LCC vs. WTM vs. TJeducation

[IATeachingMom]

Who has some insight on LCC vs. WTM? And how these compare to a 'Thomas Jefferson Education'?

[Veritaserum]

I don't have any experience with LCC, but WTM blows TJEd out of the water. You can spend thousands of dollars trying to figure out how to make TJEd work. There is an endless number of businesses, books, articles, seminars, etc. that you can spend money on. I find the philosophy to be hopelessly flawed and not based on sound principles. It is extremely popular in my area, which is why we started homeschooling with it. I ditched it because it didn't work and because the religious/cult-like devotion to TJEd at the One True Way to homeschool creeped me out. I read TWTM and finally had a practical plan to follow.

 

I blogged about TJEd here:

 

http://classicalhouseoflearning.wordpress.com/2011/06/25/what-makes-a-good-educational-philosophy/

 

These are also good blogs to read about TJEd:

 

http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2008/05/a-thomas-jefferson-education/

 

http://whyidontdotjed.blogspot.com/

 

http://themakingofauniversity.blogspot.com/

 

ETA: The comments on the above blog posts give great insight into the irrational devotion exhibited by hardcore TJEders.

Edited October 8, 2011 by Veritaserum

[Whereneverever]

http://concordiaclassicalacademy.blogspot.com/2011/02/well-trained-mind-vs-latin-centered.html

 

I did a comparison of WTM and LCC not too long ago at my blog. I can't really compare TJE because we haven't tried it.

[laughing lioness]

TJE takes the better late than early approach.

LCC is very simplified and goes deep with a focus on language.

TWTM is deep and wide.

[Spy Car]

TJE is a fraud perpetrated by a known con-man. His "degrees" are phony, and he runs a phony "college."

 

The man's education methods have done serious harm to children's educations and to the finances of those he's taken advantage of with his expensive, but ineffective materials.

 

Bill

[laughing lioness]

TJE is a fraud perpetrated by a known con-man. His "degrees" are phony, and he runs a phony "college."

 

The man's education methods have done serious harm to children's educations and to the finances of those he's taken advantage of with his expensive, but ineffective materials.

 

Bill

 

Please explain. (seeking info.)

[Veritaserum]

Please explain. (seeking info.)

 

See "The Making of a University" blog I linked above. :) It goes into detail about DeMille's false educational claims.

[Whereneverever]

See "The Making of a University" blog I linked above. :) It goes into detail about DeMille's false educational claims.

 

Is there something a little more succinct and easily accessible?

[Veritaserum]

Is there something a little more succinct and easily accessible?

 

This post sums it up:

 

http://themakingofauniversity.blogspot.com/2009/01/diploma-demille.html

[Veritaserum]

This post sums it up:

 

http://themakingofauniversity.blogspot.com/2009/01/diploma-demille.html

 

The Times and Seasons post also gives a good overview.

[Penelope]

I've (unfortunately) read the first couple of TJEd books in the name of learning more about hs philosophies.

 

TJEd is very vague and unschooly in ideology. The idea is you are supposed to read "great books" for all subjects and discuss them and eventually write essays about them. Supposedly this is how Thomas Jefferson was educated-- I'm not sure this is correct, though. However, you can never require your progeny to read these books or to do anything, really. You are supposed to inspire them to do these things by doing them yourself. And you don't even start this process until they are 8 or 10.

 

The whole thing seemed very "off" to me, and that was before I found out the author had fake degrees.

[Tress]

I've (unfortunately) read the first couple of TJEd books in the name of learning more about hs philosophies.

 

TJEd is very vague and unschooly in ideology. The idea is you are supposed to read "great books" for all subjects and discuss them and eventually write essays about them. Supposedly this is how Thomas Jefferson was educated-- I'm not sure this is correct, though. However, you can never require your progeny to read these books or to do anything, really. You are supposed to inspire them to do these things by doing them yourself. And you don't even start this process until they are 8 or 10.

 

The whole thing seemed very "off" to me, and that was before I found out the author had fake degrees.

 

I unfortunately *bought* two TJEd books :svengo:.

 

I soon realized that TJEd has nothing to do with the education of Thomas Jefferson. And to make things worse, I have never encountered such pressure to get certified and pay-pay-pay within the homeschool world as with TJEd, TJEd-mailinglists & websites. It was weird.

[mo2]

I have all three books, TJEd, LCC, and WTM.

