s/o do you aspire to, or believe you are doing, "school at home"

[Penelope]

Recent comments on another thread really surprised me.

 

I use curriculum but I don't feel what happens in my home is anything close to "school at home". I don't have a tight schedule, but even if I did, there would still be plenty of room left for rabbit trails and students having choices in learning. There is room for projects and youtube trails and history and science DVDs of their interest, even though these are not the foundation of our learning.

 

Are there that many home schools that are attempting to replicate a school at home? Maybe I'm naive. I just assume most homeschoolers are not completely tied to a schedule, but try to be flexible and grow with their children. Just because we have curriculum listed in sigs doesn't mean we all just do the next thing, all of the time. Even SWB talks about flexibility and adapting for different children in her talks.

 

:bigear:

[SorrelZG]

I don't know about a total replication but I know a couple of families that basically just "do the next thing". I don't know most homeschoolers. I kind of presumed they were like us but plenty aren't. I get excited to meet ones who are.

[NorCalMom]

We have a daily checklist of subjects to be completed, but we're not locked into a rigid schedule. If we take off in a different direction for the day we just adjust the following days to catch up here and there. As long as we've covered the material for the week, I don't care how we get there. This provides the flexibility to cover any child-led interests.

 

ETA: We do have a dedicated school room, yet I wouldn't call it replicating the classroom. It's our room to facilitate and organize all of our learning tools.

Edited September 30, 2011 by cowgirl

[angela in ohio]

I think having a schedule doesn't make one a school at home. It seems like everyone picks the one thing they don't do and labels it "school at home." :lol: Some would say anyone who uses textbooks, some would say anyone with a dedicated room for schooling, etc.

 

Scheduling or not is a matter of personality differences and finding what works for each individual family. That is the beauty of homeschooling. We don't keep a strict schedule, but that's because my dc and I work well without one. Otherwise, I would use one and never, ever consider that it made me a "school at home."

 

I have know just a tiny number of homeschoolers who really were doing "school at home." They had up seasonal bulletin boards, they rang a bell, they had hall passes for the restroom, etc. They usually have early childhood teaching degrees for some reason. :D BUT.... if that made them happy, who cares? Some kiddos thrive on that.

[Mimm]

I'm not sure what thread you're talking about but I have seen people react negatively to the idea that they are doing school at home. And I guess I don't really understand that but it probably has to do with many people having a rigid idea about what "school" is.

 

My understanding is that yes, we do school at home. We have a schedule that we kind of follow, we have subjects, worksheets, books, tests, pencils and crayons and glue, but not grades, bells or uniforms. We sit at our desks, or at the table, the couches, the floor, or we go outside. To me, this is school. It doesn't look exactly like a typical American public school classroom but since when does that define what exactly "school" looks like? School looks different in other countries but it's not any less school. There are even experimental and alternative schools here where things are very different, but it's still school.

 

So just because our school looks different, it's still school. :)

[WeeBeaks]

It really depends on how you are defining "school at home"? Do you mean textbooks, schedules, what?

 

Yes, we schedule. I set a framework each year for each subject. We may deviate some, and I remain flexible on totally scrapping something that is a total bust here with the kids.

 

We use "textbooks" for math and LA (Singapore and WWE/FLL respectively) along with Spelling Workout.

 

We use more living books for history and science. I don't use "textbooks" really for those, unless you are considering SOTW a textbook.

 

"Worksheets" occasionally, often when requested by my son, usually involving some kind of picture or activity to glue into his notebook. I got Teacher's Filebox this year (Evan-Moor) and he likes their history and science stuff. He also loves me to get him science diagrams to color and fill in. I do that when asked.

[TracyP]

I would never want to be accused of doing school at home. The reason for this is because, to me, "school at home" means making scheduling, curric, teaching choices w/o the individual student in mind. This is what schools do and this is what I want to avoid.

 

Many hs'ers buy 3rd Grade Abeka (for example) and call it good. I think that is rare in the WTM community but I think it is quite common in the rest of the hs community. It's a personal decision and I try not to be judgemental but "school at home" is not for me.

 

As an aside, I heard of someone putting a jacket on their dc, sending them outside, then calling them in to start school. :lol: I find this hilarious but still not what I think of when I think of "school at home".

[Rivka]

This is where I make my big confession...

 

...I bought my daughter a couple of school uniform skirts the last time I hit the thrift store. :blushing:

 

In my defense, she absolutely refuses to wear pants, and these sturdy khaki skirts with built-in shorts are the closest possible dress equivalent to jeans. She has decided that the pleats make them feminine enough. But yeah. There are the people who homeschool in their pajamas, and then there's my kid in her school uniform skirt.

[NorCalMom]

This is where I make my big confession...

 

...I bought my daughter a couple of school uniform skirts the last time I hit the thrift store. :blushing:

 

In my defense, she absolutely refuses to wear pants, and these sturdy khaki skirts with built-in shorts are the closest possible dress equivalent to jeans. She has decided that the pleats make them feminine enough. But yeah. There are the people who homeschool in their pajamas, and then there's my kid in her school uniform skirt.

 

:smilielol5: Love it!

[LittleIzumi]

We have a daily checklist of subjects to be completed, but we're not locked into a rigid schedule. If we take off in a different direction for the day we just adjust the following days to catch up here and there. As long as we've covered the material for the week, I don't care how we get there. This provides the flexibility to cover any child-led interests.

