SWB' idea of "history as literature"

[swimmermom3]

Talk about not connecting the dots.:tongue_smilie: I have assumed that SWB mainly chose to do history the way it is outlined in TWTM because history texts change and go out of print while we usually have access to a decent encyclopedias. I've thought it was a rather dry way to approach history. My youngest is fine with outlining, but boy does he despise those notebook pages. Anyway, I stumbled across this article in the WTM website and this point stood out:

 

"Steer away from history texts, which provide a predigested interpretation of history."

 

This is a light bulb thought for me which I am hoping others are willing to discuss. Does it really work? If you were to ask your child to describe the differences in the way people were organized in the middle ages compared to ancient times (ie, rise of nations vs. city and city-states) would they have made that connection from their encyclopedia and literature readings? I have SWB's lecture on this and will be listening to it in the next few days while we travel.

 

Do I understand correctly that the history instruction comes not so much from the encyclopedia work but from reading the good and great books and discussing them so indeed the line between history and literature is blurred? The teacher would need to at the very least be well-versed in the historical connections the student needs to know or is it a mutual discovery process for teacher and parent. Obviously, I am concerned about missing something important this way.

 

Your thoughts?

Edited August 5, 2010 by swimmermom3
missed the "s"

[swimmermom3]

Christina, do you foresee the method being as effective in high school?

[Carol in Cal.]

It depends how you view the idea of interpretation as being important in history studies. Encyclopedias tend to give the 'skelaton' of history, without as much interpretation as other books. Living books 'flesh out' history--by making it easier to imagine what life and thought was like in a particular era, and by making the era and setting vivid and memorable. Interpretation starts at the logic stage as living books are compared and discrepancies noted.

[Guest]

Aside from our attempt this year to just get through US history with the Hakim books, my daughter has never read either a history textbook or a "spine." We approach history through fiction and non-fiction books, magazines (Muse magazine has been wonderful; we also look at history magazines for the general public), field trips -- which I think are as important now as they were in elementary school -- period music, DVDs (both PBS-type and historical movies, with an eye to how they deal with the history), and whatever else I can think of. My daughter loves to play the chronology game Perspective, and she keeps a timeline; this is one way we organize that knowledge she's gaining.

 

Does this work? It depends on what you want as an outcome. My daughter can discuss concepts, historical understanding, the kinds of issues you call ways of organizing life, questions of historical perspective, the role of the historian, kinds of evidence. She is beginning to see how people's responses to historical events are shaped by the culture around them, and how their responses in turn affect historical events. I've chosen to emphasize these kinds of elements rather than turn her off with a text or even a non-textbook "spine"; I have yet to find one of these types of books that doesn't make her run screaming from the room or falling asleep at the table.

[Karen in CO]

I can tell you that my kids connect the dots, and they do it better than I do. My middle child hates history books that tell you what to think about information. She has loved history encyclopedias since she was old enough to read. We have had some amazing discussions about the relationship between things that I hadn't thought of before. It keeps me busy trying to find interesting books for me to read to keep up with her.

 

One day we discussed how the expansion of Rome led to its fall and was reflected in the loss of the Roman gods. We do our fair share of trudging through material and snuggling with books but the conversations are where the real learning takes place. This is just as true of my oldest. We trudged through the history and enjoyed the literature and were rewarded with terrific discussions. It takes more effort to truly listen to your child and lead them through a discusion, especially if you aren't used to it. But the payoff is huge.

 

I didn't spend much enough time teaching my ds to write, and we never did formal essays. BUT I made the time to talk to him. Learning to prepare for discussions and knowing that he had to have an idea and have his ideas organized must have helped him. He does a terrific job in his college classes with discussions, essays and research papers.

 

My youngest has even started joining our discussions. It will be easy with her. She loves to be a part of the talks, loves history and literature and is already comfortable forming and expressing ideas and connecting things together.

 

That was an idea I think I originally gleaned from reading about CM. That idea that kids don't need you to make the connections between the information for them. Kids will connect the information themselves.

 

I'm ready for that next cuppa coffee, the youngest is making a welcome home card for her sister, and I'm supposed to be working. I'll think more about this.

[Guest Alte Veste Academy]

--

Edited August 6, 2010 by Alte Veste Academy

[Jumping In Puddles]

Aside from our attempt this year to just get through US history with the Hakim books, my daughter has never read either a history textbook or a "spine." We approach history through fiction and non-fiction books, magazines (Muse magazine has been wonderful; we also look at history magazines for the general public), field trips -- which I think are as important now as they were in elementary school -- period music, DVDs (both PBS-type and historical movies, with an eye to how they deal with the history), and whatever else I can think of. My daughter loves to play the chronology game Perspective, and she keeps a timeline; this is one way we organize that knowledge she's gaining.

 

Does this work? It depends on what you want as an outcome. My daughter can discuss concepts, historical understanding, the kinds of issues you call ways of organizing life, questions of historical perspective, the role of the historian, kinds of evidence. She is beginning to see how people's responses to historical events are shaped by the culture around them, and how their responses in turn affect historical events. I've chosen to emphasize these kinds of elements rather than turn her off with a text or even a non-textbook "spine"; I have yet to find one of these types of books that doesn't make her run screaming from the room or falling asleep at the table.

 

Amazing! How old is your daughter?

[Avila]

xx

Edited August 6, 2010 by Asenik

[Colleen in NS]

"Steer away from history texts, which provide a predigested interpretation of history."

 

This is a light bulb thought for me which I am hoping others are willing to discuss. Does it really work? If you were to ask your child to describe the differences in the way people were organized in the middle ages compared to ancient times (ie, rise of nations vs. city and city-states) would they have made that connection from their encyclopedia and literature readings? I have SWB's lecture on this and will be listening to it in the next few days while we travel.

 

Do I understand correctly that the history instruction comes not so much from the encyclopedia work but from reading the good and great books and discussing them so indeed the line between history and literature is blurred? The teacher would need to at the very least be well-versed in the historical connections the student needs to know or is it a mutual discovery process for teacher and parent. Obviously, I am concerned about missing something important this way.

 

Your thoughts?

 

If you changed your thread title around to "literature as history," (which I think is what SWB means) would that make more sense? It made much more sense to me when I read WTM, because I had very dry, dull history classes in school - to the point where I didn't even know there was something called "ancient history" :svengo: until I read WTM and started getting into the chronological study method. But give me an overview (such as SOTW, Usborne/Kingfisher history encyclopedias), and give me biographies, literature, and interesting tidbit history books, and I'm into it. To me, the overview is just that - nothing to spend tons of time on, nothing to *have* to be read all the way through - just something from which to find new topics and get new library books about.

 

I think history encyclopedias and something like World Book are different from history "textbooks," which are full of snippets of historical events/people, with "comprehension" questions at the end of each section - this, to me, just makes us slaves to the textbook. I want a quick overview, and then I want that overview to give me ideas for interesting biographies and literature and fact-and-picture filled books (about crafts, jewelry or weapons, for instance).

 

My oldest is in "logic stage" and he is starting to make connections of various kinds. And that (along with reading and developing writing/discussion skills) is my primary concern. I don't care so much *what* connections he makes, as long as he is learning *how* to make them. So for me again, it goes back to skills vs. content right now - I'm equipping them with skills, and hope to see those skills used later on to make more and more connections.

 

As for being well versed in connections - nope, I'm not. I am learning with my kids. And though I sometimes get frustrated that I don't feel equipped to direct them to certain connections, I also feel it's OK that we all learn to do this together. There is nothing else I can do about it, after all! I do read, but I cannot possibly read enough to feel like it's "enough" to be prepared the way I think I should be prepared (it's hard not to compare myself to what I read on the boards at times). I tend to put pressure on myself to have the perfect self-study plan, and then get frustrated when it doesn't work out the way I wanted. But, I do feel my kids are progressing along nicely; they are enjoying reading, they are learning skills bit by bit, and they have me for a mother, with all my plusses and minuses, and with our own unique family situation, so we live and learn within that. I still think they are getting MUCH better educational grounding than I ever did.

[Guest]

Amazing! How old is your daughter?

 

She's now fourteen, but she has thought this way since we read picture books about the American Revolution when she was six or seven, and her very first question was how the British would write about it. So we began searching for picture books on the same topic from different perspectives, and that's how it all began.

[swimmermom3]

It depends how you view the idea of interpretation as being important in history studies. Encyclopedias tend to give the 'skelaton' of history, without as much interpretation as other books. Living books 'flesh out' history--by making it easier to imagine what life and thought was like in a particular era, and by making the era and setting vivid and memorable. Interpretation starts at the logic stage as living books are compared and discrepancies noted.

 

Carol, you always manage to distill the concept down to it's basic form. I need that right now. It was the discrepancies between a couple of favored spines that made the nagging thought at the back of my mind grow. We used Sonlight for our first two years of homeschooling. We enjoyed the literature to history connection so much, but I felt guilty that all we ever did was read and discuss. It's an ideal format for this family but it didn't meet my idea of "rigor." So here I am a couple of years later designing these elaborate history programs that are loosely based on TWTM but have more, more, more of everything. I have these wonderful resources that of course offer different viewpoints, so the plan has covering the first topic from one book and covering the second topic from another book and so on. Exhausting. And still that nagging thought that "this is not right." Sadly, I am someone who tends to know "right" at the intuitive level before the intellectual level, so things take me a while.

 

I keep looking at that sentence in bold in my first post and wondering how I could have been so caught up in the "outline on Monday, summarize on Tuesday, timeline and map on Wednesday," that I missed the entire intent behind the process.

[swimmermom3]

Aside from our attempt this year to just get through US history with the Hakim books, my daughter has never read either a history textbook or a "spine." We approach history through fiction and non-fiction books, magazines (Muse magazine has been wonderful; we also look at history magazines for the general public), field trips -- which I think are as important now as they were in elementary school -- period music, DVDs (both PBS-type and historical movies, with an eye to how they deal with the history), and whatever else I can think of. My daughter loves to play the chronology game Perspective, and she keeps a timeline; this is one way we organize that knowledge she's gaining.

 

Does this work? It depends on what you want as an outcome. My daughter can discuss concepts, historical understanding, the kinds of issues you call ways of organizing life, questions of historical perspective, the role of the historian, kinds of evidence. She is beginning to see how people's responses to historical events are shaped by the culture around them, and how their responses in turn affect historical events. I've chosen to emphasize these kinds of elements rather than turn her off with a text or even a non-textbook "spine"; I have yet to find one of these types of books that doesn't make her run screaming from the room or falling asleep at the table.

 

Karen, what you describe in your first paragraph is the prescription that I think is needed to combat my oldest's burnout. Both she and Swimmer Dude would benefit from it. I want the outcome you have described.

 

This is what's happening. I have been an unhappy rule follower all my life. Stand on the corner. Wait for the light to change even if there isn't any traffic. Do what's expected academically and socially no matter how you feel internally. Go in the closet, stomp your feet, weep with frustration, walk out, smile and keep on following those rules. Homeschooling dumped all of that on it's ear, thankfully. This last year is the first time I have felt like I really don't care what the outside world thinks about how I am educating my kids. We'll keep turning things on their ear until we discover what works for us

 

Colleen in NS keeps telling me "it is all that easy." I'm such a slow learner.:tongue_smilie:This is scattered. The kida are loud and excited right now. Karen, I know you get where I am headed.

 

 

Karen in Co - your post is awesome and I want to respond as soon as we get back from clothes shopping with the teens.

[elegantlion]

I just finished listening to SWB's lecture on "the Joys of Classical Education". She addresses this very issue. .99 download at PHP.

[swimmermom3]

I just finished listening to SWB's lecture on "the Joys of Classical Education". She addresses this very issue. .99 download at PHP.

 

:lol:That was the only download I didn't purchase yesterday.

[Jen+4dc]

Carol, you always manage to distill the concept down to it's basic form. I need that right now. It was the discrepancies between a couple of favored spines that made the nagging thought at the back of my mind grow. We used Sonlight for our first two years of homeschooling. We enjoyed the literature to history connection so much, but I felt guilty that all we ever did was read and discuss. It's an ideal format for this family but it didn't meet my idea of "rigor." So here I am a couple of years later designing these elaborate history programs that are loosely based on TWTM but have more, more, more of everything. I have these wonderful resources that of course offer different viewpoints, so the plan has covering the first topic from one book and covering the second topic from another book and so on. Exhausting. And still that nagging thought that "this is not right." Sadly, I am someone who tends to know "right" at the intuitive level before the intellectual level, so things take me a while.

 

I keep looking at that sentence in bold in my first post and wondering how I could have been so caught up in the "outline on Monday, summarize on Tuesday, timeline and map on Wednesday," that I missed the entire intent behind the process.

 

OMGoodness Lisa, I could have written this post word for word!!:ohmy: I've spent the last 3 days looking at all the resources we have for history and thinking I've just got to pare it down...somehow. Then I saw this thread today and thought "Here's my answer!"

 

So, I went to php and downloaded all the lectures. I listened to the one on literature as history while making dinner tonight. It just made so much sense! I'm just going to toss 90% of what I bought for history this year into a "book basket" and let the kids read from it as supplemental reading. I'm going to set a time requirement and call it good! We're just going to use our kingfisher and read/outline/summarize/etc.

 

Thanks for bringing this up, I really needed it!:D

Edited August 6, 2010 by Jen+4dc

[swimmermom3]

I can tell you that my kids connect the dots, and they do it better than I do. My middle child hates history books that tell you what to think about information. She has loved history encyclopedias since she was old enough to read. We have had some amazing discussions about the relationship between things that I hadn't thought of before. It keeps me busy trying to find interesting books for me to read to keep up with her.

 

One day we discussed how the expansion of Rome led to its fall and was reflected in the loss of the Roman gods. We do our fair share of trudging through material and snuggling with books but the conversations are where the real learning takes place. This is just as true of my oldest. We trudged through the history and enjoyed the literature and were rewarded with terrific discussions. It takes more effort to truly listen to your child and lead them through a discusion, especially if you aren't used to it. But the payoff is huge.

 

I didn't spend much enough time teaching my ds to write, and we never did formal essays. BUT I made the time to talk to him. Learning to prepare for discussions and knowing that he had to have an idea and have his ideas organized must have helped him. He does a terrific job in his college classes with discussions, essays and research papers.

 

My youngest has even started joining our discussions. It will be easy with her. She loves to be a part of the talks, loves history and literature and is already comfortable forming and expressing ideas and connecting things together.

 

That was an idea I think I originally gleaned from reading about CM. That idea that kids don't need you to make the connections between the information for them. Kids will connect the information themselves.

 

I'm ready for that next cuppa coffee, the youngest is making a welcome home card for her sister, and I'm supposed to be working. I'll think more about this.

 

Karen, your post is encouraging. We love a good discussion here and were too often cutting them short this year because I had a plan and by golly, we needed to stick to that plan.:tongue_smilie: I believe our initial lack of success with SWB's method may have been that I was adding other things on top of it. Also, I struggle with the chronological method when working with a resource like Kingfisher or SOTW. It feels as though one is jumping around constantly.

 

With your son, you mentioned that you thought that being prepared for discussions with you, helped with his college work down the road. Can you elaborate on this please? Did you say, "This is the reading assignment, come to school prepared to talk about it." Or "I'd like to hear your opinion on this situation?"

[Guest]

 

With your son, you mentioned that you thought that being prepared for discussions with you, helped with his college work down the road. Can you elaborate on this please? Did you say, "This is the reading assignment, come to school prepared to talk about it." Or "I'd like to hear your opinion on this situation?"

 

A different Karen jumping in here, but I have found reading at least part of what we lump under "history" aloud, together, inevitably produces more conversation than I had ever imagined. Sometimes I feel we will never get through a chapter because of all the comments and questions. Listening to books on audio in some form also has this effect in our house.

 

It is indeed time-consuming to approach history and literature this way, but talking and discussing are not only practice in developing logic, speaking clearly, and thinking things through; in my opinion they are also vital precursors to writing any kind of thoughtful essay.

 

Then when my daughter does go off and read something on her own at my request, the habit is set up of talking about what we read -- at the moment she is incapable of finishing a book without coming to find me, reading sections or quotes, and demanding what I think.

[Colleen in NS]

It was the discrepancies between a couple of favored spines that made the nagging thought at the back of my mind grow. ...I have these wonderful resources that of course offer different viewpoints, so the plan has covering the first topic from one book and covering the second topic from another book and so on. Exhausting.

 

In SWB's science lecture, she talks about the logic stage need to start comparing how different books present the same material. Right down to using your grammar knowledge to really see (I diagram in my mind, lol!) exactly what each author is saying. How they write something (as fact? as opinion?) shows how they think. So, I try to apply this to various areas. But if I had a year-long plan for doing this with specific resources, I'd never fulfill that plan - it is too much for me. Esp. when I give my kids weekly leeway (within yearly "spine" topics) for topics they want to read about. Mine will more easily see these discrepancies, if they are interested in the topic. And there is plenty out there to be interested in, without me worrying about what specific topics we have/have not covered. Thus, my use of a spine, and then using all these various techniques to study/discuss/compare/write about/evaluate biographies, tid-bit books, primary sources, literature, etc..

 

I keep looking at that sentence in bold in my first post and wondering how I could have been so caught up in the "outline on Monday, summarize on Tuesday, timeline and map on Wednesday," that I missed the entire intent behind the process.

 

Well, don't get discouraged, because you *are* teaching them study skills that they do need! So now you just fold in what you've recently learned, and tweak your weekly study plan as needed.

 

If only you could see all the wonderful Dover colouring books on my shelves, that have not been used - oh, such great resources for studying history and science......

 

Colleen in NS keeps telling me "it is all that easy."

 

(*cough, cough, splutter*) I don't try to make it sound effortless, because it certainly does take effort for me, :D. It's just a different kind of effort, I guess. And I guess because it's a more interesting effort, in some ways it seems easier? I'm hoping it will get more efficient over time, too. I think it will. For us, it's all about the study skills and the reading right now, and hope that depth and connections come along over the years (they are). Anyway, know that efforts and readjustments and worry are going on here regularly. :lol:

 

I just finished listening to SWB's lecture on "the Joys of Classical Education". She addresses this very issue. .99 download at PHP.

 

I really like this one, too.

 

Lightning storm, gotta unplug the computer.....

Edited August 6, 2010 by Colleen in NS

[swimmermom3]

OMGoodlness Lisa, I could have written this post word for word!!:ohmy: I've spent the last 3 days looking at all the resources we have for history and thinking I've just got to pare it down...somehow. Then I saw this thread today and thought "Here's my answer!"

 

So, I went to php and downloaded all the lectures. I listened to the one on literature as history while making dinner tonight. It just made so much sense! I'm just going to toss 90% of what I bought for history this year into a "book basket" and let the kids read from it as supplemental reading. I'm going to set a time requirement and call it good! We're just going to use our kingfisher and read/outline/summarize/etc.

 

Thanks for bringing this up, I really needed it!:D

 

Do you feel relieved, Jen?:D I don't know how I could spend all summer discussing breadth and depth, skills vs. content, making pacts not to over-purchase and over schedule, and miss the idea that the streamlined, non-text approach would allow the student to do some thinking on their own instead of being spoon-fed.

 

The irony is knee-deep here. Our favorite curriculum is MCT: smart, efficient, effective, and minimal paperwork. It assumes the student can think and make connections on their own. That would seem to be pattern for other subjects, right?

 

Jen, are you thinking that once the kids have covered the basics with Kingfisher, outlining, etc., that you will give them x amount of time to pursue additional reading of their choice?

[swimmermom3]

A different Karen jumping in here, but I have found reading at least part of what we lump under "history" aloud, together, inevitably produces more conversation than I had ever imagined. Sometimes I feel we will never get through a chapter because of all the comments and questions. Listening to books on audio in some form also has this effect in our house.

 

It is indeed time-consuming to approach history and literature this way, but talking and discussing are not only practice in developing logic, speaking clearly, and thinking things through; in my opinion they are also vital precursors to writing any kind of thoughtful essay.

 

Then when my daughter does go off and read something on her own at my request, the habit is set up of talking about what we read -- at the moment she is incapable of finishing a book without coming to find me, reading sections or quotes, and demanding what I think.

 

You are right in that this type of learning takes more time, but again I think if I cut the extras, the time will be there. You know, Karen, another light bulb moment for me in this discussion is the content vs. skills debate not for my children but for myself. I have spent considerable time learning content this summer when I might be better served improving my teaching skills as far as learning to ask better questions and to listen more closely. With each passing year, my kids are less perturbed if I don't have an answer to one of their questions because they know we'll go off in search of more information. Some of my favorite teaching moments have been when we make a point of discovery together. It was reassuring to have other posters validate this process.

 

Did I mention that Swimmer Dude is quite pleased to have Princess coming home so he, "can have good discussions" with her? The way those two discuss things is sure to blow any elaborate plans I have for him out of the water anyway.:tongue_smilie:

[mcconnellboys]

"would they have made that connection from their encyclopedia and literature readings?"

 

No, I don't think they'd make such a connection just from reading a two-page spread in an encyclopedia and then doing some historical fiction reading, if that's what you're saying.

 

We don't ever just read an encyclopedia spread and then read lit.

 

We pick up some of the main topics from that introductory reading and then read a lot more in-depth from a variety of other non-fiction books. We also tend to read historical fiction at the same time that compliments the non-fiction readings, as this tends to help bring those to life in a better way and make them more memorable. And I do always distinguish between the two.

 

We always read from a variety of authors, too, to get differing viewpoints/perspectives on events and people and we discuss those as we read. No history topic is ever studied entirely from the viewpoint of any one author.

 

"Do I understand correctly that the history instruction comes not so much from the encyclopedia work but from reading the good and great books and discussing them so indeed the line between history and literature is blurred? The teacher would need to at the very least be well-versed in the historical connections the student needs to know or is it a mutual discovery process for teacher and parent. Obviously, I am concerned about missing something important this way."

 

Well, I may be missing something, but I haven't ever taken it that way. I don't think that I could give my child a good feel for spanning the gap between the Renaissance and modern worlds just by reading Quixote, no matter how much we love him. I think we have to already have set the stage when we read Quixote in order to see the elements of history that are present in the story and to really appreciate them.

[swimmermom3]

"would they have made that connection from their encyclopedia and literature readings?"

 

No, I don't think they'd make such a connection just from reading a two-page spread in an encyclopedia and then doing some historical fiction reading, if that's what you're saying.

 

We don't ever just read an encyclopedia spread and then read lit.

 

We pick up some of the main topics from that introductory reading and then read a lot more in-depth from a variety of other non-fiction books. We also tend to read historical fiction at the same time that compliments the non-fiction readings, as this tends to help bring those to life in a better way and make them more memorable. And I do always distinguish between the two.

 

We always read from a variety of authors, too, to get differing viewpoints/perspectives on events and people and we discuss those as we read. No history topic is ever studied entirely from the viewpoint of any one author.

 

"Do I understand correctly that the history instruction comes not so much from the encyclopedia work but from reading the good and great books and discussing them so indeed the line between history and literature is blurred? The teacher would need to at the very least be well-versed in the historical connections the student needs to know or is it a mutual discovery process for teacher and parent. Obviously, I am concerned about missing something important this way."

 

Well, I may be missing something, but I haven't ever taken it that way. I don't think that I could give my child a good feel for spanning the gap between the Renaissance and modern worlds just by reading Quixote, no matter how much we love him. I think we have to already have set the stage when we read Quixote in order to see the elements of history that are present in the story and to really appreciate them.

 

Regena, if I am ever in Kentucky, I owe you a lot more than just a cup of coffee.:D You have your wonderful resource list divided by week and topic. Once you have read the Kingfisher or other spine material, do you assign particular resources from your list for your son to tackle or do you allow him to choose since you have a wide assortment of materials? If you are utilizing other nonfiction history materials, does that make the encyclopedia work redundant?

[Guest]

One thing SWB recommends is the creating of a context page for most pieces of classical literature the child reads at the upper levels. I don't think these have to be written out, but I like the idea. You could go about this in a wide range of ways: listening to/watching a background lecture from the Teaching Company; reading a parallel chapter in a cultural history; discussing other books and main events from the time period your child has already encountered; reading a short bio of the author and the ways he or she incorporated issues from the era into the work in question (like the introductions in the Norton Anthology); or the parent may have read more deeply about the time period in preparation and be able to give a short summary to the child informally.

 

Lisa, as to your question about whether the parent must necessarily be guide/instructor or whether the process of forging connections can be done usefully as joint exploration: in my mind this is a version of the issue of whether we need to pre-process information for our kids, and again, it depends on both the child in question and on what you want your child to gain from the process. I happen to have a child who can fairly reliably make a number of the kinds of connections I love to see, so I don't do a lot of presenting her with ready-made connections. Another child may need to have this done extensively at first, then gradually learn how to do it herself.

 

Also, I want my daughter to learn how to ask questions, to learn about the kinds of questions one can ask about the relationship between history and literature, to learn to consider the kinds of questions that don't have a single, readily pinned-down answer. I don't mind if she doesn't make all the connections that I could give her or inform her of, particularly in the first reading. One way we differ quite substantially from a number of other people is the way we re-read and re-read -- or listen to readings multiple times. Obviously we don't do this with everything, but we do it with a selected handful of books. Part of the value lies not only in WHAT we discover on multiple readings but simply in the awareness that multiple readings bring layers of understanding over time, that more and different connections can be discovered each time around, and that our interests and focus shift with re-readings.

 

The short answer is that I definitely believe in the value of mutual exploration and discovery. In fact I often think I am a better teacher of that which I have to work hardest at understanding and fitting into my own body of thinking, because it (whatever the "it" at hand might be) doesn't seem already obvious or apparent, like a fact that's always existed. As my daughter grows older and our topics of interest grow more complex and unconventional, sometimes she's the one who provides the context of background knowledge (which she LOVES). Sometimes I am the one who "teaches" or has a grasp of context and connections. Sometimes we both uncover them.

 

I used to teach university-level lit classes, and I moved over the years from teaching in a predominantly lecture model to using mostly brief lectures and then extended discussion, because what I wanted was for the students to get used to thinking up questions, and responding to questions, as they read, instead of having it all laid out for them and then struggling when they had to think for themselves during the writing of an essay. There were classes in which this strategy went brilliantly -- discussions almost led themselves, lots of kids participated, they came up with everything I had in mind for them to think about. There were other classes that were just awful; the particular group of students for one reason or another just was not able to get into the discussions, were worried about "right" answers, just wanted to be given the information and be done with it. This is how it goes with homeschooling my daughter too. Sometimes it clearly just is a time to give her an overview and either ask leading questions or sum up a few connections, because she isn't invested and isn't going to care enough to engage. Other times she has a lot of questions and comments and my role -- which thrills me -- is to say, "Why do you think that? Where does the writer say something that gives you that picture? How does that remind you of _______? How is that different from ________?" Those are the Glory Days; they're what I'm aiming for, even if we don't always get there.

[mcconnellboys]

Well, the encyclopedia articles are so very short and to the point that I don't really think it's very redundant. A two page spread on the Reformation, for instance, is going to cram a few main points about that time period in amongst the pictures. You're really not going to get much in the way of details or expansion on reasons for things unless you're reading from other books, too.

 

We may not read other books in their entirety. We may just take a chapter from this one and read the picture captions from another, etc. We're reading and discussing - looking for answers to things that the encyclopedia just touched on. Or, as we read and come upon interesting details in other books, we're looking for confirmation or disagreement about that fact in a second, third, etc. source.

 

And then we're generally reading some work of fiction along-side our history work during this same time period that's set at the same time, so we're noticing similarities in that work, details about what life was like at the time that might agree or disagree with what we've read elsewhere, etc.

 

I do make assignments of shorter books for him to read on his own, as well as reading aloud with him. His reading is not just works of literature, but also history and science books, as well.

 

So, for this upcoming year, for instance, here's what I'm looking at during the first week:

 

 

Week 1 - Monday

SOTW Chapter 1, Holy Roman Empire and Riches of Spain

 

Usborne: 140-41; 144

 

Haywood: 116-21 and 122-25

 

Kingfisher: 222-23; 220-21

 

(These first four are short readings that I will do aloud. He will read SOTW all year by himself and outline from it. We will compare what we read in the encyclopedias.)

 

Lost Treasure of the Inca, Peter Lourie (good) - L - (This is a 48 page book, so he will read this on his own.)

 

Moorish Spain, Richard Fletcher - L - (This is a 189 page book, so we will just be reading excerpts from this, if it looks good when I get it in; perhaps looking at pictures, etc.)

 

Spain and its World 1500-1700, selected essays, J. H. Elliott - L - (This is a 295 page book, so ditto above.)

 

Moorish Culture in Spain, Titus Burckhardt - L - (This is a 219 page book, so ditto above.)

 

Reading:

 

The Travels of Francisco Pizarro, Lara Bergen - L - He will read this on his own for lit.

 

I, Juan de Pareja, Elizabeth de Trevino - L - He will read this on his own for lit.

 

Secret of the Andes, Ann Clark - H - He probably won't have time to read this, too, so I will probably read it.

 

Literature:

 

Read from original Don Quixote - H - We'll read from this as time allows. We read some last year, too, but he loves it, so I thought I'd start with it again....

 

Writing:

 

Narrate your favorite exploit of Quixote that we’ve read thus far…..

How does Cervantes make fun of the romance of the Middle Ages?

 

During this first week, he's also reading a few pages daily from a geography related book, as well as a chapter a day from a missionary biography. And then he'll have some reading related to chemistry and to some outside classes.

 

(I drink tea, LOL......)

Edited August 8, 2010 by mcconnellboys

[Jen+4dc]

Do you feel relieved, Jen?:D I don't know how I could spend all summer discussing breadth and depth, skills vs. content, making pacts not to over-purchase and over schedule, and miss the idea that the streamlined, non-text approach would allow the student to do some thinking on their own instead of being spoon-fed.

 

The irony is knee-deep here. Our favorite curriculum is MCT: smart, efficient, effective, and minimal paperwork. It assumes the student can think and make connections on their own. That would seem to be pattern for other subjects, right?

 

Jen, are you thinking that once the kids have covered the basics with Kingfisher, outlining, etc., that you will give them x amount of time to pursue additional reading of their choice?

Yes, although it will probably be somewhat guided: as in choose from this list or these books....whatever interests you most from this stack, about this topic, etc.

 

We pick up some of the main topics from that introductory reading and then read a lot more in-depth from a variety of other non-fiction books. We also tend to read historical fiction at the same time that compliments the non-fiction readings, as this tends to help bring those to life in a better way and make them more memorable. And I do always distinguish between the two.

 

We always read from a variety of authors, too, to get differing viewpoints/perspectives on events and people and we discuss those as we read. No history topic is ever studied entirely from the viewpoint of any one author.

.

 

This would be my ideal, we'll see how reality pans out.:tongue_smilie: But yes, Lisa, I feel somewhat relieved. Now, I just have to scrap my overweight, spoon-fed plans and make new skeletal plans.:D

[greensummervillian]

Regina, do you do all that in one week? How much time does he spend per day reading? I'm wondering because I'm still trying to figure out if the my son's workload is reasonable, and you have a lot more reading scheduled that I do.

[Guest]

Regina, do you do all that in one week? How much time does he spend per day reading? I'm wondering because I'm still trying to figure out if the my son's workload is reasonable, and you have a lot more reading scheduled that I do.

 

I was wondering the same thing, trying to catch my breath -- WOW, what a lot of reading! I thought we were a family of marathon readers, but I'm feeling totally inadequate right now.

 

By the way, I remember so loving Juan de Pareja when I was middle school age... my daughter won't read it, because as an Aspie she has real trouble with social realism and that type of historical fiction -- but it is such a great book!

[mcconnellboys]

I have an hour of reading time scheduled for him in the morning.

 

As an example, for the first week, he will read from the geography book (just 2-4 pages, really, and not that much text at that);

 

the chapter of a missionary biography (which is probably at about a fifth grade reading level, so not difficult);

 

and all or some (depending on length) of a lit book(s) that I've selected (or that he selects in weeks where I have tons of books on our list).

 

He can read about 50 pages an hour.

 

I try to gauge their reading when they start to get into logic stage by noting where they start when they begin reading and then trying to get them to read for at least 30 minutes or an hour and see what page they're on when they stop. This might be during school time or when they're just reading on their own.

 

I do this lots over time to get a good average of how many pages they can typically cover per hour. When I make my plans, I try not to assign more pages than this. So I tend to use my library catalog to check how many pages a book contains as I make my plans (or when I order the books).

 

Of course, sometimes if you're reading a very text dense book with smaller type, you'll have to totally adjust this time. But most reading books have a similar font size and type style that we tend to get accustomed to as we read a lot and so we can generally read pretty quickly and smoothly as long as the books are in a familiar style.

 

This year, I'm beginning to split up our history and science time so that he will do more reading on those topics on his own, too. So on M,W,F when we do history and lit, I'll only read for about an hour and then he'll have an hour to read on his own (or do his writing that's associated, etc.) Now, if he's finished up his own reading for the week early, then I can just read aloud more, as I'm sure that there will be plenty to keep us going.

 

Chemistry I'm playing a lot looser because I'm not yet sure quite what to expect. I'm hopeful that a chem professor we know is going to work with him weekly, but I'm still unsure of that so I've ended up putting him in an outside chem class that claims they're doing weekly experiments. Because the hands-on is so important in science and I'm so very rotten at getting it done, I'm hopeful that this will be a good fit.

 

If we have time at home, then, we'll be doing some reading on topic here (both aloud and alone), on T/R for two hours (1:30-3:30), and I may split that time, too, to allow him more read alone time, but if all the outside stuff we're doing eats up too much time then my chemistry plan for home may be allowed to fall by the wayside.

 

I still like to make a plan because if these outside things fall through or flop, then I still have something I can pick up and run with for the rest of the year.

 

So, he should basically have about 2 hours per day (at different times) when he can get reading (or writing about what he's read) accomplished.

 

I read pretty fast, too, I guess, when I do read alouds. I've never really gauged myself to see what my speed is but we generally manage to get a couple of books read a week (at about 250-300 pages, typically). While I only have about an hour scheduled for myself for reading history/lit in the afternoons of three days (and science, maybe, the other two), the reality is that he always finishes up his written work faster than the time I allow for it so we always have more free time to just enjoy in reading.

 

In fact, for us the reading is really a treat and he seems to like to work to get finished with other things so that we can just curl up and read. I get into many of the stories, too, and look forward to taking up where we left off to see what's going to happen next, LOL. In fact, I've continued doing read alouds longer with him than with my older son because I can now, and I enjoy it, too!

 

I'm getting afraid that I'm not letting him read enough on his own which is why I'm trying to up his reading beginning this year. I've had him reading too many short stories, fables, myths and not enough longer, more difficult works the last couple of years (compared to what my older son was reading at this age). I don't want to short-change him just for my own reading enjoyment....

[mcconnellboys]

But it's really not a lot of reading! We're not reading entire works. Look at this more closely:

 

For history time: 2 hours on M,W,F:

 

On Monday:

 

Usborne: 140-41; 144 - this is only three pages and half of each page is covered in pictures.

 

Haywood: 116-21 and 122-25 - this is 10 pages and we're back-tracking some as review from the end of last year or we wouldn't even be reading this much; most weeks we'll just be reading 2-4 pages from this book. Sometimes 3/4 of the page is picture.

 

Kingfisher: 222-23; 220-21 - this is 4 pages, and again, most weeks it will just be two pages. Again, half pictures.

 

So this intro is much longer than most, just to get us started for the year, and it's only 17 pages (heavy on pictures). We can easily move through this slowly, looking at the pictures, reviewing some, and still be done with it in 30 minutes.

 

That's probably all I'll read regarding history on Monday. Then, if I haven't already had a chance to start literature earlier in the day, I'll pick up and read some selections from Quixote. We're not reading the entire book. We already read some from it last year and he's read children's versions on his own, too.

 

If I have time then I may start or continue Daughter of the Andes and read a chapter or two of it. I just play it by ear, time wise, for reading the extras I stick on the list. We don't always manage to get to all of them.

 

This will leave him the other hour to read this book on his own:

 

Lost Treasure of the Inca, Peter Lourie. This is a 48 page book, so he might finish it on Monday, if it's heavy on pictures (I don't recall right now), or he can continue it on Wednesday if he doesn't finish today.

 

In my hour of time on Wednesday, I'll read excerpts or chapters taken from these books:

 

1) Moorish Spain, Richard Fletcher - L - 189 pages

 

2) Spain and its World 1500-1700, selected essays, J. H. Elliott - L - 295 pages

 

3) Moorish Culture in Spain, Titus Burckhardt - L - 219 pages

 

I won't be reading the entire books, unless one of them really stands out when I get it and we decide to read only it! They may all be junk and I may not read any of them. That doesn't happen often, but it has happened.... Then I'll have to find something else, go online, etc. (and will probably definitely have time to read Daughter of the Andes, LOL!)

 

This book he'll start on Monday morning, during his morning reading time, which is one hour per day:

 

The Travels of Francisco Pizarro, Lara Bergen. It's also 48 pages, with pictures, so I expect he can finish it up by Tuesday.

 

And then he'll just be finishing up this book the rest of the week: I, Juan de Pareja, Elizabeth de Trevino. So any spare time he has for the rest of the week he can devote to this longer book. He has assigned reading time of at least an hour on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday mornings. He will also have at least another afternoon hour on Wednesday and Friday, if not extra time on other days when he's finished his written work early.... So I'm looking at about another 5 hours of reading time, at least, for the rest of the week. I think he can easily read this book in that amount of time.

 

I don't ever really say "you can be done for the day" early. We do school from about 8 until about 3:30 daily. If we finish up all the "written work" early, then we devote the rest of our time to "reading" during that time period. That might be read alouds or read alones, books on tape or sometimes movies. And sometimes it's discussing or writing about what we're reading, but all reading associated stuff.

 

I didn't include the SOTW chapter for the week. Really, he generally does this during his written work time since he's at a table where he can write the outline. He tends to read it first, in about 10 minutes, then go back and pick up the points and write the outline (about another 15 minutes). It's written at a younger level so it's an easy read for him at this point, but he enjoys it and it's easy to outline from it.

 

Come on, now, y'all are making me feel like a slave driver, LOL!

Edited August 8, 2010 by mcconnellboys

[Capt_Uhura]

What a wonderful thread! Unfortunately, I'm in the midst of packing for a move on Tuesday, will be in a hotel for several days before moving into our new house. I have not a brain cell functioning to digest this thread nor make a meaningful contribution. I hope to come back to it in a few days ... perhaps while we're in the hotel.

 

I think I'm making history more complex than it needs to be. My boys have learned so much just from reading books. I need to take a step back and reassess and listen to SWB's history as lit MP3.

 

Capt_Uhura

[greensummervillian]

I'm not trying to make you feel bad! Honestly, I admire what you're doing. :grouphug: Thank you for writing out how that all works. I think I am slow at reading aloud. For example, we're reading a chapter per day from The Hobbit right now. Many days it takes nearly an hour to read some of those longer chapters, and my throat gets sore! So it's taking about 3 weeks to read one book. All summer I've kept up one read aloud and the kids have read books at their own pace. To be honest, I've let them watch too much TV this summer. That's my own laziness, which needs to change.

 

I always want to know how much other people are doing because I just don't know what is considered a reasonable amount. That's why I asked.

 

(Sorry for derailing the original topic. )

Edited August 6, 2010 by greensummervillian

[Karen in CO]

For example, we're reading a chapter per day from The Hobbit right now. Many days it takes nearly an hour to read some of those longer chapters, and my throat gets sore!

 

I'm reading the Hobbit aloud right now too. It does take about an hour per chapter sometimes. So some days, I either set a timer and read for 30 minutes or I just keep my water bottle nearby and keep on reading. I love that it is taking a long time to read. It lets the kids take time to mull it over and live in it.

 

When we read Peter Pan this spring, we absolutely loved it. However, when I had assigned it to my ds for him to read alone, he hated it and I didn't see the appeal when I read it myself as an adult. Seeing it come alive in the girls' minds and play made it wonderful We spend time with my 4yo nephew while we were reading it - he embodied Peter for us - especially those perfect little pearls of teeth. We really got to experience how heartless children were and it was perfect for my middle dd who is growing into a perfect Wendy.

 

And back to the Hobbit - we reread Sea of Trolls after we started reading the Hobbit - my dd started comparing the descriptions of trolls between the two and picked up some lines that were lifted from one book to the other about roasting. She's also been noticing the Norse mythology references that Tolkien uses too. Reading aloud slowly lets thing sink in better than whizzing through books.

 

sorry for the diversion - back to your discussion. :)

[mcconnellboys]

I don't think we try to read fast; I guess we just do. Reading aloud does make books come alive, I think, as you said. We get to discuss the details and really feel them; get into them. I've always loved seeing the wheels turning as they make connections for mythologies from all over the world and see them in more modern works. I think making the connections is what it's all about!

[Rosie_0801]

Do I understand correctly that the history instruction comes not so much from the encyclopedia work but from reading the good and great books and discussing them so indeed the line between history and literature is blurred? The teacher would need to at the very least be well-versed in the historical connections the student needs to know or is it a mutual discovery process for teacher and parent. Obviously, I am concerned about missing something important this way.

 

Your thoughts?

 

My thoughts as a bod with a history degree:

 

It would be easier for the teacher if s/he was well versed in the historical connections, or the books the student would be reading, but I would say the more important skill is critical thinking because it is the thinking process that is more important than the content. You can write anything you like in history, providing you argue it well. My African history professor knew everything there was to know about what he was teaching, plus a bit more, but I doubt he had ever considered the way the economic founding of Nairobi relied on the prostitutes of the area. I got an A on the essay anyway, because I argued well. Though he was a clever gent, so maybe he did know my sources off by heart :)

 

I felt guilty that all we ever did was read and discuss. It's an ideal format for this family but it didn't meet my idea of "rigor."

:lol: You know what I did at uni, don't you? The writing I did was only so they'd have something to base my marks on. If you don't need formal marks, the writing isn't so necessary. I wouldn't argue unnecessary, because people need to practice writing, but if you do your writing in other subjects, then it won't matter at all that history is read and discuss.

 

Rosie

[Colleen in NS]

But it's really not a lot of reading! We're not reading entire works.

 

Come on, now, y'all are making me feel like a slave driver, LOL!

 

I think it's more that you are so organized with which books to use during which weeks, and which pages of those books. There is a lot of organization that goes into that. You are one of those teachers who *does* know books and connections, and so you probably are easily able to pass that on to your kids, and it shows in your plan. It's great!

 

My thoughts as a bod with a history degree:

 

It would be easier for the teacher if s/he was well versed in the historical connections, or the books the student would be reading, but I would say the more important skill is critical thinking because it is the thinking process that is more important than the content.

 

This is encouraging for me to read.

 

And I'm off to Prince Edward Island for a week, so I'll check back after that!

[Another Lynn]

I confess, I'm more in the mood for a "tell me what to do now curricula" right now, BUT I just read Daughter of Time by Josephine Tey (for myself) and thoroughly enjoyed it. I think there's a bit there that would be over my ds's head right now, but on the other hand what better way to show him there's more than one version of a story? Maybe it would be more fun to start the Middle Ages with Richard III than end with him, LOL.

[mcconnellboys]

Awww, we were just talking about wanting to go there...... See some whales for me, too....

[JennW in SoCal]

As usual, the really interesting threads that Lisa starts happen while I'm away from the board!

 

May I throw in one other approach to history? Along the lines of a literary approach, is the interest based approach. As I'm writing this I'm thinking of Lisa and her swimmer dude, and am thinking the history of swimming probably has a limited amount of literature!:tongue_smilie: What I really was thinking about was how I approached 20th century history through theater and the entertainment industry with my oldest. We watched the PBS Broadway series, he read a recent biography of Walt Disney, and he read plays and other memoirs. He made all kinds of insightful connections between political, social and cultural history, connections which have stuck with him. He would have glossed over a textbook, not caring and not learning, but the the fact that Walt Disney drove an ambulance in France during WWI, suddenly made that war more interesting, and all the propaganda movies Disney made during WWII really fascinated him, inspiring him to want to learn more.

 

My younger son has gleaned most of his history through his study of science, though he really loved reading this last year The History of the World in Six Glasses. It is a cultural history, really, of which beverages were tied in with different formative historical periods: Beer in the Fertile Crescent, wine in Greece and Rome, Tea and the British Empire -- you get the idea. I had him read the section on one of the beverages, then he read some literature of the period, with Teaching Company lectures and further background reading assigned as needed.

 

I'm with Rosie, too, that the most important thing we're teaching these kids is to think for themselves, to make connections and formulate arguments in support of their opinions. Shoot, I remember some really stupid essays I wrote in college that nevertheless passed muster as I wrote some good arguments.

 

I'm not learning all this history and literature ahead of my kids, either, I'm learning with them, and sharing my "a-ha!" moments.

 

Actually, back to swimming and swimmers. Diana Nyad is a really fascinating woman -- every time I hear her on NPR's Marketplace I have to stop and think "oh yeah, she's that woman who did some crazy swimming stunts". So maybe there are interesting connections to be made between the sport and other subjects.

[Guest]

I confess, I'm more in the mood for a "tell me what to do now curricula" right now, BUT I just read Daughter of Time by Josephine Tey (for myself) and thoroughly enjoyed it. I think there's a bit there that would be over my ds's head right now, but on the other hand what better way to show him there's more than one version of a story? Maybe it would be more fun to start the Middle Ages with Richard III than end with him, LOL.

 

I ADORE Josephine Tey. This is the type of book I tend to read aloud with my daughter as "stealth history" -- she is so resistant to any kind of dry, formal, chronological history (and I don't really blame her). Daughter of Time is one of the few books that actually shows the archival-hunting aspect of history and makes it compelling, kind of a mental detective story.