Science Documentaries for Youngsters?

An anonymous reader writes "My 7-year-old daughter is asking some interesting questions, such as, 'How did everything get created?' I've explained, in general terms, our family's non-religious views on the subject of creation and the Big Bang. I'd like to find some documentary videos geared to this age level that may explain better these concepts and theories. I've found a few PBS specials online - Stephen Hawking stuff - but they seem to be geared for young adults and older. Does anyone have recommended titles that might be better geared to children of this age bracket?"

Comments

Symmetry

[BadAnalogyGuy]

It's not a video, but if you have a science-oriented child in your household, Symmetry magazine is a very good choice. It's published by Fermilab and discusses all sorts of things related to scientific discovery, from particle physics to the daily routine of scientists at Fermilab. It's a regular publication and it costs nothing, so it's only a positive for your kid.

http://www.symmetrymagazine.org/cms/

Beginnings.

[headkase]

I'm not religious at all but still I see some mysticism in the Universe. To quote the Matrix: "Everything that has a beginning has an end.". Or to put it in human terms, we cannot comprehend something that did not have a beginning. And Turtles all the way down just doesn't cut it.

Re:Beginnings.

[the eric conspiracy]

Mysticism is a response to the unknown. Unfortunately it isn't a very useful response. It is much better to respond with empiricism and inquiry than carving stone idols.

Re:Beginnings.

[witherstaff]

Instead of quoting the matrix you may want to change to quoting Einstein:

The fairest thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true science. He who knows it not and can no longer wonder, no longer feel amazement, is as good as dead, a snuffed-out candle. It was the experience of mystery -- even if mixed with fear-that engendered religion. A knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, of the manifestations of the profoundest reason and the most radiant beauty, which are only accessible to our reason in their most elementary forms-it is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute the truly religious attitude; in this sense, and in this alone, I am a deeply religious man. I cannot conceive of a God who rewards and punishes his creatures, or has a will of the type of which we are conscious in ourselves. An individual who should survive his physical death is also beyond my comprehension, nor do I wish it otherwise; such notions are for the fears or absurd egoism of feeble souls. Enough for me the mystery of the eternity of life, and the inkling of the marvellous structure of reality, together with the single-hearted endeavour to comprehend a portion, be it never so tiny, of the reason that manifests itself in nature.
-Albert Einstein, The World as I See It

Re:Beginnings.

[Geno Z Heinlein]

Please do not look to "The Matrix" for spiritual guidance. You won't find anything worth a damn there. I respectfully disagree. The Matrix asks a lot of important questions about creation, existence, and perception that every individual absolutely must deal with if they are going to choose their place in the world around them, if they are genuinely going to decide to even be an individual. The Matrix is our generation's telling of Allegory of the Cave, which is the root of all Western European thought about both will and epistemology.

That's worth a big damn.

Re:Beginnings.

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, the mystics could just be delusional.

So, apart from the meaningless, out of context quotes from "authorities", your mystics tap into something that can't be detected and produce no communicatible results.

I'm sure it's a very nice delusion, with a way to train the release of endorphins or self-stimulate that part of the mind that produces that "one-with-the-universe" feeling (that can also be accomplished with an electrode), and it may even produce some nice rule-to-live-by....

But if you stop at mysticism - you're no better than those parents that let their kid die because they used prayer instead of medical attention.

Re:Beginnings.

[BadAnalogyGuy]

The Matrix asks a lot of important questions about creation, existence, and perception that every individual absolutely must deal with if they are going to choose their place in the world around them, if they are genuinely going to decide to even be an individual. The Matrix is our generation's telling of Allegory of the Cave, which is the root of all Western European thought about both will and epistemology.

That's worth a big damn.

Whoa!

Re:Beginnings.

[YttriumOxide]

I'm sure it's a very nice delusion, with a way to train the release of endorphins or self-stimulate that part of the mind that produces that "one-with-the-universe" feeling (that can also be accomplished with an electrode)

It can also be accomplished with hallucinogenic drugs, and it is indeed a wonderful delusion. I just wish other people would realise it IS only a delusion (I'll happily have a couple of tabs of acid and go all mystical for 12 hours or so, but while I still marvel at the tricks my mind plays on me, I still KNOW they are just tricks.

