Guest Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 I've got a question that is really a kind of thought experiment, not a philosophy or an approach I'm promoting or anything like that. Here goes: If you didn't have to worry at all about fulfilling college admissions requirements or high school graduation requirements, what might your student's life look like? What would you encourage him or her to do that you feel you can't spend time on, or can't afford to do because it's not appropriately textbooky or "rigorous," or because too much time is already spent on core classes and your kid has just had it with academics after required classes? What would you say your student wouldn't have to bother about any more? How would your teaching style change? Would you still teach at all, and if you would, would you still teach the same kinds of things? Would you have exams and grades? To what end? Would your child's relationship to the curriculum change at all, in that you'd let a child have more say, or would you as the parent still control most or all of what went on during school hours? This is just a thought experiment, and in the interests of keeping the thread a safe place to really think in some radically different ways I'd like to ask for comments to stay positive and exploratory: please no horrified criticisms of what others might propose. I'm truly interested in what people think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regentrude Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 (edited) Actually, if I think about it: pretty much the same. My DD is very interested in the things she studies through formal academics and her learning style is best served by theoretical/analytical methods - reading and textbooks. She thrives on structure (as do I; I can not wait to go back to a regular work/school schedule and become depressed and antsy by too much unstructured time) We would probably still spend 5-6 hours per day on math, science, history, english and foreign languages, and pretty much the same way, with the same media and materials. She would still spend the rest of her day either at the barn with her horses and barn friends, or writing stories and screen plays with her best friend - just as she does now. We would still spend summers, and many weekends, on outdoor pursuits and travels, spend time in Europe, go to museums and concerts and operas... but I really do not think we would do anything radically different. Guess we are nerdy and weird. ETA: You specifically asked about exams and grades: she would probably insist on having them, because she is very motivated by it. Actually, she would much prefer to be in a school where she could be in direct academic competition with other students; so grades for her are a meager substitute for this - but she wants an external measure of her performance. I am the same way. Edited August 9, 2011 by regentrude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Regentrude, may I ask about your son? I think I remember at one time that you described him as more of a minimalist than your dd, just wanting to get his work done and out of the way. Would anything change for him, if you let him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greta Lea Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) I *might* let the German & Latin. Oh, and I probably would just let him do nothing but free write and not teach the structured essay. I only do tests in math. We just discuss or write about everything else. Edited August 9, 2011 by Greta Lea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regentrude Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) Regentrude, may I ask about your son? I think I remember at one time that you described him as more of a minimalist than your dd, just wanting to get his work done and out of the way. Would anything change for him, if you let him? I did not write about my son because he is not yet high school age... he is minimalist and VERY different from his sister. For him, I would have to insist on some formal school time - otherwise, all time will be spent playing video games. I would stipulate that he be engaged in some kind of educational pursuit for a certain period each day - which is what I do now, too. I would still have him to structured mathematics, as I do now. For anything else, we are currently almost unschooling - he reads, watches documentaries, follows rabbit trails - and I do not really force him to follow specific curriculum. I see this as a transition stage and would, when he is older, switch to a more traditional formal instruction in sciences, because I do not believe that a "living book" approach gives enough. I will do this, and would do it even in your thought experiment. Like his sister, he is a theorist and abhorrs all "hands on" activities - he prefers to read about things, rather than go and do experiments and projects. Because of his inherent laziness and minimalism, I would see myself pushing him more - but because I believe HE needs it for his development, not to satisfy any requirements. he does not, at this point, have any strong interests he would want to spend his time on pursuing.. nerf guns and video games don't quite cut it, for me. ETA: Basically, our educational goals for the kids are more based on what is considered an educated person in our home country - and not on what colleges or states want to see. We come from a certain tradition and schooling, and would like to pass on the things we found important for our education to the children. Edited August 9, 2011 by regentrude Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I'm thinking mostly that I wouldn't spend so much time worrying and agonizing over whether doing right by my dd as I see it will compromise her "chances," whatever those may be, for college admissions. I spend a whole lot of time worrying, and it makes me very tired. Dd has such a major say in her own schooling right now, and so much of it is non-textbooky anyway, that I don't think we'd have to make seismic shifts. But I do think that if she wanted to spend a year or two concentrating on humanities, and then perhaps have a science-intensive year, I would let her do that instead of thinking I had to help her spread subjects evenly over each and every year. If one particular subject didn't attract her or we couldn't find something that really engaged her, I wouldn't worry about it, but plan to pick up something else another year. I'd let her spend all the time she wanted to on semi-academic or non-standard-high-school-academic things, from musical theater to linguistics, from science fiction to satire -- without worrying all the time that she's imbalanced, or that one area is fairly superficial. I'd let her read mostly fiction, because she learns from it in an incredibly powerful way, instead of thinking that she really needs to read more non-fiction because she's not evenly balanced between the two. I'd trust the process of what usually happens, which is that she comes to precisely what I would really like to see her do, in her own time and in her own way -- I wouldn't worry about whether it's happening on a schedule that's going to be optimal for college admissions. Dd changes so dramatically from year to year that this would allow me to work more with her growth patterns than I sometimes feel I can/should now. The other thing I wouldn't worry about so much is the whole issue of "output." Again, she'd probably end up doing very much what she does now, but I wouldn't worry about output on a regular, consistent basis so much, as dd seems to operate in cycles -- huge stages of input, followed by lots of what appears to be processing/mulling over, and bursts of creative or other output. Note the recurrent theme of parental worry here... I think (but maybe I'm presuming too much based on my own case) other parents of kids who think, process, or work differently would find a lot of relief in being able to let their kids follow their leanings, learn in the way that suits them best without worrying about official or preferred output, enjoy letting their kids explore and investigate without feeling the need to pull them back to a particular syllabus as dictated by a textbook or standard syllabus. I let dd do a lot of things in the way that she finds most effective and most engaging, but unlike your dd, regentrude, this does not necessarily line up with conventional academic materials and content. And although I passionately believe in dd's ability to drive her own learning, I just worry a lot because it is often quite different from the norms. I'd really, REALLY like to leave that anxiety behind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angela in ohio Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) NM Edited August 9, 2011 by angela in ohio Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carol in Cal. Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I would have encouraged DD to pursue a well-rounded high school education that gave her ample time to chase down rabbit trails and become expert in her favorite specialty areas, instead of sending her to brick and mortar high school. I do not believe that I could do justice to the CA A-G requirements while working fulltime, so this was a compromise that I had to make. Having said that, she was ready to matriculate into 'real school' and it's working out just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Like regentrude, also, we are nerdy and academic. Textbooks are fun to us. I have been told that makes us less "real homeschoolers" for many, many years at park days and mom's nights :crying:, but it IS our first choice. That's just our personality. You are very, very fortunate that your kids like to learn in a way that fits right in with the academic mainstream. We are nerdy and intellectual, I'd say, rather than academic, in that none of us really go to textbooks as our first choice for ANYTHING. And because dd is a whole-to-parts, Gestalt kind of thinker rather than a parts-to-whole, sequential, incremental learner, conventional academic materials don't suit her one little bit. Have to go finish making dinner. I hope that others will chime in and make me feel not so alone in my sometimes antagonistic, anxious, uncertain relationship to conventional education (not to say that those of you who have found your magic zone with traditional academic materials are not also very welcome indeed). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosie_0801 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Obviously I can't give a proper answer to this, but it is a fun question so I wanted to play anyway. We have a different system here, so we don't have to worry about credits for graduation. Experience in the workforce is also much more important here than it seems to be in the US. So, this means my kids will have a lighter academic load in high school than probably everyone else here, and they will be starting part time work as soon as they have the maturity. It's far more important to me that they are building a resume than completing calculus. Great if we can do both, but it isn't likely unless they want to stretch high school out into their early 20s. I hope they do, but I doubt they'll want to. Rosie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Obviously I can't give a proper answer to this, but it is a fun question so I wanted to play anyway. We have a different system here, so we don't have to worry about credits for graduation. Experience in the workforce is also much more important here than it seems to be in the US. So, this means my kids will have a lighter academic load in high school than probably everyone else here, and they will be starting part time work as soon as they have the maturity. It's far more important to me that they are building a resume than completing calculus. Great if we can do both, but it isn't likely unless they want to stretch high school out into their early 20s. I hope they do, but I doubt they'll want to. Rosie I was just coming back to quickly post something similar to this: I was going to say that one thing I'd like to have the time to do with dd is learn basic plumbing and electrical repair together. This would have been FAR more useful to me in real life, over a huge span of years, than much of the standard course load I went through in high school; and I think it will also be very useful indeed to an Aspie who isn't planning, at the moment, to marry or have a family, to be able to fix things for herself wherever she lives. On another thread I recounted a story about an alternative school I looked at for dd a couple of years back. The principal minimized academics -- just enough to make the kids eligible for the state university system -- and stressed two other things: individualized homework (for dd his suggestions were joining Young Playwrights and going to book signings/readings) and acquiring a real-life skill or mechanical competence. And dd has had a part-time work-study for three years running now. It's positively been the best thing of anything we've found in terms of self-confidence, competence, and learning about social intricacies in a work situation; I think it also will stand her in good stead both to get into college and afterwards, when she's beginning a career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
regentrude Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 And dd has had a part-time work-study for three years running now. It's positively been the best thing of anything we've found in terms of self-confidence, competence, and learning about social intricacies in a work situation; I think it also will stand her in good stead both to get into college and afterwards, when she's beginning a career. Yes, these are valuable opportunities. That's exactly why I support DD in her choice to spend 25+ hours per week at the barn. The interaction with an age diverse group of young people and the physical work as a team are an important complement to her academic studies. Plus, she has to work harder to make progress in riding than she has to excel in her academics - which is really good for her! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosie_0801 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I'm hoping my kids can do traineeships in plant nurseries, as dental nurses, or whatever I can find when they are old enough, and use their time while they are home to job hop. Firstly, their dad and I are sticks in the mud in that respect. Intellectually we know we don't owe employers life long loyalty, and it is expected that a person moves on as soon as they get a better offer, but that's knowledge, not part of our make up, kwim? Secondly, until they are adults, we're here to pay the bills so they should jump as much as they will benefit from while there is a safety net. In that stage of life, they will be able afford to work for little or nothing if the position is a worthwhile one. One of the major reasons for homeschooling is so the kids won't be stuck working in crummy retail jobs that barely count on a resume because they are the only jobs available during after school hours. But of course we'll see what happens when the time comes. Sadly, I don't get to control reality. ;) KarenAnne, that alternative school sounds wonderful. It's a shame there aren't more like that around! Rosie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harriet Vane Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Much of it would be similar--lots of great books, foreign language, lots of history. However, I would definitely change science for dd. I wouldn't worry about chemistry at all, ever--I'd let her pick a branch of science that is exciting to her and let her go for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 [quote name=Rosie_0801;3019041 KarenAnne' date=' that alternative school sounds wonderful. It's a shame there aren't more like that around! Rosie Academically I think it probably left something to be desired, and it was the very opposite of a fancy pricey private school, in that there weren't a lot of electives, there was no big science lab, there were no big yearly trips, etc. But the school was run by a psychologist who had worked for years with disaffected teenaged kids, tutoring them and doing therapy, so he came at the whole school project from a very different angle than a typical academic and/or businessperson. Every kid did an internship for several months during junior or senior year, and the principal spent a lot of time finding mentors and workplaces tailored to each student; and every kid did a presentation and/or project based on the internship. Rather than asking people in the community for money, he asked them for their time and their interaction, which I thought was truly fabulous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justamouse Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 the same. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onaclairadeluna Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I would drop writing from a prompt. My son writes pretty well but melts for an assignment on demand. Since this is something he will need for the SAT and college blue book type tests I am helping him with it. It is I think the only thing I would completely drop if college didn't loom in the distance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gwen in VA Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 What would change around here would depend on the kid. If college requirements didn't matter -- Ds2 would have dropped Latin after the first week instead of dutifully reluctantly sticking with it for three years. And he never would have done music theory, which he did solely for the fine arts credit. Dd2 would probably drop something a little more central to what a good education is -- like history -- but then she would read lots of history-related books, so in the end I don't see the change as bad. Honestly, my kids are so involved in EC's that we are already squeezing school in around everything else. We have already tried to minimize its impact on what my kids REALLY do with their days! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8filltheheart Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Our homeschool would look pretty much the same. I want my children to have a well-rounded education and try to accomplish that goal with the best sources I can find to meet their personal educational needs. None of my kids have had similar paths or coursework, so our homeschool in no way is a one-size fits all or strictly "traditional" approach. I do expect them to study materials that they may not personally choose to. Yet, they have freedom to dwell and delve into topics that they love. I do create assignments that they may dislike, but again, there are times that they get to pick a project or assignment of their choosing. I also do let them select their course concentrations in high school. My oldest and youngest sons have chosen math/science. Our dd is science oriented as well however she loves philosophy and if she hadn't chosen to attend the classical college for her sr yr, she was planning on taking a philosophy course as well as anthropology course.....both well out of the norm of our typical subjects. (as are ds's astronomy courses) One thing I would do differently if I didn't have to worry about college apps would be to fore-go all course descriptions :lol: and I would not worry about having them take standardized tests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KAR120C Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I don't think a lot would change.... Rigorous and textbooky (to an extent - not all textbooky) suits us. And what DS does on a day to day basis, even though it ends up being way heavier on his interests than on those things he's only moderately amused by, really does fit the "standard model" pretty well. As we flex to suit his interests, we actually get more rigorous and more college-prep-y. Not in a cookie cutter way, but in a thorough, in-depth, hard-work-and-stuff-to-show-for-it way. It may end up as a kind of odd transcript (just how many credits can you claim for four solid years of Shakespeare?? probably just the one... but we love it, so to heck with credits) He wants to be an engineer, and there is plenty on his plate that doesn't directly apply, but a) he could easily change his mind about his career and I don't want him closing off any possibilities too early, and b) every single thing he works at teaches him about himself, about perserverance, and about how far he can go with something when he works hard. No matter what career he chooses, that will have been a good thing to learn. I think in our case, though, we've been taking advantage of extra time. He's working ahead with no particular plans to graduate early, so he has the freedom to take some chances. He's still heading more or less in the standard direction... he's just not taking the standard route. If we had more time pressure I might be more concerned about credits and looking normal, but what I've found along the way is emphasizing the hard work in any area kind of brings us around to close to what colleges seem to want. It makes me think that there's something to that design - not just a random assortment of requirements but a pretty good and balanced model, if you're careful with it. I guess what I'm saying is that while going down a checklist of four years of English, four years of Math, three years of Science, two years of Foreign Language, etc. isn't going to make a well educated student, working toward a well educated student in a way that works for that particular student is likely to come out near all of that... plenty of reading and writing (maybe not the same reading list as everyone else), plenty of math (could be more practical math or more theoretical math), a good background in science and history... probably a foreign language... some arts and practical skills and work experience.... It might not be a standard transcript in the end, but you'll have a kid who can work hard, who knows what he enjoys and what he's good at, and who has a solid background to build on. It's not a golden ticket to college, but it's an excellent start I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenny in Florida Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 We are nerdy and intellectual, I'd say, rather than academic, in that none of us really go to textbooks as our first choice for ANYTHING. This is most of my family, too. I am more of a traditional academic. I'm one of those people who almost always knows what the important points in the reading or lecture will be, and I'm a natural test taker. I do fairly well with textbooks, but I'm also an immersive learner. When I get interested in a subject, I go into "total immersion learning" mode. I read every book I can find, watch every movie that is even remotely related, search out museums, even make foods, if that's manageable. My husband and kids are less textbook-ish and more immersion-ish. We always tell our children that the reason they have the names they do is that my husband and I were deeply into our shared Victorian phase when they were born. People always think it's funny when I tell them that my daughter--who went away to college at age 12--"isn't really an academic." But it's true. Only after a couple of years of college did she figure out that she loves learning but hates school. But, man, you should see her prepare for a role. She's singing the Evelyn Nesbit role in a concert production of Ragtime this coming weekend, and for the last month she's researched the real person on whom the character is based. She read books and watched biographies. She read every article in the New York Times online archives. She created photo collages. I suspect she knows as much about Evelyn Nesbit now as most historians. But, if she were taking a class about the era? She'd do barely enough work to come out with a solid B. My husband, one of the smartest people I know, barely managed to graduate from high school. It's just the way they're wired. In answer to your question, though, I suspect I'd worry less about output, too. And I'll be very honest and admit that I would probably allow them to get by with less math. The reality is that I didn't even manage to get through geometry in high school and took computer programming classes to fulfill most of my math requirements in college. And I have all the math I need for my life. In general, I'd probably just let them do less in the way of formal academics. We do so much in the course of plain old life that is "educational." And my kids are busy, energetic, interested and interesting people who are always doing cool things. If I didn't have to worry about checking off those boxes, I'd be able to relax and let them spend their energy on doing things that actually interest them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenny in Florida Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 Honestly, my kids are so involved in EC's that we are already squeezing school in around everything else. We have already tried to minimize its impact on what my kids REALLY do with their days! I was thinking something similar to this, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teachin'Mine Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) To be honest, if standardized tests weren't available for anyone and that wasn't even on the board for college admission, our schooling would look entirely different. I'm being honest. :D Dd would have a heck of a lot more time to pursue her own interests and could quite possibly be a published writer by now. She'd have continued her love of reading - if there wasn't assigned reading which she doesn't always care for - but they're the "classics" and part of an education under the way things actually are. She'd still choose to do her Saxon math - she loves it! But time at the end of the year wouldn't be crunched for the standardized tests so she'd probably be more interested in exploring more in depth. She would probably choose to have a part time job and would also spend more time volunteering. She'd still be doing some formal school work - improving her vocabulary, learning grammar, formal writing - but a lot more would be led by her interests. Ahhh - that was fun to dream. :lol: But, back in the world of reality, there isn't enough time to do all the things I had hoped we'd do before graduation. But learning is lifelong, and her education will undoubtedly continue long after there are tests of any kind. :) Jenny my dd is a lot like you. When she had an interest, she would totally immerse herself in that and learn everything there was to learn. She could answer just about any question on the topic and would research if she didn't have the answer. When we hit a library, she went immediately to that section of the bookshelves. But that was before our schooling was so formal. Now, it's more about meeting the requirements and doing what's due. I'm sure that if she had the time, she'd go right back to her old ways. Edited August 9, 2011 by Teachin'Mine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane in NC Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) It seems to me that the beauty of homeschooling is that students have time to follow rabbit trails--or at least some of them as there are never sufficient hours in the day. I doubt if much would change if I had the opportunity to rewrite our script. My future archaeologist was a passionate reader of selections from the WTM reading list as well as an avid listener to related lectures from The Teaching Company. He chose the big Campbell bio text and to take the associated AP exam in 10th grade---something I questioned often during the undertaking. But some kids are not satisfied with popular science books--they want something meatier. While studying from Campbell, my son would spend time with a college genetics book because it intrigued him. My son had minimal say in his math courses. I have a preference for texts written by mathematicians not math educators. Yes, I chose Latin for my son when he was in middle school. But he always liked it--in fact he continues to take Latin classes in college. He chose to add French in high school, then chose to abandon it after five semesters because he had too much else on his plate. We probably did less testing than some since I question the value of standardized exams but I did feel an obligation to cover our bases. Neither of us will ever question the time spent on his senior project which gave him hands on experience in his chosen field, connected him with experts who in turn offered assistance in the college app process, helped him focus his long term goals. Perhaps he should have dropped his second writing course at the CC when it became apparent that his prof was a flake. But otherwise no regrets. Edited August 9, 2011 by Jane in NC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantlion Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I would be bold and not give grades. Ds is not motivated by them at all. I don't feel like I have the academic credibility to NOT do grades. We'd explore more rabbit holes, we love rabbit holes. We drop all academics for the projects my ds comes up with. I came home with a paint sample card the other day. I picked it up because it has seven colors on it, all colors in our classroom. Ds decides we should use this pattern as a school flag. Awesome, don't have the money to buy paint or fabric right now, so it goes on the list. We'd dabble more in foreign languages. I'd buy those inexpensive learn in 30 day type programs and find a language ds wants to learn further. If nothing else we'd learn to hail a cab in 30 different languages. :D We'd scrap traditional biology. Ds doesn't care about biology. As it stands our biology class will look very non-traditional anyway, but I feel like we Have to do it. We'd meander through history more. We'd drop any further grammar instruction. I have a lot of creative ideas, but right now finances dictate how far and how often we can pursue most of them. I've missed being able to take advantage of some of my son's interests at the height of his enthusiasm because of tight finances. One of my goals is to work on a petty cash fund for school, just so we can hop on opportunities as they present themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeekingHim77 Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 My son is almost 16 and starting his sophmore year. If I didn't feel so much pressure to continue on the traditional high school/college prep. route, I would drop higher level science and maths. He loves nature study and learning about the world around him but despises the technicalities of biology, chemistry, etc. I would probably finish up Algebra 1 and then switch to personal finance and consumer math. He's really good at math but sees no need for the higher levels and dreads doing it every day. Honestly, he has no desire to go to college at all. He is pretty sure that he already knows what he wants to do with his life, career-wise. He's wanted to be a wildlife officer for as long as he can remember and a college degree is not required. However, I know that having some college under your belt can give you an edge over other applicants and help you to advance later on. I'm also worried that he'll change his mind and choose to go to college and not be prepared if I don't take the traditional route. He does best through reading and writing about what he reads. He detests workbooks of any kind. We have tailored our homeschool to reflect those interests in many ways. We use living books for history and literature. For science, he reads living books on whatever his current module is about, then reads the module in his textbook and writes an essay on the subject. We don't do the tests at all. We tried that with biology the first half of last year and he was miserable. He could do well but it took him a long time to memorize all the definitions his text required. Then he forgot them after passing the test, so what was the point? Just to pass the test? I'm glad he tried it and I plan on doing a smattering of tests throughout his highschool years so that he's familiar with that format of learning but am not going to waste the next 3 years having him cram to pass the test and then forgetting it all. I am constantly struggling with myself over the very issue you've brought up. What will really benefit my son in the long run? Following the traditional route or giving him freedom to follow his own interests and learn what is relevant to him? I'm still not sure if I'm making the best decisions for him right now or not. So, I'm right there with you and deep in my heart, I really feel that I should be doing the latter but I get so anxious and feel so much pressure from the homeschool community to take the first route. I'm worried that my son might blame me if he changes his mind and wants to go to college and isn't prepared. He is only 15 after all. I hope you feel better knowing that you're not the only one struggling with this issue. I know I do! :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candid Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 For my oldest, I would probably dial back the science a bit and I'd skip foreign language as I don't really believe what we are doing this year or probably in the future will be that useful in really learning a language (if anyone knows of a daily online, spoken foreign language program let me know). For my youngest, I'd probably dial back his history and lit and dial up science (I'll probably do that for him anyway). Same for language as eldest. I am smiling a little because somethings others wouldn't do, I'm already planning not to do. I think that some of the things we think we need to do for college, etc maybe aren't so crucial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 (edited) People always think it's funny when I tell them that my daughter--who went away to college at age 12--"isn't really an academic." But it's true. Only after a couple of years of college did she figure out that she loves learning but hates school. But, man, you should see her prepare for a role. She's singing the Evelyn Nesbit role in a concert production of Ragtime this coming weekend, and for the last month she's researched the real person on whom the character is based. She read books and watched biographies. She read every article in the New York Times online archives. She created photo collages. I suspect she knows as much about Evelyn Nesbit now as most historians. But, if she were taking a class about the era? She'd do barely enough work to come out with a solid B. I'm trying to figure out whether she figured out that she loved learning because college gave her what she needed and wanted, or because she realized that any classroom format wasn't going to do that, and then was able to separate the two? What do you think it is about taking a class that changes the way some of our kids react to the material? Is it the format -- lectures, reading, tests, essays? Is it that they resist the scheduling -- they want to spend time and energy investigating what interests them rather than have to stop at a certain date because the syllabus requires them to move on? Something other? Part of what I personally resist is the never-ending focus on "coverage" -- something that now extends into the second year of college with survey classes and basic general ed requirements -- at the expense of the luxury of time to investigate and pursue what really interests a student. There's a line in A Separate Peace I remember, in which Gene, the shifty and unlikable protagonist, talks about how the really brilliant kid in his prep school didn't play the game, didn't simply move on from one book to the next when required, but would get lost in following up and wallowing in something he found truly revelatory. A lot of people believe there truly is no problem, nothing that bars a kid from doing both. But in my experience, with particular kinds of kids, there is, because they don't want to be filled up like a bucket with required knowledge and information, they want to explore, wallow, experience intensity and repetition to a level that just isn't manageable if a lot of your time and energy is swallowed up with coverage, testing, etc. When dd was little, for instance, when she truly loved a book, she would listen to nothing but that book, either read by me or on audio, and later, read by herself as well -- over and over and over, often for literally, honestly, twelve hours a day. Her usual pattern was to do this for around three weeks. By then she'd have it entirely memorized, the rhythms, language, diction, structure, everything, absolutely ingrained. She LIVED that book. She had dreams about the characters and plots. She wrote characters' names in tiny print on little scraps of paper and carried them around with her. She drew picture after picture of what things looked like in her mind as she listened. Once, when we drove down the freeway listening to a book on tape, she said, "Mom, when I listen I can see two worlds at once." Although she's become somewhat -- and only somewhat -- less intense as she's grown older, dd still has that pattern of intensity, and THIS is what I feel gets lost or trampled, or even damaged, sometimes when I feel that requirements get in our way. Jenny, it sounds as though your daughter shares that kind of intensity and focus, which just couldn't be accomplished if she continually had to fulfill a slew of other requirements, year after year, with endpoints that were established by someone else. Dd's level of intense engagement is in fact at odds with what I still perceive as the need to dutifully "cover" certain materials simply because they are generally set out as what college admissions officers "want to see." It's at odds with certain types of output that are conventionally labeled "academic" -- at the expense of a whole flood of other kinds of interaction with materials and outputs that are deeply thoughtful but do not follow conventional essay format. It's also at odds with just internal thinking, lots and lots of it, open-ended and digressive, which seems to characterize dd's natural habit of mind. It's not that I have a beef against essay writing, or think that no one needs to learn biology if they're not interested. It's more that the entire approach to these things is pre-selected, narrowly defined, prescribed, in a way that inhibits kids like my dd from following their natural learning patterns and inclinations. It's that these requirements take up more and more time, and my dd has limited stamina and limited acquiescence for doing, hour upon hour each day, what someone else has determined she should know, in ways they also try to determine (I'm talking very generally about college admissions and high school graduation requirements, not what I tell her she has to do, since we go at everything jointly). Yet I find it so hard to shake these off. Particularly in California, the university system prescribes and dictates so much of what kids need to do for four entire years if they want to qualify for admissions at some point: far, far more than I had to conform when I was accepted way, way back in the Olden Times. The system dictates not only courses required but acceptable textbooks, required standardized tests, etc. I got my PhD in the system, taught in the system for a dozen years. I think this is why it still looms so large for me as a kind of baseline, and why dd's lack of good fit with this model is so difficult for me to deal with. It's also very hard having a 2E kid in general. As some of us on these boards have said to one another, our kids and our concerns don't really fit tidily into any single category: high school, special needs, advanced/gifted. They're all of these, yet none. They -- and thus we as their parents -- are a minority whose experiences don't chime with or mesh with most others. As much as I know I often seem an outlier and a rebel on these boards, I find it hard to go against the cultural grain, hard to enter into dialogue with an entrenched system that goes against my about what my daughter needs. It's exhausting. I'm grateful for those of you who have made me feel less alone in this. Edited to add: I guess what I'm imagining is an ideal world in which it wouldn't matter if dd spent months living in the world of a book -- although she doesn't do this for so long anymore -- and internalizing it, wouldn't matter that she didn't write a formal paper if she came to some of the same mental ends in her own way. Neither would it matter -- i.e. be "wrong" in some way or problematic -- if she read three hundred books and spent her time mentally comparing and contrasting them in terms of diction, characters, plot, visual adaptations, spinoffs, etc. without spending detailed time formally analyzing a single one. It wouldn't be the least bit problematic if she learned biology with a textbook, expending only minimal time, doing no labs; if she did biology exclusively through labs; if she read real books off the bookstore or library shelves rather than a textbook; if she skipped biology entirely to focus on four years of physics, with only the most glancing acquaintance with biology at this point in her life. What's anxiety-inducing in me is the way that our pedagogical culture at large, and colleges specifically, insist that proper learning needs to include these particular subjects (often in what year) learned in this particular way, every course needs to be "rigorous" as THEY define it and this is the only way that a student can show capability of handling college level work, etc. I'm somewhat less anxious because dd does test very well; but I'm resentful that this matters more than a whole lot of other aspects of education, including this particular kid's ability to responsibly plan, shape, and pursue her own educational ideals. It's bizarre how much emphasis there always is on colleges wanting "leaders," but not educational "rebels" or those who prefer to go their own way. And now, ta da, end of this. Edited August 9, 2011 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LanaTron Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 We'd probably study the same stuff, and use predominately the same materials, but in a more relaxed timespan, more like before they hit high school. The biggest change for us has been feeling like the "credit" has to be earned on academic year...before high school, I really didn't care if it took us 1 year to finish a resource/curriculum (like the 7 years we took on SOTW 1-4). Now, I feel a lot of pressure to help my dc produce a certain number of credits before they graduate. Also, I would not keep grades! I might grade things, just so they get an idea of how their doing, but I would not worry about a transcript, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Susan C. Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I REALLY wanted both dc to be able to try different types of jobs in high school (like Rosie said) so they could have an idea of what they want to do for careers. But alas, all of these requirements, with too much information to digest, it is just crammed into short term memory and forgotten. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mom22ns Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 I have to admit my knee jerk reaction to this thread and my ideas after giving it some thought are quite different. Knee jerk reaction: I would change... ! I would drop... ! But the more I thought about it, the less I could find to change or drop. The classes my kids are taking are those I think are needed to be a well educated and well rounded person. I would be bolder in using a few less standard teaching methods. For example I've been considering Caveman Chemistry for my non-science guy, but I feel I have to supplement it. If I was nog aiming at testing or thinking of college prep, I would just let him do Caveman Chemistry as enough of an overview to the subject to make my standard of a well educated person. There are other areas that are similar. We would not have history tests or grades only reading and discussions. Most of what we learn and how we learn it would not really change though. I am already trying to make sure my kids learn in a way that fits them and learn what interests them most. Those are two of the big reasons we homeschool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colleen in NS Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 (edited) I've got a question that is really a kind of thought experiment, not a philosophy or an approach I'm promoting or anything like that. Here goes: If you didn't have to worry at all about fulfilling college admissions requirements or high school graduation requirements, what might your student's life look like? My oldest isn't in high school yet, but I do have a general plan for then, and his prep for it is going pretty well. So anyway, what might it look like. I think I'd keep most things the same. The only thing that immediately comes to mind that would be a relief to me to drop would be standardized test prep, such as for the SAT. That way my kids could spend time practicing reading/discussing/analyzing/writing/experimenting/mathematical skills, instead of worrying about catering to a test. What would you encourage him or her to do that you feel you can't spend time on, or can't afford to do because it's not appropriately textbooky or "rigorous," If my kids want to do something that is "non-textbooky" or "non-rigourous," they are more than welcome to do so (and they do so, all the time). They have plenty of time to pursue their interests in addition to my schooling requirements of them, and I intend for this to continue through high school. What would you say your student wouldn't have to bother about any more? Test prep. How would your teaching style change? Would you still teach at all, and if you would, would you still teach the same kinds of things? Yes, I'd still teach, and I'd still teach the same kinds of things (certain academic skills, certain pathways through content areas). I think what we learn together provides for a fuller life throughout life, and more opportunities (not talking about just jobs) in the future. Would you have exams and grades? No, not if it didn't matter for university admissions. I would just make sure each student mastered a set of skills before moving on to the next set. And I'd make sure the student was reading fairly systematically through content material, while also picking and choosing topics of interest for them to delve deeper into. To what end? Would your child's relationship to the curriculum change at all, in that you'd let a child have more say, or would you as the parent still control most or all of what went on during school hours? I have some basic ideas about what materials I want my kids to study in high school (mostly in the skills areas), but I would open up the content areas for more student input. In fact, I already do that. For example, though my kids might read systematically through Kingfisher as a very basic history overview, they get to choose the supplemental library book from which to practice outlining. I plan to continue to give them this freedom as they advance in their skills learning, as I believe having them practice skills on material of interest to them is essential to their learning the skill. I might give them choices in their science and history spines - for example: "Here are three physics spines I've researched. You can choose which one to use for the year - which one do you want to use, and why?" I will definitely give them choices from each year's literature list. I'm truly interested in what people think. Interesting thought experiment - glad you asked! What's anxiety-inducing in me is the way that our pedagogical culture at large, and colleges specifically, insist that proper learning needs to include these particular subjects (often in what year) learned in this particular way, every course needs to be "rigorous" as THEY define it and this is the only way that a student can show capability of handling college level work, etc. I'm somewhat less anxious because dd does test very well; but I'm resentful that this matters more than a whole lot of other aspects of education, including this particular kid's ability to responsibly plan, shape, and pursue her own educational ideals. It's bizarre how much emphasis there always is on colleges wanting "leaders," but not educational "rebels" or those who prefer to go their own way. Note the recurrent theme of parental worry here... I think (but maybe I'm presuming too much based on my own case) other parents of kids who think, process, or work differently would find a lot of relief in being able to let their kids follow their leanings, learn in the way that suits them best without worrying about official or preferred output, enjoy letting their kids explore and investigate without feeling the need to pull them back to a particular syllabus as dictated by a textbook or standard syllabus. I let dd do a lot of things in the way that she finds most effective and most engaging, but unlike your dd, regentrude, this does not necessarily line up with conventional academic materials and content. And although I passionately believe in dd's ability to drive her own learning, I just worry a lot because it is often quite different from the norms. I'd really, REALLY like to leave that anxiety behind. Didn't you post one time (maybe on the out-of-the-box thread, but I can't remember) about colleges/universities that would fit your dd? Could starting to investigate those with her relieve some of your anxiety? ETA: I found some of your quotes I remembered reading - maybe they'll help relieve you right now, as they probably helped relieve others when you wrote them: Of course some colleges are still homeschooler-reluctant...but not all are like this. There are colleges out there that will be interested in the ways your son learns.... By the way, this can even include science and engineering schools; I recently read an article in which MIT professors lamented the loss of applicants who spent their high school years taking things apart and building things. ...it is also possible to find a great number of colleges, including the University of California, which structure their writing programs quite differently. They may introduce freshmen to the written conventions of different academic disciplines; literary studies may or may not be part of that. They may focus on persuasive essays in which analyzing literature has no part (but which may still incorporate rhetorical analysis of non-fiction or non-literary texts, which is why I mentioned rhetorical analysis in a larger sense in my original post). Our local branch of the UC system has six or seven different smaller colleges within its overarching governance; each has designed a completely different writing program. If you’ve got an aspiring engineer on your hands, you can easily find colleges in which your child will not have to sweat through a technical literary analysis in which he or she has no interest or finds baffling or incredibly difficult (as many Aspies do, for instance). If you have a child who excels in or loves literary analysis, you can find that too. Both will be completely acceptable for academic purposes; one or the other may best serve your individual child in preparing for the future. 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... Some colleges ... allow kids to create their own majors, design their own classes, pursue work outside of the classroom, show their learning in other forms than timed tests or written essays exclusively. Some of these colleges are very well regarded. Some are now establishing enormous, ambitious programs to help kids on the spectrum. So do different colleges work differently, require or look for different things in students, including types of exams or "output" -- this doesn't necessarily mean less "rigor." Finnish medical schools, for instance, have entrance exams based on reading and evaluating articles in medical journals; US schools give standardized, computerized exams. Each favors a different type of applicant. Some colleges require oral as well as written essay exams for graduation, while others do not. Some encourage or even require portfolios, internships, travel; others require coursework and exams exclusively. Big state schools are probably more bureaucratic and thus tend to be more rigid than smaller colleges -- at least, that is the case in my city. Edited August 10, 2011 by Colleen in NS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 (edited) People always think it's funny when I tell them that my daughter--who went away to college at age 12--"isn't really an academic." But it's true. Only after a couple of years of college did she figure out that she loves learning but hates school. I've been thinking about your daughter, Jenny, and I wonder if you wouldn't mind sharing: at what age did you realize that her wiring for learning was different? Was she always interested in/focused on theater, or did she have a number of different interests? To what extent did you radically adjust or change what you expected homeschooling would be like to fit her unique qualities? Also wondering, on a different level entirely, whether those of you who are very happy with what you are doing and don't believe you would change a single thing: would you, were high school graduation requirements and/or college admissions and merit scholarship issues out of the picture, still give grades? And if you would, what would be your reason? If it's for kids to get a sense of how they're doing, would discussion or a narrative evaluation do the trick or would you still use percentages or letter grades? Would you still use standardized tests to compare your kids to others' performance or to see how they measure up to national norms, even when/if your classical curriculum does not match up with the public school curricula on which many tests are based? Grades and testing have come up a few times as something a few people would like to get away from, so I'm just wondering. Edited August 10, 2011 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KAR120C Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 Also wondering, on a different level entirely, whether those of you who are very happy with what you are doing and don't believe you would change a single thing: would you, were high school graduation requirements and/or college admissions and merit scholarship issues out of the picture, still give grades? And if you would, what would be your reason? If it's for kids to get a sense of how they're doing, would discussion or a narrative evaluation do the trick or would you still use percentages or letter grades? Would you still use standardized tests to compare your kids to others' performance or to see how they measure up to national norms, even when/if your classical curriculum does not match up with the public school curricula on which many tests are based? Grades and testing have come up a few times as something a few people would like to get away from, so I'm just wondering. I don't grade every single thing -- homework, for instance, is checked and corrected but not given a grade in that sense... But everything we do has a big project or paper or something to go with it, and that would still get a grade. It's just a means for me to say "this met the requirements of the assignment" or "this exceeded the requirements of the assignment" or whatever. It doesn't bother DS at all, and it's a nice quick-and-dirty summary of how I judged it. We discuss too of course, but the grade sums it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renee in NC Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 (edited) Honestly? I don't have to meet college requirements or graduation requirements. No one makes you and your dc will not be forever ruined if you don't jump through the hoops. It's taken me a long time to get to where I can say that, but I realize it is true. There are so many paths to life that I won't focus my attention on just one. My 13yo *hates* anything resembling academics. HATES it! So much so that he has stagnated and won't move forward. He reads on a 5th/6th grade level, does math about the same place, and couldn't care less about history or latin or any other academic subject. His passion? Motors. He is currently planning his first total rebuild on a 1973 K-5 Blazer. He fixes things, he *uses* math everyday at a much higher level than where he can compute on paper. The kid is amazing. He doesn't fit that mold, though, and I have decided to quit trying to force it. I think he would make a great engineer and if he decides that is what he wants in the future, then he will go to cc and make it happen. If not? Then he will be the best mechanic out there because he is brilliant when it comes to that sort of thing! I do live in NC, though, where there are no requirements for a high school diploma if you are homeschooled - I get to decide what "graduated" means. I just want him to be able to pass the placement test at the cc and get into the Ford ASSET program - he'll do whatever that takes.;) (BTW, he does do Barton Reading and Spelling willingly even though he hates it because he can tell it is helping, so he is willing to work at things he doesn't like if he sees a purpose.) My 10yo and 8yo have severe LDs, so their future is also very different. There will be a lot less trauma in their education simply because my view is different for them than it was my 13yo. I started homeschooling because I wanted the best for my dc, but now I see *my* best isn't the best for them. My 8yo still struggles with English (speaking/understanding), he doesn't read at all, and can't make connections. How could he possibly benefit from traditional education? I love the idea of classical, rigorous education, but what do you do when life hands you something different? It never crossed my mind that I would have kids with LDs and I assumed they would all be like me. So far, only my 7yo is the academic type and her education will fit her abilities.;) I hope our new way gives them more room to explore what is important to them. I am not an unschooler by any means, but I am seeing that the greatest benefit to homeschooling is the ability to individualize the child's education and I can't do that if I am worried about someone else's hoops. Edited August 10, 2011 by Renee in FL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renee in NC Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 One more thing - nontraditional students to get into colleges. Private schools are more open to students who travel a different path, but it does happen. It's all in the packaging and marketing.;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane in NC Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 I've been thinking about your daughter, Jenny, and I wonder if you wouldn't mind sharing: at what age did you realize that her wiring for learning was different? Was she always interested in/focused on theater, or did she have a number of different interests? To what extent did you radically adjust or change what you expected homeschooling would be like to fit her unique qualities? Also wondering, on a different level entirely, whether those of you who are very happy with what you are doing and don't believe you would change a single thing: would you, were high school graduation requirements and/or college admissions and merit scholarship issues out of the picture, still give grades? A question and a comment arise from this post. Individuals all have their own unique learning styles. Don't most of us as homeschoolers regularly evaluate what works, what doesn't? Don't most of us adapt to our students interests? To say that something is different implies that there is a norm. And I ask this sincerely: is there truly a learning style that is "normal"? Secondly, my son's transcripts had grades in some courses, P for pass in others. But I did not give letter grades or percentages on everything he did. Classroom teachers develop rubrics for standardization. Do homeschoolers do this? For example, I read my son's Latin translations, but did not correct his daily math work. Grades on dscussions? Nope. I think it is possible to give course grades without petty accounting of every bit of daily work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renee in NC Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 A question and a comment arise from this post. Individuals all have their own unique learning styles. Don't most of us as homeschoolers regularly evaluate what works, what doesn't? Don't most of us adapt to our students interests? To say that something is different implies that there is a norm. And I ask this sincerely: is there truly a learning style that is "normal"? Secondly, my son's transcripts had grades in some courses, P for pass in others. But I did not give letter grades or percentages on everything he did. Classroom teachers develop rubrics for standardization. Do homeschoolers do this? For example, I read my son's Latin translations, but did not correct his daily math work. Grades on dscussions? Nope. I think it is possible to give course grades without petty accounting of every bit of daily work. I think she is asking about more than simple learning style differences - there is a difference between a neurotypical student and one "wired" differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingiguana Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 We'd skip the ACT and PSAT and things of that ilk. Otherwise, I wouldn't change much. But I already don't give grades or tests. When my oldest applied to college, I did put grades on her transcript, but they were based on my knowledge of what she knew rather than tests I'd given her. (But I've taught a lot, so I may have reached that phase of just "knowing" when material is mastered.) But I wouldn't change much of what we cover. I see high school as a time to get a broad overview of things, and I'd hate to skimp on an area because my kids find it boring. If they find it boring, we try to find some other way to cover the material. For the most part, "boring" means the curriculum/book isn't very good. High school is also a time to build up skills in reading and math (and writing, if you can get your kids to do that, although I have at times despaired of this). Whether they go to college or not, these skills are useful. And if they do go to college, those are the basics that they really need. Other things they can fill in as they go. On the other hand, when I was in high school, about all I did was reading, writing, and math. I didn't learn to work with my hands or draw or even play an instrument very well. And those are also useful/enjoyable life skills. If my kids find those things fascinating, why shouldn't they spend time on getting better at them? I wish I had. And although colleges put out lists of things they expect every kid to cover in high school, they really do let in kids who have gaps in that list. Even if your child is wanting to go into science, they could actually get away with doing no formal science in high school and do just fine in college. A good grounding in math is much more important. As I've got one doing well in college now who followed this sort of do what you want approach (except that I made her do math), I'm a lot less uptight about this sort of thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane in NC Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 I think she is asking about more than simple learning style differences - there is a difference between a neurotypical student and one "wired" differently. OK--I do not recall Jenny decribing her daughter as a non-neurotypical student. My mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenny in Florida Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 I've been thinking about your daughter, Jenny, and I wonder if you wouldn't mind sharing: at what age did you realize that her wiring for learning was different? Was she always interested in/focused on theater, or did she have a number of different interests? To what extent did you radically adjust or change what you expected homeschooling would be like to fit her unique qualities? We knew she was different from fairly early on. I remember reading those "What to Expect" books when she was little and wondering who wrote those things. I used to have to flip ahead by months to find things that described what she was doing. Eventually, my husband and I decided that the authors of those books must have been understating things so that parents didn't worry. Even so, though, I don't think we really understood how different she was until the day I was reading Siddhartha aloud with her. She was about eight, I think, and I was stopping every now and then to ask comprehension questions, just to make sure she was following the story. I had printed out some discussion questions from a college syllabus I found online. And every time I asked her one of those sort of leading questions, she'd answer off the top of her head while looking at me a little quizically, as though she wondered why I didn't already know that. It was, honestly, a little weird. We kept wondering whether it would be helpful to have her IQ tested, but we really didn't have the money at that point to do it without a pressing reason. I called the local school district, who told me they would test her only if we promised she was going to enroll in school. We finally decided that, if we were going to do this, we wanted to have the best possible chance of getting the most meaningful results. I knew there were complications trying to get reliable results with highly/profoundly gifted kids. So, in order to get a sense of what we were dealing with--whether we really needed to worry about getting an expert to do the formal testing--I bought a book of do-it-yourself IQ tests. (I know now and knew then that this was silly. But it seemed at the time like as good a place to start as any.) So, I gave her the first test. She got through it quickly. I sat down to score it and discovered that the chart given in the back for her age did not go up high enough to cover the number of questions she got right. I had to jump to the chart for kids two or three years older. And even then, she was in the top category. I called my husband at work, just slightly hysterical. He suggested I wait a day or two and then give her the other version of the test. The first one was multiple choice, but the second required writing in the answers. So, we figured it would be tougher for her. But, of course, it didn't change the results at all. Those two events happened within a few months of each other. And I think it was about that time that we started to actually grasp what kind of kid we had on our hands. I started doing a lot more research, and we started doing more radical adjusting in her schoolwork at home. But it's possible we had just been in denial until then. The funny thing is that a few years later, I found that IQ test book in a stack of old stuff. I gave our son the same tests and, on one of them, he actually scored a little higher than his big sister. By that time, though, I was more prepared to accept it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 OK--I do not recall Jenny decribing her daughter as a non-neurotypical student. My mistake. She actually did say both her daughter and her husband were "wired differently." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 Even so, though, I don't think we really understood how different she was until the day I was reading Siddhartha aloud with her. She was about eight, I think, and I was stopping every now and then to ask comprehension questions, just to make sure she was following the story. I had printed out some discussion questions from a college syllabus I found online. And every time I asked her one of those sort of leading questions, she'd answer off the top of her head while looking at me a little quizically, as though she wondered why I didn't already know that. So why did you choose Siddhartha to read to her? I've picked some pretty unusual things to read to dd too, but it never occurred to me -- possibly because of my own difficulty with texts like this -- to try adult philosophy. Did she like to have philosophical conversations? Was she asking lots of questions about the meaning of life or things like that? Did you just intuitively think this might catch her interest? Was there a point at which you let her be in charge of choosing materials for "school," or was she fine with what you chose the whole way through? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 His passion? Motors. He is currently planning his first total rebuild on a 1973 K-5 Blazer. He fixes things, he *uses* math everyday at a much higher level than where he can compute on paper. The kid is amazing. He doesn't fit that mold, though, and I have decided to quit trying to force it. I think he would make a great engineer and if he decides that is what he wants in the future, then he will go to cc and make it happen. If not? Then he will be the best mechanic out there because he is brilliant when it comes to that sort of thing! This is wonderful. I remember reading a passage in TWTM that has stuck with me for some reason, which claimed that a kid would be "a better mechanic" with a classical education because that would have taught him how to think critically about a problem, deal with customers, prioritize... and I just sat there unable to comprehend how this might be so (much as I think highly of SWB in a myriad of other ways; this is not a WTM bash). It was just that one passage, but I remember thinking, I don't know, all things considered, I really want to take my car to a person who has been obsessed with engines and car parts and has spent enormous amounts of time taking them apart, putting them back together, and otherwise thinking about how and why they work: in other words, a person just like your son. 'm not yet at the point -- obviously -- where I can just go on with what suits dd best without having spasms of anxiety periodically, which explains threads like this one. But I'm so happy to see someone who has reached that point and is completely and utterly at ease with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tullia Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 I've got a question that is really a kind of thought experiment, not a philosophy or an approach I'm promoting or anything like that. Here goes: If you didn't have to worry at all about fulfilling college admissions requirements or high school graduation requirements, what might your student's life look like? Probably not all that different. Most of the changes I'd make, given the circumstances you describe, would be minor and probably have more to do with how I'd document the work that the work itself, if that makes sense. What would you encourage him or her to do that you feel you can't spend time on, or can't afford to do because it's not appropriately textbooky or "rigorous," or because too much time is already spent on core classes and your kid has just had it with academics after required classes? I'd work harder to allow more time for music. That ended up being called an elective on my son's transcript which doesn't do justice to its importance in his life. I've used music as an example, but this could include a variety of pursuits depending on individual interests. What would you say your student wouldn't have to bother about any more? Test prep, although for my son the time spent was minimal. How would your teaching style change? Would you still teach at all, and if you would, would you still teach the same kinds of things? I don't think my style would change, but I prefer discussion to teaching. I'd generally include the same kinds of things. Would you have exams and grades? To what end? Would your child's relationship to the curriculum change at all, in that you'd let a child have more say, or would you as the parent still control most or all of what went on during school hours? I'd still use exams and grades; mostly for deciding whether or not a student was ready to study in greater depth or perhaps change direction. The level of input from the student would depend on the student's maturity and interest doing so. This is just a thought experiment, and in the interests of keeping the thread a safe place to really think in some radically different ways I'd like to ask for comments to stay positive and exploratory: please no horrified criticisms of what others might propose. I'm truly interested in what people think. Interesting questions. College prep was not our primary goal, so I don't think I'd change all that much if I had it to do over. I do wish we'd spent more time on in-depth rhetorical work. I'd have expanded our one semester history of science course to include more epistemology--particularly with regard to evaluating research from the social and behavioral sciences. I regret not being able to do a better job with math either on my own or through outsourcing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 I do wish we'd spent more time on in-depth rhetorical work. I'd have expanded our one semester history of science course to include more epistemology--particularly with regard to evaluating research from the social and behavioral sciences. What kinds of things (materials, activities, topics of discussion) are you thinking of with regard to these? Dh is a professor of chemistry who publishes a lot of research, so we have occasional dinner table conversations about this kind of thing; and we own a couple of trade books about it. But I'm interested that you single out social and behavioral sciences -- psychology and sociology?? -- and I'd like to hear more about your thinking. My best friend has a doctorate in sociology and the two of us have talked a lot about the problematics of research studies, but it didn't occur to me to bring this up with dd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colleen in NS Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 (edited) Also wondering, on a different level entirely, whether those of you who are very happy with what you are doing and don't believe you would change a single thing: would you, were high school graduation requirements and/or college admissions and merit scholarship issues out of the picture, still give grades? At this point, I can't think of any reason why I would (but I'm open to hearing reasons to do so). Would you still use standardized tests to compare your kids to others' performance or to see how they measure up to national norms, even when/if your classical curriculum does not match up with the public school curricula on which many tests are based? I'm actually considering doing this with ds near the end of his upcoming Grade 8 year, for precisely the reason you mentioned. It's purely because of curiosity on our part, not to report to anyone. I remember reading a passage in TWTM that has stuck with me for some reason, which claimed that a kid would be "a better mechanic" with a classical education because that would have taught him how to think critically about a problem, deal with customers, prioritize... and I just sat there unable to comprehend how this might be so (much as I think highly of SWB in a myriad of other ways; this is not a WTM bash). It was just that one passage, but I remember thinking, I don't know, all things considered, I really want to take my car to a person who has been obsessed with engines and car parts and has spent enormous amounts of time taking them apart, putting them back together, and otherwise thinking about how and why they work... (not talking about Renee's son here, just hypothesizing in general) I think a classical education could only serve to add to this hypothetical mechanic's life, rather than detract from it. The mechanic who is obsessed with engines/etc. will know how they work, yes. I think that a mechanic who has also had formal training in physics and chemistry may also have a leg up on the other one, because if he/she runs into a problem, he/she may be able to reach back into his/her physics/chemistry training and come up with a solution that might not require a few hours of fiddling around with the engine. Spending enormous amounts of time obsessing over engines is a great learning tool when growing up, but consider this: If you took your car to your hypothetical mechanic who charges $60/hour for labour, and he can't find the problem right away and needs to spend hours and hours finding the problem (which he probably will eventually discover since he is so experienced in taking engines apart). Would you want to pay for his time to do that? Or would you rather pay for fewer labour hours by the mechanic who was physics/chemistry trained *in addition* to obsessing over engines? Of course, maybe the physics/chem mechanic might charge more for labour, but he/she just might finish the job well in far less time, resulting in less cost to you in the end. As a very simplistic personal example - through my years of mothering, I've gradually come to think that a decent education in high school biology might have helped me with things like sicknesses and injuries in my children. VERY often, esp. when they were younger, I have panicked about some illness or injury, where other mothers don't seem to. And it's because I don't know enough biology background to be able to intelligently evaluate "Is this something I need to go to the ER for??" Oh, sure, people always say, "go by mother's instinct - take them in if you feel it necessary!" and I do. But I often wish I had some more *knowledge* about basic biology. I can read self-help medical references, and they are helpful. But they are specialized for parents, and often on the popular market they are written briefly as a bridge between home and hospital. A biology background would help me to even evaluate the advice in those books better. It would help me in my practical job of mothering, just as I think physics and chemistry would only add to a mechanic's effectiveness on the job. So I guess this ties in with your very first question: what would my student's life look like if I didn't have to jump through hoops - in addition to what I already answered about that, I'd also say that I would make sure the materials I used would be efficient for deeply learning (for example) those sciences. Rather than using something that used mainly comprehension questions (which is what I had in high school), I'd be looking for something that caused the student to think and experiment a lot (even if it also had comprehension questions). Hope that all makes sense. Edited August 10, 2011 by Colleen in NS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenny in Florida Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 So why did you choose Siddhartha to read to her? I've picked some pretty unusual things to read to dd too, but it never occurred to me -- possibly because of my own difficulty with texts like this -- to try adult philosophy. Did she like to have philosophical conversations? Was she asking lots of questions about the meaning of life or things like that? Did you just intuitively think this might catch her interest? Was there a point at which you let her be in charge of choosing materials for "school," or was she fine with what you chose the whole way through? She was fascinated by Buddhism. I looked and looked for a good kid-friendly book. I asked our minister (who was a Buddhist). But we never could find anything right. Finally, someone said, jokingly, "Well, you could always just read her Siddhartha." When we struck out on other fronts, we decided to give it a try. She loved it, by the way. And, yes, she did and does love philosophical discussions. Homeschooling was pretty much always a cooperative venture. Although I set goals and made lesson plans, I always consulted her about materials and reading. For the first few years, this usually meant going to the bookstore and sitting on the floor in front of the workbook section and helping her choose something for each subject. By the last year before she left for school, it meant making a preliminary list of possible materials and going over it with her before choosing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renee in NC Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 I think a classical education could only serve to add to this hypothetical mechanic's life, rather than detract from it. The mechanic who is obsessed with engines/etc. will know how they work, yes. I think that a mechanic who has also had formal training in physics and chemistry may also have a leg up on the other one, because if he/she runs into a problem, he/she may be able to reach back into his/her physics/chemistry training and come up with a solution that might not require a few hours of fiddling around with the engine. Spending enormous amounts of time obsessing over engines is a great learning tool when growing up, but consider this: If you took your car to your hypothetical mechanic who charges $60/hour for labour, and he can't find the problem right away and needs to spend hours and hours finding the problem (which he probably will eventually discover since he is so experienced in taking engines apart). Would you want to pay for his time to do that? Or would you rather pay for fewer labour hours by the mechanic who was physics/chemistry trained *in addition* to obsessing over engines? Of course, maybe the physics/chem mechanic might charge more for labour, but he/she just might finish the job well in far less time, resulting in less cost to you in the end. As a very simplistic personal example - through my years of mothering, I've gradually come to think that a decent education in high school biology might have helped me with things like sicknesses and injuries in my children. VERY often, esp. when they were younger, I have panicked about some illness or injury, where other mothers don't seem to. And it's because I don't know enough biology background to be able to intelligently evaluate "Is this something I need to go to the ER for??" Oh, sure, people always say, "go by mother's instinct - take them in if you feel it necessary!" and I do. But I often wish I had some more *knowledge* about basic biology. I can read self-help medical references, and they are helpful. But they are specialized for parents, and often on the popular market they are written briefly as a bridge between home and hospital. A biology background would help me to even evaluate the advice in those books better. It would help me in my practical job of mothering, just as I think physics and chemistry would only add to a mechanic's effectiveness on the job. So I guess this ties in with your very first question: what would my student's life look like if I didn't have to jump through hoops - in addition to what I already answered about that, I'd also say that I would make sure the materials I used would be efficient for deeply learning (for example) those sciences. Rather than using something that used mainly comprehension questions (which is what I had in high school), I'd be looking for something that caused the student to think and experiment a lot (even if it also had comprehension questions). Hope that all makes sense. My ds is dyslexic and pretty much refuses to learn anything out of a book. I figured out today that he has basically made no progress academically in the past 3 years. You cannot force a child to learn what he doesn't find important. He knows physics in a fundamental way that someone who learned it from a book will never know. I am learning to accept him for who he is and always has been instead of who I tried to make him be. Will he ever learn theoretical physics? Only if he decides he needs it for something.:glare:;) It's kind of like my Dad who knew how to use the Pythagorum Theorum even though he had no idea what it was called or what the formula was. He knew because he used it to square things in construction. He never formally studied Geometry but he *knows* Geometry! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enough Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 I've got a question that is really a kind of thought experiment, not a philosophy or an approach I'm promoting or anything like that. Here goes: If you didn't have to worry at all about fulfilling college admissions requirements or high school graduation requirements, what might your student's life look like? What would you encourage him or her to do that you feel you can't spend time on, or can't afford to do because it's not appropriately textbooky or "rigorous," or because too much time is already spent on core classes and your kid has just had it with academics after required classes? What would you say your student wouldn't have to bother about any more? How would your teaching style change? Would you still teach at all, and if you would, would you still teach the same kinds of things? Would you have exams and grades? To what end? Would your child's relationship to the curriculum change at all, in that you'd let a child have more say, or would you as the parent still control most or all of what went on during school hours? This is just a thought experiment, and in the interests of keeping the thread a safe place to really think in some radically different ways I'd like to ask for comments to stay positive and exploratory: please no horrified criticisms of what others might propose. I'm truly interested in what people think. In an ideal world I would be a strewing unschooler with a heavy dose of CM nature study. In the world I inhabit at the moment, I am a fairly rigorous classical homeschooler. Definitely, worry/fear about admission into college plays a HUGE role in why I'm schooling this way. I value basic skills (and mastery of these skills) and core/canon immensely, but if college admission were no worry I would try to incorporate these more organically into our learning rather than forcing them in at mandated ages/stages via a standard curriculum. I would incorporate a lot -TONS- more time outdoors/in wild nature, every single day. This thread is making me uncomfortable- in a good way. ;) It's making me wonder why I'm making the choices I am (my child is still fairly young- 8- and although he has some moderate to severe sensory processing issues, so far has done well with traditional curricula) and if it's "okay" to make an unconventional choice even if your kid isn't wired differently. What if you DO have the choice about how you can teach your kid- is it possible to love TWTM and still choose a more unschool-y/child-led/organic path? I had a similar thought reading the thread a few months ago about the family that had the incredibly awesome opportunity to live abroad/no access to curriculum. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.