Is 2 hours of daily academics enough for normal kids?

[HS Mom in NC]

I have heard more than one hs mother say her perfectly normal child (middle elementary school through High School) is being challenged by only 2 hours (maximum) of academics a day. These are not families in crisis or children with physical, mental, or emotional challenges.

 

How do you respond to this?

Edited July 27, 2011 by Homeschool Mom in AZ
clarification.

[tricia]

Seems to work out in our home. Even my college bound kids only did about 2-3 hours a day. Closer to 4 once they were in their last year. And college hasn't at all given them a huge challenge. They are living up to what is expected of them just fine. Often, 2 hours is about all I can handle doing with them some days!

[ktgrok]

I think it depends. Does that 2 hours mean two hours of seat work? Or does it include reading? Does it include all the time in between tasks and such? We probably do only 2 hours of actual directed work, but once you add in breaks, bathroom breaks, staring into space, pencil sharpening, dropping pencils, getting a drink, getting a snack, etc...it's a good 4-5 hours, lol.

[Pamela H in Texas]

It's none of my business.

[Jenny in GA]

I don't know, but I heard SWB on a podcast say, "A child can't get a really fabulous education without the parent spending at least four hours a day. If a parent doesn't want to spend at least four hours a day doing schoolwork with a child that age, they need to re-think homeschooling."

(She was talking about kids about age 12 and up.)

Edited July 27, 2011 by Jenny in GA
grammar goof

[nono]

Well it would depend.

 

For me (and for my sister, who homeschooled before me) we never have reading during formal school time. That's an afterschool, "part of life" activity. It gets done more frequently than schoolwork, as it's a 7 day a week thing. So perhaps this person isn't strictly counting hours and minutes of other things that contribute to an academically rich life.

 

But ultimately, I don't care, because what anyone else does in their home school, as it is no reflection of what is happening in mine. I can guarantee that. :lol:

[Jean in Newcastle]

No, it is not enough. I can't imagine doing a college prep level of education (which is what I do) with that little academics.

 

But I wouldn't bother responding to the mother. 1. You don't know exactly what she's counting as "academics". She could be not counting all reading, arts, sports and other things common in a school schedule. 2. Many people (in p.s. as well as homeschool) are only trying to meet educational minimums. You could probably meet those on only 2 hours a day. 3. Do you really know the child is "perfectly normal"? Perhaps he has a photographic memory and only needs to glance at the material to have it down pat. . . 4. It really would be none of my business.

[Mommy22alyns]

Not my kids, not my business.

[Guest Dulcimeramy]

I don't see how it could possibly be enough! I don't care what other homeschoolers do anymore, though. I've got all I can worry about right here at home.

 

I'd probably just give the mom the fakey smile I'm giving to the whole world these days. I'd confine my remarks to the weather, or maybe to the condition of the roads.

[Orthodox6]

How do you respond to this?

 

To such mothers, I don't respond at all. They have hoisted their banner and apparently would not be interested in differing views.

[HS Mom in NC]

By academics I mean anything (projects, reading silently, listening to a read aloud, writing, investigating, observing/ listening to a master of somehting, workbooks,discussions, etc.) with academic value of any kind. Anything a hser would deem a worthy activity that had value related to typical school subjects.

[RahRah]

I answered other because there is no definition of what the two hours consists of - is it two hours of seat work and lessons, with additional things done that aren't specifically bookwork or instruction (ie. independent reading, watching videos/DVD/documentaries, engaging in activities related to lessons outside the home)?

 

My guy is going to be 7 next month and we average about 2-hours a day for lessons and such, but then do a lot of other things that are educational but aren't lesson intense or book work specifically, so our hours are more than that each day for educational-learning, but only about 2-hours of very specific instruction time and work.

[Joyofsixreboot]

Our core of math, LA, science and history only takes about 2 hours. We add in various things but if all I get done is that 2 hours/day I feel I've met their academic needs. It's not like they're spending the rest of the day on x-box.

[RahRah]

By academics I mean anything (projects, reading silently, listening to a read aloud, writing, investigating, observing/ listening to a master of somehting, workbooks,discussions, etc.) with academic value of any kind. Anything a hser would deem a worthy activity that had value related to typical school subjects.

 

Well, I don't think it reflects on homeschooling overall what one, or two, or even dozens of other homeschoolers do in their day. So that's part of the poll reply.

 

But, for a 10+ year old, I would think one would need to average more time than two hours a day to get everything done? I haven't gotten there yet, but we're pretty relaxed and do more hours than that on average when I count everything I can count (and do for the hours requirements in my state) - it's not all direct lessons and instruction/bookwork, but it's more than two hours.

 

If I could get it all in and DS learn well in less time, I'm :bigear: to learn how to do it!

[EKS]

Not my child, not my problem. Pass the bean dip and all that.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

I don't know, but I heard SWB on a podcast say, "A child can't get a really fabulous education without the parent spending at least four hours a day. If a parent doesn't want to spend at least four hours a day doing schoolwork with a child that age, they need to re-think homeschooling."

(She was talking about kids about age 12 and up.)

 

:iagree:

Edited July 27, 2011 by priscilla

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Not my child, not my problem. Pass the bean dip and all that.

 

This is true too but IMHO the parents would be doing their child a disservice:(.

[Bang!Zoom!]

I like bean dip.

 

Pass my way? :)

[Joanne]

No, IMO, it's not enough starting about 7th grade and up.

[sunflowerlady]

Well, when dd was 10 yo (she is now 12) she completed her "official curriculum" in two hours or so. We were not doing a WTM or classical approach at all. However, she spends a lot of her free time writing stories and reading. She has always tested at or above grade level.

 

Last school year, the curriculum we used took a little more time-maybe three hours. I tested her again this year and she still tested great.

 

Now, dd is an only child so there are no distractions of siblings and such. When she is doing school, she sits down and does school. She is also pretty good at working independently.

 

This coming year we are doing a new curriculum, so there will be a learning curve with planning it out and implementing. My goal is about three to four hours of school for her-she is 12 yo.

[Crimson Wife]

It's such an individual thing. Some kids get more accomplished in a 15 minute math lesson than others do in a lesson 3-4 times as long. Some families choose to do shorter days but more of them (this is what we do).

 

If the child is doing short days and is working below grade-level, that would be a red flag for me. But it's not my place to say anything about it.

[at the beach]

Hmm. I think it depends on the child. Some kids may not be academically oriented, and it would be unnecessarily stressful to do more than that with them and possibly not respectful of their unique individual needs. Just because kids are not at the table with pencil and workbook, or science experiment or whatever in front of them doesn't mean they aren't learning. Even if they're doing things on their own that haven't been planned out, they are still learning every moment. We all are, aren't we?

 

2 hours a day covering math and language arts will accomplish a lot.

 

Then, if the child is doing things out of doors, playing, baking, singing... I could go on and on. I don't like to view school as being separate from life. Our days are all about learning. I know this CM quote is used a lot, but it's so true: Education is an atmosphere, a discipline, a life.

 

I really couldn't ever judge whether a child's "education" is adequate based on how much time is spent on formal academics. A kid who spends an hour a day on math and 30 minutes to an hour on grammar/writing but reads 3 hours every evening might be gaining much more than a kid who spends a lot more time on formal academics.

[jbemom]

I think it depends. Does that 2 hours mean two hours of seat work? Or does it include reading? Does it include all the time in between tasks and such? We probably do only 2 hours of actual directed work, but once you add in breaks, bathroom breaks, staring into space, pencil sharpening, dropping pencils, getting a drink, getting a snack, etc...it's a good 4-5 hours, lol.

 

Sounds like our house! :lol:

[mama2cntrykids]

Well, for my boys (going into 5th and 3rd), the basics only take this long. Sometimes it would take longer, esp at the end of last year. This year, I really think it's going to take my 5th grader 3-4 hours b/c his load is going to be heavier this year.

 

So, I would say it really depends on the child and other factors.

Edited July 27, 2011 by mama2cntrykids

[Ester Maria]

Middle elementary school, perhaps - two hours daily would still be enough to squeeze in three to four areas (30-40 minutes), which would include English and math and possibly rotate some science or social science. Mind you, we still are talking about minimalist standards here, but for a middle elementary child, or even an upper elementary child that is exceptionally bright and fast, they might accomplish those minimalist standards in ten hours weekly.

 

Now, middle school... I am having a hard time "buying" that two hours of daily work are enough at that level, even if we are still talking about minimalist standards. In fact, I would say you would need at least a solid three or four hours, depending on how quickly the child can work and how many areas you include, to include the minimum in language / literacy, literature, math, history / social sciences, and science - and where are arts, art appreciation, foreign languages, and so forth? Even if one were to do bare basics with a 12-13 year old, I do not see how it can possibly take two hours at that age - at 9, maybe, but at 13, quite impossible in my view.

 

High school - no comment. For most children two hours would cover English and math with a few pauses to dawdle away. I cannot see how high school can possibly be done without at least four and half, five hours daily - and that is a rather generous estimate for either a very quick and efficient learner, either somebody doing the bare basics. It is not unheard of to study several hours more, depending on the breadth and depth of that education.

 

If those children somehow miraculously manage to be on grade level or above, fine by me - but if not, I would think they are being done a disservice.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I have heard more than one hs mother say her perfectly normal child (middle elementary school through High School) is being challenged by only 2 hours (maximum) of academics a day. These are not families in crisis or children with physical, mental, or emotional challenges.

 

How do you respond to this?

 

I think that this might be great or early elementary, especially if there was together time that wasn't counted in the 2 hours (like helping in the kitchen or reading together).

 

But (speaking as a draconian homeschooler) I think it is probably setting the family up for failure down the road. I have a hard time with thinking you can get through even basic subjects. Heck, 2 hours wouldn't even cover our history or math. Maybe I could say that there was 2 hours of contact time per kid and not count reading and problem solving they do without me.

 

Having said that, people are free to make mistakes all the time. I probably wouldn't weigh in unless asked about it.

 

Update: I should add that my middle son has been known to get up and start school before breakfast. He has frequently been finished a couple hours into the school day (though it typically reflects more than 2 hours of work on his part).

Edited July 27, 2011 by Sebastian (a lady)

[Laura in STL]

How I would respond to this depends on the situation. If it was in the context of a conversation in which the other mother expected me to respond, then I would probably say that I couldn't possibly do all that I do with my dc in just two hours. Occasionally we have a short day to accommodate a special activity, but not on a regular basis. I wouldn't go out of my way to point this out if she was just making an offhand comment.

 

Honestly, in my state a parent could not make this comment as we are required to school for 1,000 hours per year. 600 of these hours must be core content instruction that occurs in the home. I think it may be possible to do a decent job with that small number of hours if the student is doing core work only, but we do many electives at our house. Again, our state specifies certain subjects that must be taught, as well.

[Carpe]

Did she mean

2 hours per weekday, 36 weeks per year (360 hours per year)

2 hours per weekday, 52 weeks per year (520 hours per year)

2 hours per day everyday (730 hours per year)

or something else (??? hours per year)?

 

I think a well focused, quick reader probably could get a reasonable education in 730 hours per year for most years. It would be a struggle in High School though.

[RoundAbout]

I can't imagine its enough unless the child likes to spend a lot of their free time reading, writing, etc.

 

It's none of my business how other people educate their kids though.

[Peela]

I just don't have enough experience of other kids, other families, other styles of homeschooling to be able to say it isn't enough. If its enough, its enough. If they just tihnk its enough, and the kid ends up with not enough education to get into college or whatever...then they were wrong.

But what i think doesn't matter- if they are not asking for my opinion, its not really my place to give it.

[6packofun]

I voted "other" because I'm not the judge of what's effective or not in someone else's family. Although, I now see that the choice before that was more appropriate, I guess. lol

Edited July 27, 2011 by 6packofun
...

[msjones]

It depends on what they're hoping to achieve. Not everyone has the same goals for their children.

 

I cannot imagine doing so little, but that's me.

[Dmmetler]

What counts as school? My DD isn't to that age level yet, but right now, we probably only spend about 2 hours a day on school-but that doesn't count independent reading in her book baskets or read-alouds (almost none of the Sonlight reading is done in that 2 hours, for example-only the history part), or any sort of extended project, or her lab science class, or music lessons, or so on.

 

I suspect she spends about as many hours doing academics over the course of a day as her PS friends are in school-but that because of the way it's broken up, it seems like much less.

 

Maybe that's what's happening here?

[joannqn]

With certain children, it can be enough especially if they are only worried about staying at grade level with kids who can handle well above that.

[Mynyel]

I can't say if a child is being challenged or not. It depends on how many subjects are being covered and what is being taught.

 

I refuse to say that a child isn't being challenged if they get work done in 2 hours. What is challenged? Struggling to learn concepts and taking 5 hours for school work or taking 15 minutes to learn it and doing school for 2 hours?

 

Why is it that people think that just because it doesn't take a whole lot of time that there is no challenge?

 

For instance my ds9 was struggling today in math. He was challenged by his math. He was near tears. So do I keep challenging him then? Or take a break for a day and go back to it when it may take him 15 minuted to get it instead of an hour or longer and making the school day last longer?

 

Things like this just rub me the wrong way when people start saying that a child isn't being challenged just because they get school done in two hours. Please.

 

OK :chillpill: *steps off soap box and dons flame resistant suit*

[Garga]

The correct answer is probably that it's ok as long as the kids are progressing and not behind where children ought to be at their ages.

 

My honest, unvarnished opinion, that I would never share in person is, "NO NO NO! That's not enough! Ahhhh! What are they thinking!? There's a big-wide world out there and they're missing out on learning all about it!"

 

But I would NEVER say that. The reason why I would never say that is this: I might be wrong. I've learned by being on these boards for the past couple of years, is that my honest, unvarnished opinions are wrong more often than I'd like to admit.

 

So I wouldn't say anything. If pressed, I might ask the mom how she fits everything into 2 hours, and see what she says. I might voice concerns in a manner of, "Huh. I can't do it in 2 hours. How do you? Are we covering different topics or something? What's the difference between us?"

[Daisy]

I voted that I don't care.

 

I don't think it would be enough for MY kids and I would and do expect more, but I don't think a mom teaching her on-grade-level child for only 2 hours a day reflects poorly on homeschooling.

 

The ONLY time I have ever thought a "homeschooling" family was really messing things up was when their 15yo son couldn't read and did nothing but play video games all day. The older sister was asking me how she could get her brother some help since her mother figured he'd learn to read when he got motivated enough. But even in that situation I didn't think it reflected poorly on homeschooling. I thought it reflected poorly on the mother because she WASN'T homeschooling at all. She was wishful-thinking-schooling.

[Momma2Many66]

We spend two hours a day on math alone, I can't imagine how two hours could be enough with all our core subjects, even if we did weekends too.

 

But....I agree that they are "not my kids", so what other people do with their children in regards to homeschooling is their business.

[Ria]

I voted that I don't care.

 

 

The ONLY time I have ever thought a "homeschooling" family was really messing things up was when their 15yo son couldn't read and did nothing but play video games all day. The older sister was asking me how she could get her brother some help since her mother figured he'd learn to read when he got motivated enough. But even in that situation I didn't think it reflected poorly on homeschooling. I thought it reflected poorly on the mother because she WASN'T homeschooling at all. She was wishful-thinking-schooling.

 

Daisy, you are much kinder than I. I believe that kids deserve an education. The child you mentioned didn't get one. That really does reflect poorly on whatever education system the parents have in place...unfortunately, in this case, it is homeschooling.

 

Ria

[Ester Maria]

Things like this just rub me the wrong way when people start saying that a child isn't being challenged just because they get school done in two hours. Please.

If we are talking about younger children, I agree, as there are many bright and efficient children who can get it all done in a shockingly short time period.

 

However, middle and high school? If a child is "done with school" in two hours at those levels of education, do you seriously not find that something might be wrong about the content or the standards of their education? Except in a very hypothetical case of a very rare photographic memory genius or something of the kind, how can it possibly be enough, while including all of the "standard package" of language, literature, mathematics, sciences, history and geography, foreign languages? Where are arts? Where is discussion? Where is writing? Where is assigned reading? It sometimes takes me over two hours only to discuss things with my daughters the older they get, and that of course does not include their own preparation in terms of reading, textbook work, translation, written work, and so forth.

 

I just cannot fathom how can it possibly be done - I mean, I can fathom that somebody can be "done with school" in two hours, but then I have very serious doubts as to what that school consists of and whether it corresponds to the educational minimum and the standard the child would be getting at a solid school.

[elizabeth]

I have heard more than one hs mother say her perfectly normal child (middle elementary school through High School) is being challenged by only 2 hours (maximum) of academics a day. These are not families in crisis or children with physical, mental, or emotional challenges.

 

How do you respond to this?

 

I call bu****it.:lol: Ludicrous.

[Daisy]

Daisy, you are much kinder than I. I believe that kids deserve an education. The child you mentioned didn't get one. That really does reflect poorly on whatever education system the parents have in place...unfortunately, in this case, it is homeschooling.

 

Ria

 

In the above case, The child wasn't getting an education at all. I've seen it in public school with excessive truancy and I've seen it in those who claim to be homeschooling. I wasn't all that kind. I told the mom to get her son some help immediately or I would report her to CPS for educational neglect.

[LaxMom]

I think it depends. Does that 2 hours mean two hours of seat work? Or does it include reading? Does it include all the time in between tasks and such? We probably do only 2 hours of actual directed work, but once you add in breaks, bathroom breaks, staring into space, pencil sharpening, dropping pencils, getting a drink, getting a snack, etc...it's a good 4-5 hours, lol.

 

That's our house. Our school hours are 8-noon and that doesn't cover independent (assigned) reading. But there's a lot of navel gazing, pencil sharpening, etc.

 

Even if they worked in the time allotted per subject, though, 2 hours wouldn't really be enough.

 

Eta: my response would be the honest one: I couldn't possibly do that.

[swellmomma]

If a parent strictly follows the provincial curriculum here, as in uses distance learning modules, then yes they sure could finish everything in 2 Hours. That would be the main core subjects. Those that I know who did this had to also include PE in their day but most did not count it as school. If a parent is only talking in terms of the 4 core subjects, then yes it can be done. They may not be counting electives, PE etc in it.

 

I know of a couple families that did 3 hours of school per day 6 days a week, Summers off, right through high school and the children got into University simply because they followed the provincial curriculum via modules. Doing it that way means read and fill in the blank essentially. Very little hands-on, discussion etc happening. Or maybe they are using a block type schedule and completely immersing themselves in a topic for those 2 hours of "school time" for a set number of weeks before moving on. In that way the kid could cover a lot of material in a shorter amount of time. Especially if the family does school for 6-7 days a week, and for a longer school year (maybe 42 weeks instead of 36 kwim)

 

I also know plenty of families who say they do zero hours of school a day because they are unschoolers yet the kids are constantly learning, and being challenged. It's all semantics. There is no set number of hours that determines a better education. As long as the child is learning and progressing who am I to decide that for someone else. That is like a public school mom deciding that since our kids are not doing 7.5 hours a day of school like little johnny they are not being challenged oe educated enough. Each family needs to find the routine/rhythm that works for them.

[Spy Car]

I call bu****it.:lol: Ludicrous.

 

:iagree:

 

And I do care, just as I care about failing schools.

 

Bill

[2_girls_mommy]

No

[Mynyel]

If we are talking about younger children, I agree, as there are many bright and efficient children who can get it all done in a shockingly short time period.

 

However, middle and high school? If a child is "done with school" in two hours at those levels of education, do you seriously not find that something might be wrong about the content or the standards of their education? Except in a very hypothetical case of a very rare photographic memory genius or something of the kind, how can it possibly be enough, while including all of the "standard package" of language, literature, mathematics, sciences, history and geography, foreign languages? Where are arts? Where is discussion? Where is writing? Where is assigned reading? It sometimes takes me over two hours only to discuss things with my daughters the older they get, and that of course does not include their own preparation in terms of reading, textbook work, translation, written work, and so forth.

 

I just cannot fathom how can it possibly be done - I mean, I can fathom that somebody can be "done with school" in two hours, but then I have very serious doubts as to what that school consists of and whether it corresponds to the educational minimum and the standard the child would be getting at a solid school.

 

Yes, put the OP didn't specify what was being done in that two hours. My dd13, if left unchecked, can have her daily "work" done in two hours.

 

See the whole thing is just to ambiguous. "Work" can be done in two hours. Corrections? Talking about the assignment, asking what they learned? Sure that takes longer, but isn't that essentially part of life? What is the line between homeschooling and what they learn from day to day?

 

What I am thinking is that it isn't so much done in two hours as "seat work" is done. As I mentioned my dd13 can get hers done in that time. However we spend more time going over her work, making corrections, figuring out issues she had and discussing what was learned and applying it to life. I don't count the discussions of Greek mythology on the way home from karate as official "school" but technically I suppose it could.

 

School to me is the math sheet, grammar sheet, writing lesson and what have you.

 

Oh, I do have a caveat right now. We are on a summer schedule, we only doing half the work load. So after we get everything back (in Sept-Oct) then we will be going longer but still not longer than 4-5 hours a day. I have to work 30 hours a week! :)

 

Perhaps 2 hours seems little to us, but perhaps the child in question has a significant intelligence? Who knows. I still won't say that two hours isn't enough because I truly can't say that with certainty. Shoot, I was in school 3 times that and barely learned anything in high school, so it really doesn't have anything to do with how long so much as what is taught.

[Pamela H in Texas]

By academics I mean anything (projects, reading silently, listening to a read aloud, writing, investigating, observing/ listening to a master of somehting, workbooks,discussions, etc.) with academic value of any kind. Anything a hser would deem a worthy activity that had value related to typical school subjects.

 

What do you think these kids are doing outside of such things?

 

When I was a kid, I had running letters to my uncle. Oftentimes, these were research papers about various animals. Other times, I worked on sports stuff, girl scout badges, playing volleyball and badmitton in the backyard with friends, doing long distance biking (back when the area that now is Cinco Ranch and a Mall in Katy, TX were just nothingness), reading various interest-based things, reading fiction galore, playing Battleship and Rummy with my brother, making cookies, etc, etc, etc. There are benefits to all of those. Even watching Modern Marvels or the NASA channel could be educational. So is volunteer work, scouting, Bible study, etc.

 

Seriously, I have a hard time thinking that these kids are doing NOTHING of educational value outside of two hours per day. They probably are doing other beneficial activities at least some of the time. If the parents decided to look at what they were doing in terms of academic or developmental benefit, I think they'd see the kids are doing more than 2 hours.

 

But again, none of my business so I wouldn't try to convince anyone of anything.

Edited July 28, 2011 by 2J5M9K

[catz]

It all depends what 2 hours means. Many days my kids only would be doing 2-3 hours of what we call "table work". But they'd practice their instruments for 30-60 minutes, take science outside the home, do 3-5 hours of other extras a week including things like chess club, engineering team, theater, circus arts, dance and both test WELL ahead of grade level. My younger reads at least 30-60 minutes a day and my older tends to read 1 hour+ a day. I think we're doing great. Yes, we could be doing more but my kids are happy and high achieving. And I think they are gaining plenty by all our "extras". I'm not in a huge hurry to send my kids to college at 12 which is the path we'd be headed if we were nose to the grindstone on basic academics all day. Our 2 hours is directed and rigorous - we don't do busy work.

 

And for the record, my oldest went to PS for K and 1st. There was no way he was actively learning and engaged for even an hour a day in all honesty.

Edited July 28, 2011 by kck

[Crimson Wife]

If we are talking about younger children, I agree, as there are many bright and efficient children who can get it all done in a shockingly short time period.

 

However, middle and high school? If a child is "done with school" in two hours at those levels of education, do you seriously not find that something might be wrong about the content or the standards of their education? Except in a very hypothetical case of a very rare photographic memory genius or something of the kind, how can it possibly be enough, while including all of the "standard package" of language, literature, mathematics, sciences, history and geography, foreign languages? Where are arts? Where is discussion? Where is writing? Where is assigned reading? It sometimes takes me over two hours only to discuss things with my daughters the older they get, and that of course does not include their own preparation in terms of reading, textbook work, translation, written work, and so forth.

 

I just cannot fathom how can it possibly be done - I mean, I can fathom that somebody can be "done with school" in two hours, but then I have very serious doubts as to what that school consists of and whether it corresponds to the educational minimum and the standard the child would be getting at a solid school.

 

Didn't the Swanns only do 3 hours per day? They certainly seemed to give their children a HS education superior to what many (if not most) HS families do without spending 6-7 hours per day at it.