Wonders of Life Series

[the eric conspiracy]

Frank Capra did a series of science documentaries in the 50's that are quite amazing. Adults might find them a bit over the top, but for a seven year old they can be really mind bending. I know they had a big impact on me as a child.

Our Mr. Sun
Hemo the Magnificent
Unchained Goddess
The Strange Case of Cosmic Rays

are available on DVD. The whole series had nine films, but I haven't been able to find the others.

Winged Migration is also quite good.

Simpsons to the rescue again!

[mlawrence]

This opening video should keep your child interested and fuel a healthy discussion. http://youtube.com/watch?v=5X4L-Q9MHCg

"The Universe" on the History Channel

[RAM_Doubler]

"The Universe" series on the history channel has some quality episodes about the origins of the solar system and the Universe. (http://www.history.com/minisite.do?content_type=Minisite_Episodes&content_type_id=54042&display_order=7&mini_id=54036)

Cosmos

[Lord Byron II]

It's old, but its wonderful. It's truly Carl Sagan at his best. And when she's old enough, there's the companion book. And the whole thing is available on Netflix.

Re:Cosmos

[Geno Z Heinlein]

Absolutely seconded, Cosmos is just brilliant. Even without the science, even just as some visual tone poem, it would be a fascinating show. I remember a "thought spaceship" -- it might not have been that exact name -- where Sagan introduced the idea that we might picture in our minds what could exist literally "billions" of light years away. Cosmos also was my introduction to the composer Shostakovich and his 11th symphony.

But with the science? Cosmos is of profound educational and inspirational value. It's been something like 30 years since it came out -- I tend to think of Cosmos in one mental breath with the specials about relativity that came out in 1979 for the centennial of Einstein's birth -- but I remember feeling like this was something special. Sagan was a guy who really had a sense of just how damn cool the universe is.

Look at PBS again.

[Lumpy]

Search for "magic school bus" and they have an episode on the big bang.

in fact that tv show is good for chemistry, molecular physics, biology, etc....

The only thing that I know is this:

[zappepcs]

See, when we were growing up we didn't have science shows aimed at 7 year olds, so 7 year olds had to ask their parents or grandparents etc. And they chose the best answer they could find.

The best thing that you can do IMHO is to take your daughter in hand and go find the answer. She will learn two things at a minimum: The answer to the question as best as it can be answered, the fact that you care to do that for her, and the methods you use to find answers. That last one is way more important than you might think.

I used to hate hearing the words "go look it up" but it did lead to me looking for a lot of things... and finding them. When she learns from you HOW to look for answers, hopefully she will never stop looking for answers as long as she lives.

Magazines and the Public Library

[anmida]

When I was growing up (which wasn't that long ago, really), my parents got me a Ranger Rick subscription as a very little kid. Then they got me Kids Discover which I read until I was 9 or so, I think. National Geographic is also really good, and Scientific American, for when she gets a little older. In addition, the public library should have some nice glossy picture books about the planets and other things. I would recommend that she read as opposed to watching TV; she'll become a better reader and you can really get lost in books, stare at the pictures and let your mind turn on all of it - take your time as opposed to being rushed along as films too often do. But films are good too :)

Re:www how things work dot com of course

[2TecTom]

well, let's see what googles, shall we ...

Wikipedia for Kids:
http://schools-wikipedia.org/
Article on Wikipedia for Kids:
http://www.marrowbones.com/commons/technosocial/2007/12/wikipedia_for_kids_teaching_a.html
NASA for Kids:
http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forkids/kidsclub/flash/index.html

and yes, if you want kids books, ask a librarian at the library, imho

Re:you could try this one...

[Clockwork Apple]

If Ben Stein couldnt keep a highschool class awake, what good is he going to do for a seven year old? Anyone? Anyone?

C.

http://richarddawkins.net/growingupintheuniverse

[SolitaryAnt]

"Growning up in the universe" is for children. It is available free online at the above adress and you can order dvds if you like.

Not a title of a documentary per se

[...charc...]

But a repository of good multimedia clips and lessons aimed at children of different ages: http://www.teachersdomain.org/

This site is run by the PBS station WGBH. You might be able to find footage of what you are looking for here and questions that could spark and interesting conversation between yourself and your child.

Kids TV has gone downhill

[RackinFrackin]

It's too bad there's no modern equivalent of 3-2-1 Contact or Mr. Wizard's World. Both (and I'm sure some others) were good shows aimed at teaching kids science on a good level. Newton's Apple was excellent too, although it was not aimed solely at kids.

Bill Nye and Beakman (especially Beakman) were not as good because they were too interested in being flashy and funny and catering to kids with no attention spans.

I don't know if there's anything comparable on TV today.

Old, but brilliant...

[PinkyDead]

The Life on Earth series from the BBC.

I know it's fairly local (i.e. our planet) - but it is inspiring.

Planetarium Possibilities

[BearInTheWoods]

Check your local planetarium, if possible. They often have shows geared to younger children.

I took my niece (then about 6 years old) to one a couple of times after she showed interest in star-gazing. I think these days, she (now 9 years old) might be better than me at picking out constellations!

Observe your daugher carefully

[Qbertino]

I don't know your daughter and wether she is a potential savant or not. Asking such questions at the age of 7 could indicate that. However, it is more likely that she's just like any other child. Meaning that at about the age she is in, normal healthy children ask questions for the sake of asking questions. They practice the task of asking. You can observe this when they repeat a question or when they inmediately follow up with another question without really pondering your last answer that much. Because they really can't fathom what you're saying actually. It's the general process of Q&A their interested in. That doesn't mean you should lie - just stick to answers that are low on the abstract and rich on images. And - honestly now - screw any conserved media. A wildlife documentary around the age of 10 or so every once and a while is ok - but it's not before well into teenage that children can really gain knowledge from these. Other means of education are far more important before that.

By far the biggest screwup of modern western education - with huge, seemingly unrelated consequences for society - is that it treats kids under teenage and even teenagers far to much like intellectually fully developed grown-ups. Appealing to pure reason and logic in a 7-year old does more damage than good, with consequences that show up far later in life (lack of will and motivation, concentration problems, undeveloped social skills, restlessness, etc. - we geek kids of the 80ties know all this). If here questions are of the usual nature (her *praticing* the process of questioning!) then see it as a game and follow along, even if it turns into seemingly strange circular Q&A sessions. Ask her repeating questions in return yourself - she's praticing the act of questioning, the subject hardly matters ("Where do you live?" and a few other related questions repeatadly asked and answered, is a classic for this sort of thing). You'll actually notice that this questioning goes away after a while and comes back during the teenages if it was dealt with appropriately at younger age.

The first specs of true scientific interest come at the age of about 9. And then a trip to the library or the zoo or a science park and you sticking to personal and live explainations (that needant be all that scientifically detailed) of real phenomenon (weather, "Where do rivers come from?" "How can a car drive?", etc.) are all she needs. And don't worry - if you give her the right kind of education at the right time, she'll be a bright kid all by herself when her intellect and her strength for own reasoning fully awakes. Usually at the age of adolescence - as parents all around the world know very well. In fact, her reasoning will be far more healthy and her own if she doesn't get intellectually challenged to early in life. And it will be supported by a healthy own will, if she has the correct treatment as a child to look back on. There are other things children need to develop before they can develop a healthym intellectual reasoning. It's for that exact reason that the question "What would you like?" often is totally misplaced towards a toddler or small child.

And FYI: Yes, that is an essential conclusion of waldorf education. An educational methodology sometimes considered heretic by other educational trends. I've found it to be spot on. Make you own experiences, but do your and your sibling a favour and don't burry your kid in all kinds of media to early before you know what's really going on.

My 2 cents as a father of a 10 year old daughter.

Re:Observe your daugher carefully

[PDAllen]

You're not too far off in terms of general development - but you really cannot assign ages like this.

Some kids develop faster, others slower. If you look more closely, it's usually even more of a mixture: some kids learn some things faster and other things slower. I still remember my first primary school teacher insisting that at age 5 I could not possibly have learnt to read yet, and not allowing me to have books beyond 'A is for Apple' when I wanted to have something more like 'Thomas the Tank Engine' (not so much more advanced, maybe, but there are complete sentences in the latter even if they're short). Three weeks of boredom seems like a lot when you're five (that being about how long it took her to understand that I could read simple sentences without sounding out the words).

(incidentally - sibling = (brother or sister), not child)

Re:Wikipedia lessons for kids

[YttriumOxide]

Go to an important (for your kids) Wikipedia article, say one on Hannah Montanah.
Edit it. Add the fact that she has a dinosaur for a pet. Or the part about her having five elbows. Save. Show. (And then revert.) Ask your kid about the wisdom of using Wikipedia. (*)

Better idea, do all of that, but DON'T revert it. Go back to the page sometime later and point out that someone else has fixed the mistakes. THEN ask your kid about the wisdom of using Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is not infallible, and mistakes can slip through and even remain for a long time in some rare cases, but most things will be fixed very quickly, and "in general" it is a fairly accurate resource (especially if you actually check cited references). It is, on the whole, far MORE accurate than many other accepted resources precisely because it is editable.

Pure FUD

[Anonymous Coward]

I occasionally vandalize obscure articles on Wikipedia on purpose, just to test its integrity. No matter what I do, it's always reverted within a few hours.

There are a lot of smart, careful, and bored people who do nothing but watch the global changelog and review new edits.

I am actually proud of my kids' school, where they have banned wikipedia for use as a source.

Good for them. In the coming century, that policy will make it that much easier for my kids to outcompete yours.

Avoid TV, go for discussion and books

[EmbeddedJanitor]

TV programs, even documentaries, have to attract eyeballs for advertising revenue. Therefore entertainment has priority over education. Magic School Bus and Discovery Channel get dumbed down and hyped up until they're just shows with an "education" handle so that parents let the kids watch them. Perhaps you can find some reasonable BBC stuff, but I would expect not.

As parent says, get the kid interested in books and magazines. Take them to public lectures. These are all typically higher quality than TV/video. Read up yourself and do some of that quality time stuff.

I'm a homeschooling parent and spend a lot of time having discussions on a wide variety of subjects with the kids. Sure, this is a bit more effort (I have to read up on stuff I don't know about), but that gives you a second chance at an interesting education too.

... And don't give me that "I don't have the time" BS. It does not take a lot of effort to read up on stuff, instead of watching crap on TV. If you don't have the time to interact with kids, get yourself sterilized.

No, that's exactly why it's *right*

[John Miles]

The evolution of the standard atomic model is a perfect illustration of how the scientific process is one of continuous refinement. You can use it to introduce the idea that the Universe doesn't owe us an explanation of itself, and how there will never be a time of genuine "enlightenment" when we can stop asking questions.

It's a good way to give the kid antibodies against superstition and mysticism, in other words. "No, we don't really understand what stuff is really made from. Nobody does... not yet. But people know a lot more about it than they did I was your age, and we can do a lot of cool stuff with the knowledge we have."

Connections with James Burke

[Uosdwis]

This Show is old but it is very interesting. How a silver rush in Czechoslovakia leads to telephone is amazing. History and science at its best. How one idea leads to another and how things are the way they are, you can't beat it. This guy is amazing and his shows explain some complex things in easy enough terms for a twelve year old. Maybe a bit more than your daughter but if she is asking questions then this is what you want. Truly an amazing historian. Otherwise tell her about Ada Lovelace, Ãmilie du ChÃtelet, Lise Meitner and Marie Curie. Amazing women of science.