(Sorry, I posted the wrong link above - the podcasts are here. ) The Moores, and most other authors who recommend "delayed formal academics" (for lack of a better phrase), do also tend to encourage independent work, at least in some subjects, when the heavier studies are started. This is usually more like age 10 or even 12, rather than 8. In the meantime, the children are supposed to have been spending time on work and play activities that build up their self-discipline and ability to concentrate. IIRC, both the Moores and Bluedorns suggest that children can be running their own small business by age 8 or 10. There's a strong precedent for this in US educational history, which has come up a bit in other recent threads. One-room schoolhouse methods were heavy on self-study. Working youths and adults, from Nathaniel Bowditch to Frederick Douglass, educated themselves by reading classics and textbooks. There are pros and cons to this approach, but when the teacher's resources are limited -- as they nearly always are, in both home and school education -- ISTM that there's a great deal to be said for it. In any case, the early years are not about leaving children to their own devices. They're about building strong relationships and putting foundational skills in place. This tends to be quite demanding for the adult, which I suspect is one reason why modern practices, based on group child care (aka "early childhood education"), have switched more toward formal sit-down learning. That said, I do use Cuisenaire rods and even workbooks with my little ones. When I need a break from the harder stuff. ;)

OP -- if you're still following this thread -- there's a series of podcasts here [ETA: fixed link] from people associated with Raymond and Dorothy Moore, who popularized the phrase "Better late than early." I haven't listened to much of it yet, so I don't know how much they say about math, but thought you might be interested. The first one features a woman who was homeschooled in a western logging camp in the 1930s and early 40s. There are also some old posts on math here, taken from an e-mail list for families following the Bluedorns' approach. They all seem to have used Saxon (sorry!), but there might be some helpful comments about the adjustment period.

Interesting post from an advocate of "living Latin," about the experience of listening to a famous, hour-long speech recited out loud. "Did the Romans Really Understand Cicero? Live, in Real Time?"

A couple of new babies ago, we lost the groove that we'd had since my older ones' primary years. We never did get it back, even in a modified version; we ended up forming an entirely new groove. But just in the last couple of days, I've realized that my younger ones are in pretty much the same groove that the older ones used to be in. :001_smile: (EFL's writings have changed me a lot, but apparently they haven't ended up changing what worked in our homeschool.) So I guess nothing is permanent. But at the same time, nothing ever changes. Not sure if I can deal with paradoxes so early in the morning, but there it is. :laugh: Also wanted to mention that Journeyman Pictures has some very good geography videos on Youtube. If you're up to watching people cooking and eating, the "Savouring Europe" series has some lovely depictions of "slow food" cultures. I've been previewing these sorts of videos myself in the evening (while doing my own work, or just relaxing), then showing selections to the children the next day. I have them sit at a table, with pencils and paper in case they want to draw. Since I've already seen the shows, I can be in and out of the room while they're watching. It's worked out very well for our recent spate of low-energy days. I feel all right about the moderate use of recorded media, even if it's not what EFL would have done (I really have no idea about that). This book I've been attempting to read documents the way that, in mid-20th century Britain, traditional "work songs" were replaced by factory-wide piped-in music on the radio. At least technology is letting us retrieve the ability to choose our own selections, share them with a small group of people nearby, and turn them off when we've had enough. And we can use our creativity to re-express and expand on them. We still do sing while working, when possible, but it gets a bit trying with small children whose enthusiasm greatly exceeds their abilities. They especially love to sing songs in other languages (liturgical chants, folk songs, a bit of ethnic pop music), and tend to get the cadences right, but completely mangle the words. Left to their own devices, they do this over and over. I'm pretty sure this is not an EFL approved activity. It is certainly not "tired mommy approved!" :laugh:

The other type of lesson that comes to mind is "music class" or "exercise class," which is a music/movement sort of thing. There's nothing like this in EFL, as far as I've seen, but it's a mainstay of early childhood programs -- or at least it was, throughout the 20th century. I suspect that she might have recommended it as a rainy day activity if music recordings had been widely available in her time. For this, you need: - Floor space - Suitable music selections & some way to play them - Rhythm instruments for the children (older children can make the shakers) - A few objects for passing, tossing, or rolling -- e.g., bean bags, a small ball, or a small soft toy Then you can either lead the children in a orderly way, or just demonstrate a bit and let them go free until they get too rowdy. Music has to be chosen carefully, so as not to over- or under-stimulate. We tend to do a mix of recorded songs, songs sung out loud, recorded instrumental music, rhythm sticks, and silent activities. If you end on just the right sort of energy, then -- much as with the videos -- they will often keep it going for a surprisingly long time on their own. Speaking of which, I need to go back and re-read what McLuhan said about "balancing the sensorium." I'm starting to get an intuitive sense of what sort of media environment to turn to, if the children have had too much of environment X, and are starting to act in way Y. But it's taken hard-won experience, and I still have trouble remembering this (not to mention that my own sensory balance gets thrown off, too). In theory, we should be able to come up with a cheat sheet. There's a lot of overlap with Sensory Integration ideas, but media ecology is supposed to be able to explain the causes for the problems, rather than just labeling them.

When we listen to an audio recording, look at a picture, or watch a video, the media artifact is the basis of the lesson -- just as, with literature, the text is the basis of the lesson. I don't feel the need to come up with "activities" to go with these media, any more than I would for a poem. Here's how we usually follow up on an educational video, for example. (We've just been doing this for geography, and were able to keep going, even through illness of multiple family members.) Independent learning: Have one or more related books available, in a convenient place (e.g. a small bookcase, an easel, or a magazine rack on the wall). Independent recitation: Provide space and materials for modeling, drawing, or writing. Children above preschool age will usually choose to base their work on what they've been watching. Guided learning: As your energy permits, answer their questions about the subject. (If you're not available, suggest that they write their questions in a notebook.) Have any sort of discussions you'd like, about the material in the lesson, or family stories relating to the subject, or about the medium itself. For instance, you could talk about what sort of work went into making the movie, discuss the particular slant that it gave to the topic, or critique the narrator's annoying habits, LOL. Guided recitation: Have them tell DH what they learned. They are usually very eager to do this!

What exciting news! Will be praying for the LostCove family's well-being, on all fronts. :001_smile: My elementary aged children are regularly doing a lot of chores with little or no help, but below age 10 or so, I'm still finding it necessary to be in the same room with them, to make sure they stay on task. And they nearly always need reminders to do the chore in the first place. The middle schoolers can usually be relied on to take care of their special individual responsibilities (such as recycling duty and pet care), but still tend to flake out on the generic ones such as clearing the table, putting outdoor gear in the shed, and keeping their rooms clean. School responsibilities are also uneven. There are days, and even weeks, when their independent or semi-independent work goes very well. But we've also had some backsliding with all ages, especially when I'm not well, or our routine gets disrupted for some other reason. I don't suppose this is inevitable, but I don't know any families IRL whose children are doing any better, and some of the mothers are a lot more no-nonsense than I am. So, just a word of caution about expectations. It definitely helps to have a "system," but the system is still going to be more of an art than a mechanism. My suggestions for what to prioritize, then, would focus less on getting the children to more independence, and more about your own well-being and ease of supervision, e.g.: - Having a couch/comfy chair, and access to some sort of media player, in every area where work has to be done. - Making those areas as free as possible from clutter, hazards, and attractive nuisances. - Stocking them with basic supplies. Very basic supplies. For schoolwork, this would include pencils and notebooks, colored pencils and paper, brown modeling clay, and generic workbooks (if you do workbooks). Children can always benefit from more time to use their creativity, and to work on very basic skills. In my experience, this is not the time to get some fancy educational game or kit that has complicated parts, requires adult guidance, and will make you feel bad if you don't get much use out of it. BTDT. Those things can be fun, but they take a lot more energy than just being with the children. Because you still have to just be with the children anyway. Plus you have the kit to deal with. Interesting objects, art books, and audiovisual media can be helpful starting points for lessons. I was just going to post about media -- will do that soon. :001_smile:

Thanks for sharing this, LostCove! I'm glad you heard back; it was kind of him to reply. The first reader for Artes Latinae is made up of sayings like the ones in Smart Latin. I ended up giving my eldest the teacher's key with the translations, so in theory, the effect should be similar. The sententiae in AL are a bit more complex, though. Even the earliest ones are mostly three words long. I guess we'll keep reading them together from time to time during our recitation periods, but my Latin is so weak that I'm not sure I'll be any help. Our Roman Roots also uses sayings, and was recommended for elementary by James S. Taylor. We have it around somewhere, and I've been thinking about using it with the younger ones this year. (This happens almost every year, but maybe this time I'l get beyond the "thinking about it" stage. ;) ) The Bolchazy-Carducci readers are another resource that might fit with Fr. Pavur's idea of "little units." What does he mean by "matching with the various verb forms and their translations?"

I dream of doing this, but if I take my focus off the younger children (ages ~8 and under) for any length of time, one or more of them will inevitably get into trouble, which derails my work with the older ones. How do you prevent this? I'm sure you've described it before, but I've forgotten. :tongue_smilie:

YMMV, of course, but I wouldn't save "Hiawatha's Childhood" for a US history year, any more than I'd save Aesop's fables for an ancient history year. EFL's poetry recommendations for younger children seem to be one of the most time-tested parts of her system. I intend to keep using them, along with other similar works, for the bulk of the primary and early elementary literature lessons. The challenging part, for me, starts about age 10-12. There's less basic skill work needed, and a wider range of literature to choose from, and her advice also gets a lot less specific. We started out the year with my older ones using vintage school anthologies, but then they were each doing their own thing, and I felt pulled in different directions. The thematic approach makes it simpler, and also gives us the opportunity to use what we have -- both regular books and anthologies. They'll have to go back to graded selections by the time they get to rhetoric, though. I guess we might be looking at a sandwich curriculum with EFL on one end, Fr. Donnelly's textbooks on the other, and homemade literature salad in the middle. :laugh:

Thanks, LostCove, that is very helpful. The emphasis on the "phrase-based approach" reminded me of these two resources I've been planning to start using for French: Petites Causeries - one of those 19th century UK homeschool textbooks Kloo - a card game where you make simple sentences I wonder if EFL's mysterious Latin booklet instructs the parent to do the noun lessons that way, as well? So that, instead of just showing the item and saying the noun, you'd say, "This is a [noun]," or "Give me the [noun]." It does seem like the more natural approach, and I think I'll make a point of doing that in future with our primary lessons (such as they are).

I found an article on the teaching of Church history that's pretty helpful for understanding the old-time American way of teaching humanities in general. Not surprisingly, schools and colleges used the usual form of "recitation": student reads the text independently, then repeats the material -- not always verbatim -- in response to questions from the teacher. By the beginning of the 20th century, the meaning of "recitation" had expanded to include all the new components of teacher-led lessons, including class projects and even field trips. The basic type of exchange was called "oral reproduction." Of course, this is also pretty much what today's homeschoolers call "narration," though I can't recall ever seeing that term used in old US books, or even in UK books other than CM's. I'm not sure what it was called in England, though I think the same method was used. There's an anecdote in the governess book about a girl who didn't "learn her lesson," and claimed that it was because her father was talking to her the whole time before breakfast -- which was normally a study period, both in schools and at home. There's also this, from the 1840 Common School Journal. It's translated from Wyttenbach, who, the Internet informs me, was "a German Swiss classical scholar." It's an argument in favor of the study of primary sources -- for boys in their teens, at any rate -- and contrasts this with the schoolroom methods that were evidently in use at the time. "R: Pray, what books are those? P: Our Governess had two, written in French; one a small book, that we learn to recite; the other a large work, in several volumes, from which she sometimes reads to us." So the same practices seem to have prevailed in Britain and continental Europe, at least among Protestants educated at home. For Catholic education, all of the detailed descriptions I've found are for large-group systems (the Jesuits, the Brothers of the Christian Schools, the various religious sisters). Other than EFL, of course. But even after reading her writings, I can't tell how much of a part the recitation method played in Catholic home education. Maybe we have to go back farther. To Charlemagne? :laugh:

I'm wondering anyone has found out more about how religion and humanities subjects -- other than literature -- were taught at the secondary level, before "university methods" and the Harkness/GB model took over. This would have been mostly in private girls' schools, I think, since boys didn't have much erudition outside of classical literature. Although they did have catechism, and I think most schools had added history by the mid-1800s. The following book didn't answer my question, but it's very interesting and quite helpful anyway. Sort of an early Victorian "How to be a Supernanny." :001_smile: The Guide to Service: The Governess (1844) For the younger ones, there's a lot of information on discipline, without being heavily dependent on corporal punishment. The author has them transition from the "nursery" to the "schoolroom" at about age 9 or 10. The advice on academic subjects starts on page 199, and much of it is still relevant. "A judicious selection of books is a most important branch of the duty of the governess, and the judicious choice of abridgements is perhaps the most difficult part of this duty." I noticed the assumption that the governess would be having the children copy passages from current authors (such as Macaulay), rather than older ones. I guess that reflects the fact that girls were being educated to take their place in contemporary social life, rather than being formed by the classical curriculum, or even the "vernacular classics" for that matter. The girls did have a foundational education based on ancient texts and values, but it was religious, rather than secular. So this is another example of how the different approaches to male and female education balanced each other out. I'm still not sure how we're going to handle this. I'm open to tailoring the combination to each child, but it will be tricky to find suitable material on the contemporary end. It would be interesting to look up the textbooks that are mentioned, as it's likely that many of them are available online, though I'm pretty sure some of the history books would have been anti-Catholic. In 19th century England, there were quite a few schoolbooks written specifically for home instruction, or, as the lessons for the younger children were sometimes called, "nursery tuition." If you come across one of these, it will often have a catalog of others in the back. Anyway, I liked the governess book so much that I've ordered a print-on-demand copy. Will let you know how legible it turns out to be. :001_smile:

Also thinking that some of our work in "content subjects" could be done in a similar way to the group composition lesson described by EFL. I was just reading this PDF transcript of a talk by Laura Berquist, and thinking that the Bible story book would lend itself to this approach. 1) Choose one text at an upper elementary/junior high reading level. In this example, it would be Fr. Schuster's Bible History. The older children will read the whole text, and the younger children will listen to excerpts. The curriculum could be also differentiated by using two texts at different levels, but it might be tricky to make the topics line up. Besides, books written for younger children are often too simple. If there isn't one book that would suit everyone (which is likely to be the case with topics that require some maturity), I think it would be better to choose a substantial text for the older children, and use one-off lessons for the whole group, as described below. 2) Make a list of the passages you'd like to use with everyone, and figure out a tentative schedule for them. 3) Have the older children start reading the book. Have them think about the study questions and take notes, then discuss with you, as above. 4) Once they've studied a passage that you've selected for group work, read it aloud to everyone. 5) Do the composition lesson as described on p. 86 of EtCaH, with the older children writing more on their own. As usual, I'd make sure to have materials available for those who might want to read more, look at maps or diagrams, or illustrate their work. The above could be done with longer books such history textbooks, biographies, or natural science (e.g. Fabre or Durrell type books). It could also be done as a one-off lesson, e.g. with folk tales from other countries, saints' lives, narrative picture books, or excerpts from any longer books that aren't being used as main texts. I think it would even work with some educational videos. (This is the voice of sick mommy talking! :laugh: )

Well, now I'm down with a virus. So either that insight did take a lot out of me, or it was an early sign of delirium. ;) At any rate, macro-level planning is off the table for now. Meanwhile, I think I need to firm up my model lesson plans, for the language work with children who are reading. Let's say my 10 year old is doing a longer poem in English. I think this is more or less how it's supposed to go: Recitation: Child recites lines learned up to now. Written work check: Adult checks copywork done independently. Prelection: Adult recites more lines of poem (or reads aloud); explains vocabulary & erudition if needed; calls out any points of grammar or style In-Class Exercise: Child takes notes on vocabulary, grammar, etc., and recites lines after adult --> If using Montessori materials for grammar, metrics, etc., these would be brought in at this point Assignment: Child copies & memorizes the lines read in class. ---> And works with M. materials, if used For intensive reading of a short passage of English prose -- "Model English" style -- the lesson would be similar, but instead of memorization and copying, there would be exercises based on imitation. But what about extensive reading? How do we teach this? Do we teach this? This is how I've been going about it so far: Recitation: Child answers questions on the passage that was read independently. (I might ask for oral reproduction of an incident in the story, or description of a character, or just answering some of the study questions in the textbook.) Checking written work: Adult checks vocabulary list in child's notebook, making sure all unfamiliar words in that passage were written down. Prelection: Adult gives brief introduction to the next passage. In-Class Exercise: Nothing really, unless there were notes to be written down about either the previous or new passage. Assignment: Read the new passage; look up & write down unfamiliar words; look over study questions to make sure you understand it IDK, my upper elementary children enjoy this, but it seems kind of lame. Unless there are a lot of unfamiliar words or erudition, we're not really doing much with the passage. But I guess that's the point of "extensive reading." Our job is to assign the work, and to make sure they've read and understood it, so as to help form good reading habits and add to their general culture. School teachers can't do this in person with each child, even briefly, so they have them do book reports or quizzes. I'm thinking that for high school level work, I might use make heavier use of a study guide, but rather than assigning selected questions and having the child write out the answers, I'd instruct the child to look over all the questions in the guide (assuming that I'd crossed out any irrelevant ones), and take notes, in point form, for the ones that seemed challenging. They would also take notes on anything else of interest. Then the child could refer to those notes when we met in person for discussion, and also when putting together whatever sort of project we end up deciding on for "output." I feel as if this might be an appropriate balance between my own energies, the printed resources that are available, and the child's own initiative. Even with my children who are avid readers and notebookers, when I just assign something and say "read this and take notes," it's deer in headlights time. If you have suggestions for study guides (for either classic literary works, or solid textbooks) that might work well with this approach, please share them. I'm looking for questions that are less about specific writing assignments, projects, or additional erudition, and more about verifying the student's understanding of the material in the text.

Up to now, I've been thinking in terms of doing a significant chunk of our formal humanities and social science work after rhetoric, using university methods. Now I'm thinking that's too much of a compromise with the modern system. If our goal is to provide a liberal secondary education, why should we require our students to study (e.g.) history the way a historian does? Practically speaking, even if they choose to go into a research field, it's not as if they're going to be admitted straight into graduate school with a home-grown transcript anyway. They'll have to do some sort of additional preparation, either independently or through standard coursework. That seems like the right time to learn the conventions, i.e., "writing in the disciplines." And if we take that approach... there's no need for (what feels like) a rush to get through the classical studies by the middle of high school. Age 15 or 16 might have been typical for rhetoric in the ancient world and Renaissance, but everything shifted forward in the colonial US, so that the average was more like the early 20s. In Fr. Donnelly's time, the US Jesuits were teaching rhetoric in the sophomore year of university, around age 19 or 20. In Britain and the Commonwealth, it seems to have been mainly taught as a university subject, when it was taught at all. So I'm not sure there's even much a tradition of teaching English rhetoric to 15 year olds. Looking at the models, I've been thinking that it would be hard to do some of them justice with such young students. And they require a pretty substantial amount of erudition, on top of what's being done for the classical languages. I think, then, for our family, it would make sense to aim for rhetoric in the last year of high school -- which we'd be pushing forward to age 18-ish, to make room for both classics and the required modern subjects. This would still be two years ahead of early 20th century US practice, which goes along with the widespread observation that there were two wasted years in the standard curriculum. And I don't think lack of maturity would be a big problem, since two-year grade skips were fairly common. On the one hand, this is very freeing. We can use the secondary years to study what seems worthwhile, in ways that seem worthwhile, without jumping through hoops unnecessarily. On the other hand, it means that I can't pass the buck. I'll have to find ways to get all of the humanities and social science material into rigorous, high-school-credit-worthy packages, without the modern style writing assignments that are usually the backbone of assessment. And I was sort of counting on a final year of modern history, literature, and philosophy, using an outside curriculum. To, you know, help my child transition out of the bubble. ;) But maybe it's more the case that we should be integrating those ideas, in age-appropriate ways, all the way along. And in truth, I think that's what we've ended up doing anyway. So... I feel kind of shaken up by this. But it really does make a lot more sense in terms of our ideals, and it also helps with some immediate practical problems: the time crunch for learning multiple languages, the difficulty of trying to divide the content subjects up into "for now" and "for later," and the (in hindsight) grave stupidity of trying to approximate a 200 year old plan of studies while relying heavily on 100 year old materials. Natural science credits will have to be earned alongside the classical curriculum, not after it, but I can live with that. And philosophy drops off the formal course of studies, but it was likely to be kind of sketchy anyway. "Here, read these 1950s textbooks." Or "watch these Ralph McInerny videos." :rolleyes: I think I'll take the energy that I might have put into planning that, and direct it toward my own philosophical education, so I can do a better job of discussing big questions as they come up. I guess now I have to go back and re-do that tentative plan I posted a while back. Those of you who only have young children, and have read all of this anyway, thank you for your patience. :laugh:

You know, that would explain why families get so attached to their preferred model of homeschooling. It becomes their inner model of what "school" looks like. So they can put their efforts into the actual work, rather than having to keep adapting to new expectations. And we've had more success when sticking pretty closely to one model all year (even those I didn't particularly like), than when I've tried to optimize by using what seemed like ideal methods for each subject. I used to think this was a sign that I was disorganized, and needed canned curriculum as a starting point. But that can't be true, because we actually did well with the DIY unit studies. So maybe it's more that we naturally seek organization, of one sort or another, and don't want to have to keep re-organizing ourselves. Which is a sort of repeated trauma (now I sound like Hunter again!).

Adding a few references, from the 1910s-30s, for those who might be thinking about how to help children learn to study. "Directed Study" - A. W. Burr The Study Hall in Junior and Senior High Schools - Hannah Logasa Directing Learning in the High School - Walter S. Monroe These were aimed at public high schools, but many of the points are relevant to homeschoolers. For instance, the author of the first article mentions the discouragement caused by the large number of subjects, which are often taught in different ways from one year to the next. He also suggests that the usual styles of teaching in some subjects (e.g., a hands-on science class) can make the students less inclined to study independently from books in other subjects. I never thought of that, but it makes sense. IDK where this leaves us, though. I'm not inclined to go "full Robinson," but can see the advantage of having a consistent method. Up to now, I've been trying to find a balance between heavy and light requirements, and between independent study and more interactive lessons, within each child's curriculum as a whole. Maybe this is actually counterproductive, and I should be going for this sort of balance within each subject, and consistency between subjects. I mean, it seems obvious to me that, say, algebra should require a very different level and type of effort from history (which is basically an "extra" at this age), but maybe it's not so obvious to the children. This would explain some "work habit" problems we've been having. I must be totally reinventing the wheel here! :laugh:

I don't know if she mentions re-reading specifically, but I think it was a given in rural 19th century America, where even relatively well-educated families wouldn't have had access to many books. Father Donnelly -- who was a bit older, and lived in small-town Pennsylvania -- was a great re-reader. In additon to standard classics, his family had a couple of anthologies of Irish literature in translation, which were treasured and read over and over again. I think most good home libraries of any size are like this, with a selection of books that are likely to show up on standard book lists, and others that are more family-specific. EFL was open to the use of media other than print (such as photographs), and it seems to me that much the same thing can happen with those. Among friends my age, many of us used to sit together with siblings or friends and listen to some old 45 RPM record, over and over, long past the point when we had it memorized. If it had a narrative, sometimes we'd act it out. Sort of like the "marble obsession" described in one of those old books on recreation. My own children have developed pretty intense connections with a few vintage short films, from compilation DVDs that I found at a discount store. These are not examples of high culture, but they've.contributed to our "group traditions," and helped to make us the people we are (creative or weird... take your pick :laugh: ).

That was just my attempt at coming up with a general description for a phenomenon that I'd noticed in many different circumstances. "Group norms" might have been a better phrase. There seem to be a couple of other things going on as well, though. Some people have said that "there isn't just one correct way," i.e., "according to those who can be considered authorities on this subject (e.g., school systems, OTs), there are several acceptable ways." This makes sense, but it doesn't really answer the OP's question, since we don't know whether most Americans are using these grips, or different ones that are still incorrect by the above standards. Others have said, in various ways, that "there's no such thing as an incorrect grip." This, it seems to me, is more of a philosophical statement, i.e.: "There are no authorities. I'm going to hold my pen however I like, and nobody can tell me I'm wrong." :D

No, I'm not trying to generalize about the entire forum. It's not entirely American, and there are American posters who don't share the attitude that's predominated in this thread. My point was that there are different sorts of conformity, and one of these is the "do your own thing" sort -- where there's social pressure not to speak up for some standard that's more exacting than the current local norm, because it might give offense to those who don't follow that standard (whether by choice, or by circumstance). I think, as homeschoolers whose values are in some sense "classical," we've all encountered this in some way. Some would say that pencil grip is an entirely different issue from, say, expectations about the type of literature studied in high school. Others might disagree, and see it all as part of the same big picture. I think this gets at some fundamental questions about education, and could be the basis of an interesting discussion. Whatever the OP's motives might be. :001_smile:

I guess we're reading this differently, because I'm pretty sure they did. See posts #3 and #4, for starters.

Interestingly, Europeans often see Americans as very conformist. (I think Chesterton and de Tocqueville both said this, though I might be misremembering.) As an immigrant, I tend to agree. For instance, witness the conformity in this thread. Apparently, the only socially acceptable response is to say that all pencil grips are equally good. If someone happens to disagree, then they'd better keep quiet, or else be willing to get into some war of "scientific studies" (for whatever that's worth!). All the while, having their motives questioned, and being told how much they're giving offense to others. It reminds me of the "Ask a Montessorian" thread from a while back. I wonder if "Humble Thinker" and "Fast and Curious" are related. :laugh:

Mrs. A, I didn't see your post before replying. I agree about explanations breaking up the reading. To me, this is the difference between literature that's used for lessons (including memorization), and literature that's just read as a family activity. EFL does talk about the value of reading aloud, though I can't find the reference now. And listening to an oral storyteller or singer could also be considered "passive," but it's clearly been fundamental to the development of human culture, including classical literature. I don't think it's bad to be passive, per se. This actually goes along with a book I've just been reading, by David Schindler: Heart of the World, Center of the Church: Communio Ecclesiology, Liberalism, and Liberation There's a chapter about how our modern culture, by putting the emphasis on "making" and "doing," fails to respect the importance of receptivity, which is linked with femininity. Schindler says that the latter is more fundamental, since we can't act, without first having the acted-upon. I haven't read much of the chapter yet, but I've been looking forward to seeing how it might apply to education. This seems to be one example. Without a listener, we can't have a storyteller. :001_smile:

Hmm... I'm pretty sure I haven't read to my children too much. We probably have too many books at an easy reading level, though. Especially non-fiction aimed at middle schoolers, and "old-fashioned fiction" (really, mostly mid-20th century) such as the series from Bethlehem Books. In these sorts of books, words that might be unfamiliar tend to be explained in the text, or surrounded by ample contextual clues, so that a reasonably bright child never has to ask for help (or look in a dictionary) to understand what's going on. Another example of the "elevator." I never thought of that. :huh: Argh. This is definitely helping me figure out what to do about our home library, but now I'm old and tired and have a bunch of children to wrangle, and the actual work is looking daunting and kind of discouraging. If only I'd just ignored all the voices recommending to stock up on baskets of children's "living books" (which wasn't even my personal inclination), and put 1/4 of that effort into finding suitable reference books. Live and learn! We talked a while back about geography books. I have a bunch that were discarded by school and public libraries, but are still fairly current. The children like them, but besides the clutter factor, I've found it necessary to edit out some of the content (e.g., a section about child trafficking, in a book aimed at 9-12 year olds -- let's just say that I disagree with that editorial decision). Now, thinking that they might be causing lazy reading habits, I'm feeling even less favorably inclined toward them. But we do need something, and there aren't any suitable grown-up books that I've seen. I think I'm going to keep just enough of the best ones to have some coverage of each country, cut up just enough of the mediocre ones to have a good selection of pictures and maps, and give away the rest. I'll keep the pictures in a "continent binder" (in lieu of Montessori "continent boxes," which seem to make little sense in our home), with a few favorites glued on to 8.5" x 11" card stock, and the others in an envelope at the back, so that the children can use them for projects. We could print current facts about countries from the Internet and add them to the binder, which would reduce the need to keep books on hand. Come to think of it, I have a set of reproducible activity books that I picked up at the teachers' store; I could copy the info pages and include those. So that's one way to solve the reference book problem: make our own! :001_smile: I guess this is the way to go. I put together a family notebook, from resources that are at hand. The children use this, and our discussions, and other resources, to put together their own individual notebooks, with some amount of guidance. Sort of like the way old-time students made commonplace books, or those Colonial-era math notebooks that I posted about a while back. Seems like a pretty solid approach, pedagogically speaking. My sense is that this is what "lapbooking" ought to be, but is not. Though, even if it were, I'd object to it on the grounds that the name is annoying. ;) :leaving: