter
States of Matter
* Solid
-Structure of solids
-Lattice energies
-Crystals
* Liquid
* Gas
-Ideal Gases Laws
Equation of state for an ideal gas
Partial pressures
-Kinetic molecular theory
Interpretation of ideal gas laws on the basis of this theory
Avogadro’s hypothesis and the mole concept
Dependence of kinetic energy of molecules on temperature
Deviations from ideal gas laws
-Changes of state
Critical points
Triple points
* Changes of state
* Plasma
Structure of Matter
* Atomic theory
-Proton, Neutrons, Electron
-Atomic masses, Atomic number, mass number; isotopes
-Electron energy levels:
Atomic spectra,
Quantum numbers,
Atomic orbitals
-Periodic Table & Periodic relationships
Atomic radii,
Ionization energies,
Electron affinities,
Oxidation states
* Chemical bonding & Molecules
* Binding forces
-Ionic,
-Covalent,
-Metallic,
-Hydrogen bonding,
-Van der Waals
-London dispersion forces
* Polarity of bonds
* Molecular models
-Lewis structures
-Valence bond
-VSEPR
* Geometry of molecules and ions,
-Structural isomerism
-Coordination complexes
-Dipole moments of molecules
-Geometry and chemical properties
* Quantum theory
-Photons
Wave-Particle duality
* Crystals
* Polymers
* Compounds
* Solutions
-Solubility
-Concentration
-Normalities
-Raoult’s law and colligative properties (nonvolatile solutes)
-Osmosis
Nuclear decay
* Half-lives
* Radioactivity
Chemical Reactions
Reaction types
* Acid-base reactions;
-Concepts of Arrhenius, Brønsted-Lowry and Lewis;
-Coordination complexes; amphoterism
* Precipitation reactions
* Oxidation-reduction reactions
* Oxidation number
* The role of the electron in oxidation-reduction
* Electrochemistry:
-Electrolytic and galvanic cells;
-Faraday’s laws;
-Standard half-cell potentials;
-Nernst equation;
-Prediction of the direction of redox reactions
Stoichiometry
* Ionic and molecular species present in chemical systems: net ionic equations
* Balancing of equations, including those for redox reactions
* Mass and volume relations
-The mole concept
-Empirical formulas and limiting reactants
Equilibrium
* Concept of dynamic equilibrium, physical and chemical;
-Le Chatelier’s principle
-Equilibrium constants
* Quantitative treatment
* Equilibrium constants for gaseous reactions: Kp, Kc
* Equilibrium constants for reactions in solution
* Constants for acids and bases; pK; pH
* Solubility product constants
-Solutions and precipitation
-Dissolution of slightly soluble compounds
* Common ion effect; buffers; hydrolysis
Kinetics (study of rate of chemical reactions)
* Concept of rate of reaction
* Reaction rate laws
* Temperature & rate of reaction
* Energy of activation
* Catalysts
Thermodynamics
State functions
Laws of Thermodynamics
* First Law of Thermodynamics: Conservation of Energy
-Enthalpy
-Heat of formation
-Heat of reaction
-Hess’s law
-Heat of vaporization
-Heat of fusion
-Calorimetry
* Second Law of Thermodynamics
-Entropy
-Free energy of formation
-Free energy of reaction
-Dependence of change in free energy on enthalpy and entropy changes
Heat & Work
Engine Cycles
Entropy
Life Science (Biology)
Cells and Their Structures
Biochemistry
Cell Functions
Heredity, Genetics and Evolution
Classifying Life
Evolutionary patterns
Survey of the diversity of life
Phylogenetic classification
Evolutionary relationships
Examining Types of Living things
Plants (Botany)
Animals (Zoology)
Fish, Reptiles, Snakes, Birds, Mammals, etc.
Biological Systems (Physiology)
Skin, Bones, and Muscles
Food and the Digestive System
Cardiovascular System
Respiratory and Excretory Systems
Controlling the Body
Diseases and the Body’s Defenses
Reproductive Systems and Life Stages
Ecology
Population dynamics
Communities and ecosystems
Global issues
Health / Nutrition
 Ken Ham canceled from Great Homeschool Conventions Parents who read homeschool blogs or plan to attend an upcoming home educator conference will be aware of recent events concerning Answers in Genesis president Ken Ham vis-a-vis bible scholar Peter Enns and Apologia science textbook author Jay Wile. Because of the positions that these three individuals represent in relation to natural science and biblical interpretation, the controversy involving Ham, Enns and Wile is significant and relevant to the concerns of the American Scientific Affiliation (ASA) and this Homeschool Science Resources website.
