Course Outline

Home 

Policies Course Outline Assignment Calendar

Student Links

 Teachers Parents  

 

 

(Subject to adjustment)

 

Click here for Revised Version 11/14/04 (MSWord Document)

Regents Living Environment
Course Outline
Holt Biology Textbook (New York State Edition) Note
Rationale for This Sequence

Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution
Theodosius Dobzhansky (1900-1975)

 

Unit 1: Introduction to Mental Models, Scientific Method & Living Environment
(2 full week = 14 periods)

Unit 2: Evolution - Darwin's Model (2 week = 21 periods)

Unit 3: Principles of Reproduction & Heredity - Mendel's Model (3 Weeks = 21 periods)

Unit 4: Cell Biology & Homeostasis  (7 weeks = 49 periods)

Unit 5: Modern Synthesis & Evolution of Life on Earth (4 week = 28 periods)

Unit 6: Ecology (3 weeks = 21 periods)

Unit 7: The Future & Human Impact on the Environment (4 Weeks = 28 periods)
Chapter 18

Unit 8: Human Biology & Homeostasis (6 weeks = 42 periods)



Rationale for This Sequence


I would like to begin the year with a unit on evolution, since I truly believe the Dobzhansky quote about biology only making sense in the light of evolution.  At the same time, I know that my students do not yet have the requisite background information to tackle the issue.  I thought about the least number of steps I would need in order to get to evolution.  I'm still thinking about breaking up the evolution unit and doing a simple, natural selection unit before the cell biology unit.  That would require revisiting modern synthesis after cell biology.  On paper that makes sense, I'm just not sure my students will be able to handle the back-and-forth nature of such an approach. (Note: I've just made the change. We'll see if it works or not.)

Of course Darwin formulated his theory of natural selection knowing nothing about genetics or simple Mendelian rules of heredity.  Mendel, for his part, knew nothing about the actual mechanism for passing on traits - no idea what a "gene" was. He used the term "factors," a rather vague term for some unknown entity that was responsible for carrying traits.  So why then must students know what genes are before studying heredity?  Why must they understand heredity before they study evolution? I suspect that time is the issue.  It simply takes longer to "cover the material" if we start with observable patterns and phenomena, then work toward the unobservable mechanisms. It seems easier to work from the mechanism, since the mechanism explains the phenomenon and is ultimately necessary to understand the phenomenon.  But this is the reverse of how science usually works, and leaves the teacher open to the constant whining of "Why do we need to know this?"  I want to start with the big questions - How did we get here? What makes us "us?" How do our bodies work?  These are questions that students are genuinely interested in, and the answers to those questions require dabbling in some areas of study that are not otherwise immediately "interesting." 

So, start with big ideas that arouse curiosity, then move to the details that are necessary to understand the big ideas, revisit big ideas.  That's my approach to the extent possible. Learning is and teaching should be an iterative process. Notice that a major theme of this course, homeostasis, is introduced with cell biology, and revisited with human biology.  Of course there will be many opportunities in other units to reinforce the concept, but in the two units mentioned it will be a major focus.

The other difficult decision is whether to finish the year with ecology or human biology.  Both are heavily tested on the exam, and both offer great opportunities to review and apply major themes of the course. I decided that ending with human biology would be more enjoyable for my students.

Addendum: I should have mentioned the significance of actually starting with a unit on mental models and the scientific method.  A great deal of time this year will be spent dealing with mental models of how things work in biology.  In fact virtually all of our theories about the natural world are mental models, and it would be helpful for students to understand the significance of that statement by creating their own mental model of a simple but visually opaque system using "indirect" observations - i.e., sound and feel will be used to produce a visual representation of something un-seeable. The specific version of activity itself comes from FOSS Models & Designs, a grade six science kit that my sixth graders had a hard time with when I piloted the unit a few years ago.  I think it will be more appropriate for my grade 8 students.

A Note About the Textbook

I am a bit annoyed that these so-called "New York State Editions" of major national textbooks are nothing more than slightly fluffed up versions of the standard editions, with "Practice Regents Exam Questions" at the end of the chapters.  Otherwise, they are in no way aligned with NY State's core curriculum except by coincidence.  You might at least expect a reference at the beginning of each chapter noting the core objectives that will be addressed in the chapter, but that is missing.  Many of the Key Ideas in the core curriculum are given short-shrift in the textbook, while other ideas are over-developed.  It's got nearly as many pages as my college biology textbook (but fluffed up, of course, with photos and "activities" and the like).

On the other hand, Holt was more readable in my opinion than our other choice, the Glencoe Biology: Dynamics of Life, which seemed to be even more over-stuffed with unnecessarily complex terminology and consequently unreadable (How many vocabulary words can we cram into a paragraph and claim that we have "covered" the concept?).