 

:iagree:

[zenjenn]

We school at home, but not the kind of school that's public and down the street. :) I think in many ways we do try to replicate what schools have been historically, in our home, with some modern twists like utilizing technology and the very liberal use of paper!

[Poke Salad Annie]

This is where I make my big confession...

 

...I bought my daughter a couple of school uniform skirts the last time I hit the thrift store. :blushing:

 

In my defense, she absolutely refuses to wear pants, and these sturdy khaki skirts with built-in shorts are the closest possible dress equivalent to jeans. She has decided that the pleats make them feminine enough. But yeah. There are the people who homeschool in their pajamas, and then there's my kid in her school uniform skirt.

 

I personally think they are darling, and a +1 for you for finding them on sale at the thrift. (I love a good thrift store!) If this is her selection of what to wear, and she's happy, why not? I've mulled over the thought of those nice polo shirts for my little guy, and I'm not bothered that they're uniform shirts.

[mommymilkies]

I would never want to be accused of doing school at home. The reason for this is because, to me, "school at home" means making scheduling, curric, teaching choices w/o the individual student in mind. This is what schools do and this is what I want to avoid.

 

:iagree:

[Lang Syne Boardie]

(joining thread drift)

 

French Toast brand wears like cast iron! Some of the sweaters, polos, and khakis that I bought eight years ago (for a brief fling with private school) lasted through four children. Amazing.

[JudoMom]

I think having a schedule doesn't make one a school at home. It seems like everyone picks the one thing they don't do and labels it "school at home." :lol: Some would say anyone who uses textbooks, some would say anyone with a dedicated room for schooling, etc.

 

Scheduling or not is a matter of personality differences and finding what works for each individual family. That is the beauty of homeschooling. We don't keep a strict schedule, but that's because my dc and I work well without one. Otherwise, I would use one and never, ever consider that it made me a "school at home."

 

I have know just a tiny number of homeschoolers who really were doing "school at home." They had up seasonal bulletin boards, they rang a bell, they had hall passes for the restroom, etc. They usually have early childhood teaching degrees for some reason. :D BUT.... if that made them happy, who cares? Some kiddos thrive on that.

 

:iagree:

[mamakim]

I've always thought of that term as describing those who do the online programs with the public school teacher at the other end. A friend of mind did this, pulled her sons who were being bullied at public school. She had no desire to otherwise homeschool - just providing a safe environment for those two boys. So the program dictates the curriculum (K-12), the teacher at the other end of the computer makes assignments and corrects them. Parental input is still needed, of course, to explain stuff and make sure it is being done.

 

My friend was quite upfront saying "We school at home, we don't homeschool" but I HAVE met other parents who call themselves homeschoolers who are enrolled in that same program.

[In2why]

We do too much school at home! We only school Monday-Thursday, but when we are engaged in learning we are doing more scheduling, checklists, and do the next thing than I would like. I thought about this a couple of days ago and decided to use today and this weekend to think about my choices more. I feel basically comfortable in our learning, but this isn't what I imagined when I first imagined homeschooling.

[ElizaG]

I'm not sure what thread you're talking about but I have seen people react negatively to the idea that they are doing school at home. And I guess I don't really understand that but it probably has to do with many people having a rigid idea about what "school" is.

 

We school at home, but not the kind of school that's public and down the street. :) I think in many ways we do try to replicate what schools have been historically, in our home, with some modern twists like utilizing technology and the very liberal use of paper!

 

:iagree::iagree:

 

It seems as if many posters are using the word "school" as shorthand for "the worst aspects of the public schools in my neighborhood." Given that everyone on this board is supposed to share an interest in classical education, I'm not sure why there's so much emphasis on one's own local, present-day circumstances. It might be more helpful to take a longer and broader view. There have been, and still are, as many different kinds of schools as there are different cultures and educational theories.

 

Of course, looking at it from this perspective, people wouldn't be able to use "school at home" as an easy way to pigeonhole others who do things differently from them. But I don't think that would be such a shame.

[Beth in SW WA]

:iagree::iagree:

 

It seems as if many posters are using the word "school" as shorthand for "the worst aspects of the public schools in my neighborhood." Given that everyone on this board is supposed to share an interest in classical education, I'm not sure why there's so much emphasis on one's own local, present-day circumstances. It might be more helpful to take a longer and broader view. There have been, and still are, as many different kinds of schools as there are different cultures and educational theories.

 

Of course, looking at it from this perspective, people wouldn't be able to use "school at home" as an easy way to pigeonhole others who do things differently from them. But I don't think that would be such a shame.

 

:iagree:

 

Hi, Eleanor. :) We do hard & heavy academics here. I could be accused of being a school-at-home mom. We have a schedule/routine that we stick to. My dds thrive on structure. I guard our school hours like a hawk. We don't lay around in jammies and start at 10 am. We start when hubby leaves with big kids at 7:30. We finish around 3. We have long, rich days of learning and talking -- with breaks to play with our puppy, running around outside and coloring. Yes, I call it recess.

 

We work hard so we can play hard. School is school. Fun is fun. Sometimes they overlap. :)

[Mrs Twain]

It seems there are different meanings to "school at home."