Who are Ken Ham, Peter Enns and Jay Wile?
Ken Ham is founder and president of Answers in Genesis (AiG) and the Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky. The organization is devoted to defending Young-Earth Creationism (YEC) and biblical literalism against any view of natural history that accepts geologic time-scales or biological evolution requiring anything less than a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation accounts. Ham is a frequent speaker at Christian homeschool conventions, whose organizers and attendees generally agree with his YEC (and anti-evolution) position.
Peter Enns is a PhD Old Testament Bible scholar who has recently written the first book of a homeschool Bible curriculum called Telling God’s Story (Olive Branch Books). No stranger to controversy, Enns taught at Westminster Theological Seminary from 1994 to 2008, when he left WTS as a result of views he expressed in his 2005 book Inspiration and Incarnation – Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament (Baker Academic). Several months later he became a Senior Fellow of Biblical Studies at the BioLogos Foundation, an organization “committed to promoting a perspective on the origins of life that is both theologically and scientifically sound.” This includes acceptance and promotion of evolution as science. Enns is a frequent blog contributor on the BioLogos Forum.
Jay Wile is a PhD nuclear chemist and author of the popular Exploring Creation with… homeschool science textbook series. Like Ken Ham, Jay Wile is a strong advocate of Young-Earth Creationism. He founded Apologia Educational Ministries in 1994 to support publication of his science textbooks. In 2008 he sold the company, and in 2010 Wile left Apologia because of philosophical differences with the new owners. He continues to lecture and blog about critical thinking and the Christian worldview in science education and homeschooling, including to oppose mainstream scientific consensus about evolution and environmental issues such as global warming.
What’s the news about Ken Ham, Pete Enns and Jay Wile?
 Ham, Enns and Wile speak at same homeschool convention. Briefly, here is what has transpired:
- Spring 2011: Great Homeschool Conventions schedules Ham, Enns and Wile as featured or workshop speakers at four regional conferences, the first of which occurred March 3-5 in Memphis, TN. Coincident with the introduction of his Bible curriculum, Enns gives three talks relating to Christian Bible education.
- March 15, 2011: Ken Ham blogs to warn homeschoolers about Peter Enns before the second convention in Greenville, SC the following weekend. Ham labels Enns a “compromiser” and makes his readers aware of Pete Enns’s association with the Evolutionary Creationist (EC) views of the BioLogos Foundation. Ham declares that the teaching of Peter Enns “is outright liberal theology that totally undermines the authority of the Word of God.” Ham calls Enns’s position “an attack on the Word–on Christ.”
- March 16, 2011: Jay Wile blogs to refute the accusations made by Ken Ham that Pete Enns’s views and approach to teaching the Bible are unbiblical. While being clear that he does not agree with Enns about the creation narratives, Wile strongly supports the participation of Enns at the convention as being part of healthy dialogue and an “opportunity for critical thinking.” The blog post provoked over 600 comments, many of them expressing outrage that Wile would defend Enns and rebuke fellow YEC Ham.
- March 18 and 20, 2011: Jay Wile blogs again and again about Pete Enns after taking the opportunity to attend his workshops at the conference that weekend. Both posts are very complimentary of the perspective Pete Enns brought.
- March 20, 2011: Ken Ham posts a warning on Facebook about both Enns and Wile, reiterating his concern that Enns represents dangerous, liberal theology.
- March 25, 2011: The advisory board of Great Homeschool Conventions disinvites Ken Ham from its two remaining regional conventions, citing as the reason his mean-spiritedness toward Peter Enns. Christianity Today reports the story as well.
- April 1, 2011: Ken Ham continues to blog about the views of Pete Enns.
Why are these events significant?
There are several noteworthy aspects of these developments:
- The very fact that Great Homeschool Conventions (GHC) is allowing Peter Enns to speak at all is significant. It was obviously a shock to Ken Ham and his supporters.Young-Earth Creationism (YEC) has been the dominant view of biblical theology and natural science represented in the Christian homeschool community to date. Indeed, anti-evolutionary creationism is one of the formative and defining perspectives of most Christian homeschool cooperatives. One would assume that GHC organizers were aware of the background, views and associations (i.e., with the BioLogos Foundation) of Pete Enns before allowing him to present. They must have known that he does not align himself with their stated YEC view — indeed that his approach to biblical interpretation and inspiration does not require or support young-earth conclusions. Yet, they clearly defend the qualifications and value of Peter Enns to present about Christian Bible education. Of course, none of Enns’s talks at these conventions were directly about biblical interpretation in relation to science. Nevertheless, one wonders if the actions of GHC are a sign of greater openness in the future to more diverse Christian perspectives regarding creation-evolution issues. Or, will a backlash of displeasure from homeschoolers cause the GHC (and other homeschool networks) to retreat and entrench to preserve their support base? Only time will tell.
- How will these events impact initial sales of Telling God’s Story, the new Bible curriculum by Pete Enns? Is the controversy good or bad publicity? How will this affect and be affected by Enns’s association with respected homeschool speaker and author Susan Wise Bauer? Enns and Bauer are colleagues from graduate school, and Telling God’s Story has the same publisher and complementary style and format as Bauer’s four-volume curriculum Story of the World – History for the Classical Child. (The connection to Bauer has not been overlooked by Ken Ham.) The Enns curriculum appears to be unlike other Bible curricula that currently exist, and it is likely to provide the sort of approach that at least some parents have been desperate to find.
- What will be the effects of and on the BioLogos Foundation, whose mission and agenda could not be more opposite (within the Christian worldview) from that of Answers in Genesis? BioLogos President Darrell Falk has addressed the recent events in blog posts on April 1 and April 6.
- Jay Wile’s comments on the events are impressive for how they differentiate him from Ken Ham, though both are ardent young-earth creationists who many might assume are cut from the same cloth. Clearly, Wile’s style and approach to apologetics and Bible-science issues derive from a different sort of “scientific” method. The immediate response by Wile following Ham’s initial blog post indicates that he comes by his convictions honestly – that is, he commented before the GHC decision to disinvite Ham, not afterward (which might have been perceived as a way to protect his reputation). Indeed, he is likely to lose some supporters who feel like they must now throw their support behind either him or Ham.
What does this have to do with the ASA Homeschool Science Resources website?
If you are visiting this website for the first time, you should know that the American Scientific Affiliation (ASA) is an association of Christians who are professional scientists. Our purpose is to investigate the relationship of Christian theology and natural science and thereby to edify both Christian and scientific communities. This Homeschool Science Resources (HSR) Project is intended to fulfill these purposes for the Christian homeschooling community. By reviewing and providing information about available curricula, textbooks and other science education resources, we hope to assist parents in choosing tools to effectively teach science subjects to their children.
Are you struggling as a parent to comprehend how science ought to be understood in relation to Christian faith? Are you searching for practical resources to help teach and discuss science from a particular perspective in your homeschool? We have you in mind as we build this HSR website. In several important ways, we are positioned to provide the kind of help that no other site can:
- First, unlike the individuals and organizations discussed in this post, we have no commercial interests (i.e., do not sell curricula or advertising) and do not depend on the homeschool community (public approval) for support. Administration of this project is completely voluntary.
- Second, we do not promote only one specific position on science and faith topics. Although many ASA members have views akin to those of the BioLogos Foundation (some individual are members of both organizations), we represent a broad range of denominations, scientific disciplines and views of biblical interpretation in relation to science. This differentiates our mission from BioLogos’s mission.
- Third, our membership includes highly qualified scientists (and theologians concerned with science issues) in a variety of fields. Scientists join our organization because they care deeply about exploring the nuances and wonder of science-and-religion issues. We are a highly educated bunch. Some are very prominent scientists and theologians. Each individual has particular views but knows and respects other perspectives within the Christian worldview.
- Finally, we want to provide information and resources that are practical. We are not interested in creating a forum for noisy debate and endless strings of comments. Our goal is to review textbooks and available resources in a rigorous and generally objective manner so that you have sufficient information to make purchase decisions and/or to locate appropriate materials to supplement a purchased commercial curriculum to provide additional perspective.
For example, we assume that parents would like to know how and why Jay Wile’s approach is different than Ken Ham’s (theologically and/or scientifically) before choosing to teach their children with materials from one or the other source. And parents who are more trusting of the scientific community might wish to know how and why both Jay Wile’s and Ken Ham’s versions of Creationism are considered disproven scientific theories by most believing physicists, geologists and biologists. And how might we begin to understand and teach respectfully about different Christian views on the historicity of Adam and the Fall, biblical interpretation of Genesis 1-11, creation doctrine and theology, the nature of revelation and inspiration of the Bible, and the meaning of infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture?
No one is sure how the recent controversy concerning Ham, Enns and Wile will affect the kind of science that parents will have the opportunity to study and consider in the homeschooling world (e.g, conferences, co-ops and the like) in the coming months and years. We hope, along with Jay Wile, that a diversity of views are allowed to be presented as the entire Christian community struggles to properly understand the mysteries and wonder of faith in Christ for our time.
However volatile debate becomes in the broader community, you can expect to find useful and practical information here. Visit again soon.
–Douglas Hayworth, PhD; HSR Project Coordinator
Hi everyone, this is Patrick.
Back in January, Doug asked, “Is there a volunteer who will take the lead in developing a useful school subject and topic list?” I volunteered and have been struggling to collect my thoughts and put words and order to them. Before I could regret my decision, Doug sent a file with his preliminary work. He had a lot of great work. (Thanks Doug.)
The goal is to classify reviewed items to help visitors find the reviews. The study of the natural sciences is to be divided into a short useful list of ‘main’ subjects. Then each subject would be broken down further into a short list of topics. Finally, additional keywords can be added. (See Developing a subject-topic index.)
I am still struggling and could use feedback. Below is my latest draft of a subject-topic index. After the outline, I will continue commenting. The subjects are in bold type and the topics in italics.
Astronomy
The Cosmos
Galaxies and Stars
The Solar System
Planets
Earth Science
Structure and Composition of the Earth
Geology & the Earth’s surface
The Atmosphere, Weather and the Climate
The Earth’s Water (The Hydrosphere)
Earth’s History
Earth’s Resources and their use
Ecosystems
Physics
Forces, Motion, Energy & Momentum (Classical Mechanics)
Fluid Mechanics
Heat and Thermodynamics
Waves (EM, Light, Sound, and Water)
Electricity and Magnetism
Non-Newtonian Physics
Matter
States of Matter
Structure of Matter
Molecules & Chemical bonding
Compounds & Solutions
Nuclear decay
Chemistry
Chemical Reactions
Chemical Thermodynamics
Life Science (Biology)
Cells and Their Structures
Classifying Life
Examining Types of Living things
Biological Systems (Physiology)
Ecology
Health/Nutrition
Interdisciplinary Subjects
Earth and Space Science (Includes Earth Science and Space Science)
Environmental Science (Includes aspects of Life Science & Earth Science)
General Science (Includes Studies of most branches of Science)
Nature Study (Includes aspects of Life Science & Earth Science)
Physical Science (Aspects of Physics and Chemistry)
Technology and Applied Science
Scientific Instruments
Inventions
Engineering
Science as Study
Unifying Concepts and Processes
Science as Inquiry
* Scientific Method
* Measurement
Nature /Philosophy of Science
History of Science
Science & Society
Science and Christianity
Science and belief in God
Science and the Bible
Science and Christian theology
Science and Christian practice
The first set of subjects are traditional ‘main subject’ areas of the natural sciences. They are Astronomy, Earth Science, Physics, Chemistry, and Life Science (Biology). There are three odd items that stick out. First, Matter is really a topic for both Physics and Chemistry. It is a small topic in Physics yet a large topic in Chemistry. How should it be treated? Second, Thermodynamics is a topic in both Physics and Chemistry; yet it is replicated! Third, Health/Nutrition is very different from the other topics in Biology.
The ‘Interdisciplinary Subjects’ are added to help find common combinations of the main subjects. Some parents will be more familiar with Physical Science and not think of checking both Physics and Chemistry.
The last three subjects are not ‘main subjects’ of science as they are not about describing nature. These subjects are Technology and Applied Science, Science as a Study, and Science and Christianity.
Science as a Study is about the study of science itself. A few of these topics come from the NSES. Without reading the standards, I would have trouble finding a Unifying Concept. By the way, Unifying Concepts includes such things as cycles (rock cycle, water cycle), scaling (powers of ten), and mathematical models. Similarly, I would have trouble using Science as Inquiry.
This outline started with many of the outlines listed in the last post. Additional topics were added based on course outlines. Then the outline was pruned and pruned to keep it short. Perhaps the outline is too short now.
Alright. What needs to be done to bring this into a final, practical index? What is missing, wrong, or confusing?
Here is an update on the Conceptual Framework for New Science Education Standards Project from the Board on Science Education (BOSE) of the National Research Council (NRC). I am on the email list to be notified about the progress of this project. I’m looking forward to the publication of the new science standards framework, as it will provide a guide and benchmark for evaluating textbooks and resources that we review.
Dear Colleagues:
The revised Framework report is undergoing a confidential external review by a group of independent experts selected by the National Research Council. The report will be released once it has cleared this rigorous external review process. At this point, we anticipate releasing the Framework to the public in late spring 2011. If there is any delay we will announce it on the project website.
http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Standards_Framework_Homepage.html
Thank you for interest in the project.
Rebecca Krone
Program Associate
Board on Science Education
National Research Council
Keck WS1125
500 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
www.nationalacademies.org/bose
The National Academies
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering and Medicine
 Here is a report that I wrote for possible inclusion in the next ASA Newsletter about a workshop that I had the privilege to be a part of last month.
On February 19, Douglas Hayworth participated in the workshop “Overcoming stumbling blocks to communicating human evolution” at the National Museum of Natural History in Washington, DC. The event was organized by the Smithsonian Institute staff responsible for the Hall of Human Origins exhibit, as well as NESCent, the National Evolutionary Synthesis Center.
The event included about 45 high-profile researchers, science writers and educators who have particular expertise and experience in paleoanthropology and/or teaching about evolution. Doug was invited because of his role in leading ASA’s Homeschool Science Resources website project and because he had helped Randy Isaac organize and communicate the feedback offered by ASA meeting attendees who visited the Human Origins exhibit in July. (You will remember that Rick Potts, the exhibit’s curator, spoke at the 2010 ASA meeting in Washington D.C.)
“It was an honor for me to be part of this stellar group, to represent the ASA and to share the particular concerns and needs of homeschoolers,” said Doug. “I commend Dr. Potts and the entire Human Origins Program staff for creating an exhibit and educational environment that encourages serious and broad-ranging dialogue about what it means to be human in light of current knowledge about human evolution.”
The workshop included large- and small-group sessions in which participants shared what they see as being the major stumbling blocks (barriers) to learning about human evolution as well as any strategies or tools that they have found helpful in overcoming these barriers in their own teaching. All the ideas were captured for later compilation and ongoing discussion by the group via a working group wiki. Doug is excited about the many types of excellent educational resources that are becoming available for the public and for the new connections he was able to make at the workshop. He was able to meet several people he had corresponded with previously about science education matters.
ASA members Paul and Kathy Arveson kindly offered for Doug to stay the night at their home. The time together was delightful, and Doug enjoyed worshiping with them on Sunday morning at The National Presbyterian Church.
 To help our website visitors easily find and compare different curricula and resources, it is important that we classify every item that we review or describe by subject and topic. We need to develop a comprehensive list of subjects and topics and then use it consistently for classification of our textbook and resource reviews.
I must confess that every time I’ve sat down to sketch out a subject-topic list, I have quickly become completely overwhelmed and flummoxed. Am I over-thinking the problem, attempting to do the impossible, or simply failing to see the obvious pattern? Is there a volunteer who will take the lead in developing a useful school subject and topic list?
What am I talking about?
For our purposes, “subject” refers to the main disciplines of science, such as physics or biology. “Topic” refers to the subdivisions within subjects, such as inertia or momentum in physics, and cell structure or organ systems in biology. Both levels of classification are necessary because some books or individual resources will be about only one or several topics within an overall subject area. (“Keywords” constitute a third level, but they don’t need to be organized in any particular way, so it is not the concern of this discussion except where we need to decide when a term qualifies as a topic vs. a keyword.)
Harder than it looks
Classification of standard middle and high school textbooks by subject is fairly easy (biology, chemistry, physics). Those are full-year subjects that more or less cover the same range of topics in all curricula. But that’s about as far as “easy” takes us. In fact, even with these standard subjects, there are choices to be made. For example, do we call it biology or life science? Isn’t the middle school subject called “physical science” a combination of physics and chemistry? At the subject level (usually in grade 7 or 8), earth and space are often treated together as topics under “earth science”; do we follow this convention or consider earth science and astronomy to be two different subjects?
Typical elementary school curricula break down primarily by topic rather than subject. A textbook for a given year might contain units on the human body (biology or health), electricity and magnetism (physics), the solar system (astronomy), and plants (biology again). Depending on the curriculum, these units are separate books, so one might classify a given book (or unit of a textbook) by its main subject and topic (e.g., biology – human body). Either way, some basic list of topics is necessary within each general subject area.
Some initial thoughts
I think the subject-topic list should be just large enough to meaningfully classify most of the materials we might discuss, yet small enough to be useful, simple and intuitive. The question is, “What amount of detail is sufficient and optimal and what particular subject-topic titles are simple and direct enough to enable homeschool teachers (parents) to identify relevant items?”
I’ve perused the table of contents of several textbooks, but they use a variety of titles for main sections (topics). I’ve even looked at places like the PBS Nova TEACHERS website (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/teachers/), where they list the following subject areas for the teacher resources they have:
- Anthropology
- Archeology
- Earth Science
- Engineering
- Environmental Science
- Forensic Science
- Geography
- Health Science
- History
- Life Science
- Math
- Paleontology
- Physical Science
- Science & Society
- Space Science
- Technology
I’m not suggesting that this list is exactly what we need. It’s obviously customized to the range of topics represented in Nova programs. However, this Nova Teachers site is “standards-based” so topics are related to areas that are considered key subject and topics in education content. For example, environmental science is usually a major topic within middle school earth science and again in high school biology. Should we classify it as a subject or just a topic? Likewise, health science is split out from life science (biology), and that is probably appropriate at the subject level.
Science content standards as a guide
I have found it helpful to consider the National Science Education Standards (NSES) (http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=4962). You can download the entire PDF document for free. The portion on “content standards” (pages 103-111) identifies several content “topics” in each of the following eight categories:
- Unifying Concepts and Processes
- Science as Inquiry
- Physical Science (includes Chemistry)
- Life Science
- Earth and Space Science
- Science and Technology
- Science in Personal and Social Perspectives
- History and Nature of Science
Obviously these are not directly school subjects, but a consideration of the main content standards for the three grade levels (K-5, 6-8 and 9-12) in each of these content categories is instructive with regard to the task of developing a subject-topic list. (You’ll have to view the document to see the list of individual standards in each of these categories.)
And what about the Christian perspective?
In addition to categorizing regular (merely secular) school subjects and topics, our site must provide an expanded list of topics and subjects relating to science and Christian belief. We need more detail in this area because our site will have much more content in this one area. Of course, discussion of Christian perspectives cuts across all subject areas (and all of content categories of the NSES). However, some topics are unique to the Christian audience.
If I were to add another content category and its standards to the NSES, it would be:
- Science and Christian belief
- Science and the Bible
- Science and belief in God
- Science and Christian theology
- Science and Christian practice
Those seem like logically distinct areas within this additional category.
Putting it all together
Okay, so I’ve described some of the issues involved in developing a subject-topic list (or index). And I’ve suggested that it’s instructive to think about subjects and topics in relation to the NSES content categories (plus a new category specific to the Christian perspective). This provides a framework and a beginning, but I need help bringing it together into a final, practical subject-topic index. Ideas and suggestions, anyone?
Do I have a volunteer who’ll take the lead on this one?
– Doug
In October I wrote privately to our project volunteers to explain some of the things that will be happening next with the development of the site. Now, more than a month has passed! I did finally solve some infrastructure issues that needed to be addressed, and now, Lord willing, things can move ahead at a quicker pace.
Here’s what to expect in the coming weeks:
- Shorter, more frequent blog posts: There are still various website issues to discuss and acquire feedback about. Writing shorter, more focused posts about individual questions will allow me to post with greater frequency and therefore to maintain a more constant level of activity on the site.
- More diverse blog posts: Several people have forwarded to me general news items about science education, Christian education or homeschooling. I’d like to start posting these bits of news, even if it’s nothing more than an FYI without much commentary. Please tell me about any such items you encounter. I encourage you to include a few brief comments of your own that draw attention to how the issue relates to science homeschooling or Christian education.
- Publisher Profiles: I (finally) will be sending letters to several key homeschool curriculum publishers this week. Whether or not I receive timely responses, I plan to create a page for each one that provides at least a very brief description. We can always update and expand on the profile if and when the publisher responds to our survey.
- Resource Reviews: There are a number of books, websites and various ASA-related resources that I own and have some ideas for reviewing. I’ll list these in a forthcoming post in case someone else in the group is already familiar with (or has taught from) certain ones and would like to take a first crack at writing a review.
Finally, I hope that you are praying for this project, that it will develop in a way that serves and glorifies God by promoting unity among Christians and proclaiming the name of Christ to the world. Please also pray for me personally, as I have “coincidentally” experienced various interruptions and family crises at exactly the moments when I set aside time to work on this project.
–Doug
This is just a short post to correct and clarify changes affecting the blog feed URL for the site. Previously, nearly all content on the site was categorized as part of the blog (i.e., as posts). If you wanted to subscribe to the “ideas blog” (discussion forum and announcements about the site), you were instructed to use the following feed:
http://asa3online.org/homeschool/category/blog/
Now I have classified most of the site content (reviews, lesson plans, guides, etc.) as pages rather than posts, which means that blog posts are now reserved exclusively for the the “Ideas blog” content. Therefore, please unsubscribe to the aforementioned address and re-subscribe using the following URL:
http://asa3online.org/homeschool/blog/
I apologize for this slight course-correction. I’m quite sure this will be the last such change. This does not affect the logical or conceptual menu-structure of the site; it only affects how pages are classified at the back end.
This message will be the last blog post that will be accessible via the old feed link.
Doug
 Title page of the public draft of A Framework for Science Education Relevant to our recent discussion of science curriculum standards and benchmarks is a new initiative by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), and the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) to establish national science education standards for K-12.
In my earlier post about guidelines for the HSR project, I referenced two sources of national science standards (here and here). As I understand it, those earlier projects are now 10 to 20 years old, and the new initiative is a collaboration of the same organizations to update and refine the standards.
Here is the announcement letter that the AAAS membership received (forwarded to me by Randy Isaac):
Dear Colleague,
An opportunity is at hand for AAAS members to make a significant contribution to science education reform. As we noted in our 28 May 2010 editorial in Science, efforts are underway to move the nation toward a “clear statement of learning goals for science that are the same across states.” A coherent set of learning goals is essential to the design of curriculum and assessment materials, and the scientific community needs to play an active role in the development process.
The Board on Science Education at the National Research Council has just released a draft of a conceptual framework to guide the development of next generation standards for K-12 science education and your input is needed. We hope you will take the time to download and read the request from the NRC and if at all possible to respond by August 2.
Sincerely,
Alan I. Leshner, Shirley Malcom, and Jo Ellen Roseman
Public feedback is welcome.
The invitation to review these drafts and provide feedback applies to everyone, not just AAAS members. I look forward to studying the draft proposal and completing the online survey. I encourage you to do the same.
Start with this Cover Letter. (Links to the relevant documents and online survey links are at the bottom).
|
Note Thanks for checking in!
We're fully functional and ready to begin adding content (reviews, essays, etc.).
Please browse the site and provide your feedback and suggestions.
Home Teacher Survey Vote for your favorite science curriculum and tell us how we can make this site better. Please take a few moments to complete our Homeschool Teacher Survey. |
Site Blog