Going in depth with younger children.

[Embassy]

What do you think of curricula/unit studies that go in depth on a specific topic during the elementary years? Would you child hate spending all year learning about the human body, for instance? Does your child thrive with depth?

 

By depth I am talking about introducing information not normally introduced until high school, but done so in an age appropriate manner.

[the4Rs]

Mine would be bored with a topic after 2 weeks. That's just their personalities. You have to gauge it off of your kids....and YOU. I personally would hate to go that in depth on something for an entire year. But if you can and your kids will thrive then go for it.

[LibraryLover]

Sure. Our kids have had very particular interests over the years. They knew how to work the library from a very young age. We go where they wish to go, and study in depth that which excites them, no matter their age.

[MorganClassicalPrep]

DD is very much a depth child. She loves to learn more and more about one specific topic, so I think she'd love doing a full year on one thing.

[justasque]

Why a full year? I would be a tad concerned about what you excluded in order to include that much depth on one thing, if you see what I mean. For us, 3-4 units a year has sometimes been a good fit - that's 9-12 weeks, which is a lot of time. On the other hand, if you were using the topic (say, human body) to include a bunch of other stuff (like a bit of chemistry when you do makeup of the bones, and nutrition, and some physics when you look at how muscles work, etc.) then it could be a great way to take a child's interest (I assume the child is actually interested in the topic, and that's why you're asking) and expand it to cover all kinds of subjects. (For history, we usually take one time period and do a whole year of it, but I assume you're talking more about science here.)

 

I would also note that I have found that you can only go so far with certain things, without bumping up against other topics that you have to learn before you can go any further. So for example, when doing the human body, you can only go so far without a good background in chemistry - that'll impact nutrition, etc. And you can only go so far without a good background in biology - cells and cell division and so on. And then you can only go so far in chemistry without having a good background in math - algebra and such. And eventually you really need superior non-fiction reading skills to go further. And to explain what you're learning, you will need some decent non-fiction writing skills. And so on. So while you can to some extent introduce high school level topics to an interested younger child, (I'm thinking here of The Elements chemistry program that does a fantastic job with a bit of that), keep in mind that there will be limits you'll bump up against at times, and you'll want to work on other skills so that you can eventually push beyond those limits. Did that make sense?

[Embassy]

Thanks for the responses. I'm interested to hear the different opinions.

 

Why a full year? I would be a tad concerned about what you excluded in order to include that much depth on one thing, if you see what I mean. For us, 3-4 units a year has sometimes been a good fit - that's 9-12 weeks, which is a lot of time. On the other hand, if you were using the topic (say, human body) to include a bunch of other stuff (like a bit of chemistry when you do makeup of the bones, and nutrition, and some physics when you look at how muscles work, etc.) then it could be a great way to take a child's interest (I assume the child is actually interested in the topic, and that's why you're asking) and expand it to cover all kinds of subjects. (For history, we usually take one time period and do a whole year of it, but I assume you're talking more about science here.)

 

Just a general question. The curricula/unit studies could apply to history or any other subject with no assumption of a child's interest level.

[Corraleno]

Sure. Our kids have had very particular interests over the years. They knew how to work the library from a very young age. We go where they wish to go, and study in depth that which excites them, no matter their age.

:iagree:

DS12 has always been a "depth guy," even as a toddler. When he's interested in a subject, he wants to know everything there is to know about it. The mile-wide, inch-deep textbook approach did not work for him at all. We're back to "going where he wants to go, and studying in depth that which excites him," as LibraryLover so nicely put it. Right now what excites him is Ancient Greece, and especially the history of warfare, and much of what he's learning is actually college level. I'd be crazy to tell him "that's enough of Greece, we need to move on and do a month on Rome, then a month on the Dark Ages, so we can start the Middle Ages on schedule" or whatever. My long-term goals for my kids are to light a fire and instill a life-long love of learning, not to cover X number of facts in X number of months. And I firmly believe that kids retain much more information, and make better connections, when they're interested and self-motivated.

 

Jackie

[Kate CA]

What do you think of curricula/unit studies that go in depth on a specific topic during the elementary years? Would you child hate spending all year learning about the human body, for instance? Does your child thrive with depth?

 

By depth I am talking about introducing information not normally introduced until high school, but done so in an age appropriate manner.

 

I found that when I did that, a few years later they didn't remember much of it. I have chosen to do things differently with my younger children. Music would be the only thing I think would be of value to go "in depth" with as it is a practiced skill done every day.

[Embassy]

I found that when I did that, a few years later they didn't remember much of it. I have chosen to do things differently with my younger children. Music would be the only thing I think would be of value to go "in depth" with as it is a practiced skill done every day.

 

Wow, I find this interesting. It seems that going in depth would make the information stick. Do you mind sharing what you used and why you think it didn't stick?

[Kate CA]

Wow, I find this interesting. It seems that going in depth would make the information stick. Do you mind sharing what you used and why you think it didn't stick?

 

Sorry - just saw this! This was many years ago now so I am not sure that my memory will serve. We used a well known child's history text and fleshed it out with other books, both fiction and nonfiction, and we even went to a museum that focused on this subject! It did not make much difference for history I think because we moved on as we continued learning over the year.

 

Now if you were to study a single subject or people group for a lengthy period of time (what I am doing now with my younger ones - Colonial US History this year) then I think it makes a difference because it will be with them longer. Will they remember who founded the VA colony? Probably not, but they will remember some of the finer details of Colonial life and culture and who Squanto was, and why tobacco changed the course of America's early life. (We are using a combo of Joy Hakim's History of US, From Reformation to Colonization, Time Travelers: Colonial Life from http://www.homeschoolinthewoods.com, and the DVD series from the history channel.) I really like the Time Travelers for fleshing out the life these people led and for hands-on experiences. They *do* remember those experiences.

 

I love history and it is very important to me that my children absorb at least some of it. We do still use historical fiction and nonfiction books, and they always LOVE the historical fiction. I also assign reading on the historical period we are studying. I have found that the older they are, the more they retain. I decided (on the second time through the ancients with my oldest two) that I would never do ancients again with very young children and I have not done so with my second group. They will get it in another year or so, but my 8yo would not walk away with much and I would rather wait until she does.

[Embassy]

Sorry - just saw this! This was many years ago now so I am not sure that my memory will serve. We used a well known child's history text and fleshed it out with other books, both fiction and nonfiction, and we even went to a museum that focused on this subject! It did not make much difference for history I think because we moved on as we continued learning over the year.

 

Now if you were to study a single subject or people group for a lengthy period of time (what I am doing now with my younger ones - Colonial US History this year) then I think it makes a difference because it will be with them longer. Will they remember who founded the VA colony? Probably not, but they will remember some of the finer details of Colonial life and culture and who Squanto was, and why tobacco changed the course of America's early life. (We are using a combo of Joy Hakim's History of US, From Reformation to Colonization, Time Travelers: Colonial Life from http://www.homeschoolinthewoods.com, and the DVD series from the history channel.) I really like the Time Travelers for fleshing out the life these people led and for hands-on experiences. They *do* remember those experiences.

 

I love history and it is very important to me that my children absorb at least some of it. We do still use historical fiction and nonfiction books, and they always LOVE the historical fiction. I also assign reading on the historical period we are studying. I have found that the older they are, the more they retain. I decided (on the second time through the ancients with my oldest two) that I would never do ancients again with very young children and I have not done so with my second group. They will get it in another year or so, but my 8yo would not walk away with much and I would rather wait until she does.

 

Thanks for taking the time to respond. Yes, I was thinking of a single subject that goes in depth over a long period of time like the entire school year. Hands-on experiences do seem to be memorable, don't they?

[Kate CA]

Thanks for taking the time to respond. Yes, I was thinking of a single subject that goes in depth over a long period of time like the entire school year. Hands-on experiences do seem to be memorable, don't they?

 

You are welcome! What subject are you thinking of? Did you have a particular curriculum in mind?

[Embassy]

You are welcome! What subject are you thinking of? Did you have a particular curriculum in mind?

 

Subjects like history, science, geography, and art or music history come to mind. I don't know of a particular curriculum that goes in great depth though.

[Kate CA]

Subjects like history, science, geography, and art or music history come to mind. I don't know of a particular curriculum that goes in great depth though.

 

Well I think that is going to depend on what you mean when you say in-depth and what subject you are going in-depth on! :D I mean one cannot study a single cell for an entire semester and hold the attention of their children (I don't think) but you can study the human body for a whole semester (or year for that matter) if you are not just studying the eye for example. We used My Body as our very simple "spine" (so to speak) and studied the body with its various parts and systems fleshed out with other books (and created wall-sized bodies at the same time).

 

However, even with all that, if you expect your children to remember everything you teach them then you will always be disappointed. I don't think there is a "fool proof" way to teach and no matter how much one goes in-depth, there will always be more to learn and there will always be things we forget. That is sort of the way it is with our brains. To expect it to be differently with our children I think is expecting too much. (JMHO, but I have been doing this for eleven years now and this has been the experience of all my friends as well.)

 

I prefer to focus on enjoying the journey as we walk along the way. We learn many things together and many things are retained (reading for example! :001_smile:) We can enjoy an historical fiction book as we read it and forget the main characters names in a month yet still find value in the reading. I guess I try not to focus too much on memorizing the *facts* so much as enjoying the journey we are on together as a family. This too often gets lost in the teaching. (Not that I am saying the facts are not important, but they can be the end-all focus.)

 

This is sort of a "soap box" issue for me because I think we as homeschool parents get caught up in a lot of things that take our focus off what we are doing--raising and loving and growing up people. I wrote this five years ago, but I still think it is true in the homeschool world.

 

Homeschooling is a process and not a product! So often we get bogged down in the process and forget we are working with living breathing creations of God. These are His children, not just vessels to be filled with bits of knowledge, instruction, math facts, and grammar. We are entrusted by our very Creator to teach them diligently as we walk by the way. (Deut. 6:7 “You shall teach them diligently to your sons and shall talk of them when you sit in your house and when you walk by the way and when you lie down and when you rise up.â€) This means SO much more than just teaching them the basics. It is living with your children, day in and day out, and being there for them. It is learning together the things of God as well as the things of knowledge. I love what the 1930 Calvert School Head Master, Virgil Hillyer, explained more than eight decades ago, “School is not the preparation for life – it is life.†We will always be learning.

 

Anyway, best of success with your children. This journey is a gift. :001_smile: