Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

PeachyDoodle

Members
  • Content Count

    2,057
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4,155 Excellent

About PeachyDoodle

  • Rank
    you can call me queen bee
  • Birthday December 31

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female
  • Location
    North Carolina
  • Interests
    My avatar is from http://eq5.net/tavler/avi-narnia-alyosha-e.html. Permission is given on this site to use images for message boards.

Contact Methods

  • Location
    North Carolina
  • Occupation
    Homeschooling Mom & Homemaker

Recent Profile Visitors

995 profile views
  1. The Kretzmann Popular Commentary is available online. The Kretzmann Project claims the copyright to the online edition but allows full reproduction rights, so long as the content isn't altered. The original Commentary is in the public domain and was never copyrighted.
  2. PeachyDoodle

    Wreath

    Half an hour. It's easy.
  3. PeachyDoodle

    Wreath

    I got the flowers on sale at Michael's so I spent about $30.
  4. PeachyDoodle

    Wreath

    What about something simple, like a boxwood wreath? You can dress it up to fit the seasons, or just leave it plain. I love to make my own wreaths, but doesn't sound like you'd be into that! Just in case, here's an easy spring one I recently made:
  5. Yes. They are. That's kind of been the whole point. Look, I'm not the only one who's reading what you're saying as setting up this false distinction. You keep moving the goalposts. First you were against "traditional." Then it was about parental involvement. Then it was "guided discovery" vs. "do what the teacher says." So I don't think this discussion is going anywhere. Thanks for the conversation.
  6. You're the one who said: " I’d rather a kid had great models for all the arithmetic operations and could reason with numbers than they knew algorithms." So I'd say: Right there. ETA: I have no problem with the methods and philosophies you're advocating. But I do hope you will more carefully consider the impact of your words on people like the OP, who are already struggling with the idea that they are somehow not doing enough if they choose less "guided discovery" and more of a straightforward approach. At the end of the day, students who are functionally able to do the math they need to do are fine -- even if they don't get the joy in "discovering" math the way you'd like. (I have to admit, "discovering" math sounds like my idea of hell.) Just like they will be fine if they can read but don't ever the the joy in discovering classic literature the way I would like. There is an ideal and then there is the real world, and we have to live in the latter with the students and circumstances we have.
  7. I think you are creating a false dichotomy between mathematical reasoning and the standard algorithm that doesn't exist. And I think that's not helpful. I think it just fuels the anxiety we already see in posts like the OP's. We are obviously not going to agree. But I am tired of these math wars and the insinuations on both sides that you have to do X to learn math well.
  8. This right here is what I'm talking about. It's the attitude of "either you do it my way or you aren't giving your kid the best (or even basic! -- good lord) math education." It's not helpful.
  9. Which is fine, so long as it's clear that that's a matter of educational philosophy and not right vs. wrong. My philosophy is, shall we say, very different from yours. Saying things like, "I wouldn't give a child a traditional workbook and let them learn independently" comes off as the latter. You probably didn't mean it that way, but it does. I think it's important that we don't add to the drama and anxiety that already exists around math education by implying that one philosophy turns out independent thinkers and the other turns out drones. There is so much of that out there already, especially with the Common Core debates. We see it on this board constantly -- somebody asking, "Is this is a *bad* curriculum?" It's not helpful to anyone to think about curriculum in that way. The curriculum that is good is the one that works for YOUR student. A solid math education can be provided using a variety of approaches. I know we have a lot of people here with experience in the classroom, and I suppose it's only natural that that experience would spill over into these discussions. But the vast majority of us homeschool precisely because we didn't want the one-size-fits-all approach that is necessary when you are dealing with groups of kids. Whatever the experience of traditionally schooled students has been when they reach college is irrelevant to me. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that many of them were taught using the popular conceptual methods -- and that almost none of them used CLE, which is the curriculum under discussion here.
  10. It's not like "traditional" programs (the ones I'm familiar with anyway) teach the algorithms in a vacuum though. I don't know of any program that expects kids to figure out place value from the carrying algorithm. CLE certainly teaches place value, expanding numbers, etc. alongside the traditional algorithm, while using picture models and manipulatives and such. I think there's a lot of not-useful hand-wringing around "but does that kid really really really understand numbers or are they just using the algorithm???" IMO, it's much ado about nothing. Some kids really take to numbers and get them. Other kids need a more functional approach and may not ever get past a more general idea of how numbers interact but will hopefully be able to use them effectively in everyday life. Both will be perfectly fine in the end. FWIW, my dd pretty much has always worked independently in math, at least since she was reading well. So by 3rd grade. I oversee things, I check to make sure she is following up on her mistakes and understanding where she goes wrong, I am available for questions (now that role falls more to her tutor, but I still step in when necessary). But I don't actively teach most lessons. We have always used "traditional" programs. We tried BA in elementary school and it was a complete flop. She scored in the 600's on the math section of the SAT at 12. I am not the least bit concerned about her mathematical education. That said, I have no intentions of turning my ds loose by himself next year when he is in 3rd. He's just not ready for it. But that says a lot more about their individual personalities than it does about the program we use. Like everything else with homeschooling, this ultimately comes down to the kid you've got in front of you and what that kid needs to succeed. Expecting any curriculum, in any subject, to work magic if the parent isn't going to put forth the effort of knowing the student they have and doing what's necessary to help that student succeed is a recipe for disaster.
  11. Totally agree with the parts-to-whole vs whole-to-parts comparison. I think that honestly some kids learn better with one approach than another. We are parts-to-whole in virtually every subject, and that's why CLE works for us. I define "long haul" as basically elementary/early middle grades. I think CLE is wonderful for building arithmetic skills, but the non-Sunrise upper-level maths are not as good. We transition to Saxon, another parts-to-whole curriculum that gets an undeserved bad rap, for those. My eldest made that switch after about the mid-600's and moved into Saxon 87. It was an easy transition for her, but I wanted to give her time to adjust to Saxon before jumping into algebra. I chose 87 because she was just turned 11 and I wanted to allow her two years of pre-algebra if she needed it. She didn't. She's 13 and almost finished with Saxon Algebra 2. We recently brought in a math tutor because dd has surpassed what I remember from high school and I don't have the time or inclination to relearn hyperbolas and parabolas, etc. She's not struggling, but I want her to have someone she can ask questions of and talk to about mathematical concepts. After the first lesson, the tutor pulled me aside and said that she's incredibly well-prepared and understands math better than most of the private-school juniors and seniors the tutor teaches in her day job. So yeah, CLE did the job and did it well. My youngest is in CLE 200 this year, and while I don't expect him to be the math whiz his sister is (he is much slower across the board than she), he is absolutely solid on the fundamentals. We do use manipulatives fairly regularly, often as directed in the teacher's guide, or similar. We supplement with c-rods and Education Unboxed videos, with Process Skills in Problem Solving (which is Singapore, but which honestly I haven't found to be all that helpful), and just recently added logic puzzles from The Math Profs. We talk about math in everyday life, as we do with all our other subjects. But CLE is our workhorse, and we intend to stick with it until it no longer works for us.
  12. Just my personal opinion... Of the ones here that I've read, I would recommend either The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes OR Hound of the Baskervilles (not both), Across Five Aprils, and Treasure Island (maybe -- my dd vastly preferred Kidnapped if you want to do RL Stevenson) as 8th grade level. My dd liked Hound; I hated Across Five Aprils when I read it in 8th, but it's not a difficult read. Connecticut Yankee is slow and surprisingly difficult. I'd recommend Tom Sawyer, or perhaps some short stories by Twain instead. "The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County" is fun. If she's read Tom Sawyer, I might consider Huckleberry Finn, but I think that one is deeper and probably best reserved for high school. War of the Worlds is meh, unless you have a real sci-fi lover. It's not that long though, and do-able. It could be made more fun if you listened to the radio recording and talked about its impact. I agree that Pickwick wouldn't be my first choice for Dickens, especially not a first exposure. DD has read A Christmas Carol, Oliver Twist, and A Tale of Two Cities. AToTC was definitely her favorite, but Christmas Carol is a nice introduction to Dickens, and has the added benefit of being short and having ample movies and/or live performances to go along with it, especially if you read it around Christmas time. I personally wouldn't want my student's first experience with Lewis to be the Space trilogy either. I'd do The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (even though it's below grade level) or even The Screwtape Letters. Or else wait until she was ready for some of his essays. Lewis is too good, and the Space trilogy doesn't do him justice. The others I don't have personal experience with. Here is my dd's current 8th grade list: Lord of the Flies by William Golding The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams Little Women by Louisa May Alcott A Tree Grows in Brooklyn by Betty Smith The Importance of Being Ernest by Oscar Wilde Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe The Jungle Book by Rudyard Kipling The Red Badge of Courage by Stephen Crane Animal Farm by George Orwell Anne Frank: Diary of a Young Girl by Anne Frank To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee Chinese Cinderella by Adeline Yen Mah
  13. Your initial statement read to me like a sarcastic comment along the lines of, "There's all this evidence that waiting until 18 is best, and yet still these people call that infantilizing." That sounds like a sweeping generalization in the opposite direction to me. Perhaps I misinterpreted that, and if so, I apologize. As I said, I wouldn't call it "infantilizing" per se to make teens wait until 18 to drive, but there are many areas where that kind of law is a serious restriction on their independence, the likes of which your solutions of walking, biking, and public transportation just won't fix. Which I suspect was what "those people" were getting at when they said it was infantilizing. My point is that there is not a one-size-fits-all solution. As a parent in an area where alternate modes of transportation simply don't exist, I have to weigh my children's need for safety and their need for independence carefully and make the best choice I can.
  14. Well, it's no more helpful to make sweeping generalizations in the opposite direction, though. I agree with Farrar that it's not realistic to say we should do things here the way they are done in a small, relatively homogeneous European country. There are just too many factors at play. I realize you didn't advocate that specifically, I'm just making an observation. If we had alternative options for transportation, I'd absolutely have my kids using them. For reasons I mentioned above, I'd be totally fine with my kids holding off until 18 or later to start driving. I'm not so fine with being their sole means of going out in public until that time. I don't think it's good for them, and it's not great for me either. Infantilizing is perhaps an overstatement, but in areas like mine it is extremely limiting to refuse a driver's license to 16- and 17-year-olds. I expect my dd will begin driving independently at 16, and yes, we will buy her a (safe, reliable, but not fancy) used car. Without transportation, it's difficult to maintain a job, so she won't have had the opportunity to earn enough to buy her own. I will expect her to follow all applicable laws and handle herself appropriately, and should she not do so, she will lose her privileges -- which may also mean she loses her ability to participate in activities if I am unavailable to transport her.
  15. Unfortunately, walking, biking, and public transportation are not options in some (many?) areas of the country. My kids have no choice but to drive (or be driven) wherever they need to go. I don't think it's infantilizing to keep teens from driving until they are 18. But it would certainly make life more difficult for some 16- and 17-year-olds, especially those who need to work.
×
×
  • Create New...