Teaching "outside the box" - or "Now what?"

[johnandtinagilbert]

Wowza. I leave the boards for a few days and this thread goes all over the place....still interesting reading, though.

 

So, I get that "out of the box" is often defined by an approach different than public school format, but I'd say, in this forum, that's preaching to the choir, even if some use textbooks or similar approaches. I get the point, though, that many think of "out of the box" as an entirely different approach and categorize themselves to be in a different school of thought. I get it. As I've said before, many here have encouraged me to tailor our schooling more and I see how it brings more joy to the equation.

 

However....I have to say I believe that accommodation to learning style is simply good teaching and why it is not generally found in p.s., it is often found in home school settings. That accommodation can go either way, towards text or away. I don't see it as a big deal, I see it as the point in homeschooling. The outline and paragraph example is to me, simply good teaching. I don't think of it as outside the box at all.

 

For the OP: How do we get there? Faith and experience in other forms. Even in my baby steps outside of my box, I've made changes and when they work, I find pleasure in their successes. If I wasn't sure I could teach within the box and learn to take suggestions from material A and apply it in material B, I probably wouldn't have found the confidence to make changes in the first place. The Box was a stepping stone for me to climb out of the box.

 

The one thing I disagree with comes into the "engaging" portion of this discussion. I agree that when they engage, they enjoy learning more and are more likely to take it to a higher level outside of our daily learning, but I can say, without a doubt that Rod & Staff grammar Never, never engaged any of my 3 older dc, but they learned grammar like crazy from it! One son, in particular is Not.at.all a textbook learner (much more Mr. Living Books and a voracious reader), but he can tell you all you need to know about grammar and with some maturity in general, they can recognize when it's lacking in writing. He learned what RS taught, even though he despised the method. On the same wavelength, my son who is Not LA oriented, also learned all there was to learn about grammar from RS. Dreaded or not, he did learn. I will admit, it wasn't until the logic stage that they applied it, but I often think that's a matter of maturity and brain development and I admittedly think learning such later would be just as effective. So, I guess, this leads me to a question, is the inability to learn if not engaged a result of an LD or am I missing something? We can learn without being engaged, we simply prefer the engagement.

[Embassy]

We can learn without being engaged, we simply prefer the engagement.

 

Yes, we can learn without the "spark" being lit. My goal in education isn't to teach my children x, y, and z so they will know it. It is to ignite a spark that will motivate them to continue learning about the topic on their own. I don't think that will happen without the engagement.

[jvenice]

:iagree: If we don't engage, they likely will never study that subject/area on their own. Of course they can learn without being engaged, but it's kind of like eating brussel sprouts with no seasoning when you hate brussel sprouts. I am not saying you don't need to eat brussel sprouts at all...just spice them up a bit. I think it is why many of us are constantly looking for the 'right' curriculum (in the way of materials) when it might be better to look at the outcome and work from there while utilizing your own child's strengths and learning style for scaffolding. A book that I liked was Understanding By Design...it explains how to work backward for the intended goal.

[Capt_Uhura]

I'm always surprised when I hear parents (and this isn't directed at you, yllek) insist that some subjects are just inherently boring, and life is full of boring things, and kids need to get used to that. Why? If my kids find something truly boring, I change the way I teach it.

Jackie

 

SWB commented that some subjects are just boring, like grammar. I thought "That's the most fun thing going on for us this year w/ MCT!" :lol:

 

 

Jackie - have you posted a day in the life anywhere? I'd love to see how a typical day goes for your son and in particular, where those pesky skills are brought in.

[johnandtinagilbert]

Yes, we can learn without the "spark" being lit. My goal in education isn't to teach my children x, y, and z so they will know it. It is to ignite a spark that will motivate them to continue learning about the topic on their own. I don't think that will happen without the engagement.

 

:iagree: If we don't engage, they likely will never study that subject/area on their own. Of course they can learn without being engaged, but it's kind of like eating brussel sprouts with no seasoning when you hate brussel sprouts. I am not saying you don't need to eat brussel sprouts at all...just spice them up a bit. I think it is why many of us are constantly looking for the 'right' curriculum (in the way of materials) when it might be better to look at the outcome and work from there while utilizing your own child's strengths and learning style for scaffolding. A book that I liked was Understanding By Design...it explains how to work backward for the intended goal.

 

I think I've gotten better with this over the years. There are some things my first batch of dc learned in elementary school, but I didn't see application in a "real world" kinda way until middle school. Now that I can see where I want to go, I have searched for materials to facilitate our endgame. My experience shows me where to stick with it, but my discernment now tells me whether or not to get the materials in the first place. Experience has been a better teacher for me than intuition; perhaps the intuition was intimidated by fear in the first place so I needed the box before I could step out of it. In the end (although I'm not at the end yet), I believe I was born to do this and just hope and pray we get out of this well learned and still liking each other.

Funny, just now, a friend called and I told her, "By the time we're finished with home schooling, I think my dc will she's a little quick tempered and sometimes a bi*ch, but I know she gave her all in being my teacher." When I hung up, my 15yo said he agreed whole heartedly. :D I can not be offended by that b/c I know it's true....and he's the one who I made cry the most, my guinea pig :D

[Capt_Uhura]

Funny, just now, a friend called and I told her, "By the time we're finished with home schooling, I think my dc will she's a little quick tempered and sometimes a bi*ch, but I know she gave her all in being my teacher." When I hung up, my 15yo said he agreed whole heartedly. :D I can not be offended by that b/c I know it's true....and he's the one who I made cry the most, my guinea pig :D

:lol::lol::lol::lol: I know my kids will say half of that about me....guess you're wondering which half. :lol: The first half...and let's hope they will say the second half as well.

[johnandtinagilbert]

:lol::lol::lol::lol: I know my kids will say half of that about me....guess you're wondering which half. :lol: The first half...and let's hope they will say the second half as well.

At least I know I'm in good company!

[Guest]

What happens when learning disabilities, extreme giftedness, or quirky personalities push us to move beyond the norms in teaching? How did you get to that point? How did you make the change? What tools did you have on hand that help you? What tools do you feel you need? Where would you encourage someone that is struggling to start from?

 

 

Colleen, this is the original question; it began with the notion of quirky kids or kids who process differently to such a degree that we are "pushed" to move beyond the norms.

 

For those of us with kids who are very quirky indeed, we are often pushed beyond most curricula -- even those that look in and of themselves "outside the box," creative, etc. I myself have been pushed to allow my dd enormous input into her own education, to the point that I have come to think of it as hers rather than something I provide or give to her.

 

8FilltheHeart, I totally agree with you that homeschoolers do indeed by their very nature step outside the box of institutional school. However, that does not in and of itself mean that they are outside many other curricular or pedagogical boxes that may prove just as undoable, confining, or stifling to a quirky kid. Many curricula, however fun and creative, still emphasize linear thinking, incremental learning, parts-to-whole understanding, repetition, and a reliance on worksheets or reports that do not fit the way Jackie's or my child thinks. And for my child, what's most important at all is that she has not had a voice in any of those pre-made, directive curricula. She very much has other ideas. They work for her.

 

What constitutes being out of the box differs according to where you stand. Some people can get good results from their kids from formal grammar curricula or math textbooks in the early grades. That's fine. I think everyone has been bending over backwards to say this is the whole point -- how your kids best learn.

 

Justamouse, I have said that dd and I don't play games for high school math. I used games learning because this is not a high school thread, and I was talking about what worked well for dd in grades 5-8 -- the logic span of this board -- and how some of that doesn't translate into high school, but some does. We may not play games for geometry, but we may watch PBS videos on number patterns, fractals, or cryptology. We may read math articles from the NYT (there was a great series last year). We may read popular math books by mathematicians and do some puzzle-solving along the lines of the original math circles (not the Math Olympiad that has largely replaced them). We may build geometric models, go to a museum exhibit on the mathematics of knots. We also use a textbook of dd's choice.

