Geography as a separate subject or linked to history?

[djsmom]

Which do you prefer and why?

I'm looking for specific points to consider so I can make a decision I'm completely content with for our next school year.

Also, for those who have done geography both ways, which do you feel promoted a greater retention of geography in your child that you can still see the benefits of?

 

Thanks so much, Charlotte

Edited July 1, 2009 by Charlotte
added to another question

[Chris in VA]

Well, I'm in the "both" camp. I definitely see the benefits that using SOTW with the maps has had with dd. It was easy to remember where Spain, France, and the African Continent were, for example, because we heard the stories of the Rock of Gibraltar and the Moors. Because we equated the setting with the characters of the story, it became more real to us--got into both parts of our brains, so to speak! Our time in Egypt and Greece and Italy were well-spent--she came out of Ancients knowing so much, about part of the world most kids don't know the first thing about. I wouldn't have necessarily studied these parts of the world in the early grades had they not been in our history rotation. It just makes the world so much more interesting to both of us, to think in terms of many places rather than just the US.

 

That said, I love being intentional about geography, too. We have a giant map of Africa on the wall now, and we'll be adding in some fun African studies this year (largely because we can, and because the map is so very cool...lol). We'll also learn the 13 US Colonies, and travel with Lewis and Clark, and then there's the postcard thing going on--

 

I do like tying it all together--just can't be either/or for us.

[BillieBoy]

My reasons for teaching Geography stem from being raised overseas most of my life and the fact that American PS’s have left our nation very lacking in the discipline. Yes, I teach History that is rich in historical geography but I supplement with a core Geography program that I have designed myself.

 

Most PS’s center their social studies curriculum using a “me” outward approach. Where as the ”me” is the center, then home, school, community, state, country…etc. I turned that upside down and started with a world inward approach. I feel that it gives my Dd a better perspective of her place in the world, not insignificant in anyway just way more “aware” of the rest of the world. I also feel that doing this concurrently with her historical geography gives her more reference to today and current events. For instance she can truly appreciate that when she hears news of bombings in Iraq she asks about the temple at Ur.

 

Dc’s are sponges in their primary years, and I do not find it unreasonable for them to memorize every country, capital, major geographic feature and a few other facts about every nation in the world before they are finish with the grammar stage. At least that’s our goal. We’re getting there.

[sagira]

My reasons for teaching Geography stem from being raised overseas most of my life and the fact that American PS’s have left our nation very lacking in the discipline. Yes, I teach History that is rich in historical geography but I supplement with a core Geography program that I have designed myself.

 

Most PS’s center their social studies curriculum using a “me†outward approach. Where as the â€me†is the center, then home, school, community, state, country…etc. I turned that upside down and started with a world inward approach. I feel that it gives my Dd a better perspective of her place in the world, not insignificant in anyway just way more “aware†of the rest of the world. I also feel that doing this concurrently with her historical geography gives her more reference to today and current events. For instance she can truly appreciate that when she hears news of bombings in Iraq she asks about the temple at Ur.

 

Dc’s are sponges in their primary years, and I do not find it unreasonable for them to memorize every country, capital, major geographic feature and a few other facts about every nation in the world before they are finish with the grammar stage. At least that’s our goal. We’re getting there.

 

:iagree: Children have a big imagination and are more than able to imagine distant lands. In fact, they may not have this ability as primed and sharpened in the years to come (when most of ps kids are beginning to get more in-depth lessons about the rest of the world.)

[kckamy]

We are studying 1 continent per semester and this has worked out well for us. Last year we studied North America and South America. This year we will study Europe first semester and Asia second semester.

 

When we started out we were trying to do history and geography together but we were not getting as in depth with the geography as I wanted. Since we have seperated it out, we are really able to learn a lot.

 

I think it can be accomplished both ways but this is working better for us and obviously you can't totally seperate the two subjects - we are definitely learning some geography while we study history.

 

Amy

[Peela]

I tihnk it depends on the ages of your child to some degree. Geography linked to history is a great way to cover geography without adding in an extra subject, while the kids are young. Mine learned all their geography from SOTW etc. However, I am now feeling they could do with a years worth of a program to learn more about modern geography issues- environmental, geographical, soceo-economic issues. I loved geography as a kid, although we include earth science as geography in Australia, as well.

[Orthodox6]

Both.

 

"Nuts-and-bolts" geography -- by which I mean map skills, countries-and-capitals, land/water formations -- I teach separately.

 

Cultural geography naturally goes hand-in-hand with history.

 

In addition, as I have posted elsewhere, I tie geography in with our daily reading of saints' lives.

Edited July 2, 2009 by Orthodox6

[Orthodox6]

My reasons for teaching Geography stem from being raised overseas most of my life and the fact that American PS’s have left our nation very lacking in the discipline. Yes, I teach History that is rich in historical geography but I supplement with a core Geography program that I have designed myself.

 

Most PS’s center their social studies curriculum using a “me†outward approach. Where as the â€me†is the center, then home, school, community, state, country…etc. I turned that upside down and started with a world inward approach. I feel that it gives my Dd a better perspective of her place in the world, not insignificant in anyway just way more “aware†of the rest of the world. I also feel that doing this concurrently with her historical geography gives her more reference to today and current events. For instance she can truly appreciate that when she hears news of bombings in Iraq she asks about the temple at Ur.

 

Dc’s are sponges in their primary years, and I do not find it unreasonable for them to memorize every country, capital, major geographic feature and a few other facts about every nation in the world before they are finish with the grammar stage. At least that’s our goal. We’re getting there.

 

:iagree: I still remember spending the entire 3rd grade studying the City of Houston. [insert Snoopy lamenting, "Good grief !"] That was because one could not study Texas history/geography until grade 4, nor U.S. history/geography until grade 5.

[Julie in MN]

I didn't really have an opinion until I started using MFW. I have really appreciated how they step back from history for a year after each rotation and just "enjoy" the world, try foods & music, memorize where everything is, notice where different languages occur, rethink the biomes (deserts aren't just along the equator; access to water often determines where people live; etc). I think history is just impossible to be unbiased with -- even tho SWB tries very, very hard. But geography, now that can just let you be part of the whole world.

 

I also liked praying for the world, BTW.

Julie