Please tell me more about your experience with the Robinson Curriculum.

[Camy-7 boybarians 1 lady]

After homeschooling for 15 years, I am interested in a more student-led, guided program for my children that are still learning at home (6 yob, 9 yob, 11 yog).

 

The Robinson Curriculum intrigues me, and I have checked out the website. I love the idea of a literature-based program and the use of Saxon math.

 

My 9yob is a struggling/dyslexic reader and I am wondering if the reading selections would be too difficult for him. I am also curious about how much time is required of me daily to supervise my children in their work. Also, how much time does this student invest daily to complete their work?

 

I love the price of this program but need more info.

 

 

Thanks!

 

Camy

Edited June 7, 2012 by Camy

[ErinD]

Bumping for you, because I'm curious.

[Hunter]

I believe that when teaching we can get about 90% of the results from just 10% effort. When we try and close in on that last 10% of results, it seems to take 90% of effort.

 

I'm not a fan of the exact Robinson TITLES, but his basic METHOD will get most families about 90% of the results they are looking for.

 

Have you seen the Rosegate Harbour site?

 

My younger son did a radical LCC method that was actually based on Robinson. Latin and Greek were added to the math, and the KJV, Loeb Classics, Brittanica Great Books and hardcopy 70's-80's encyclopedias were his books. This was in the late 90's and early 2000's. It had its pros and cons. It's what we did for better and worse :-0 I don't regret it, but am not sure I'd do it again, knowing all that I know now and being who I am now. But I wasn't that person yet, back then, and didn't know what I do now. So at the time, it was right, I think.

[Camy-7 boybarians 1 lady]

Thank you for this info. I will check this site out. Yes, I do want big results with reasonable effort.

 

Camy

[Hunter]

The two things things we forget, is that when we institute a rigorous textbook, the textbook uses up a certain amount of general energy that cannot be applied to all the other subjects, and the textbooks uses time that cannot be devoted to other subjects.

 

So when we remove "The Good", we free more time and energy for the "The Great". Sometimes the harder we try, the less we accomplish, which is such a shame.

 

One of the things that works well with Robinson, is the combination of a draining and time consuming textbook, and the lighter and gentle free reading. It brings some balance. All too often a curriculum is ALL one or the other. The most effective full curricula are the balanced ones.

 

Instead of trying to fully implement Robinson, I suggest figuring what PIECES of it are the most effective in GENERAL, and what pieces will be most effective for YOU. Don't automatically copy the full package of what worked so well for someone ELSE, because we all have SUBTLE little difference that can offset the BALANCE and make a whole program ineffective, if not acknowledged and tweaked.

[redsquirrel]

You might want to do a search in this forum about the Robinson curriculum. I know I have seen some very educational threads about it in the past.

[Camy-7 boybarians 1 lady]

redsquirrel, I have tried a search, but it didn't turn up anything significant.

 

Blessings,

 

Camy

[Ummto4]

Camy, try 'RC'

[Hunter]

Google "robinson curriculum" site:http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/

[Heidi]

They have a pretty active yahoo group the last time I looked into it, 3 years ago.

[Hunter]

They have a pretty active yahoo group the last time I looked into it, 3 years ago.

 

Sorry, I thought everyone knew about this.

 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RobinsonUsers4Christ/?yguid=346544951

[Spy Car]

Thank you for this info. I will check this site out. Yes, I do want big results with reasonable effort.

 

Camy

 

Robinson wants to $ell people on the idea that they can almost completely neglect their children and that somehow those kids, armed with a pile of books and flash-cards, can educate themselves. It is a siren-song. Don't buy it.

 

Bill

[Hunter]

Robinson wants to $ell people on the idea that they can almost completely neglect their children and that somehow those kids, armed with a pile of books and flash-cards, can educate themselves. It is a siren-song. Don't buy it.

 

Bill

 

:lol: I don't think that is his motive. I just think he is a unique individual that is an EXAMPLE that we can GLEAN from. I've never bought his CDs and don't plan to, but the man has offered ideas, that were helpful to me.

 

I never saw the video. It's interesting. I don't advocate following ALL his ideas :lol: BUT, I do think he is worth listening to.

[thefragile7393]

I know a lot of people who enjoy it, although I have no personal experience with it. It is a pretty good curriculum from what I have seen with others and with my own research. Obviously you don't have to use the method as he does, but listening to his seminars and watching his videos can give ideas on how he uses it with his family, which in turn can give you ideas on how to adapt it for your own family.

 

I don't think one should discount the whole curriculum simply because of how one person uses it or says it should be used. You can use any curriculum any way you wish or make it into what you want for your family.

[Camy-7 boybarians 1 lady]

Bill, do you really believe Mr. Robinson is advocating that parents put their children (along with the curriculum materials) on a boat and then shove them off into oblivion on their own? (okay, that is a bit of an exaggeration) Regardless of his philosophy, I am interested in the structure and suggestions of this curriculum. Frankly, I am feeling old and want something that is done for me. I would be there to assist my children and instruct/teach certain subjects if necessary, yet I am too tired to search around and put things together anymore. I am attracted to the literature-based idea, and the challenging aspect of it. The price is right, too! The fact that the cd's are for k-12 is really enticing to me. The cd's also have many of the literature selections. I would likely have my children use an e-reader (though I am concerned about the effects on the brain of staring at digital media for hours).

 

And, Bill, I believe you are the "Bill" from many intriguing Well-Trained Mind discussions of old. Am I right? I have not been around here much, but I do remember you :o).

Blessings,

 

Camy

[Spy Car]

:lol: I don't think that is his motive. I just think he is a unique individual that is an EXAMPLE that we can GLEAN from. I've never bought his CDs and don't plan to, but the man has offered ideas, that were helpful to me.

 

 

I never saw the video. It's interesting. I don't advocate following ALL his ideas :lol: BUT, I do think he is worth listening to.

 

 

"Unique individual" is an understatement. This is a guy who believes that radioactive nuclear waste is good for people (and therefore ought to be scattered about the earth), who denied that HIV causes AIDS, who denies climate change and who promotes wacky cancer cures (read non-cures), among a long list of "unique" perspectives.

 

 

If we have something to learn from the man it should be to avoid wackadoodles like Art Robinson.

 

 

One advantage to the Robinson curriculum is that it (to my knowledge) is the only homeschool curriculum that teaches 12 Graders how to survive thermo-nuclear war using duct-tape. No lie!

 

 

If people want to believe they can put 7 minutes a day into their child and all will turn out well, here you go. I would advise running away from Robinson as fast as you can.

 

 

Bill

[Lang Syne Boardie]

He had a system that succeeded (by his definition of success) in his own family. That's not the same as creating a method that will be successful for other families.

 

OP, I don't know anything about you so please don't take this personally, but in my opinion if a parent finds that they can't or don't want to teach their children they should put them in school.

 

I worry about all the threads asking for entirely independent, "self-teaching" curriculum for ever younger children because Mom doesn't have the time, interest, or ability to help her child. Some kids learn an awful lot on their own, but most need teachers and involved parents.

[Ummto4]

As soon as I read the thread title I thought about you. :D

 

:iagree:

 

This, and TCOO ....:001_smile:

[Camy-7 boybarians 1 lady]

Tibbie Dunbar, I thank your for your input, however, I do not agree with your supposition. I homeschooled for many years and then put my children in a private school for 2 years. It has been a good experience yet has had it caveats as well. My children come home exhausted and are not able to enjoy family life. They have developed habits in relationships at home due to being overtired and over busy. This has turned them all into very self-centered individuals. Self-centeredness does not work well in a large family household. We have found that during vacations and time off of school that our children get along fabulously. It is not fun to live in a house with 8 children (7 sons) who are cranky and fighting all the time!

 

To me, it is not unreasonable to expect a measure of independence in older children, mainly those who are reading and writing quite well. I do believe they are up to this challenge. However, I would not leave them to fend for themselves.

 

My children have tested exceedingly high in school in the areas of reading, and I love the idea of a literature-based curriculum. I would not let my children to math independently though. It is likely that the Robinson family members are born scientists and mathematicians. This has not been a trait in our family (dang it). We are just low average math people.

 

Your concern over the matter of self-teaching curriculum makes sense. I am too much of a hawk to let them entirely on their own (grin).

 

Thanks for your frankness.

 

 

Blessings,

 

Camy

[Camy-7 boybarians 1 lady]

Tibbie Dunbar, I thank your for your input, however, I do not agree with your supposition. I homeschooled for many years and then put my children in a private school for 2 years. It has been a good experience yet has had it caveats as well. My children come home exhausted and are not able to enjoy family life. They have developed habits in relationships at home due to being overtired and over busy. This has turned them all into very self-centered individuals. Self-centeredness does not work well in a large family household. We have found that during vacations and time off of school that our children get along fabulously. It is not fun to live in a house with 8 children (7 sons) who are cranky and fighting all the time!

 

To me, it is not unreasonable to expect a measure of independence in older children, mainly those who are reading and writing quite well. I do believe they are up to this challenge. However, I would not leave them to fend for themselves.

 

My children have tested exceedingly high in school in the areas of reading, and I love the idea of a literature-based curriculum. I would not let my children to math independently though. It is likely that the Robinson family members are born scientists and mathematicians. This has not been a trait in our family (dang it). We are just low average math people.

 

Your concern over the matter of self-teaching curriculum makes sense. I am too much of a hawk to let them entirely on their own (grin).

 

Thanks for your frankness.

 

 

Blessings,

 

Camy

[Camy-7 boybarians 1 lady]

"Unique individual" is an understatement. This is a guy who believes that radioactive nuclear waste is good for people (and therefore out to be scattered about the earth), who denied that HIV causes AIDS, who denies climate change and who promotes wacky cancer cures (read non-cures), among a long list of "unique" perspectives.

 

One advantage to the Robinson curriculum is that it (to my knowledge) is the only homeschool curriculum that teaches 12 Graders how to survive thermo-nuclear war using duct-tape. No lie!

 

Bill

 

 

Bill, you seem to be well-informed of this Robinson character. Would you mind sharing the source of your comments? Have you used this curric?

 

Camy

[mumto2]

I bought it many years ago because I had to have all of those wonderful books! I love to supplement and thought I had found one giant source. To be perfectly honest it proved to be too much work. It was cheaper to buy used then print in most cases. Finding what I needed seemed time consuming. Now so much of it is on the kindle.

 

There is a list of what is included linked to one of the recent threads. Take a good look first--I didn't have access to the list. Part of the reason I wanted it so badly.:lol:

 

I will admit to the fact that my box of cd's is a bit of a home ed security blanket......but it really has not been used much. I thought Ds would love Henty. He has never voluntarily read one. There are lots of kindle Henty books!

[JaneP]

I haven't bought the cds or ever implemented the curriculum but I do think the simplicity of one hour writing, two hours math and two hours reading a day very appealing.

I think the idea is that the dc school 6 days a week and don't take many holidays.

 

In the end, I just didn't like the book lists. This was a big problem since the books are supposed to cover history, early science and of course literature! If you wanted to "do" the curriculum I would consider making my own list from sources such as Ambleside, Old fashioned Eduction, Rosegate harbour etc and then loading the books onto a kindle. Maybe you could make a book list during summer to work through the school year?

 

When I considered the RC list I realized that if dd couldn't do the curriculum because the books were too hard to read (etc) then the curriculum would no longer be "self teaching".

 

All the best with your plans. I can imagine how you feel and I'm sure you will find something that will suit your particular needs.

Edited June 8, 2012 by JaneP
wrong info

[my2boysteacher]

I read an article about him back when my olders were just starting school. It was very interesting, but I remember thinking there is no way that would work for my family. We are pretty 'crunchy' here. ;) I think from a very young age- 5 or 6, his kids were expected to sit and do an hour of math with no break. Very rigorous. If that type of schedule is conducive to your parenting style/beliefs, more power to you.

Go for it!

[Hunter]

PS is not the default plan when mom gets tired. It is ONE option for SOME families. For others it is not even one of the options.

 

I too am not a fan of the booklist. The booklist is made up of the books that the Robinson's had easily available to THEM. Many more books have become available since then, and better technology has developed.

 

I like the METHOD of LCC, not the curriculum suggestions. I like the METHOD of Robinson, not the booklist.

 

Spy Car, I too would like to see some proof and DATES. There are some comments made by people during the 80's when AIDs was brand new, and during Y2K when people were scared, and all sorts of other times in the PAST that need to be viewed in context.

 

I think Art Robinson did the best he could with what he had to work with, like we all do. What people do when SQUEEZED, is so often an excellent example for us of what we might want to try, and what we might not want to try. I think what I failed at, is often a better teaching example for others than what I succeeded at. Art Robinson is human. I am human. Everyone here is human. Sometimes watching others both succeed and fail, can help us succeed more often. They key is to GLEAN, not copy.

 

OP, if you start with the METHOD, and ANY books, I think things will settle down where you will have the energy to PICK books. I suggest giving yourself 2 months with the method and if you still feel the need to have someone else pick the books for better or worse, than order the CDs.

 

Does anyone know of any decent literature study guides, that might be a good plan for the OP in place of the Robinson book list, and flash cards? Something with vocabulary lists, tests, and history and science background?

[EKS]

Bill, you seem to be well-informed of this Robinson character. Would you mind sharing the source of your comments? Have you used this curric?

 

Camy

 

Not Bill (obviously), but a quick google will give you the information you're wanting.

[JaneP]

Great advice, Hunter.

 

The only thing is that I wouldn't ever consider ordering the cds, even as a last resort. You might want to check with the yahoo group, but my understanding was that the cds used old technology which is not suited to the way we read books today on kindles etc. I may be wrong though so please ask at the RC yahoo group. They are very helpful!

Edited June 8, 2012 by JaneP
wasn't clear enough in my first post

[stripe]

Spy Car, I too would like to see some proof and DATES. There are some comments made by people during the 80's when AIDs was brand new, and during Y2K when people were scared, and all sorts of other times in the PAST that need to be viewed in context.

 

He made a lot of statements and did tv interviews in 2010 when running for political office.

 

He is a celebrated figure among those with similar views for his statements on HIV and radiation, etc.

Edited June 8, 2012 by stripe

[Hunter]

Hmm googling only brought up sites that are obviously slanted. I'm not saying he's innocent, but that the sites are obviously slanted.

 

I've known people with lax nuclear beliefs, one of whom was giving my children instructions on what to do if the local power plant malfunctioned, and I was NOT happy, because my boys were listening to this man, instead of me, because they believed him to be an expert. Drinking lots of water doesn't flush the radiation out of your body, if the water is also contaminated, right?

 

I've seen the results of what I suspect to be a nuclear boo boo up close and personal, and may have even been mildly exposed myself. But, I still took math advice from these men, even if I wanted to wring their necks.

 

These free Glenco Lit Guides include vocabulary lists, and might be a good resource for anyone trying out the Robinson method.

Edited June 8, 2012 by Hunter

[stripe]

He did a lengthy interview with Rachel Maddow, available on Youtube. I presume he felt capable of speaking for himself.

 

His suggestions of nuclear waste disposal in the ocean from his 1995 newsletter article can be seen at this archive

http://www.webcitation.org/65MAI56xB

 

Art Robinson didn't really mean those things. Did he?

(excerpt)

But now, he won't deny that he repeatedly seemed to call for abolishing public schools, or for spreading nuclear waste in the oceans, or for a Social Security policy based on a mathematical impossibility that should be clear to a research scientist. He just explains that he said those things a while ago, or that when he said them he didn't know that he'd ever be running for public office, or that he was talking to an excited crowd and got excited himself.

 

It's an unnerving set of positions but a fascinating set of explanations.

 

About his statements on public schools, he complains, "They're pretty old. One is from a year ago, but I was quoting myself."

 

He agrees he told a group of Maine Republican legislators that public schools should be abolished, but, "Every so often, you get worked up, and speak with hyperbole. Had I known I would ever run for office, I'd have said it differently."

 

...As a scientist, he's also been concerned with making radioactive waste go away. Reported The Register-Guard of Eugene, "An advocate of nuclear energy, he has suggested in the monthly newsletter he writes and edits that nuclear waste can be disposed of by diluting it and adding it into the foundations and insulation of homes, or that it might be diluted and sprinkled over the ocean, or over land."

 

But Robinson is furious at DeFazio for saying Robinson wants to dump radioactive waste into the ocean, complaining, "It is false in substance. It is another falsehood of omission, but the omitted information requires explanation beyond political sound bites."

 

Asked what's false, Robinson says, "The picture he paints is that I'm going to take spent fuel rods, take them down to the pier and dump them off."

 

So no fuel rods off the pier -- just distributing the waste gently and letting it dissolve in the ocean.

 

But besides, says Robinson, "It's politically impossible. People will never be able to understand it."

Edited June 8, 2012 by stripe

[LittleIzumi]

He did a lengthy interview with Rachel Maddow, available on Youtube. I presume he felt capable of speaking for himself.

 

:iagree: It was... creepy.

[Farrar]

Spy Car, I too would like to see some proof and DATES. There are some comments made by people during the 80's when AIDs was brand new, and during Y2K when people were scared, and all sorts of other times in the PAST that need to be viewed in context.

 

But most of those comments were willfully ignorant or, in the case of AIDS, bigoted, even at the time. I'm okay with judging most of them, honestly. And Robinson's for that matter.

[2cents]

I looked into the Robinson Curriculum many years ago when we first started hsing. We decided to choose a more eclectic approach. I just felt that I couldn't commit to just one program. I had some reservations about their approach to science. At the time I recall there wasn't much in the lower grades. I also felt that the printing requirements would become drudgery and create another expense (ink and printer use). I also thought that 20+ cds was asking for trouble. Disks go bad or have copy errors all the time and the odds are there that we would be dealing with tech issues. I just feel that my time is better spent teaching and the less time I have to spend dealing with printing and the inevitable tech issues is better for me. It is IMO pricey as well. I could have avoided a lot of the printing but I didn't want the children to have to spend hours reading on the computer.

 

I have read that many hsers have used RC do so as a supplemental.I think that it would be a resource to have for this purpose. However, I think that a lot of what is in the program can probably be found free on the net at Gutenberg, online textbook sites, etc. if one is willing to put in the time researching. Overall, it wasn't for us but if it works for folks then that is good. I'm all about finding what works. :)

[LivingHope]

When I first started homeschooling nearly ten years ago, I read a review of the Robinson Curriculum and became intrigued by the thought of children reading quality literature for an extended amount of time every day. I then discovered The Well Trained Mind, Ambleside Online, Beautiful Feet, and Sonlight (and a thousand booklists since) and felt confident that I could have my children read and read and read from my own customized list. Reading about the Robinson Curriculum encouraged me early in my homeschooling journey to raise well read children.

 

The kindle is one of my favorite things.

[nansk]

OP, if you start with the METHOD, and ANY books, I think things will settle down where you will have the energy to PICK books. I suggest giving yourself 2 months with the method and if you still feel the need to have someone else pick the books for better or worse, than order the CDs.

 

What is the 'method'? I joined the RC yahoo group for a while to try and understand it, but there is nothing I could find, either on the group, or online about the 'method'.

[Hunter]

I'm going to assume Art Robinson is the ONLY early homeschool curriculum writer to have run for public office? What a combination :lol: I mean really. If ever there were 2 paths that were not meant to mix, it's these 2 paths. The environment then, was just...different. A LOT of people were saying a LOT of things. I'm not excusing him, no more than I am excusing the late 19th century geography book writers. I'm just trying to keep it all in context.

 

Art Robinson wrote some things on his website, that I read at a critical time, when I was crying myself to sleep in fear and guilt that I wasn't providing my "gifted" child a good enough education. The higher he scored on tests, the more people wanted from me. It was just an escalating mess, and while the expectations were escalating, we were sinking deeper into poverty and my health was getting worse and worse.

 

My gut said to focus on skills, but I was being pushed to teach endless lists of content from textbooks. I was basically being told to abandon everything that I believed had led to those high test scores. I had finally given up and agreed to put my kid back in school, and that's when they told me he couldn't come back with test scores like that :-0 They would have him driven an hour away to the city, but he refused to spend over 2 hours a day commuting to a school that was going to assign hours of homework. That made sense; I didn't fight him.

 

And I've been told this week that I don't get shocked when I should. That I have spent my life in such lunacy, that I don't rate things like "normal" people do. An entire row of upper cabinets almost fell on me and electrocuted me last week, and I guess my reaction was a little too calm and accepting :-0 I was just too happy that I didn't get hurt, and that neither did the people trying to help me. I stayed focused on first making sure everyone was safe, and that no further damage was taking place, while everyone else was just in shock that this could be happening.

 

Their shock was immobilizing them and causing them to make illogical and risky choices, with the flooding water and crossed wires. Afterwards people kept saying to me, almost yelling, "Don't you understand how unusual this is???!" "No! I don't. Someone didn't put the cabinets up right, so they fell down." :-0 Believe me I've seen worse construction than that :-0 I still don't get why grown men were so messed up that the cabinets came down. They don't get why I do.

 

Maybe it's the same with Robinson. I've seen so much worse. Those people just didn't run for office :-0

[Supertechmom]

OP, You're welcome to pm me and I'll tell you our experience. :001_smile:

[Hunter]

OP, You're welcome to pm me and I'll tell you our experience. :001_smile:

 

Oh, come on. Share! I understand if you don't want to though. I really do. I'm a big blabbermouth in general, but believe it or not I am holding back more than people would ever imagine, about some things :-)

[Camy-7 boybarians 1 lady]

Wow, Stripe, your thoughtful and thorough insight is appreciated. Thank you for taking the time to elaborate. What you said were things that were in the back of my mind.

 

Blessings,

 

Camy

[Spy Car]

What is the 'method'? I joined the RC yahoo group for a while to try and understand it, but there is nothing I could find, either on the group, or online about the 'method'.

 

That's the thing. Beyond his "unique" ideas (like adding nuclear waste to the cement used in foundations in American home building for it's efficacious health benefits) and the fact that in-the-main people are paying him for public domain books they could get on the web for free, what is "the method"?

 

The "method" (as described by Robinson) is you give kids (including the youngest learners) a pile of books and flash-cards and make them figure out how to do math, how to read, and how to learn almost everything else on their own.

 

He believes this neglect is good because it makes children take responsibility for their own educations. A parent who "helps" their child by trying to "teach the child" is (in his view) robbing a child of their autonomy and self-reliance. If a 6 year old can't figure out their Saxon math, they will just have to struggle with it until they can. The children are to be almost completely ignored.

 

I would no more choose this "method" than I would insulate my home with nuclear waste.

 

Bill

Edited June 8, 2012 by Spy Car

[Hunter]

What is the 'method'? I joined the RC yahoo group for a while to try and understand it, but there is nothing I could find, either on the group, or online about the 'method'.

 

Some of the things people have GLEANED from him are:

 

To do well is science you need good math and reading skills. When crunched, it's better to focus on the math and science hobbies and science living books, than trying to complete a science textbook.

 

Most--but not all--children will learn an ADEQUATE amount of spelling and grammar just from reading copious amounts of good literature. The newer edition does include spelling and grammar now, though.

 

People can get so overwhelmed by teaching writing the "right" way from a plan, that they never require the children to just write. Better to just "do it" than to not do it at all.

 

Skills before content.

 

Children CAN learn to READ math textbooks, if they stick with a single well written series. Children can learn to be accurate and quick at math.

 

Children who just read, write and are given time to complete a rigorous amount of math, and live in a controlled environment without a lot of distractions and temptations, and don't have any significant LDs will get an adequate education, without a significant amount of direct teaching, and use of content textbooks.

 

I don't know. There is more to it than that, but...these are some of the big issues some people have grabbed onto, that changed their priorities and foci.

 

Not all parents are equipped to give their children a FULL TWTM style education, and they are looking for help in prioritizing. Few parent are looking for permission to neglect their children. Instead they are looking for help in facing reality and making the best choices possible within that reality.

 

I do think some parents will only become more confused by listening to Robinson. But most will just GLEAN what they need to hear, and are wise enough to use some good judgement.

[Spy Car]

Children CAN learn to READ math textbooks, if they stick with a single well written series. Children can learn to be accurate and quick at math.

 

Children who just read, write and are given time to complete a rigorous amount of math, and live in a controlled environment without a lot of distractions and temptations, and don't have any significant LDs will get an adequate education, without a significant amount of direct teaching, and use of content textbooks.

 

To translate. Once a child can read (are they supposed to teach themselves that too?) they are given stacks of flash-cards and books and are sat down at a desk "in a controlled environment" for extended periods of time and told to give themselves a rigorous education on their own.

 

Bill

[kalanamak]

 

But besides, says Robinson, "It's politically impossible. People will never be able to understand it."

 

He struck me as a high IQ guy with high IQ kids who likes to be a mover and shaker, and would say/do outrageous things rather than be ignored and unimportant.

 

Not to make too extreme a statement about him, but think of the Pearl families who killed a child: adopted. Didn't have their genes that made rigid obedience attractive, and didn't start from the get-go. I wonder how his method would do taking a 9 year old kid from rural 3rd world country. And, if the kids just lay down and wouldn't do the work, what would he do.*

 

*I'm not saying he's heinous, like Pearl, just that he sells a product that may match very poorly with many children.

[kalanamak]

 

Children CAN learn to READ math textbooks, if they stick with a single well written series.

 

As an aside, I learned to read reading maps. We traveled a lot and my father was a prof of geography. He'd be driving and I'd be in back with a map on my lap. Presumably, some older sib pointed to where we were. Then, Father would start asking me where to turn, how many miles, etc. Since he had the map in his brain, he'd ask if Wichita was coming up, and I'd learn to associate those letters with the sound.

 

It was an occupation on those long drives on rural two lanes at 55 mph. My sister (20 years older than me) relates the time she tried very hard to get him to turn onto a river, and he patiently drove back and forth over the bridge over the "road" she just swore would take them where they were going.

 

However, it was certainly parent intensive.

[Supertechmom]

 

I would no more choose this "method" than I would insulate my home with nuclear waste.

 

Bill

 

 

We know. You chose public school. The fact that their methods completely and totally contradict his method is not lost on anyone. Please stop comparing those who do use this as neglectful harmful parents because you have settled on a different path. The implied insults are a little much and do not help your argument. Especially in a conversation started by someone asking for clarification and input that can only come from those who USE IT. :chillpill:

[NDQuilts]

Not to make too extreme a statement about him, but think of the Pearl families who killed a child: adopted. Didn't have their genes that made rigid obedience attractive, and didn't start from the get-go. I wonder how his method would do taking a 9 year old kid from rural 3rd world country. And, if the kids just lay down and wouldn't do the work, what would he do.*

 

*I'm not saying he's heinous, like Pearl, just that he sells a product that may match very poorly with many children.

 

FWIW - the death mentioned above was that of Lydia Schatz. Her parents, Kevin and Elizabeth, used the Pearls ministry to justify abhorrent, abusive behavior. IMHO the Pearls do not teach anything close to the atrocity that was committed against this child. The violence lies squarely upon the Schatz.

[thefragile7393]

Hmm googling only brought up sites that are obviously slanted. I'm not saying he's innocent, but that the sites are obviously slanted.

 

I've known people with lax nuclear beliefs, one of whom was giving my children instructions on what to do if the local power plant malfunctioned, and I was NOT happy, because my boys were listening to this man, instead of me, because they believed him to be an expert. Drinking lots of water doesn't flush the radiation out of your body, if the water is also contaminated, right?

 

I've seen the results of what I suspect to be a nuclear boo boo up close and personal, and may have even been mildly exposed myself. But, I still took math advice from these men, even if I wanted to wring their necks.

 

These free Glenco Lit Guides include vocabulary lists, and might be a good resource for anyone trying out the Robinson method.

I've never understood why I am supposed to not like someone's method of teaching or curriculum because of their beliefs. Opinions are not facts, and I see no fact-based reasons as to why this curriculum should not be used simply because he holds xyz belief. His actual CD's have old published resources that were written by others long before he was born-it isn't a curriculum written by him, it's a METHOD of teaching with the resources on this CD. It's what I said earlier...take what you want, leave the rest-it's THAT EASY. You don't have to agree with or believe everything you hear about any side. The parents I know that do use this do not use it like he says it should be used, not by a long shot!

 

Hunter, you make my thoughts so much clearer than I could!

[thefragile7393]

FWIW - the death mentioned above was that of Lydia Schatz. Her parents, Kevin and Elizabeth, used the Pearls ministry to justify abhorrent, abusive behavior. IMHO the Pearls do not teach anything close to the atrocity that was committed against this child. The violence lies squarely upon the Schatz.

Ehhh really? I've seen quite a bit in their books that say they certainly contributed. That is a different board thread and board though and I won't go further.

[Supertechmom]

To translate. Once a child can read (are they supposed to teach themselves that too?) they are given stacks of flash-cards and books and are sat down at a desk "in a controlled environment" for extended periods of time and told to give themselves a rigorous education on their own.

 

Bill

 

you are wrong. He clearly states multiple times that he teaches the child the concept with manipulates, showing them how to work it out until the child gains understanding. Then instead of showing him ever single math fact and every type of problem, he has the child repeat what he has learned with a different problem. Very much like Singapore that expects a child to jump from two digit multiplication to three with no instruction. The concepts are in place, the child has to learn to apply it in different situations.

 

the controlled environment is no different than many a school room by many parents here. A place where the child has a desk, limited distractions and a mom near by expecting them to finish their work. The rigorous education is the fact the fluff is left off and the child actually learns material at an early age because there is no distracting fluff. Every year, we have the topics of "how do i set up a school room" "how do i keep my child from being distracted" How do I get my kid to do his work" what is the best planner and check list"

 

Is the RC way really any different? The child knows what to except, what he needs to do, and does it. If he doesn't, he doesn't do anything else until he does. is that really any different than the advise given by so many here when moms ask what to do to the child that won't do his homework?

[Supertechmom]

He struck me as a high IQ guy with high IQ kids who likes to be a mover and shaker, and would say/do outrageous things rather than be ignored and unimportant.

 

Not to make too extreme a statement about him, but think of the Pearl families who killed a child: adopted. Didn't have their genes that made rigid obedience attractive, and didn't start from the get-go. I wonder how his method would do taking a 9 year old kid from rural 3rd world country. And, if the kids just lay down and wouldn't do the work, what would he do.*

 

*I'm not saying he's heinous, like Pearl, just that he sells a product that may match very poorly with many children.

 

:iagree: Which is why you do your research and find what will work. which is what the OP was about in the first place. This method works with a certain dynamic between mother and child. Much like TOG and Sonlight work with certain groups and not others and usually not with each other :001_smile: But we have to find the method that works with our unique little group, don't we?