 

This whole thread is about what happens when a purchased curriculum or formal program DOESN'T work, when your child DOESN'T learn well that way, no matter whether this is a unit study, an older grammar book, a computer curriculum, or whatever form it takes. It's about seeing your child turn off her mind, and being willing to do whatever you need to do to see the light come back. If your child is not like this, what we're saying about being pushed into the unknown, and being so glad when we see the return of the child we once knew, isn't going to resonate with you.

 

JennW has started a thread about using out-of-the-box learning for non-quirky kids. Has anyone had a look?

[5LittleMonkeys]

 

The one thing I disagree with comes into the "engaging" portion of this discussion. I agree that when they engage, they enjoy learning more and are more likely to take it to a higher level outside of our daily learning, but I can say, without a doubt that Rod & Staff grammar Never, never engaged any of my 3 older dc, but they learned grammar like crazy from it! One son, in particular is Not.at.all a textbook learner (much more Mr. Living Books and a voracious reader), but he can tell you all you need to know about grammar and with some maturity in general, they can recognize when it's lacking in writing. He learned what RS taught, even though he despised the method. On the same wavelength, my son who is Not LA oriented, also learned all there was to learn about grammar from RS. Dreaded or not, he did learn. I will admit, it wasn't until the logic stage that they applied it, but I often think that's a matter of maturity and brain development and I admittedly think learning such later would be just as effective. So, I guess, this leads me to a question, is the inability to learn if not engaged a result of an LD or am I missing something? We can learn without being engaged, we simply prefer the engagement.

 

Can a dc that is not engaged in a subject still learn? I believe that it depends on the dc. My oldest does not love to do R&S; it is tolerable at best. She does not enjoy it anymore (she did when we first started using it because it was new), but yes, she does learn from it and retains it. Now, enter quirky dd11. She feels the same way about it as her sister and will do the work if pressed but she will not retain it long term (she can get through the test but then the info evaporates). If I give her the same information in game form or in the context of something she does find engaging then it is stored in her long term memory. Last week I would have said its because dd11 might have an LD but now I feel confident that this is not a disability, it is simply that their brains need different types of input and different levels of stimulation in order to put information into their long term memory.

[johnandtinagilbert]

Can a dc that is not engaged in a subject still learn? I believe that it depends on the dc. My oldest does not love to do R&S; it is tolerable at best. She does not enjoy it anymore (she did when we first started using it because it was new), but yes, she does learn from it and retains it. Now, enter quirky dd11. She feels the same way about it as her sister and will do the work if pressed but she will not retain it long term (she can get through the test but then the info evaporates). If I give her the same information in game form or in the context of something she does find engaging then it is stored in her long term memory. Last week I would have said its because dd11 might have an LD but now I feel confident that this is not a disability, it is simply that their brains need different types of input and different levels of stimulation in order to put information into their long term memory.

I have seen some dc need application, not repetition, for something to "stick", so I agree with you....I find that to be learning style related, which brings me back to teaching towards strengths and finding a way to make it work.

Using the RS example, I have 3 kinds of dc in my Elders. The eldest needed the Oral Review, then it stuck; the 2nd is just gifted in LA, so it all stuck w/o effort (he abhored writing out all the work in RS); the 3rd was content to do the work alone, didn't need the oral review and it stuck. For her, it was the repetition, though that did it, as well as the "fill in the formula point of view.

 

So far as math for these 3, #1 understands concepts well, but often makes careless mistakes; (Chalkdust works b/c of the DVD) #2 Not mathy, loves LoF; #3 doesn't think as abstractly as her eldest brother, but never makes careless mistakes, so thrives in math (Chalkdust) b/c of the formulaic nature of Alg. and the text used.

 

My #4 is more like your dd (as I mentioned b4) and learns with less public schoolish work, so I focus on projects for her. We hit the basic skills with psish materials, but the projects do the cementing.

 

#5....maybe an LD (auditory processing), hyper but not ADHD, and Needs Hands On, so we do a lot of oral work so he can think, but not write. He thinks completely contradictorily than I...he is so spatial....I am the parts to whole that was successful in p.s.

 

So far, we haven't dealt with the extreme quirky that many here have and I'm learning daily how to implement what works best for each dc. Practice, makes perfect you might say.

 

For you, I think the most important piece to your puzzle is recognizing you need to make some changes to suit her. For me, I've found programs that allow me to facilitate all the learning styles in my house from one spring board, and from there I tailor to meet needs. Some people might think I have it easy b/c I don't struggle w/ the LDs, and I suppose I would say they're right; nonetheless, I'm walking a trial and error line at times too and experience has been my greatest companion.

 

eta: I have also seen, ala Write Shop, that while one of them hates the step by step of the checklist, he loves the Practice Paragraph time together. He's at least engaged there! For him, he doesn't need the checklist for writing (b/c it's a natural skill for him; he hates outlining, too) BUT he needs to improve his organization skills, so we simply use the checklist and occasional outlines to work on that skill. I do, however allow other forms of organization most often (he doesn't mind note taking) to remove dread in those areas.....flexibility!

Edited January 24, 2011 by johnandtinagilbert

[swimmermom3]

Many board member have been pushed to teach "outside the box" - going against traditional methods or curriculum or even current standards. Sometimes it is our own personalities rebelling against our youthful educational experiences, but most often, the needs of our particular children push us to the ledge and straight over.

 

What happens when learning disabilities, extreme giftedness, or quirky personalities push us to move beyond the norms in teaching? How did you get to that point? How did you make the change? What tools did you have on hand that help you? What tools do you feel you need? Where would you encourage someone that is struggling to start from?

 

 

My purpose in starting this thread was not to pit one way of teaching against another way of teaching. "Outside the box" and "quirky" seemed to be problematic. Let's put it another way: Please share your stories about how you moved from having a student be a passive learner to having one be an active learner. It could be in one subject or with regards to school overall. I used "quirky" because I have a student who has suffered from severe depression. She is neither LD nor extremely gifted, but then she isn't "normal" when it comes to teaching her either. If there is a better term than "quirky, " let me know. It is a term that covers a multitude of issues that may not have specific names or diagnoses.

 

No one should feel a need to defend the way they teach as no one else is standing in their shoes.

 

This is the way it works for me. I spend a fair amount of time following posts like those of Corraleno, KarenAnne, JennW, and Nan because I have kids that require the type of ideas and lessons that they all use. I am not good at coming up with original ideas, but I can appreciate great ideas and make them my own.

 

Picture if you will, a 5'7" well-finished, yes, well-finished will work here, slightly disheveled-looking woman sitting at her laptop with her third cup of coffee. The eternally cold cat has its head on the hand that is typing. She is reading some posts between Corraleno and KarenAnne. The lightbulb that is conveniently located over her head goes on. "Oh that's brilliant. I can use that if I do a, b and c to it." Soon ideas are spilling out of our heroine's (:tongue_smilie:) head onto the sleeping cat and mucking up the hardwood floors. The kids have become scarce. Mom's "ideas" usually mean stretching way outside of one's comfort zone or hard labor on some house projects.

 

Next, well-finished woman scoops up some of those ideas and runs with them. Nah. Make that "ambles." Occasionally, she ambles with them in a nice, clean, unobstructed path straight over the finish line and celebrates the victory of active learning triumphing over passive learning. And sometimes she ambles, and ambles, and ambles. Here comes the vision of the dark, unfriendly woods pushing in on our well-finished woman. Suddenly, in the middle of the thickest tangle of branches, she drops that load of ideas with a resounding splat, looks around and exclaims, "Where the blank am I and more importantly, where did I leave my coffee mug?" At this point, well-finished woman ambles back in the direction she came and sits back down to the computer. Now she goes off in search of Eight, EsterMaria, and others to reorient herself. It's a give and take process that works fairly well for well-finished woman, who is a psychotic mix of aging hippie and Catholic school girl.

 

I could not do my job as well as I do without the varied input that I receive from this board. I ask questions in order to become even more proficient at my job of teaching my children. If I can do that and have fun as well, it's all good. Not necessary, but it makes the journey more memorable. Sadly, as Eight as pointed out, there are times and situations in which no amount of changing curriculum or stepping "outside the box" is going to change certain aspects our outcomes of our children. But isn't the goal the same, to do the best that we can?

[Colleen in NS]

Colleen, this is the original question; it began with the notion of quirky kids or kids who process differently to such a degree that we are "pushed" to move beyond the norms.

 

This whole thread is about what happens when a purchased curriculum or formal program DOESN'T work, when your child DOESN'T learn well that way, no matter whether this is a unit study, an older grammar book, a computer curriculum, or whatever form it takes. It's about seeing your child turn off her mind, and being willing to do whatever you need to do to see the light come back.

 

I've reread the original post many times already. We are interpreting the intent of the original post differently (and I've already explained what my interpretation was and why I felt I could participate), and we are differently interpreting what this thread is all about. I'm just going to agree to disagree on those two points.

 

EDIT: and now I see from Lisa's update, that I was not out in left field in interpreting "quirky" differently than you and Jackie did. So I think that this thread is still an appropriate place in which to share our stories about working with our "non-quirky" and "quirky" (both with your definition) children. Yes, I did look at Jenn's thread. I also realized I had another assumption. I assumed that if Lisa was being really specific about "quirky" having a more specific meaning that I think you are thinking, then she would have posted her thread on the special needs board. I know the SN board description mentions SN within a classical education, but I imagine the posts there encompass all sorts of "SN" (and I don't mean that as a super-limiting label) in other types of homeschooling.

Edited January 24, 2011 by Colleen in NS

[Colleen in NS]

Suddenly, in the middle of the thickest tangle of branches, she drops that load of ideas with a resounding splat, looks around and exclaims, "Where the blank am I and more importantly, where did I leave my coffee mug?"

 

:lol::lol: I feel like that when I am in the middle of intensely trying to learn a new skill (like logic last week...) and then figure out how it fits into the bigger picture!!:D

[johnandtinagilbert]

My purpose in starting this thread was not to pit one way of teaching against another way of teaching. "Outside the box" and "quirky" seemed to be problematic. Let's put it another way: Please share your stories about how you moved from having a student be a passive learner to having one be an active learner. It could be in one subject or with regards to school overall. I used "quirky" because I have a student who has suffered from severe depression. She is neither LD nor extremely gifted, but then she isn't "normal" when it comes to teaching her either. If there is a better term than "quirky, " let me know. It is a term that covers a multitude of issues that may not have specific names or diagnoses.

 

No one should feel a need to defend the way they teach as no one else is standing in their shoes.

 

This is the way it works for me. I spend a fair amount of time following posts like those of Corraleno, KarenAnne, JennW, and Nan because I have kids that require the type of ideas and lessons that they all use. I am not good at coming up with original ideas, but I can appreciate great ideas and make them my own.

 

Picture if you will, a 5'7" well-finished, yes, well-finished will work here, slightly disheveled-looking woman sitting at her laptop with her third cup of coffee. The eternally cold cat has its head on the hand that is typing. She is reading some posts between Corraleno and KarenAnne. The lightbulb that is conveniently located over her head goes on. "Oh that's brilliant. I can use that if I do a, b and c to it." Soon ideas are spilling out of our heroine's (:tongue_smilie:) head onto the sleeping cat and mucking up the hardwood floors. The kids have become scarce. Mom's "ideas" usually mean stretching way outside of one's comfort zone or hard labor on some house projects.

 

Next, well-finished woman scoops up some of those ideas and runs with them. Nah. Make that "ambles." Occasionally, she ambles with them in a nice, clean, unobstructed path straight over the finish line and celebrates the victory of active learning triumphing over passive learning. And sometimes she ambles, and ambles, and ambles. Here comes the vision of the dark, unfriendly woods pushing in on our well-finished woman. Suddenly, in the middle of the thickest tangle of branches, she drops that load of ideas with a resounding splat, looks around and exclaims, "Where the blank am I and more importantly, where did I leave my coffee mug?" At this point, well-finished woman ambles back in the direction she came and sits back down to the computer. Now she goes off in search of Eight, EsterMaria, and others to reorient herself. It's a give and take process that works fairly well for well-finished woman, who is a psychotic mix of aging hippie and Catholic school girl.

 

I could not do my job as well as I do without the varied input that I receive from this board. I ask questions in order to become even more proficient at my job of teaching my children. If I can do that and have fun as well, it's all good. Not necessary, but it makes the journey more memorable. Sadly, as Eight as pointed out, there are times and situations in which no amount of changing curriculum or stepping "outside the box" is going to change certain aspects our outcomes of our children. But isn't the goal the same, to do the best that we can?

Amen.

[Colleen in NS]

but she will not retain it long term (she can get through the test but then the info evaporates). If I give her the same information in game form or in the context of something she does find engaging then it is stored in her long term memory.

 

You've painted a picture that helps me understand why you might look, more frequently and extensively I than would, for alternate methods of teaching. Thanks for the concise explanation, and good luck to you!

 

Please share your stories about how you moved from having a student be a passive learner to having one be an active learner. It could be in one subject or with regards to school overall.

 

:lurk5:

[8filltheheart]

 

8FilltheHeart, I totally agree with you that homeschoolers do indeed by their very nature step outside the box of institutional school. However, that does not in and of itself mean that they are outside many other curricular or pedagogical boxes that may prove just as undoable, confining, or stifling to a quirky kid. Many curricula, however fun and creative, still emphasize linear thinking, incremental learning, parts-to-whole understanding, repetition, and a reliance on worksheets or reports that do not fit the way Jackie's or my child thinks. And for my child, what's most important at all is that she has not had a voice in any of those pre-made, directive curricula. She very much has other ideas. They work for her.

 

What constitutes being out of the box differs according to where you stand. Some people can get good results from their kids from formal grammar curricula or math textbooks in the early grades. That's fine. I think everyone has been bending over backwards to say this is the whole point -- how your kids best learn.

 

 

KarenAnne,

 

I don't disagree with what you, believe it or not. ;) I post while multi-tasking and had a sick 5 yo on my lap most the weekend (and a baby when she wasn't.) That you have the time and the resources to accomplish what you do is a blessing for your dd. She is blessed.

 

I went back and I read my posts and I can see that I have not articulated my thoughts well and that they could be interpreted differently than I intended. I am in no way meaning to denigrate the methodology being presented.

 

The only points I intended to make were:

 

1- that creative educational approaches do not necessarily equate to successful educational outcomes for all non-traditional learners. And that not all educational difficulties have a finite "end." Some disabilities are lifelong and simply cannot be eliminated regardless of educational approaches. Also, even if the educational goals are achieved, the other aspects of the disability can still be disabling.

 

2-not requiring traditional output is considered an educational accommodation. Rightly or wrongly. I was not meaning to make a judgmental statement. Based on the definition of education accommodations.......altering the norm is the definition.

 

I was thinking of readers that might not be well-versed in standard educational norms and the way writing was being described as being taught. 1 or 2 papers/yr during high school is on the extreme low end of the spectrum and published original research is on the extreme high end on the spectrum. Both are far from high school norms.

 

The other issue is that that word "interest." Interest and methodolgy are not necessarily interchangeable. Parts to whole/whole to parts/linear vs. spatial........those refer to learning styles and the teaching approach is the methodology . That is distinguishable from linking methodology to subject content. When method has to be linked to content, I would suggest from purely educational standards that that would be defined as an educational accommodation.

 

That distinction is not meant to be derogatory in any way. But for parents that are not dealing with any issues other than method, it is a real distinction that they might want to be aware of.

 

3- parents that teach by a methodology that is linear or whatever is the opposite of what many posts describe are just as actively facilitating the education of their children as those using alternative methods.

 

And yes....I agree that there are homeschoolers that actually even do school at home. However, active "engagement" with children and learning is not limited to specific methodologies.

Edited January 24, 2011 by 8FillTheHeart

[Corraleno]

I was not out in left field in interpreting "quirky" differently than you and Jackie did. So I think that this thread is still an appropriate place in which to share our stories about working with our "non-quirky" and "quirky" (both with your definition) children.

Lisa also has a gifted son, which falls within the definition of "quirky" that Karen and I have been using. Jenn & I also have "normal" kids, with whom we use the same approach.

 

However, when a parent who is already a homeschooler, and already using WTM, is specifically asking for ways to get more out of that "box," because her children are asking for it and she wants to accommodate that, then pages and pages of posts about how homeschooling and WTM are already as far out of the box as some people want to go, or how lots of people like textbooks, or it's really not important to make everything "engaging," or people shouldn't panic and feel guilty just because they can't make up games or develop unusual projects, really don't address the question Lisa was asking: if I want to do this, how do I do it? And since pretty much every thread on this topic inevitably devolves into a defense of whether this approach to homeschooling is dangerous, unnecessary, or even doable, there comes a point where some of us have to ask ourselves "why bother?"

 

Lisa, your PM box is full. Can you email me later? Thanks.

 

Jackie

[prairiegirl]

I have been thinking alot about the best way of educating my children during the lifespan of this thread. I am going to try to express my thoughts, not because anyone cares but because I need to get these thoughts out of my head so that I can move on.

 

I have 3 children who all have LDs. My oldest has mild dyslexia which manifests itself through math and grammar. My ds, who just turned 10, has dyslexia and apraxia. My youngest, who just turned 8 has dyslexia and possible ADD. There is something going on with her but I am not sure what and I am in the process of wondering if it matters that I find out. My youngest still does not know her letter sounds (and, believe me, it is not for lack of trying on my part.) We are experiencing progress but it is so sllloowww.

 

As you can see, I have 3 children with all different issues. What works with one child does not work for the rest. I feel like I have to re-invent the wheel for every subject for each child. Some days are extremely frustrating for me as I feel like I am spinning my wheels.

 

I have no irl support. I have no one to give me ideas or to tell me that I am on the right track. This forum is my support. Reading these threads on educating 'outside the box' has been a ray of light for me. I NEED these kinds of threads.

 

I can not come up with these ideas on my own. Once I hear of an idea, I can take it and run with it and add on to it but I can't come up with it on my own. For ex. my oldest has been having major problems with grammar. It has taken me 5 years to clue in that curriculum does not work well in this case. I read 8FillTheHeart's incremental writing post on OhElizabeth's writing thread and the bells started ringing. We started doing grammar in this way this morning. This is the answer! This feels comfortable for both her and I. Hallelujah!

 

I sincerely hope that the underlying tension of this thread will not put an end to these kinds of threads. I NEED them! I NEED the sharing and the ideas that is found in them. For those of you who continually share, thank you!

[Guest]

KarenAnne,

 

I went back and I read my posts and I can see that I have not articulated my thoughts well and that they could be interpreted differently than I intended. I am in no way meaning to denigrate the methodology being presented.

 

The only points I intended to make were:

 

1- that creative educational approaches do not necessarily equate to successful educational outcomes for all non-traditional learners. And that not all educational difficulties have a finite "end." Some disabilities are lifelong and simply cannot be eliminated regardless of educational approaches. Also, even if the educational goals are achieved, the other aspects of the disability can still be disabling.

 

2-not requiring traditional output is considered an educational accommodation. Rightly or wrongly. I was not meaning to make a judgmental statement. Based on the definition of education accommodations.......altering the norm is the definition.

 

I was thinking of readers that might not be well-versed in standard educational norms and the way writing was being described as being taught. 1 or 2 papers/yr during high school is on the extreme low end of the spectrum and published original research is on the extreme high end on the spectrum. Both are far from high school norms.

 

The other issue is that that word "interest." Interest and methodolgy are not necessarily interchangeable. Parts to whole/whole to parts/linear vs. spatial........those refer to learning styles and the teaching approach is the methodology . That is distinguishable from linking methodology to subject content. When method has to be linked to content, I would suggest from purely educational standards that that would be defined as an educational accommodation.

 

That distinction is not meant to be derogatory in any way. But for parents that are not dealing with any issues other than method, it is a real distinction that they might want to be aware of.

 

3- parents that teach by a methodology that is linear or whatever is the opposite of what many posts describe are just as actively facilitating the education of their children as those using alternative methods.

 

And yes....I agree that there are homeschoolers that actually even do school at home. However, active "engagement" with children and learning is not limited to specific methodologies.

 

I know that we have a large degree of overlap in what we're discussing and I think we both appreciate that we do. I am not feeling so much attacked or disagreed with as I am misunderstood; I am saying certain things over and over that somehow get passed by or seem to be unheard.

 

However, I do differ from you in that I see not requiring traditional output as one more way of working outside the box, not accommodating. What I am talking about is only defined as accommodation inside a rigid institutional system with a limited definition of what forms output may take. I do not have to accept their definition of what constitutes an accommodation, just as both Jackie and I refuse to define our kids' wildly variant processing styles as disabilities because that's how a particular, limited educational institution defines them; in fact, that's part of how I work out of that particular box.

 

[Note that I've tried to distinguish between dd's actual disabilities, which have to do with vision, fine motor problems, anxiety, and some social inhibitions, from differences in processing. Her early dysgraphia WAS a learning disability that in early elementary years DID prevent her from producing "appropriate output." Now that we've largely cleared up the vision and some of the fine motor weakness, it no longer is.]

 

Back to the issue of accommodations: Many universities, and many courses, offer kids a variety of different ways to tackle a question or problem in a literature course. They are all written, but they are not all conventional "essays." This would not be the case with a Great Books school like St. John's, but it is widely available within the University of California, for instance. And kids do not have to approach the professor and ask for an alternate assignment. This is not accommodation; rather, different options are built into the course. They all have to do with writing, but they are not all asking for traditional essays. This may not be the case across all disciplines, but in my own field of experience it definitely is, and that's primarily where I'm applying it to dd. I've said she keeps a science notebook and that she does math from a textbook (as well as from other things).

 

And I have also made it clear, I hope, that dd writes a whole ton of other things on her own, of her own initiative, that relate to what she's reading, viewing, or doing. My house is positively sinking under the load of writing she produces. What I assign her only ensures that she practice a longer essay with a thesis, the kind Jackie is talking about, periodically.

 

I totally agree that interest-based learning is not linked to one methodology or to creative or outside the box projects. It differs kid by kid. I was talking throughout about what works for my own child, and why. I was talking about people for whom conventional curricula fails to engage their child's interest to the point of a child withdrawal, anxiety, depression, or otherwise demonstrates quite clearly that this approach is not working. In these cases, I was suggesting an alternative that has worked for my one child (although like Jackie I have also worked this way with other "typical" children, in my case in a co-op setting.)

 

I have also repeatedly mentioned that I am aware that dd and I are on the more extreme end of out-of-the-box. I'm not offering this as the necessary alternative for anybody to grab wholesale; nor have I said that anybody whose child is the slightest bit atypical ought to do it precisely this way (at least, I try to bend myself into contortions trying not to do that, because the whole point is that I work from the child, not from a particular theory). It's a collection of thoughts about why and how we do what we do, for anyone who is interested to pick and choose from or ignore altogether, and a few suggestions of how they might start.

 

I've also tried very hard to make it clear that our schooling has taken the shape it has from dd's own initiative and from her own understanding of how she likes to learn. I did not have one magical moment of enlightenment when I decided to turn everything we did into fun and creative projects.

 

I followed her lead. That's my answer to Lisa's question: I followed my dd's path, not the other way around.

 

Because we're talking about philosophies that have evolved around the needs and processing styles of very, very different kinds of kids -- none of the kids we talk about are alike although they certainly share various forms of quirkiness, giftedness, and/or LDs -- they're NOT going to be equally applicable to all. What Jackie and I are trying to show is how we found and followed what worked for our particular children, which might or might not make sense or sound like what is happening with someone else's kids. For both of us, though, this experience has led us to think about the whole concepts of education and teaching very differently than we had before.

 

But I don't think either of us are trying to tell anyone that this process is going to look the same for anybody else, or evolve in the same way ours did. It's difficult to talk about something so individualized which yet has applicability to larger philosophies and teaching styles. That's perhaps where the inevitable confusion and mix-ups in understanding come in. That's also why there can never be a book of "how-to" for ALL quirky or different kids in the way that WTM which proposes itself as an all-encompassing guide.

 

Sorry so long-winded. This is not meant to be argumentative, but descriptive. If you have any advice on how I can make my points more visible or understandable, I'd be pleased if you would tell me (either here or in a PM), because in my mind I'm saying the same thing over and over and no one is hearing it: this is not an all-purpose guide to how to be creative with your kids as the only possible way to engage their interests or teach out-of-the-box! It's my experience with one kid, with some suggestions of places to begin if you don't know where to start when conventional methods or purchased curricula HAVE NOT and DO NOT work, and it becomes clear that your child is explicitly or implicitly ASKING FOR, WANTING, OR NEEDING something else. It's not about curriculum jumping, but about rethinking what education might look like if you take the step away from a guided, scripted process.

Edited January 24, 2011 by Guest

[Colleen in NS]

Many board member have been pushed to teach "outside the box" - going against traditional methods or curriculum or even current standards.

 

What happens when learning disabilities, extreme giftedness, or quirky personalities push us to move beyond the norms in teaching? How did you get to that point? How did you make the change? What tools did you have on hand that help you? What tools do you feel you need? Where would you encourage someone that is struggling to start from?

 

This is really broad

 

I used "quirky" because I have a student who has suffered from severe depression. She is neither LD nor extremely gifted, but then she isn't "normal" when it comes to teaching her either. If there is a better term than "quirky, " let me know. It is a term that covers a multitude of issues that may not have specific names or diagnoses.

 

now I see from Lisa's update, that I was not out in left field in interpreting "quirky" differently than you and Jackie did.

 

Lisa also has a gifted son, which falls within the definition of "quirky" that Karen and I have been using.

 

I didn't know her son was gifted/quirky, and she didn't write about her gifted/quirky son in her OP and in her recent update, where she actually mentioned her daughter. She wrote what is above, and that is how I am making my conclusion, which I also quoted above. By quoting two of Lisa's and then mine, I'm trying to show you my train of thought, in an effort to help you see why I concluded what I did.

 

However, when a parent who is already a homeschooler, and already using WTM, is specifically asking for ways to get more out of that "box," because her children are asking for it and she wants to accommodate that, ...really don't address the question Lisa was asking: if I want to do this, how do I do it?

 

I understand your frustration about threads spiraling into people feeling defensive about their methods. And, like I said before, I admire your ability to come up with all sorts of ways of teaching and engaging your kids - your creativity is to be commended!!!! And I read your comment on Jenn's thread - I, too, would be interested to read more details (yes, even here some more) about how you do things - how kids learn things (esp. skills) is always interesting to me. It's part of my fascination with homeschooling. It's why I read and participated here!

 

I have also worked hard here to understand what you meant by certain words, and to understand how your ways are accomplishing the things you say are being accomplished. I've accepted your definitions of quirky and engaged and box. I've accepted that your methods accomplish what you say they do. My understanding has been enlarged.

 

But I ask you and KarenAnne to please try to understand and accept something from me now: I did not interpret Lisa's intention in the same way you and KarenAnne did. And with her recent update, I'm still interpreting it differently than I think you are. And I see nothing in her OP or update, that makes me think she is specifically trying to "get out of a WTM box." And, Lisa herself wrote that the initial input (I think that's the part she meant) I had given was welcome (I can't remember her exact words). So I'm assuming I wasn't too far off in my interpretation. If I thought she was specifically looking for ways to break out of the "WTM box," I'd never have written about my experience - it wouldn't benefit her at all.

 

So, I'm not asking you to agree with my interpretation; just asking that you accept that this is how I interpreted, and know that you and KarenAnne won't change my interpretation - I think right now, only Lisa could.

 

Hoping for some more stories that Lisa recently asked for....

Edited January 26, 2011 by Colleen in NS

[8filltheheart]

I know that we have a large degree of overlap in what we're discussing and I think we both appreciate that we do. I am not feeling so much attacked or disagreed with as I am misunderstood; I am saying certain things over and over that somehow get passed by or seem to be unheard.

 

However, I do differ from you in that I see not requiring traditional output as one more way of working outside the box, not accommodating. What I am talking about is only defined as accommodation inside a rigid institutional system with a limited definition of what forms output may take. I do not have to accept their definition of what constitutes an accommodation, just as both Jackie and I refuse to define our kids' wildly variant processing styles as disabilities because that's how a particular, limited educational institution defines them; in fact, that's part of how I work out of that particular box.

 

[Note that I've tried to distinguish between dd's actual disabilities, which have to do with vision, fine motor problems, anxiety, and some social inhibitions, from differences in processing. Her early dysgraphia WAS a learning disability that in early elementary years DID prevent her from producing "appropriate output." Now that we've largely cleared up the vision and some of the fine motor weakness, it no longer is.]

 

Back to the issue of accommodations: Many universities, and many courses, offer kids a variety of different ways to tackle a question or problem in a literature course. They are all written, but they are not all conventional "essays." This would not be the case with a Great Books school like St. John's, but it is widely available within the University of California, for instance. And kids do not have to approach the professor and ask for an alternate assignment. This is not accommodation; rather, different options are built into the course. They all have to do with writing, but they are not all asking for traditional essays. This may not be the case across all disciplines, but in my own field of experience it definitely is, and that's primarily where I'm applying it to dd. I've said she keeps a science notebook and that she does math from a textbook (as well as from other things).

 

And I have also made it clear, I hope, that dd writes a whole ton of other things on her own, of her own initiative, that relate to what she's reading, viewing, or doing. My house is positively sinking under the load of writing she produces. What I assign her only ensures that she practice a longer essay with a thesis, the kind Jackie is talking about, periodically.

 

I totally agree that interest-based learning is not linked to one methodology or to creative or outside the box projects. It differs kid by kid. I was talking throughout about what works for my own child, and why. I was talking about people for whom conventional curricula fails to engage their child's interest to the point of a child withdrawal, anxiety, depression, or otherwise demonstrates quite clearly that this approach is not working. In these cases, I was suggesting an alternative that has worked for my one child (although like Jackie I have also worked this way with other "typical" children, in my case in a co-op setting.)

 

I have also repeatedly mentioned that I am aware that dd and I are on the more extreme end of out-of-the-box. I'm not offering this as the necessary alternative for anybody to grab wholesale; nor have I said that anybody whose child is the slightest bit atypical ought to do it precisely this way (at least, I try to bend myself into contortions trying not to do that, because the whole point is that I work from the child, not from a particular theory). It's a collection of thoughts about why and how we do what we do, for anyone who is interested to pick and choose from or ignore altogether, and a few suggestions of how they might start.

 

I've also tried very hard to make it clear that our schooling has taken the shape it has from dd's own initiative and from her own understanding of how she likes to learn. I did not have one magical moment of enlightenment when I decided to turn everything we did into fun and creative projects.

 

I followed her lead. That's my answer to Lisa's question: I followed my dd's path, not the other way around.

 

Because we're talking about philosophies that have evolved around the needs and processing styles of very, very different kinds of kids -- none of the kids we talk about are alike although they certainly share various forms of quirkiness, giftedness, and/or LDs -- they're NOT going to be equally applicable to all. What Jackie and I are trying to show is how we found and followed what worked for our particular children, which might or might not make sense or sound like what is happening with someone else's kids. For both of us, though, this experience has led us to think about the whole concepts of education and teaching very differently than we had before.

 

But I don't think either of us are trying to tell anyone that this process is going to look the same for anybody else, or evolve in the same way ours did. It's difficult to talk about something so individualized which yet has applicability to larger philosophies and teaching styles. That's perhaps where the inevitable confusion and mix-ups in understanding come in. That's also why there can never be a book of "how-to" for ALL quirky or different kids in the way that WTM which proposes itself as an all-encompassing guide.

 

Sorry so long-winded. This is not meant to be argumentative, but descriptive. If you have any advice on how I can make my points more visible or understandable, I'd be pleased if you would tell me (either here or in a PM), because in my mind I'm saying the same thing over and over and no one is hearing it: this is not an all-purpose guide to how to be creative with your kids as the only possible way to engage their interests or teach out-of-the-box! It's my experience with one kid, with some suggestions of places to begin if you don't know where to start when conventional methods or purchased curricula HAVE NOT and DO NOT work, and it becomes clear that your child is explicitly or implicitly ASKING FOR, WANTING, OR NEEDING something else. It's not about curriculum jumping, but about rethinking what education might look like if you take the step away from a guided, scripted process.

 

LOL......I guess I wasn't just addressing you, but the entirety of the thread in general. How is that for great communication. :D

 

 

FWIW.....I would recommend that parents check with universities that they might be interested in and how writing is approached and what sort of accommodations might be made. Our experience differs from what you describe. I know the university where my oldest attends that writing is not addressed in the way you describe. It is a STEM university and the writing requirements have been formal essays with even the research essentially "essay" format in that it has had to be original thesis not simple reporting.

 

My Aspie ds has multiple issues and the standard accommodations the CC permits (which I would assume are in line with the state unis here since they have complete reciprocity) are:

 

1- longer time on tests

2- use of a computer in class for taking notes

3- sitting in the front row.

 

All assignments were standard one size fits all and essentially take it or leave it. No accommodations on the actual assignments were allowed. This became an issue for our ds b/c the major project for the term required the balancing of a family budget for a couple that was on the brink of bankruptcy. The numbers given in their original budget and their original income prior to the recession did not match. The teacher's assertion was that the recession hurt their business and reduced their monthly intake to only $5000/month. (for example, their original income was supposedly $150,000/yr but their monthly outflow prior to the recession was approx. $20,000/mo......so the income/outflow didn't match prior to the recession)

 

Ds met with the teacher and tried to comprehend what actually happened. Her response to him was the numbers didn't matter, only how he dealt with the budget. He ended up making an 83 on the project, but he didn't understand anything that he did b/c he couldn't get beyond the invalidity of the original assumptions. It was too theoretical for his literal thinking. The teacher was not interested in helping him understand at all, either.

 

Knowledge about what is expected at specific higher institutions might not impact posters that have multiple options for higher ed, but parents that are limited in choices might need to know what to expect.

 

ETA: I almost forgot my most important point b/c my oldest ds just called me to tell me that his wife is expecting a baby on his birthday!! I'm going to be a grandma and my baby is going to be an aunt. :D

 

I am wondering if typical CC and state universities, etc are going to allow for easy transitioning for the students if they aren't used to typical output, etc? I know that ds's friends really struggled at the collegiate level when they had not been prepared for equivalent output during high school. (failing several classes.) I can't help but wonder if a blend might not better serve students that might not be able to hand pick where they go to school.

Edited January 24, 2011 by 8FillTheHeart

[Guest]

I am wondering if typical CC and state universities, etc are going to allow for easy transitioning for the students if they aren't used to typical output, etc? I know that ds's friends really struggled at the collegiate level when they had not been prepared for equivalent output during high school. (failing several classes.) I can't help but wonder if a blend might not better serve students that might not be able to hand pick where they go to school.

 

Nowhere have I ever said dd does not do "typical output." In fact I said I have in the past periodically required her to produce regular essays so I know that she can do it (and as someone who has taught freshman writing, I know what this looks like, so I can feel pretty easy about it), and I am now requiring her to produce two longer regular old essays a year. These are, incidentally, probably longer than most people require of their kids; but writing longer and more complex rather than more frequently and shorter is dd's choice. So we do both. I have nowhere said that parents should feel free to discard all concerns about conventional output.

 

I have also said repeatedly that I have a child who is an intuitive writer and inveterate scribbler. I therefore wouldn't think my individualized requirements would necessarily transfer over onto someone whose child was NOT a kid who pursued writing on his or her own. In that case I would probably do something very different -- but it would still be tailored to the child, still probably wouldn't focus on conventional essays to the exclusion of any other forms of showing that learning has occurred, and probably in the logic stage would include VERY unconventional, often jointly written games and projects. This doesn't mean I would not use formal grammar or have the child write paragraphs. I might or I might not, depending on the kid, in the middle school years.

 

It's the leap from the specifics of my story to "all parents should be aware that not having your kid do anything conventional is a danger to their possible educational and career goals" that has me beating my head wondering how I am presenting what I say in a manner that can be interpreted in this way.

 

P.S. Congratulations on the forthcoming grandchild!

[5LittleMonkeys]

Back to the issue of accommodations: Many universities, and many courses, offer kids a variety of different ways to tackle a question or problem in a literature course. They are all written, but they are not all conventional "essays."

 

I'm really glad to hear you say this because I have wondered how this dd would handle college. She says at this time that she wants to attend a culinary school but I don't want to put her in a position that she couldn't function in a more traditional college setting if that were to end up being the path she choose.

 

I seems to me though, in allowing your (generally speaking) dc to become more of an active learner than a passive one and allowing your dc to have a larger influence in directing their learning that they would have a greater ability to be really successful in college. They would have that drive to dig deeper and push themselves harder to achieve the knowledge and skill that they need in order to fulfill their goals and more importantly, to become really good at their chosen profession. I would think a passive learner (one that is spoon fed everything and never goes above and beyond) would not stand out in a college class, would possibly write a well constructed paper but one without a distinctive voice and would continue to only do what is necessary to pass the class. (I'm thinking of my nephew here:glare:)

 

I think my older dd would be a good example of what SwimmerMom is asking here.

Please share your stories about how you moved from having a student be a passive learner to having one be an active learner.

She is a passive learner at heart. Just wants to know what boxes to check off and be done with it. Never goes above and beyond. We switched to an interest led method for history and science in an attempt to get her excited about something. She was excited in the beginning but then, because she is a passive learner, didn't really know how to run with the idea. She chose mythology as her topic. She started reading some mythology books and making a few notes but not really digging deep or allowing what info she was getting to carry her to the next question and the next and the next. So, I gave her a world map and asked her what types of mythology they had in different parts of the world. She did a bit of research on that and then stalled again so I asked her (in a very casual sort of way) if she had any insight as to how a cultures early mythology affected the way that culture was today. I also asked her how Greek mythology differed or was similar to Asian mythology. I told her that I didn't expect essays or projects if she didn't feel like doing them but I did give her a journal and told her she could write whatever she wanted in it just as a means to help her collect and analyse her own thoughts. Well, those open ended questions helped her move past thinking that there were right or wrong answers and moved her past thinking that the goal was to write a paper. I do talk to her everyday about what she has read and what she thinks about it and I'm starting to notice that she is becoming more willing to give her pov and eloquently defend it. (My hope is that as she becomes more fluent in verbalizing what she has learned and is able to articulate why she feels a certain way about her position then I will be able to require more written work.) Sometimes I will pose a question that she hasn't thought of and that will start a new trail. She has gotten more and more into it now that she has moved out of passive and into active. She asked just last week though, if I need to see her journal and I said only if she wanted to show it to me. I think she still thinks there is going to be a test.;)

 

So, there has been so much mis-understanding in this thread so I hope I didn't mis-understand SwimmerMom again. Even with all of the confusion I've still really loved this thread and actually all of the over explaining have helped me sort out conflicting ideas in my own mind.

[Corraleno]

I am wondering if typical CC and state universities, etc are going to allow for easy transitioning for the students if they aren't used to typical output, etc? I know that ds's friends really struggled at the collegiate level when they had not been prepared for equivalent output during high school. I can't help but wonder if a blend might not better serve students that might not be able to hand pick where they go to school.

I'm mystified by the need to keep warning people that what KarenAnne and I are doing is dangerously extreme and out of the box and might render dc incapable of further education. If my son is capable of writing a 10-15 page research paper (based on original research no less) by 12th grade, I don't think he'll be seriously handicapped in college. I don't happen to believe that a student needs to write 40+ short essays every single year of HS in order to be capable of writing a solid research paper by 12th grade. Were your DS's friends who struggled in college writing extensive research papers all through HS? Were they doing the copious amounts of creative writing that KarenAnne's DD does? If not, then I'm not sure why their experiences should serve as a cautionary tale against the things KarenAnne and I are talking about.

 

It's the leap from the specifics of my story to "all parents should be aware that not having your kid do anything conventional is a danger to their possible educational and career goals" that has me beating my head wondering how I am presenting what I say in a manner that can be interpreted in this way

Exactly. Save me a spot on that wall you're beating your head against.

 

Jackie

[justamouse]

I didn't ready anything but outloud wondering in 8's post.

 

8-I've been reading COLLEGES THAT CHANGE LIVES and I think there's a lot in there that might apply to what you're asking--BUT it may make you more nervous-though these colleges take 'lower performing' students and turns them into graduate school students-there's a *lot* of writing involved. It does talk a lot about finding fits for children with LDs.

 

Another but-financing might be prohibitive though that wouldn't stop me from trying.:001_smile:

 

For the person who cannot afford a right fit college for their kid, they might have to slog through a CC course where a prof may not want any personal interaction with the students or try to bring out the best of a slower growing student. For THOSE kids, I can see her concern.

 

I firmly believe that having the finances will enable your kid to get into a fantastic college that fits them-out of the box teaching will be lauded and the kid will have an amazing experience. For those that will have to get pounded into round holes-a more traditional approach may be more beneficial to them.

Edited January 24, 2011 by justamouse

[Corraleno]

For the person who cannot afford a right fit college for their kid, they might have to slog through a CC course where a prof may not want any personal interaction with the students or try to bring out the best of a slower growing student. For THOSE kids, I can see her concern.

There is an assumption here that kids who are allowed to pursue their interests and passions, who are allowed to deviate from textbooks and essays, who are given a great deal of input into the structure and methodology of their education, will somehow be incapable of performing in a "normal" college environment. Therefore, that kind of homeschooling experience is fine for kids who can choose some really exotic specialist college that perfectly replicates their out-of-the-box homeschooling experience, but for kids who will be going to the local CC or state uni, they better not stray too far from the box.

 

My son will be taking CC courses in HS. He will be attending our state university. I have no doubt whatsoever that he will be well prepared for college. He will be able to write. He'll be able to use textbooks. He will be able to cope with the occasional boring class and idiotic professor. The fact that I don't think kids need to start practicing writing essays and outlining textbooks and dealing with boredom and meaningless busy work in 2nd grade doesn't mean my child will be incapable of this for the rest of his life!

 

I think that many skills can be much more easily taught when kids are older and are ready for them.

 

I think kids learn better when they're interested and engaged and involved in their education, and I believe in making that happen as much as possible.

 

I do not think this approach is only suitable for kids with LDs.

 

I believe that kids who are educated in this way can be just as well-prepared for college.

 

I do not think everybody else should teach their kids this way.

 

Jackie

[Jane in NC]

I didn't ready anything but outloud wondering in 8's post.

 

 

 

:iagree: I think that we are all trying to help each other out here.

 

Not everyone is coming to the table with the same tools. Further, I cannot keep track of everyone's children in terms of age, "quirks" and accomplishments. So forgive my ignorance if I am unaware that something was said in another thread. And I believe that I speak for other posters in making these statements.

 

No one is participating here to slight the ideas of another poster.

 

I enter this discussion from a different place. I am no longer homeschooling but have a child who has been there, done that, and is now doing amazingly cool stuff at an interesting Liberal Arts College. Certainly, not everyone needs to follow my path, but I can offer a perspective of success to those who may be interested. And those who are not can ignore me.

 

Sigh. I just hate seeing the hurt feelings because we all have the best interests of our children at heart.

 

Jane

[Colleen in NS]

I didn't ready anything but outloud wondering in 8's post.

 

Me, too. And I noticed it was tacked on to the end of *her personal story* about her aspie son. She also said she was addressing a general audience, not specific posters.

 

It's the leap from the specifics of my story to "all parents should be aware that not having your kid do anything conventional is a danger to their possible educational and career goals" that has me beating my head wondering how I am presenting what I say in a manner that can be interpreted in this way.

 

I'm mystified by the need to keep warning people that what KarenAnne and I are doing is dangerously extreme and out of the box and might render dc incapable of further education.

 

There is an assumption here that kids who are allowed to pursue their interests and passions, who are allowed to deviate from textbooks and essays, who are given a great deal of input into the structure and methodology of their education, will somehow be incapable of performing in a "normal" college environment.

 

Why don't you two ask 8FilltheHeart (or me, or whoever you think is assuming things about you) for clarification of what she means, before saying these things? I am not reading the same things into her posts as you two seem to be, but even if I *was* going to challenge them like this, I'd rather ask her to clarify, first. Sometimes a simple word or phrase defined in simple terms can help you see what someone is actually saying, and it might be different than what you think.

 

I think that we are all trying to help each other out here.

 

No one is participating here to slight the ideas of another poster.

 

Sigh. I just hate seeing the hurt feelings because we all have the best interests of our children at heart.

 

:iagree:

Edited January 26, 2011 by Colleen in NS

[PeterPan]

She is a passive learner at heart. Just wants to know what boxes to check off and be done with it. Never goes above and beyond. We switched to an interest led method for history and science in an attempt to get her excited about something. She was excited in the beginning but then, because she is a passive learner, didn't really know how to run with the idea. She chose mythology as her topic. She started reading some mythology books and making a few notes but not really digging deep or allowing what info she was getting to carry her to the next question and the next and the next. So, I gave her a world map and asked her what types of mythology they had in different parts of the world. She did a bit of research on that and then stalled again so I asked her (in a very casual sort of way) if she had any insight as to how a cultures early mythology affected the way that culture was today. I also asked her how Greek mythology differed or was similar to Asian mythology. I told her that I didn't expect essays or projects if she didn't feel like doing them but I did give her a journal and told her she could write whatever she wanted in it just as a means to help her collect and analyse her own thoughts. Well, those open ended questions helped her move past thinking that there were right or wrong answers and moved her past thinking that the goal was to write a paper. I do talk to her everyday about what she has read and what she thinks about it and I'm starting to notice that she is becoming more willing to give her pov and eloquently defend it. (My hope is that as she becomes more fluent in verbalizing what she has learned and is able to articulate why she feels a certain way about her position then I will be able to require more written work.) Sometimes I will pose a question that she hasn't thought of and that will start a new trail. She has gotten more and more into it now that she has moved out of passive and into active. She asked just last week though, if I need to see her journal and I said only if she wanted to show it to me. I think she still thinks there is going to be a test.;)

 

Aime, I wanted to address this a bit. Active and passive make it sound like a character thing, a good or bad, a volitional issue. There are actually differences in the way people think here that go beyond being active or passive. Passivity in education is where you can THINK more but are too lazy. The person wants it pre-digested for them. It doesn't sound like this is what your dd is doing. When I got my dd evaluated for OT (yes OT, which shouldn't have anything to do with education, right? lol), the first thing out of her mouth was: You need to give your dd more structure. Think about that. Think about a neurological situation where the dc is genuinely curious, enjoys engaging, but just plain does better with STRUCTURE. So I spent months trying to figure out what in the WORLD "structure" was, lol, till I found a post by some lady on the board here whose name I forget. The lady, a former teacher, used the term and when I wrote her privately said it just plain means a SCHEDULE. Well lightbulb moment here!!!

 

Think about this. The whole tenor of this thread has been that out of the box is child-led. It's not necessarily. I don't know how to say this more clearly. Some kids need very alternate methods and materials, but they still need structure. I've increased the structure dramatically in our house, and you should see how happy dd is. She knows exactly what is required of her for the week. She knows when those things need to be done. She knows what day each thing is due and the plan for if it's not done (whether it bumps, whether it means she is late for her Saturday activity, whatever).

 

Now there are actually fancy terms for this like dyspraxia, initiation, and stim level, things OT's and professionals talk about. But the long and short of it is going out of the box doesn't necessarily mean de-structuring. You said your dd wants to check boxes. Give her the boxes!!! Just change what is written beside the box.

[justamouse]

There is an assumption here that kids who are allowed to pursue their interests and passions, who are allowed to deviate from textbooks and essays, who are given a great deal of input into the structure and methodology of their education, will somehow be incapable of performing in a "normal" college environment. Therefore, that kind of homeschooling experience is fine for kids who can choose some really exotic specialist college that perfectly replicates their out-of-the-box homeschooling experience, but for kids who will be going to the local CC or state uni, they better not stray too far from the box.

 

My son will be taking CC courses in HS. He will be attending our state university. I have no doubt whatsoever that he will be well prepared for college. He will be able to write. He'll be able to use textbooks. He will be able to cope with the occasional boring class and idiotic professor. The fact that I don't think kids need to start practicing writing essays and outlining textbooks and dealing with boredom and meaningless busy work in 2nd grade doesn't mean my child will be incapable of this for the rest of his life!

 

I think that many skills can be much more easily taught when kids are older and are ready for them.

 

I think kids learn better when they're interested and engaged and involved in their education, and I believe in making that happen as much as possible.

 

I do not think this approach is only suitable for kids with LDs.

 

I believe that kids who are educated in this way can be just as well-prepared for college.

 

I do not think everybody else should teach their kids this way.

 

Jackie

 

At this point I think you are so defensive you are reading RIGHT PAST what I'm saying and jumping to defending yourself again.

 

I'm bowing out of this thread, now.

[johnandtinagilbert]

Frankly, I'd say a research paper by 12th grade IS typical. How you get there may be different than other paths, but your outcome is the same. I didn't get hat 8 said otherwise. I understand her comment though and I didn't think it was a shot in your directions.

 

I think about college expectations all the time. I see, via my "adopted" daughter that my dc better be prepared to write...a lot. Each of her classes requires essay, starting at 250 words. Whether we can do that here by middle school or high school is irrelevant, just so long as my dc Can do it by the time they enter CC...which is either 10th or 11th grade most likely. I can't wait 'til 12th grade, so I won't.

 

I think about science expectations and have found we can go science light over here and let college entry level sciences pick up the slack.

 

I think we've left the dock in this thread and I'm sad for it. Sigh. I think we all realize there are many ways we can educate our dc and each of us has valuable input. Going waaaay out of the box doesn't work for everyone and that's just as okay as how well it works for others. My goodness. To each his own. We appreciate the suggestions from everyone, it doesn't mean we have to agree. I'm just perplexed that we can't all get along. What on earth happened over here?

[PeterPan]

What on earth happened over here?

 

Earlier in the week I thought it was the full moon. Now I don't know. :D

[5LittleMonkeys]

Aime, I wanted to address this a bit. Active and passive make it sound like a character thing, a good or bad, a volitional issue. There are actually differences in the way people think here that go beyond being active or passive. Passivity in education is where you can THINK more but are too lazy. The person wants it pre-digested for them. It doesn't sound like this is what your dd is doing. When I got my dd evaluated for OT (yes OT, which shouldn't have anything to do with education, right? lol), the first thing out of her mouth was: You need to give your dd more structure. Think about that. Think about a neurological situation where the dc is genuinely curious, enjoys engaging, but just plain does better with STRUCTURE. So I spent months trying to figure out what in the WORLD "structure" was, lol, till I found a post by some lady on the board here whose name I forget. The lady, a former teacher, used the term and when I wrote her privately said it just plain means a SCHEDULE. Well lightbulb moment here!!!

 

Think about this. The whole tenor of this thread has been that out of the box is child-led. It's not necessarily. I don't know how to say this more clearly. Some kids need very alternate methods and materials, but they still need structure. I've increased the structure dramatically in our house, and you should see how happy dd is. She knows exactly what is required of her for the week. She knows when those things need to be done. She knows what day each thing is due and the plan for if it's not done (whether it bumps, whether it means she is late for her Saturday activity, whatever).

 

Now there are actually fancy terms for this like dyspraxia, initiation, and stim level, things OT's and professionals talk about. But the long and short of it is going out of the box doesn't necessarily mean de-structuring. You said your dd wants to check boxes. Give her the boxes!!! Just change what is written beside the box.

 

Oh goodness Elizabeth! Another mis-understanding I think. I wrote on my post that this was my oldest (dd13) that is the passive learner. She definitely wants things pre-digested! I should have been more clear that I wasn't speaking of dd11 (who I had previously been speaking of). So sorry!

However, in regards to dd11, I agree with what you are saying about structure. If I don't give her a schedule for when she needs to be studying x,y or z she will loose herself in her projects and never get anything done. If she doesn't have that list that allows her to see what she should be working on at any given time it causes her anxiety. Now, my oldest (dd13) makes her own structure, she takes what she knows she has to do and writes out her own schedule.

[PeterPan]

No biggee. So fascinating to hear the differences! :)

[EKS]

My older son (gifted with dyslexia) forced me to become adept at modifying higher level resources, first just to keep him close to something approximating his grade-by-age level and later to challenge him with materials that were written at his level of intellectual functioning. I did this mostly by reading things aloud, allowing for lots of work to be done orally, and modifying output expectations. It seems pretty standard now, but when I first started doing it I was terrified that I was doing something wrong.

 

When my younger son began lessons with me, I just naturally applied the techniques that I used with my older one. So, even though he doesn't have learning disabilities, I've been teaching to his level of intellectual functioning and modifying output expectations as necessary. As such, he is working 3-4 grades ahead with accommodation for his younger motor skills. This means that sometimes I take dictation, copy math problems, use a whiteboard instead of paper, that sort of thing. This time around it all seems very natural.

 

So I don't know if modifying output expectations is truly teaching outside the box, but there it is.

 

ETA (after actually reading some of the thread): My 9th grader writes just as much as a typical 9th grader. It's just that we have taken a different route to get to this point. The only accommodations he needs are extra time on tests and the ability to use a word processor in class. As for the younger one, I'm just waiting for the input and output levels to cross. I expect it will happen within the the next 2-3 years.

Edited January 25, 2011 by EKS

[swimmermom3]

:iagree: I think that we are all trying to help each other out here.

 

Not everyone is coming to the table with the same tools. Further, I cannot keep track of everyone's children in terms of age, "quirks" and accomplishments. So forgive my ignorance if I am unaware that something was said in another thread. And I believe that I speak for other posters in making these statements.

 

No one is participating here to slight the ideas of another poster.

 

I enter this discussion from a different place. I am no longer homeschooling but have a child who has been there, done that, and is now doing amazingly cool stuff at an interesting Liberal Arts College. Certainly, not everyone needs to follow my path, but I can offer a perspective of success to those who may be interested. And those who are not can ignore me.

 

Sigh. I just hate seeing the hurt feelings because we all have the best interests of our children at heart.

 

Jane

 

Thank you, Jane for trying yet again to bring this thread around. I have appreciated hearing what you have done with The Boy. I remember feeling so relieved when we discussed the notebooking pages. I would like to hear more of your perspective since he is now in college, but I think this particular thread has reached its expiration point.

Edited January 25, 2011 by swimmermom3

[PenKase]

Reviving this thread to say that I AM COMPLETELY BLOWN AWAY by the information shared here. I only came upon it last night but I've been reading my way through since then (about 2/3 done reading). I haven't slept much since then trying to wade my way through all these knowledgeable jams and jellies. For a newbie like me, threads like these are invaluable!

[Tammyla]

:iagree:This thread is worth reading.

 

Reviving this thread to say that I AM COMPLETELY BLOWN AWAY by the information shared here. I only came upon it last night but I've been reading my way through since then (about 2/3 done reading). I haven't slept much since then trying to wade my way through all these knowledgeable jams and jellies. For a newbie like me, threads like these are invaluable!