Why doesn't everyone teach classical education?

[mom2agang]

Public school, private schools and homeschools. It just makes so much more sense! I think American kids would be SO much smarter! I see in some countries they have to test to get into high school and then test to see if they can go into college. Why don't we expect more like that? I think everybody should have the opportunity but it should be an earned opportunity not a pay as you go thing. I have a friend who while going through med school barely passed BARELY! Pass his boards BARELY! Now he is a Dr. and people treat him like a genuis. He can't even remember the names of some main bones in your body. He can't spell.( well neither can I) but my health lies in the hands of a Dr. Who has to look things up to make sure he's right? And this is what America is dishing out as an educated person? As long as you can google it your smart enough?

[Mom2J112903]

We homeschool, but do not follow the WTM guidelines-does that make us a horrible homeschooler since we do not teach classically?

[NanceXToo]

Just so you know, not everyone on this board teaches a classical education lol.

 

I don't. I use Oak Meadow which is not Waldorf but Waldorf-ISH. Very creative and hands on, involves the child as a whole, laid back in the earliest years rather than pushing a lot of academics in, say, Kindergarten, and so on. I'm a fairly relaxed homeschooler. I still can see that my child is thriving more than she ever did in public school, that she's benefitting from my one on one instruction, AND that she's getting to just be a kid and has time to follow her own interests, as well.

 

Is it working? Yes. I can SEE that she's learning just by interacting with her. I hire an evaluator each year as per PA law who is happy with and impressed by our annual portfolios. I turn in a portfolio to the superintendent of our schools each year as per PA law, who has accepted said portfolio and acknowledged that an appropriate education had been received. A standardized test administered last year shows that she is right where she's supposed to be (which is more than I can say for most of the kids around here judging by the test scores published in the paper, annually. Around here, schools don't even meet state average).

 

There's more than one "right" way to homeschool ;)

[Annabel Lee]

:iagree:

 

Mom2agang, I agree with your core point that education in America (generally) stinks. The amount of money thrown at it dwarfs the less-than-stellar results, which IMO means money is not the answer.

 

There are those here who are lost without something to follow (like me) and find TWTM to be a very good guide. Like Nancy and the PP said, there's also people here who are doing what they can or what works best for them; perhaps some have even found things they think are *better* for their children than WTM recommendations.

 

I don't think SWB would want anyone slavishly following WTM if it meant the detriment of their homeschool, burnout of you or the kids, or if it disproportionately overshadows other equally important areas of life. It doesn't have to be all or nothing - I have Nancy to thank for helping me see that.

 

Just as Nancy likes the Waldorf-ish Oak Meadow, I'm keen on Montessori methods. I don't use any official Montessori items but I like to demonstrate concepts in a concrete way using visual/kinestheic aids. In our homeschool, I hope to help my dc discover a hobby, interest, passion, marketable skill, handicraft... something they love and want to learn in depth. I hope they can find something like that to keep them busy by the Jr. High years. ;)

[Carrie12345]

When I play "When I Win the Lottery", I like to plan my private classical (secular) school. It's NOT an easy task when you're talking about a K-12 school and trying to fund small classrooms, even with pretend money. Heck, I don't find it all that easy when talking about THREE students (which will eventually be 4, but not more) in my house!

 

When you're talking about "plain old" rigorous, in general, I don't think that's applicable to every child. Providing a rigorous education for my ADD/possibly dyslexic dd is a tall order. I'm working hard to meet it, but it's far from easy. Not every kid is built for a rigorous education, and not every family feels it's necessary.

[BlsdMama]

Wendy,

 

I understand what you're saying, but the reasons of how and why a person homeschools number into... Well who knows?

 

I have a friend who unschools her children. Her reason for educating them at home are different than mine and so her method looks different than mine.

 

And most methods people are talking about aren't even classical, they're neo-classical. And even modern proponents differ in what they believe is a classical education.

 

Let's take your example. The friend who is a doctor... I'm less frightened by him than I am by his patients who never second guess, never try to find out what's ailing them and then rigorously follow whatever he says blindly without any actual thought. It seems to me people of all ages & backgrounds are insanely willing to follow ANYONE they deem an expert these days - teachers, administrators, doctors. It's a bit Nazi-ish and frightening really.

 

I wonder constantly at adults who have no curiousity. I have to say to that end, many people are educating "classically" because of the rigorous academic standards, but they don't actually follow through to the end when children are able to think through arguments, take a stand, and articulate their beliefs both spoken and written. I believe that if I raise curious children who can think and find things out for themselves and articulate what they are saying well, I will have succeeded.

 

~Classically eclectic?~

[snickelfritz]

Well my question is more about why can't all people get a better more rigorous education. I don't think it has to be classical. In fact, I'm not even quite sure what classical education is and supposedly I've been doing it for three years.

 

I will just throw in my little disclaimer for the public education system, without seeming to endorse it. They're doing something wrong. I'm homeschooling because I don't want that system for my kids. I don't claim to begin to know how they should fix it.

 

BUT

 

How many school systems in the world provide an education for EVERY child, no matter whether they are learning disabled or can speak the language? I'm not willing to start weeding kids out at the elementary level because they can't keep up with a rigorous education. And I'm not willing to weed them out because the parents don't put a priority on education, either.

 

I taught at a rigorous classical private school. But, they even tested for entrance to pre-k.

[Perry]

Why doesn't everyone teach classical education?

I'm a huge fan of classical education, but I don't think that would work out any better than any other one-size-fits-all policy.

 

Instead, I'd like to see lots of choices available, with a variety of approaches. Parents could choose what they think is best for their kids.

 

This wouldn't work well in small communities though.

[mommaduck]

Because it doesn't fit every learning style. It assumes that everyone learns the same or should learn the same. That would be as bad as the system itself. Also, I'm glad that we can pay for classes at the college level. Some simply like to continue their education. Some may not be able to handle the courses at the typical young age and because they don't test well in their late teens, that should hold them back from acquiring a degree in their late 30's and 40's?

[Harriet Vane]

Well my question is more about why can't all people get a better more rigorous education. I don't think it has to be classical. In fact, I'm not even quite sure what classical education is and supposedly I've been doing it for three years.

 

:iagree:

[Nestof3]

I'd love to know how long have you been providing this perfect classical education to your ten children, and what are their ages?

 

Public school, private schools and homeschools. It just makes so much more sense! I think American kids would be SO much smarter! I see in some countries they have to test to get into high school and then test to see if they can go into college. Why don't we expect more like that? I think everybody should have the opportunity but it should be an earned opportunity not a pay as you go thing. I have a friend who while going through med school barely passed BARELY! Pass his boards BARELY! Now he is a Dr. and people treat him like a genuis. He can't even remember the names of some main bones in your body. He can't spell.( well neither can I) but my health lies in the hands of a Dr. Who has to look things up to make sure he's right? And this is what America is dishing out as an educated person? As long as you can google it your smart enough?

[Haiku]

my health lies in the hands of a Dr. Who has to look things up to make sure he's right?

 

My kids' doctors routinely look things up, and I'm glad they do. That extra measure of certitude is a good thing.

 

You chose not to send your kids to school because it wasn't right for you, correct? Classical education is not right for all homeschooling families. It's right for us, but plenty of my homeschooling friends have chosen different methods, and I would not be so quick to rip on them.

 

Perhaps you didn't mean it to, but your post came off as quite holier-than-thou.

 

Tara

[EKS]

I have a friend who while going through med school barely passed BARELY! Pass his boards BARELY! Now he is a Dr. and people treat him like a genuis. He can't even remember the names of some main bones in your body. He can't spell.( well neither can I) but my health lies in the hands of a Dr. Who has to look things up to make sure he's right?

 

I would *much* prefer to have my doctor look something up than to simply go with what s/he remembers. There is *no way* a doctor can remember everything they might need to know to treat every ailment that comes along. Also, knowing the names of every bone in the body probably doesn't correlate much with good medical care.

[LuvToRead]

My Dr. has this cool looking PDA type thing that she actually uses to look things up. I'm glad she does. By looking things up in front of me, it shows me she cares enough to make sure she gets it right. Plus it shows me she's not so arrogant that she can admit she doesn't know everything.

 

I do a mixture of classical, unit study, and literature based. It is what works for my family.

[shougmom]

I'd love to know how long have you been providing this perfect classical education to your ten children, and what are their ages?

 

:iagree:

[mommaduck]

Dr's also look things up because the medical field is constantly changing and new things are being found. Offer thanks that the Dr doesn't leave things to his own assumptions. Those are the type of dr's that think they are gods and should be avoided.

[mom2agang]

I guess I ment more like why can't all people get a better more rigorous education. I have been homeschooling since my oldest son was almost 3 and he will be 13 in Oct. To me classical education seems more rigorous. I'm not saying it's the best for eveyone.

[mommaduck]

I guess I ment more like why can't all people get a better more rigorous education. I have been homeschooling since my oldest son was almost 3 and he will be 13 in Oct. To me classical education seems more rigorous. I'm not saying it's the best for eveyone.

Because the system is broke and it's used for experimentation in theories more than for actual education.

[fhjmom]

I guess I ment more like why can't all people get a better more rigorous education. I have been homeschooling since my oldest son was almost 3 and he will be 13 in Oct. To me classical education seems more rigorous. I'm not saying it's the best for eveyone.

 

Why doesn't everyone teach classical education? Public school, private schools and homeschools. It just makes so much more sense!

 

Ummm... if you weren't saying it was best for everyone, who were you leaving out when you said "pubic schools, private, schools, homeschools"?

 

We don't follow a strictly classical education model. I am a very eclectic homeschooler. My oldest DS *hates* rote memorization although he can memorize things very easily. He has like a photographic memory and adult friends say he is like a walking encyclopedia, LOL! Having him do memorization and chants would kill his love for learning. He has to know the "why behind a concept", he needs to see where it fits in the big picture, and see why it is important or he has no interest in learning it. He has been in the logic stage since he was 3! LOL!

 

I realize you may not have intended it that way but your post came off as pretty judgemental.

[easygoer]

I guess I ment more like why can't all people get a better more rigorous education. I have been homeschooling since my oldest son was almost 3 and he will be 13 in Oct. To me classical education seems more rigorous. I'm not saying it's the best for eveyone.

 

My crack is: because The System, trying to provide a free, comprehensive education to every single child with every possible background, circumstance, and ability, faces gigantic social (and political and financial) obstacles that a single family doesn't have anywhere near it's radar.

 

Obviously, it could be improved, and so many people would like nothing more...implementing that certainly isn't trivial.

[Renee in NC]

I guess I ment more like why can't all people get a better more rigorous education. I have been homeschooling since my oldest son was almost 3 and he will be 13 in Oct. To me classical education seems more rigorous. I'm not saying it's the best for eveyone.

 

I am very impressed that you have been able to "do" classical while having a baby every year or so. I only have 7, and the years when I was nursing/pregnant/nursing/pregnant and so on and so forth led to times where we didn't get much done in the way of "classical."

 

Even now, with mostly school-age kids, I struggle to get the basics done. I do have two with educational issues, but even if they didn't it would be very difficult for me to do TWTM with all of them as laid out in the book. I am having to settle for "good enough" instead of best.

[cathmom]

I am very impressed that you have been able to "do" classical while having a baby every year or so. I only have 7, and the years when I was nursing/pregnant/nursing/pregnant and so on and so forth led to times where we didn't get much done in the way of "classical."

 

Even now, with mostly school-age kids, I struggle to get the basics done. I do have two with educational issues, but even if they didn't it would be very difficult for me to do TWTM with all of them as laid out in the book. I am having to settle for "good enough" instead of best.

 

:iagree:

[NanceXToo]

Well, actually, if you read her past posts, she has NOT done a classical education all along and has struggled plenty herself. So maybe she just meant this post in theory and was including herself in the people she thinks "should" be doing it?

[hornblower]

Well, actually, if you read her past posts, she has NOT done a classical education all along and has struggled plenty herself. So maybe she just meant this post in theory and was including herself in the people she thinks "should" be doing it?

 

Yes, that's how I'm reading it.

[Renee in NC]

Well, actually, if you read her past posts, she has NOT done a classical education all along and has struggled plenty herself. So maybe she just meant this post in theory and was including herself in the people she thinks "should" be doing it?

 

Makes sense, I guess.

 

ETA: I looked back at the OP's past posts and she uses Heart of Dakota. I was thinking classical in TWTM sense. Isn't Heart of Dakota more unit study than classical?

Edited September 2, 2010 by Renee in FL

[Closeacademy]

Because classical doesn't work for every kid. I have one that does best with Waldorf and another that does best with a classical/Waldorf mix.:001_smile:

[6packofun]

For one of the main reasons that we homeschool: To give each of our children an *indivdualized*, unique education based on their abilities, interests, and needs. I realize that "classical education" could be broader than a national standardized type thing, but man, I love having kids who are doing different things that they are passionate about--and some things that they're not. ;) I cringe whenever I hear that ALL kids *should* be doing nearly the same thing. Blech.

[Nestof3]

I know! I only have two as I already finished homeschooling our eldest, and it nearly kills me to get it all done, and we're not even doing a foreign language (though we are studying Latin and Greek roots).

 

I cannot imagine having a baby every year and doing this amount with four times the children.

 

I am very impressed that you have been able to "do" classical while having a baby every year or so. I only have 7, and the years when I was nursing/pregnant/nursing/pregnant and so on and so forth led to times where we didn't get much done in the way of "classical."

 

Even now, with mostly school-age kids, I struggle to get the basics done. I do have two with educational issues, but even if they didn't it would be very difficult for me to do TWTM with all of them as laid out in the book. I am having to settle for "good enough" instead of best.

[angela in ohio]

Well my question is more about why can't all people get a better more rigorous education.

 

It's cultural, in large part, I think.

 

But I think the bigger issue is that it takes either a rigorous education of their own or a Herculean effort from the teachers/ mothers/ mentors to guide a child to a rigorous education. Not everyone has the ability or the resources for that.

[Ester Maria]

Because the public school system doesn't exactly comprise out of academic institutions but, rather, out of prolonged day-cares whose purpose is to take care of children while their parents are working way more than to actually educate those children. One can see it just by glancing at the structure of American public school education: giant institutions with "menu-like" courses where you get to pick what you like and thus lack the unity of a class which has most of their classes together, one-semester or one-year professors with whom one cannot create even a good intellectual relationship, let alone bond with them as persons, quickly going from one "course" to another... It's not a structured, thought-out system, it's an umbrella institution for a bunch of mutually independent things - and, even better, actual education is often neglected by a plethora of other non-academic things (sports especially) that the school provides for children.

 

So of course that in such a setting one cannot provide a rigorous education (not necessarily "classical") - at best, one can provide a student with rigorous bits and hope they manage to glue them into a meaningful unit some day. And "classical" especially isn't a good fit for such a setting.

 

Regarding home education, OTOH, the reasons why people mostly don't do it are so diverse. Some don't do it, to put it quite bluntly, because of the lack of specific education on their own part to provide their children with such an education (you cannot teach what you don't know); some don't do it because they take an utilitarian approach to education and wish to stress the fields which "pay off" and which are concretely useful other than focus on education as the process of building a mind and a person; some don't do it because their reasons to homeschool weren't academic in the first place, so the only thing which they wish to do is to get the standard package of 'education' at home; and some don't do it because their children cannot do it and obviously aren't "targets" of such an education.

 

Keep in mind that most of solid American classical schools are private, they don't accept everyone - and in Europe, while they might have an open access policy, they sometimes have a pretty high dropout rate, children transferring to other schools, because it just isn't a "perfect" education that's going to suit every single kid that tries it. And frankly, it's ALWAYS been the type of education that educated up to the top 10% of children academically, NOT everyone. It has never been aimed at masses, it doesn't work for masses and even know when it's accessible to masses, just look at the numbers of children - it's still the same top few percent that attend schools with a classical label on them. For most of children, such an education is not applicable in everyday life (with its focus on Latin and Greek rather than, say, computers), it's too theoretical (and most children don't learn the best that way), it's too ex cathedra (again, most children are far from that profile of learners), it moves too quickly, it has too many subjects, etc.

 

It's just not a one-size-fits-all type of education at all; in fact, you're taking something which was designed by the minority for the minority and which remains consumed by the minority and try to apply it to ALL. It doesn't work that way.

 

And for my part, I'm happy it doesn't. I'd rather provide a solid, excellent classical education for those 10% than force a mediocre version of it onto everyone. Other 90% are going to thrive in some other things and by some other methods. What's important is that they have access to it, not that they actually stay within the framework that doesn't work for them.

[AlaskaGrownFamily]

Because classical isn't the one "right" education for everyone?

[Crimson Wife]

I'll sidestep the whole hornet's nest about whether classical is the "best" model for education and talk about why it'll never be implemented on a wide scale in government-run schools.

 

On our local NPR station's "California Report" segment, there was a discussion of a new virtual school in Elk Grove that uses curriculum from K12. You can read a transcript here.

 

NPR quoted some professor of education at UC Davis criticizing the curriculum as too "old-fashioned and very whitewashed". She admitted that the literature was award-winning and classic but it's not "diverse" like the state-recommended book list.

 

Political correctness reigns supreme among educrats and resurrecting classical education would never fly. Teach students actual history with an emphasis on Western Civilization? Perish the thought. Study Latin and/or Greek instead of Spanish & Mandarin? Get with the 21st century! Memorize math facts, spelling & grammar rules, historical names & dates? Give the kids a calculator, spell-check, and Google.

[mom2agang]

I'm able to do A complete classical education because my husband is home from his job from Nov- May and we both teach. Yes I bought HOD and did it for a couple weeks. It was more of a Charlotte mason type education. We did not like it and decided not to continue with it. I have tried different types of homeschooling and keep finding I like classical the best.

[Renee in NC]

I'm able to do A complete classical education because my husband is home from his job from Nov- May and we both teach. Yes I bought HOD and did it for a couple weeks. It was more of a Charlotte mason type education. We did not like it and decided not to continue with it. I have tried different types of homeschooling and keep finding I like classical the best.

 

Classical is the best in my opinion, but, like I said, I have to stick to what I can get done instead of absolute best.

[JennyD]

There are a lot of things I like about the 'classical' model, but it's far from the only version of a rigorous education, IMNSHO.

[regentrude]

If you do classical with its focus on language and history, there will be other areas that you can not focus on at the same time. Some people have different interests and prefer to give their kids a more rigorous education in mathematics, sciences or modern languages.

There is only so much time in the day that everybody has to set priorities.

 

If you look for example at the schedules in WTM, you see only 120 hours of math and a measly 108 hours of science for each year of highschool - not nearly enough for a truly rigorous math/science education. (Anybody manage to master Campbell Reece bio in 108 hours?

 

While learning Greek is certainly nice, it is also nice to cover number theory in math, take two years of physics, or spend several hours a day training horses or playing the violin ... Why should classical be superior?

[bettyandbob]

I don't want everyone to get the same type of education. Classical education made sense for my family. However, it does not make sense for everyone. Among educated people, it is nice to encounter all different types and styles of thinking and approaches to problems.

 

Do I think everyone should have a rigorous education? Yes, but there are other ways.

 

As for the doctor who looks things up. I welcome that. I've encountered quite of few arrogant doctors because my kids have serious health issues. They make it clear they are not to be questioned. One such doctor was seriously wrong in his approach to my dd and set about a path that would have destroyed her liver. Just because you look stuff up and verify your approach does not mean you are not smart enough for the job.

[angela in ohio]

If you do classical with its focus on language and history, there will be other areas that you can not focus on at the same time. Some people have different interests and prefer to give their kids a more rigorous education in mathematics, sciences or modern languages.

There is only so much time in the day that everybody has to set priorities.

 

WTM is one author's interpretation of classical education. Classical education, in general, does not require neglecting science and mathematics. It really just depends on whose definition of classical you are using. :001_smile: Our classical homeschool gives a lot of attention to math and sciences, for example.

[Guest Barb B]

OK I'll admit something - I do what works for me so I never looked in depth at classical education. When I do look - I see lots of greek and roman literature. There is nothing wrong with this - but for my family they would go nuts. Aslo, it seems that (again - for my family) I would like to have more US history then a classical education seems to give.

 

The main point is - not one education fits all. Classical doesn't fit us (truthfully it would drive me nuts - I am just reading the Odyssey now and it is just plain weird!). But, that doesn't mean the education I provide isn't rigorous.

 

Barb

Edited September 3, 2010 by Barb B

[stripe]

Public school, private schools and homeschools. It just makes so much more sense! I think American kids would be SO much smarter! I see in some countries they have to test to get into high school and then test to see if they can go into college. Why don't we expect more like that?

I don't see the connection between a classical education and obsessive testing. In fact, I believe an environment fixated on testing can often fail to teach well.

 

I also don't believe many of the countries, particularly in Asia, that have extensive testing, use a classical model, because they are not so fixated on western cultural achievements in terms of their historical and literary focus.

 

I also don't think a classical education (whatever that is) is the only way to guarantee children who are not incompetent.

[stripe]

Political correctness reigns supreme among educrats and resurrecting classical education would never fly. Teach students actual history with an emphasis on Western Civilization? Perish the thought. Study Latin and/or Greek instead of Spanish & Mandarin? Get with the 21st century! Memorize math facts, spelling & grammar rules, historical names & dates? Give the kids a calculator, spell-check, and Google.

I don't think it's about not embracing western civ. It's not as if students come out actually knowing much about the entire continent of Africa except insofar as it's the origin of slaves, history of Latin America, anything about Asia except wars of the 20th century, or are able to actually speak/read ANY other language. If students were graduated bilingual in Mandarin or Spanish or read lots of diverse literature, that would be one thing. As it is, students don't speak any language well and aren't asked to read books, just excerpts as part of test prep.

[catz]

Well my question is more about why can't all people get a better more rigorous education. I don't think it has to be classical. In fact, I'm not even quite sure what classical education is and supposedly I've been doing it for three years.

 

I don't think the classical model is the end all/be all to education. What I do think is important is tailoring to a child's learning style, level, pacing, and even interests. If I followed a strict classical model, my kids would push back hard. They are both well above grade level, so that allows us quite a bit of leeway. I consider our content and approach probably rigorous. Busy work and output required, quite relaxed. This works well for us. Some kids need more drill and structure.

 

I think this gets into a philosophical argument about homeschool approaches. At one point aren't you doing Classical, CM, Waldorf, Unschooling etc? I think if a school or homeschool is worrying more about following a particular dogma than serving individual children and how they learn best, maybe rethinking that might be a good idea.

[catz]

While learning Greek is certainly nice, it is also nice to cover number theory in math, take two years of physics, or spend several hours a day training horses or playing the violin ... Why should classical be superior?

 

Totally agree with this! There are lots of wonderful roads to take. All very child/family/priority dependent. Science and Math are definitely playing a big part in our plans as we move forward.

 

Personally, I don't see the allure of taking Latin over a modern language. My husband did take it in college though (he took several). We do latin roots via MCT here. But the kids are also taking homeschool Spanish this year.

[mama2cntrykids]

I assume I'm going to have much of the same answer that many other ppl have. I have one child who would probably do fine with a classical education. My other son would not thrive at.all with it. He just wouldn't. He would end up hating learning and our relationship would be severly damaged because of the issue.

 

It's just that not everyone can fit that mold (or any mold for that matter). It's not one size fits all. Just my thoughts here!

[ereks mom]

I don't think the classical model is the end all/be all to education. What I do think is important is tailoring to a child's learning style, level, pacing, and even interests. If I followed a strict classical model, my kids would push back hard. They are both well above grade level, so that allows us quite a bit of leeway. I consider our content and approach probably rigorous. Busy work and output required, quite relaxed. This works well for us. Some kids need more drill and structure.

 

I think this gets into a philosophical argument about homeschool approaches. At one point aren't you doing Classical, CM, Waldorf, Unschooling etc? I think if a school or homeschool is worrying more about following a particular dogma than serving individual children and how they learn best, maybe rethinking that might be a good idea.

 

:iagree:

[Ruby]

I may get blasted here but for me it is most definately not all about the academics. For us less is more. Only now is my oldest dd 15 really hammering into her grammer, but she was a good writer before and the grammer has helped enhance what she does. I think a knowledge base of many things is great, if you can dig into your interests that is great too. I believe in being sure that my kids can express themselves both written and orally, have math skills to take them through college if they choose and have a soled set of study skills. But we have always had friends that could barely study a subject and it sticks in their heads. My children require a lot more effort and study for things to really take hold. In the long run I want them to have great people skills, loving relationships, know how to work hard, etc. I keep an eye on the California state standards but don't really care too much about them. But there is a game to be played. If you don't have the basic knowledge than you cut your options for college. We will never produce Harvard attendees at my house but they love one another, treat people well and will continue to develop the skills they are good at. They know how to work hard and that will open many doors. I'm definately not expressing myself well here but anyway.....even though we aren't classical I love this board.:D

[Ester Maria]

Personally, I don't see the allure of taking Latin over a modern language. My husband did take it in college though (he took several). We do latin roots via MCT here. But the kids are also taking homeschool Spanish this year.

But it's such a false dichotomy, this whole "a classical vs. a modern language". In the rest of the world studying multiple languages is more of a rule than an exception - especially in European classical schools that often dedicate equal amount of time to modern foreign languages conversational abilities as literacy as to literacy in classical languages...

you look for example at the schedules in WTM, you see only 120 hours of math and a measly 108 hours of science for each year of highschool - not nearly enough for a truly rigorous math/science education. (Anybody manage to master Campbell Reece bio in 108 hours?

 

While learning Greek is certainly nice, it is also nice to cover number theory in math, take two years of physics, or spend several hours a day training horses or playing the violin ... Why should classical be superior?

Personally, I haven't one found classical to neglect mathematical and scientific literacy - but I'm a WTM heretic anyway, especially in this area.

 

I found that a basic scheme of 160 hours for mathematics and 80 hours per each science (which would make it 240 overall, since we do integrated sciences) leads to excellent results in this field and doesn't neglect them - and yet, it's way more than what WTM suggests and I believe it's pretty much al par with what people who provide their children with heavy sciences are doing. And while it might be too much for some kids, it's also not a false dichotomy of sciences vs. Latin/Greek. Italian scientific lycees don't have Greek, but some of them have 5 years of Latin x 5 hours weekly... and their focus are still sciences.

 

(The above scheme is just an illustration; I do schedule it pretty much that way, but my kids do science very differently one from another, so it's not representative of either's knowledge.)

WTM is one author's interpretation of classical education. Classical education, in general, does not require neglecting science and mathematics. It really just depends on whose definition of classical you are using. :001_smile: Our classical homeschool gives a lot of attention to math and sciences, for example.

I agree.

[smrtmama]

Public school, private schools and homeschools. It just makes so much more sense! I think American kids would be SO much smarter! I see in some countries they have to test to get into high school and then test to see if they can go into college. Why don't we expect more like that? I think everybody should have the opportunity but it should be an earned opportunity not a pay as you go thing. I have a friend who while going through med school barely passed BARELY! Pass his boards BARELY! Now he is a Dr. and people treat him like a genuis. He can't even remember the names of some main bones in your body. He can't spell.( well neither can I) but my health lies in the hands of a Dr. Who has to look things up to make sure he's right? And this is what America is dishing out as an educated person? As long as you can google it your smart enough?

 

Because the inappropriateness of a one-size fits all education is one reason why we left the public school system.

[regentrude]

I found that a basic scheme of 160 hours for mathematics and 80 hours per each science (which would make it 240 overall, since we do integrated sciences) leads to excellent results in this field and doesn't neglect them -

 

Ester Maria,

would you mind me asking how many hours your kids do total? I am still fairly new at this and always worry we don't do enough.

My kids are unable to do high quality, concentrated academic work for more than 4 (DS11) or 5 (DD13) hours a day on a daily basis (music, PE and electives are extra). DD is really tired after a few hours of math/physics - we simply don't manage Greek/Latin.

Yet I'd rather they work a few hours with concentration than they spend a whole day coasting and doing mediocre work.

Thanks - I always appreciate your insights.

[Ester Maria]

Ester Maria,

would you mind me asking how many hours your kids do total? I am still fairly new at this and always worry we don't do enough.

My kids are unable to do high quality, concentrated academic work for more than 4 (DS11) or 5 (DD13) hours a day on a daily basis (music, PE and electives are extra). DD is really tired after a few hours of math/physics - we simply don't manage Greek/Latin.

Yet I'd rather they work a few hours with concentration than they spend a whole day coasting and doing mediocre work.

Thanks - I always appreciate your insights.

I have daughters, 12 and 13 years old - and both are gifted and highly motivated for certain areas, so the way I work with them might also not work with next child, etc.

 

And actually, since I get this question a lot, let me write it all out here so I can just link to it next time somebody asks me about it. :)

 

When I plan out our academic year, I plan roughly 35 weeks (x 6 days weekly = 210 days a year). So, a subject that I plan 35 hours for I estimate roughly to be done one hour weekly, and for a subject I plan 70 hours for roughly to be done two hours weekly.

 

IMO, I actually plan quite little mathematics (DH thinks we should be doing more, and DD12 is doing more out of her own interest), since my basic calculation is 35x4 (4 hours weekly), which leads to 140 hours, and then I add 20 hours on top of it, assuming that most weeks mathematics is going to take 5 hours rather than 4 - so I count additional hours of exercise, quizzes, whatnot.

 

Similar thing with sciences: my basic scheme is 70 hours per science per year (2 hours weekly per science), but I add additional 10 hours per science since I count with some experiments, possibly need to do some additional reading or project, so I feel more at ease if I know that we're dealing with 7 hours total sciences weekly rather than 6 (we do Bio/Chem/Phys, when we do Geography I count it with social sciences even though half of it could be grouped with natural sciences).

 

So I count with 4-5 hours of mathematics and 7 hours of sciences weekly (roughly from about 6th grade when "science" gets split into branches; before that when I did a more mixed science, it was probably 4-5 hours weekly). That's 12-13 hours weekly for sciences and mathematics.

 

My general scheme for Italian is 6 (an hour daily), for English 5 hours weekly, making it 11 in total for native languages and literature; regarding other languages, the girls aren't studying them with the same intensity. The older one gets approximately 7-8 hours of Latin and 4-5 of Greek and Hebrew each, while the younger one gets 4 of Latin and 2-3 of Greek and Hebrew each, BUT, she invests the remaining hours in science and mathematics (she does some things which aren't in "my" program at all), so we're speaking about approximately 9 hours of additional languages as 'basic requirement' (what DD12 does), making it a total of 19 hours of language stuff, and about 7 additional hours that language-minded DD13 has for languages, but those 7 hours DD12 puts into more mathematics, sciences and art.

 

So, now we're on 31 hours.

What remains is History and Geography (often combined, I plan about 4 hours weekly for that area), Music/Art (scheduled minimally, up to 2 hours weekly), Judaics (aside from Hebrew as a language, this gets planned at minimal 2 hours weekly too, though for the older kid it gets close to 3-4), Formal Logic (1 hour weekly), when you add it all up, it's pretty much at 40 hours weekly.

 

BUT.

Those 40 hours are usually not 40 60-minutes hours, even though I plan those, they ALWAYS finish things sooner than that. Sundays through Thursdays they get a solid 7-8 hour working day, but that includes pauses, lunch, etc., since what I plan for 60 minutes they usually end up doing in about 45 unless it's very demanding content, and Fridays are always shorter, with about 4-5 hours of academics.

 

Now, that was theory, and how it worked until recently; now we have a system according to which they get sessions with me when we work/review things together, but they do the vast majority of things on their own, and even though I still plan roughly 40 hours of work, trust me that in theory it's often more like 30 because they work very quickly and I don't take advantage of it by adding additional work for them to complete, they just have those few lenghty sessions with me (each 2-3 hours) and some extra reading hours (since I don't count actual reading of Italian/English works in those 5-6 hours weekly).

 

I guess that when you put it all together, it extremely rarely goes over 45 actual hours weekly (and it's often down to something like 40), and that's pretty much what they'd be doing in any decent school anyway (if you count homework and all, the fact that they have two sets of reading for literature, etc.). It's about 7 hours a day equivalent for 6 days a week.

 

However, I'm stressing again: I have gifted, motivated kids who spend most of their free time doing some kind of additional studies anyway. I can't calculate precisely how many hours they're studying since so much things are intertwined and interdisciplinary, they very often mix free time interests with school, and nowadays they mostly control their studies, not me, since I switched to few session weekly with them and the rest is on their own.

 

Most of the day I see them reading and doing stuff relateed to their interests - as long as they present themselves on those sessions with me knowledgeable about school content, I don't care if they put less time into mastering it than I planned. :)

 

Hope this responds to your question.