We have been kicking around the idea of reversing the "normal" order for our higher track students: 9th - physics (discovery/exploratory with no more than algebra I math) then chemistry then biology (or biology then chemistry just for the KS state assessments).
Cognitive devlopment makes sense - you can roll balls, pull rope or push springs and get the (sorry) feel for the science rather than labelling bits of cells and determining genetics which is more abstract.
Currently our lower track students can take earth science, biology, then usually zoology/botany. We have thought of some sort of health science and/or some sort of environmental/technolgy science for the vocational jobs that are in high demand. Upper track is biology, chemistry, physics then AP something.
Leavenworth High School
From: "Kelly Deters" <kellymdeters@xxxxxxxxx>
To: KACT <kact@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [KACT] Course revamp questions
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 20:28:48 -0600
Our school is consolidating next year and may revamp the science
curriculum both to meet the new Regents requirements and just to make it
more significant for our students. We now require physical science for
our freshman but Regents will not accept it. As we will be either a
large 3A or small 4A school we cannot get too broad in our courses. I
would like to know what other schools, esp smaller ones, are doing with
their curriculum? Especially needed are 1) what do you require freshmen
to take -- is it a general required course, like Phys Sci, or are there
frosh options; 2) do you let sophs take chem (as it will now be required
by Regents requirements) or do you wait til they are juniors like we
currently do; 3) what junior+ courses do you offer, esp to the lower
"track" students. We would like to offer earth science but are
limited/prohibited by certification (good old Kansas: why can't we
get/keep science teachers but let's keep specializing certification!).
I'd appreciate any input from you all.
Terry J. Tinich
Pomona High School
Pomona, KS 66067