 

Sometimes it seems that people accuse others of school at home if they are having their kids sit at a desk and do difficult work from a book. In the opinion of some, it is not "homeschool" unless the days are characterized by student interest-led activities including all manner of rabbit trails and field trips. While we are quite fond of rabbit trails and field trips, I also see the value of having the kids sit at a desk and doing difficult work for part of the school day. There is usefulness in teaching children how to "gut it out." This is a valuable skill to build, which I can attest to after going through a graduate school program. Anyone who has been through higher level education can tell you that you need a measure of toughness and ability to gut it out to be able to complete a dissertation or other advanced program of study. I don't think it is bad to have a time each day where the children are sitting at a table or at a desk, working hard on a "traditional" sort of assignment.

 

Another aspect of "school at home" that people often react negatively to is the scope and sequence. They don't like being tied down, preferring to chart their own course according to what they think is most important. Of course I think we all do that, at least to some extent. However, having a list of things to cover each year to ensure the children are learning basic and necessary skills is not in my mind a bad thing. I don't want to get to a point where I find my children have all sorts of gaps because of my pursuit of my own or their own interests to the neglect of standard education they should have gotten.

 

Sometimes I wonder if the people who criticize those of us of doing "school at home" are some of the same people who later bemoan the gaping holes they find in their kids' knowledge base, desperate to find some way of catching them up or remediating. I wonder if the people who think school should be mostly rabbit trails and field trips are some of the same ones who say their kids have never finished a math or grammar book in any of their years of homeschooling.

 

I am not against rabbit trails and field trips. I have a certain number of days included in my schedule for which we can take off on impromptu field trips. Some of the rabbit trails are often our most memorable educational moments. However, I put value in having a scope and sequence to cover for each grade, to make sure we have time sitting at the desks every day to gut through the difficult subjects, and giving the kids standardized tests every year to try to see if we have any significant gaps in the curriculum.

[Haiku]

We have a schedule, and we stick pretty well to it. That's my personality, and I don't do well trying to be free-wheeling. We use curricula. That's my personality; I don't do well trying to cobble my own stuff together (although I am winging modern history this year as I didn't want to use SOTW4).

 

It's not school at home. I am educating my kids at home, but school involves a teacher teaching a group of kids from a predetermined curriculum at a predetermined pace to meet predetermined, arbitrary standards so that the kids perform well on standardized tests. That's not what we do.

 

I tutor my kids and set my goals based on their individual progress, and I don't give a hoot about what is on, or not on, any standardized test.

 

Tara

[Dmmetler]

Well, my DD will happily tell you we do "school at home", and the more it looks like what she thinks school looks like for her friends, the happier she seems to be. Of course, her "School at home" includes a lot of dressing up stuffed animals and dolls in costumes to create "History pageants" and having "bring your pet to school day", where she then turns all her Singapore math word problems into animal-related versions and looks for animal poems to use for copywork. Teacher File box is my best friend this year :). And I suspect that if I could get her "Mount Parnassus Elementary School" hydra embroidered on a matching set of school uniform shirts for her and her American girl dolls with cute little khaki skorts, she'd be in absolute heaven (hmmmm....I may have just found her Christmas present :) ).

[justLisa]

Even the most "schooly" home school situation is faaaaar from public school. You could even try to avoid it but at home kids experience real life all day long. I think my kids are very prepared for life AND academics. In school they have to try to assign everything to a class/lesson.

 

My intention was to be very classical, and I do think we fit that somewhat. However I also enjoy that at 5 and 7 they have some free time in their little lives for things they enjoy doing. We learn Polish and music also, and they need a little abstract time to get into creative mode I notice. We do 2 chunks of time. Either math/seat work, then break, possible quick errand/outdoor play, whatever they want, lunch, etc. Then another chunk of more creative things such as art, literature, read alouds, art, music, Polish etc. Or the reverse. The blocks of time and what we do within them stay about the same, but sometimes they just wake up in a different mood and are eager to get going on something specific.

 

We also enjoy science much more now that I have found how to implement it more regularly but they don't really see this as part as the school day.

 

Sometimes I get a little self conscious when I read how unbelievably creative and ambitious some other kids are. I do not have notebooks full of great stories and my kids don't beg me for work LOL. Maybe to me sometimes it doesn't SEEM as schooly but i think I like that better. If you asked them a bunch of questions they could ramble on forever about things they know and are interested in. DS 7 can talk for hours about our living 75 gallon aquarium and the ecosystem and how it thrives in it's totality. And then he will go on about exactly what tools were needed and the process of drilling a hole in to the garage to pipe a sump pump to cycle the water, which then leads out to the garden......then he will go on about the gardening process. I do NOT have word of this on paper. I don't need to! Hands on experience here. I do not feel the need to have "proof on paper" for everything. They will learn to write well, have good math skills, read books etc. All in due time. For now I want them to see the benefit and enjoy the process. Sometimes whipping out the notebook and pencil just kills the interest. I would like them to be well rounded but most people have certain interests and skills that they build on and become an expert in a particular area. For this reason I like to see where they want to take things sometimes.

 

So, I guess we do school at home, but it's "our" school and I love it!

Edited September 30, 2011 by 425lisamarie

[5LittleMonkeys]

We do what I count as school from 9 to about 4 everyday. I have 5 dc and I have to have some order and consistency to ensure that everyone is learning what I want them to learn. They do things outside of that time frame that are definitely learning (their own reading, projects, homemade books, documentaries, building things, art, music, etc.) but I don't get involved in those things because, quite frankly, I have a house to maintain, dinner to make, errands to run, a husband that likes to have my attention occasionally, and fun things I want to do with and sometimes without my family, that aren't necessarily learning activities.

 

During our "school time" we use curriculum to make sure we are progressing systematically in skills and content knowledge but we aren't slaves to the program. We deviate for rabbit trials, extra books, videos, discussions, impromptu projects, and sometimes we just toss all the books back on the shelf and go to the park. We do math, reading and writing everyday but not always sitting at the table following a curriculum. I took dd8's math lesson from yesterday and went over the concepts while we put a penny collage together, because she saw the project in a book and wanted to do it. Now, we don't always learn like that. Sometimes my dc have a big project of their own that they want to get to and so they ask if we can just work from our books. Fine with me. My older dc were given the choice this year of doing history and science interest led (like they did last year) or would they rather have programs to work with. They both chose programs. One is using the programs as written and one has tweaked her programs to fit better with her creative\artistic nature. She wouldn't be able to do that if I were doing "school at home".

 

I have to say, I struggled with finding the right blend of strategies that would work best for all of my dc. Some of them needed rigid structure some of them needed more freedom. I found myself working all day with those that needed the structure and all evening and weekend with the one that wanted to do things differently. It was too much. What I have now is probably as close to perfect as we can get for right now. Everyone knows where they need to be by the end of the day or week but they can take different paths to get there. I have set up a system that allows me to help each one along their path but that still provides me with the ability to have order and consistency, and which assures that I still have time to put on the other hats that we all must wear and take care of business that doesn't pertain to education.

 

I will say that I really get irritated with people who think that because you have a schedule and because you don't fill every waking moment of your day with learning opportunities for your dc that somehow you aren't doing your dc justice or that you're not instilling a love of learning (I get so sick of hearing that term by the way). I'm just going to say it...Educating my children is the top priority of the day and is important to me because it will open doors to them when they become adults, but it is not THE most important thing in our lives. I do what I can to show my dc that learning is enjoyable, but if they grow up not having a "love of learning" then I'm good with that as long as they are happy and doing what they have a passion for.

Edited September 30, 2011 by 5LittleMonkeys

[angela in ohio]

\My intention was to be very classical, and I do think we fit that somewhat. However I also enjoy that at 5 and 7 they have some free time in their little lives for things they enjoy doing.

 

Just a note: classical is not the opposite of kids having free time. :D (Not sure if that's what you meant.) Classical education is a method, not a time frame.

[woolybear]

I don't think what we do resembles b & m schools at all, so to me it's not "school at home." On the other hand, it is much more like "school" than when we were unschooling. :D So, I do refer to certain work we do as "school" and we are home. In conclusion, I think I do aspire to some sort of school at home. Nothing like "public school at home", though.

[ElizaG]

There is usefulness in teaching children how to "gut it out." This is a valuable skill to build, which I can attest to after going through a graduate school program. Anyone who has been through higher level education can tell you that you need a measure of toughness and ability to gut it out to be able to complete a dissertation or other advanced program of study. I don't think it is bad to have a time each day where the children are sitting at a table or at a desk, working hard on a "traditional" sort of assignment.

Absolutely. We're a fairly academically oriented family. (DH's mother and grandmother both earned masters' degrees many decades ago, when that wasn't at all common.) It seems likely that some of our children will end up in graduate school. If not, that's fine, but one of our reasons for homeschooling in a classically-influenced way is to lay the foundations for intensive scholarly work.

 

This doesn't mean we have to work them hard at an early age, of course. My children are currently done with their hour or so of sit-down "book learning," and are running around out back. But I'm aware that their academic workloads will ramp up in the next few years, and this does affect the choices we've been making from the beginning as parents and homeschoolers. (So I guess my current signature is only partly tongue-in-cheek. ;))

[Beth in SW WA]

Of course, her "School at home" includes a lot of dressing up stuffed animals and dolls in costumes to create "History pageants" and having "bring your pet to school day", where she then turns all her Singapore math word problems into animal-related versions and looks for animal poems to use for copywork.

 

Awesome!

 

My girls often play 'school' on their free time. Our weather is turning so they're not outside as much. This week they taught their stuffed animals the multiplication tables up in their bedroom. They take it seriously with white boards, rewards and schedules.

 

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. :)

[justLisa]

Just a note: classical is not the opposite of kids having free time. :D (Not sure if that's what you meant.) Classical education is a method, not a time frame.

 

Oh I know, i should have lengthened that sorry. I meant to say that it seems in the classical method there is so much writing.... narrations, dictations etc. It seems to be an overwhelming mount for us right now. We do plenty of writing for what they are capable, but I dont' want to take it to the point of tears, and THEN back off a little if that makes sense. I would rather not get to that point. I guess it also depends on your kids. Mine are not apt to complaining about work so I know when upset happens, it's usually the work load or being overwhelmed. I don't know many people in real life who HS so it's really hard for me to gauge how much we do or if it is "enough" for this age. I tend to be very critical of myself if I read a book on a method and can't put it to practice 100%

[Michele B]

I'm not trying to replicate public school at home. That said, I do read about curricula and schedules used by schools I admire (In the case of the Highlands Latin School- Memoria Press, I down-right drool over) to get ideas, but I do not consciously try and replicate the curricula or schedules.

 

I think it depends in large part on a family's reasons for homeschooling. Some families may be homeschooling primarily to keep their children away from a dangerous or content-less local public school. It may be enough for them to order a curriculum, and work their way through it. They may not have time, or means, or other wise feel the need to research every topic and make substitutions.

I have a friend who always has it in the back (sometimes the fore) of her mind that something will happen to her or to the family situation and the children will nave to enter public school. So she worries constantly that they are learning skills and content that would enable them to enter ps. She worries a lot more about 5-paragraph essays than I do.:tongue_smilie:

I don't look down on people who "go by the book." I make myself crazy by tweaking EVERYTHING! Sometimes I wonder how healthy it is - maybe they will one day diagnose that! :lol:But I enjoy crafting my children's education, and I want to educate myself at the same time.

[Michele B]

I might have misunderstood the original question. I thought it was about "curriculum-in-a-box" vs. the parent cobbling the whole thing together.

 

Is this about schedules and scope-and-sequence? I don't try to plan too far ahead on paper, although I do have 12-year goals. I don't quite understand un-schooling, but there seems to be quite a broad spectrum to the definition.

 

We have work that needs to get done, (sometimes on the way to 10 billion dance classes), but we do plenty of things spontaneously a walk, a swim, a read aloud on the couch, nature sketching... I encourage the girls to seek out books on topics they are interested in, but that is above and beyond, not instead of math facts, grammar, latin, piano practice etc. So around here, School still means School, but with all the delightful addends like art, music, dance, poetry etc.

[Aurelia]

This is where I make my big confession...

 

...I bought my daughter a couple of school uniform skirts the last time I hit the thrift store. :blushing:

 

In my defense, she absolutely refuses to wear pants, and these sturdy khaki skirts with built-in shorts are the closest possible dress equivalent to jeans. She has decided that the pleats make them feminine enough. But yeah. There are the people who homeschool in their pajamas, and then there's my kid in her school uniform skirt.

 

 

I did something similar. Ariel has a couple of "school uniform" outfits, one's a jumper and the other is a polo shirt with khaki pants or a navy skirt. She loves them. She would wear them nearly every day if I would let her, but she only has the one shirt. For Thanksgiving last year she went to her grandmother's house in her shirt/skirt combo with knee socks and mary janes of her own free will.

 

I don't consider what we do necessarily "school at home," we have a dedicated room and time each day, but it's not like she'll have homework if we don't finish the lesson, and we take breaks or go on rabbit trails as needed. I tend to think of a curriculum like Calvert or K12 as "school at home."

[mom31257]

This is SO a pet peeve of mine! There are so many places (not just here) that I hear homeschool parents say something like "Oh, we don't do school at home, we homeschool".

 

I thought homeschooling was so you could follow any model you choose, even if it looks like regular school. Why are homeschoolers so judgmental of others' methods? I think you have to do what works for you and your kids. If you want to unschool, follow classical methods, CM, eclectic, or just the way you were taught in school, it's your choice.

 

I do a combination of methods, but honestly, I loved regular school. I graduated 3rd in my class in high school, made a perfect score on one section of my college entrance exams, got a great scholarship, and have a degree in math. I think I survived a "school" education just fine!

 

I was reading in my dh's state educator magazine about the teacher of the year. He was finishing up law school when he decided to become a teacher. He said in the article that he expected to teach the way he had been taught, "stand and deliver". He realized he can't teach his kids this way because of technology and kids being different now. What I wanted to ask is why is the way you were taught so bad since you were able to make it through law school.

[8filltheheart]

Sometimes I wonder if the people who criticize those of us of doing "school at home" are some of the same people who later bemoan the gaping holes they find in their kids' knowledge base, desperate to find some way of catching them up or remediating. I wonder if the people who think school should be mostly rabbit trails and field trips are some of the same ones who say their kids have never finished a math or grammar book in any of their years of homeschooling.

 

.

 

I don't criticize people that school at home and I know many that that is exactly what they do. (mostly they are wonderful ladies that order grade level x from Seton and what the lesson plans say to do is exactly what they do.) I could never survive doing that and I would end up being committed in an insane asylum. I would have quite homeschooling 17+ yrs ago if I could only teach via the Seton approach. I used Seton w/my oldest for K and it drove both of us crazy.

 

That said, we do follow rabbit trails (though we aren't into field trip). We don't have a scope and sequence laid out for science. We have a vague one laid out for history. I do not bemoan my kids' education, nor do I have to remediate their education. My kids have all been completely on target or way ahead of the game. ;) That is completely related more to their personal abilities than anything else.

 

 

As far as the OP......

 

I don't equate schedules or even lesson planning w/school at home. My view of school at home is more fitting every subject into its own little category, standard textbook scope and sequence surface knowledge, fill in the blank worksheets, etc.

 

I view our approach as more educating the child vs. school. Subjects blend and overlap. But the where they do or the schedule behind how they do it is really nothing more than a reflection of our homeschool philosophy and in no way resembles what would be found in a typical classroom (public or private) nor would I be able to purchase what we do from a curriculum provider.

 

But......I certainly don't think that our method is "superior" to anyone else's. It is simply the method that works well for our family amid multiple grade levels/mixed levels w/in grade levels/and general chaos that I attempt to keep at a minimum. ;)

 

ETA: FWIW, I personally identify myself as an academic-oriented/classical bent homeschooler.

Edited September 30, 2011 by 8FillTheHeart

[laundrycrisis]

The only people I have ever known IRL to use "school at home" as a negative label are those who favor unschooling. In that world, there are two types of homeschoolers - unschoolers and school-at-homers. When I meet someone new who is trying to figure out which type I am, I clearly state that we do school at home. It eliminates any confusion.

[Tigger]

We have a daily checklist of subjects to be completed, but we're not locked into a rigid schedule. If we take off in a different direction for the day we just adjust the following days to catch up here and there. As long as we've covered the material for the week, I don't care how we get there. This provides the flexibility to cover any child-led interests.

 

ETA: We do have a dedicated school room, yet I wouldn't call it replicating the classroom. It's our room to facilitate and organize all of our learning tools.

 

:iagree:

 

And I'll add, we certainly do not need 7-hours to complete our work, nor do I need to assign "homework" once we're done for the day!

Edited September 30, 2011 by Tigger

[Homeschooling6]

We school at home, but not the kind of school that's public and down the street. :) I think in many ways we do try to replicate what schools have been historically, in our home, with some modern twists like utilizing technology and the very liberal use of paper!

:iagree:

 

I use a bell, stand at the whiteboard and have the children raise their hands. These things just make schooling 6 dear children easier. I'm not trying to replicate the public class room but it just works.

 

It may sound silly but I taught the children at a young age to raise their hands because at times three children were trying to tell me something. Even now that they are older my ears are trying to listen to lots of children at once, so raising their hands helps. If I'm listening to one child and see a hand go up I acknowledge the other child with a nod of my head and they know their turn is coming.

 

Same with the bell. This not only works for 'school' but also if I need to call all the children in from outside. One ring of the bell and a heard of elephants I mean children come inside.

 

I teach using the whiteboard and yes I stand while my children sit, usually I'm teaching two at a time but even with one. I have always taught this way. I guess this one could have come from going to public school and I did at one time wanted to be a teacher when I grew :lol:

 

We school at home, we educate at home, we homeschool.................

Edited September 30, 2011 by Homeschooling6

[Just Robyn]

It doesn't look exactly like a typical American public school classroom but since when does that define what exactly "school" looks like? School looks different in other countries but it's not any less school. There are even experimental and alternative schools here where things are very different, but it's still school.

 

So just because our school looks different, it's still school. :)

 

If you have this particular definition of what school-at-home means, then yes. All homeschoolers school at home in some way or the other. The kids are at home and they are learning by some means. When I hear the term school-at-home that is not what is usually implied. When I hear the term school-at-home it is usually accusing people of literally replicating public school in their homes (but of course I don't think these people have really thought out exactly what that would mean).

 

I would never want to be accused of doing school at home. The reason for this is because, to me, "school at home" means making scheduling, curric, teaching choices w/o the individual student in mind. This is what schools do and this is what I want to avoid.

 

I am educating my kids at home, but school involves a teacher teaching a group of kids from a predetermined curriculum at a predetermined pace to meet predetermined, arbitrary standards so that the kids perform well on standardized tests. That's not what we do.

 

:iagree:And to name a few other ways in which we don't school-at-home:

 

I don't put my children into separate rooms all day, every day just because they are different ages.

 

If a curriculum or method of education isn't working I don't stick with it and give the child a bad grade.

 

I do make plans for the year before the year begins, but I am willing to change them and I have each child's needs in mind when making it. It is customized. I don't make one plan based on trends, testing, etc. and expect it to work for every child.

Edited September 30, 2011 by crstarlette

[TracieT]

This is SO a pet peeve of mine! There are so many places (not just here) that I hear homeschool parents say something like "Oh, we don't do school at home, we homeschool".

 

I thought homeschooling was so you could follow any model you choose, even if it looks like regular school. Why are homeschoolers so judgmental of others' methods? I think you have to do what works for you and your kids. If you want to unschool, follow classical methods, CM, eclectic, or just the way you were taught in school, it's your choice.

 

I do a combination of methods, but honestly, I loved regular school. I graduated 3rd in my class in high school, made a perfect score on one section of my college entrance exams, got a great scholarship, and have a degree in math. I think I survived a "school" education just fine!

 

I was reading in my dh's state educator magazine about the teacher of the year. He was finishing up law school when he decided to become a teacher. He said in the article that he expected to teach the way he had been taught, "stand and deliver". He realized he can't teach his kids this way because of technology and kids being different now. What I wanted to ask is why is the way you were taught so bad since you were able to make it through law school.

 

This is why I haven't been to this forum in a while. I realized homeschool parents are just as judgmental as every other group. :( It was very disheartening.

 

I, too, loved school. So, yeah...maybe my homeschooling is more like "school at home." We have real school desks in front of a chalk board and white board. I do sometimes ring a bell to get the boys to come to the room. (which they love, by the way) I do use worksheets (again, which they love), specific books for each subject. It works.

 

I really think I am going to start having my boys raise their hands in some situations. It's something they need to know. When we go to the library story hour they need to raise their hand to talk. In class at church they need to. It's one of those life skills and why not teach it along with everything else?

[cello4life]

:iagree:

 

I use a bell, stand at the whiteboard and have the children raise their hands. These things just make schooling 6 dear children easier. I'm not trying to replicate the public class room but it just works.

 

It may sound silly but I taught the children at a young age to raise their hands because at times three children were trying to tell me something. Even now that they are older my ears are trying to listen to lots of children at once, so raising their hands helps. If I'm listening to one child and see a hand go up I acknowledge the other child with a nod of my head and they know their turn is coming.

 

Same with the bell. This not only works for 'school' but also if I need to call all the children in from outside. One ring of the bell and a heard of elephants I mean children come inside.

 

I teach using the whiteboard and yes I stand while my children sit, usually I'm teaching two at a time but even with one. I have always taught this way. I guess this one could have come from going to public school and I did at one time wanted to be a teacher when I grew :lol:

 

We school at home, we educate at home, we homeschool.................

:iagree:I am teaching 5 of our 6 children this year(grades 4,3,1,1 and prek) and I am finding my self getting much more "school" like just to maintain order!!

[ElizaG]

I don't criticize people that school at home and I know many that that is exactly what they do. (mostly they are wonderful ladies that order grade level x from Seton and what the lesson plans say to do is exactly what they do.) (...)

 

I view our approach as more educating the child vs. school. Subjects blend and overlap. But the where they do or the schedule behind how they do it is really nothing more than a reflection of our homeschool philosophy and in no way resembles what would be found in a typical classroom (public or private) nor would I be able to purchase what we do from a curriculum provider.

See, now that's a use of the term that makes sense to me (and doesn't imply a value judgment). I can see how "school at home" could mean that the child is being educated according to a specific curriculum that's been set by an "away school." It could be a brick & mortar school, an online school, or a home study school where the child is enrolled and the parent follows the lesson plans exactly. In all these cases, it's as if the child were attending that school, but as a distance learning student. The parent's role would be mostly supervisory, with some extra explanation where needed.

 

This doesn't say anything about the content of the curriculum, nor about whether or not the student is allowed to work at his or her own pace. These things seem to vary a great deal from one program to another. It also doesn't say anything about whether or not there's a brightly colored alphabet on the wall, or the mother rings a bell, or the students do their work in their pyjamas. :D

 

I'm not sure why some people would say that this sort of "school at home" isn't a legitimate type of homeschooling. If it's not, then it follows that all those families who used Seton and Calvert years ago weren't really homeschooling at all. Which would be kind of strange, since everyone thought they were doing so at the time. ;)

Edited September 30, 2011 by Eleanor

[linguistmama]

For me "school at home" would mean not making choices. If my children went to ps we would not be able to decide what days to take off, when to start our day, what materials to use, etc. Instead we can choose what works for us whether it resembles ps or not.

[silliness7]

Recent comments on another thread really surprised me.

 

I use curriculum but I don't feel what happens in my home is anything close to "school at home". I don't have a tight schedule, but even if I did, there would still be plenty of room left for rabbit trails and students having choices in learning. There is room for projects and youtube trails and history and science DVDs of their interest, even though these are not the foundation of our learning.

 

Are there that many home schools that are attempting to replicate a school at home? Maybe I'm naive. I just assume most homeschoolers are not completely tied to a schedule, but try to be flexible and grow with their children. Just because we have curriculum listed in sigs doesn't mean we all just do the next thing, all of the time. Even SWB talks about flexibility and adapting for different children in her talks.

 

:bigear:

 

Before reading the replies let me first say that we need a working definition of "school at home." That phrase means different things to different people. And I'm one that doesn't necessarily think the phrase has negative connotations though I know many if not most homeschoolers do. I actually used to myself. But I've come a long way in my many years of homeschooling. I have a tight schedule. That may come across as school at home to some. There isn't any way in the world I could homeschool 6 kids without it. It doesn't mean I am not flexible or don't grow with my kids. It simply means that we're disciplined to sit down and do math at 10:00 every day or whatever. Most of the time we will do the next thing. But if there is a problem we will slow down or back up. But we still do math at 10:00. Does that make sense?

 

O.K. off to read the responses.

[Mimm]

It's not school at home. I am educating my kids at home, but school involves a teacher teaching a group of kids from a predetermined curriculum at a predetermined pace to meet predetermined, arbitrary standards so that the kids perform well on standardized tests. That's not what we do.

 

I don't equate schedules or even lesson planning w/school at home. My view of school at home is more fitting every subject into its own little category, standard textbook scope and sequence surface knowledge, fill in the blank worksheets, etc.

 

For me "school at home" would mean not making choices. If my children went to ps we would not be able to decide what days to take off, when to start our day, what materials to use, etc. Instead we can choose what works for us whether it resembles ps or not.

 

But why? That's not in the definition of the word school, it's just the negative associations you are attaching to the word. I see a lot of people in this thread are doing that. "We don't school at home because we don't do XYZ undesirable aspect of the standard American public school system."

 

But again, that's not how school is inherently defined. I just feel like we should be more positive about the whole idea of school in general. Why add another term to the list of things that we find offensive? And true, people might mean it in a snarky way, and if so, whatever. I'm not going to get offended if some unschooler thinks I'm a draconian school-at-homer. ;)

Edited September 30, 2011 by Mimm
clarity

[Mrs Twain]

Here is another "school at home" thing we do: Opening Ceremonies.

 

Each morning when school starts, one child takes his turn being the person who holds the American flag and hands out the song sheets of traditional, patriotic songs. He then leads us in the Pledge of Allegiance, followed by one or two songs of his choosing from the song sheet. This is wildly popular at our house. I highly recommend it.

 

Not everything that traditional schools do is bad or wrong, just for the fact that the schools do them.

[silliness7]

It seems there are different meanings to "school at home."

 

Sometimes it seems that people accuse others of school at home if they are having their kids sit at a desk and do difficult work from a book. In the opinion of some, it is not "homeschool" unless the days are characterized by student interest-led activities including all manner of rabbit trails and field trips. While we are quite fond of rabbit trails and field trips, I also see the value of having the kids sit at a desk and doing difficult work for part of the school day. There is usefulness in teaching children how to "gut it out." This is a valuable skill to build, which I can attest to after going through a graduate school program. Anyone who has been through higher level education can tell you that you need a measure of toughness and ability to gut it out to be able to complete a dissertation or other advanced program of study. I don't think it is bad to have a time each day where the children are sitting at a table or at a desk, working hard on a "traditional" sort of assignment.

 

Another aspect of "school at home" that people often react negatively to is the scope and sequence. They don't like being tied down, preferring to chart their own course according to what they think is most important. Of course I think we all do that, at least to some extent. However, having a list of things to cover each year to ensure the children are learning basic and necessary skills is not in my mind a bad thing. I don't want to get to a point where I find my children have all sorts of gaps because of my pursuit of my own or their own interests to the neglect of standard education they should have gotten.

 

Sometimes I wonder if the people who criticize those of us of doing "school at home" are some of the same people who later bemoan the gaping holes they find in their kids' knowledge base, desperate to find some way of catching them up or remediating. I wonder if the people who think school should be mostly rabbit trails and field trips are some of the same ones who say their kids have never finished a math or grammar book in any of their years of homeschooling.

 

I am not against rabbit trails and field trips. I have a certain number of days included in my schedule for which we can take off on impromptu field trips. Some of the rabbit trails are often our most memorable educational moments. However, I put value in having a scope and sequence to cover for each grade, to make sure we have time sitting at the desks every day to gut through the difficult subjects, and giving the kids standardized tests every year to try to see if we have any significant gaps in the curriculum.

 

:iagree::iagree: Love this post! (particularly the bolded)

[Haiku]

I just feel like we should be more positive about the whole idea of school in general.

 

My dd17 has been in school since 6th grade. What I stated as my definition of school is what we have experienced during her years in school (complete with standardized test "boot camps" the kids attend to get them ready to do well on the test). It's the truth as we experience it. And I don't do it at home. So, to me, we don't do "school at home."

 

Tara

Edited September 30, 2011 by TaraTheLiberator
typo

[8filltheheart]

But why? That's not in the definition of the word school, it's just the negative associations you are attaching to the word. I see a lot of people in this thread are doing that. "We don't school at home because we don't do XYZ undesirable aspect of the standard American public school system."

 

But again, that's not how school is inherently defined. I just feel like we should be more positive about the whole idea of school in general. Why add another term to the list of things that we find offensive? And true, people might mean it in a snarky way, and if so, whatever. I'm not going to get offended if some unschooler thinks I'm a draconian school-at-homer. ;)

 

My view of how school systems operate is exactly what you bolded in this quote:

 

Originally Posted by 8FillTheHeart View Post

My view of school at home is more fitting every subject into its own little category, standard textbook scope and sequence surface knowledge, fill in the blank worksheets, etc.

 

History is a history textbook, science is a science textbook, grammar is a grammar textbook, writing is a writing assignment from the English/grammar textbook, etc. Student knowledge is tested by multiple choice, matching, fill in the blank worksheets w/the odd short answer or essay question. Grade 5 has this list of scope/sequence standards that all 5th graders complete.

 

That isn't a "value judgment." That is simple school reality. It is also how I view ordering a program like Seton and completing it as is at home.

 

Education does not have to be about "school." Education can be content-driven w/completely variable content depending on the needs of the individual, however not in a standard school setting.

[ElizaG]

My view of how school systems operate is exactly what you bolded in this quote:

 

My view of school at home is more fitting every subject into its own little category, standard textbook scope and sequence surface knowledge, fill in the blank worksheets, etc.

 

History is a history textbook, science is a science textbook, grammar is a grammar textbook, writing is a writing assignment from the English/grammar textbook, etc. Student knowledge is tested by multiple choice, matching, fill in the blank worksheets w/the odd short answer or essay question. Grade 5 has this list of scope/sequence standards that all 5th graders complete.

 

That isn't a "value judgment." That is simple school reality.

When John Paul II said that the family is a "school of love," he didn't mean that parents teach their children to love through textbooks and scope/sequence standards. :confused:

 

I know you're Catholic, and I'm sure you know that the Latin root of "school" is "schola" (leisure). And that many classically oriented schools in past centuries were based more on teacher-student interaction than on textbooks. There weren't even printing presses until the 15th century. How could there have been worksheets?

 

I can understand not wanting to copy the mainstream school system of our time. I'm just not getting this negativity toward the whole concept of school itself.

[Mommy22alyns]

I do not aspire to, nor believe I am doing, "school at home." I have no value judgements on how anyone else teaches their kids. We do "do the next thing" a lot, but we also do projects and experiments (today we dipped candles).