We're off the history rotation...

[Kate in Arabia]

I'm trying not to be a stickler here (goes against my nature, lol); we're off the 4-year history rotation, so I'm trying to get settled in my own mind a general idea of where we're headed. I'm pushing a bit to hopefully be finished, or nearly finished, with year 2 this year; it took us four years to get through 2 years of the history cycle. Somehow, in my mind, it seems like a good idea to be back at the beginning (ancients) when we get to highschool. So I have four years left (omg!) and we have 2 segments left of history to finish our first go round.

 

#1, is it even relavent/important to try and start with ancients "fresh" at the beginning of highschool?

 

#2, I can either push forward and finish the next 2 segments in two years, then have two years open to either going back to the beginning and seeing how far we get; or doing something completely different those years, like a year of American history and/or a year of intensive geography, or civics..

 

#3, I could stretch out the remaining 2 segments to cover four years instead of two.

 

This is all based on my oldest, who is going into 5th grade in the fall. My poor 1st grader (2nd in fall) is kinda dragged along with us, but I also wonder whether I should consider what will work for him better. We had him tag along with us in science this year, physics, and it was a mistake in retrospect.

 

I know none of this is earth-shatteringly important, it is just helpful to me to have these long-term patterns in my own mind, kwim?

 

Thoughts? Advice?

 

Kate

[Rosie_0801]

Um. If you aren't wanting to do the four year rotation, why not continue to plod along through time as you seem to be happily doing? Then when you get to the present day, you can go back and start with the ancients, then plod through again. Or you could go off on a tangent and study local history. I'm sure when you get to the end of this cycle, your kids will be happy to tell you their preference.

I think it is most important to wander through in chronological order. If you get bogged down with the coolness of the Romans and spend 6 weeks there, well you've enjoyed yourselves and learned about Rome. Later you'll probably run into a topic you don't care so much for, and give it a 20 minute skim. Does it matter to you what history the kids learn? Or just that they learn some?

:)

Rosie

[Kate in Arabia]

Well, I'm not really wedded to anything in particular, lol. I should note that we are doing a separate study of Middle Eastern history parallel to world history, so that is a different thing.

 

I think, for me, I'm more aiming for the overall patterns of world history. We got really "bogged down" in the ancients; I don't regret it at all, I feel like my kids really enjoyed that and it was of value It took us 2+ years to do the Ancients and I feel like they have a really solid knowledge of and appreciation/enjoyment of that period.

 

I'd say we've taken a year and a couple months to do the Middle Ages. If I push it we will just about finish the Middle Ages this year (like, doing history daily instead of twice a week). If I don't push, we'll have a couple months of material left to cover at the beginning of next school year. I don't really have a problem with this (not pushing); if we go at our current pace, we will be ready to start with exploration of the New World in August, which I think would be fine.

 

I had wanted to stick to the 4-yr cycle, it seemed logical and made sense to me.. but once we got into it, well, circumstances dictated otherwise.. and then adding in another child who isn't at the same spot grade-wise, it started to seem less critical -- I think that is another reason our ancients studies stretched longer.

 

Maybe my concern is trying to balance two kids in two different stages; cover appropriate things at appropriate levels for each, while still maintaining their interest and love of learning, kwim?

 

Kate