 

TJED---I initially liked the theory but then came to realize that in reality, it would never work. Not for my family, anyway. No matter how much I read (and I read a lot, and self study Latin and other subjects), my eldest has ONE TIME in her life picked up a book to read without being told to. ONCE. Inspire, not require? Not with my kids.

 

WTM and LCC----I love both of these. Ideally, I would have the time and resources to do everything WTM says to. But sometimes I just don't. That's when I turn to LCC, which tells me it's okay to focus on the basics. If we don't do science for a couple of weeks, it's okay. Keeping up on the core subjects of reading, writing, math (and Latin for some--we have yet to start Latin with our dc), gives the child the tools they need to get through life, and they can read the science book later.

[Jim]

I have one of his presentations on disk. I like it. It's thought provoking. I also have a few books. I still don't see how to put it to use. That said, I often listen to his presentation. I find it inspirational, in a theory sort of way.

 

I could give 2-cents about his own educational background. If someone offers info that I find useful I will grab it and run. This forum is an excellent example. Plenty of those that share lack a college degree and by their own admission struggled through school. Yet, I've picked out to many great ideas to count.

 

Jim

[Penelope]

 

I could give 2-cents about his own educational background. If someone offers info that I find useful I will grab it and run. This forum is an excellent example. Plenty of those that share lack a college degree and by their own admission struggled through school. Yet, I've picked out to many great ideas to count.

 

Jim

 

I agree that a lack of formal education isn't a deal breaker if someone has something useful to say.

 

However, this is a case of someone misrepresenting his credentials. A Ph.D. from a diploma mill may in theory still be a Ph.D., I guess, but someone who claims to highly value education shouldn't put fake degrees behind his name.

[Veritaserum]

I have one of his presentations on disk. I like it. It's thought provoking. I also have a few books. I still don't see how to put it to use. That said, I often listen to his presentation. I find it inspirational, in a theory sort of way.

 

I could give 2-cents about his own educational background. If someone offers info that I find useful I will grab it and run. This forum is an excellent example. Plenty of those that share lack a college degree and by their own admission struggled through school. Yet, I've picked out to many great ideas to count.

 

Jim

 

While I agree that a degree doesn't necessarily qualify someone and the lack of one doesn't necessarily disqualify someone, the lack of honesty is unsettling. There are enough problems with his philosophy that one doesn't even need to look at his character to see that TJEd is a bad idea. His shady educational shenanigans certainly don't make TJEd more appealing. ;)

 

I've met Oliver DeMille in person. He's congenial enough to visit with socially. He's got a very high opinion of himself and his ideas, though, and that tends to grate. ;) Oh, and as far as I know he still calls himself "Dr. DeMille"--despite the PhD not being real. Or maybe he gave himself a doctorate from his own "university." :p

Edited October 10, 2011 by Veritaserum

[elegantlion]

I read TJed, which wouldn't work for us. It brought me around to the idea of continuing self-education.

 

WTM intimidated me, I only read it in the book store.

 

LCC resonated with me. It helped me see that classical education could be possible for us. Previously, I had thought my lack of a classical education could be a hindrance. I consider LCC the framework of our school.

 

AFTER I read and understood LCC I bought and read WTM. It was less overwhelming. :D I brought in some WTM style to our LCC classroom.

 

We're now in our 4rd year of classical (8th year of homeschooling) and our class is a mix of LCC, WTM, and some interest led activities.

 

LCC helped me feel like classical was possible, WTM showed me how to implement some subjects.

 

When I'm feeling like we're trying to do too much I reread LCC 1 and 2. I do this at least once a year.

[IATeachingMom]

Wow, such great insight. I don't know much about TJed, but now I'm glad that the bookstore that I almost ordered the books through couldn't get them! Does anyone have any insight on the rigor of WTM/LCC. I know I'm opening a can of worms on this one... and I'm not trying to get to "this is better than that" for responses. But if I'm understanding them correctly LCC is more heavy in LA areas and WTM is more history heavy? So depending on what you have as a goal for your dc, either one might be the "more rigorous fit" so to speak.

[yvonne]

Isn't it a little ironic that someone whose primary message is "get off conveyor belt education" feels the need to use a PhD title in the first place?

 

And why would he so need a PhD title? Credibility, perhaps? Authority? Isn't there anything else that could give him credibility?

 

And then to use an unearned, empty title? And to continue using it? That says a lot about him & his own insecurities. I just think it's ironic that here he is selling this idea of "you don't need the status quo education" (ie, the titles, ....) when he apparently feels he needs a title, even unearned.

 

Contrast him with Andrew Pudewa..... Andrew P. has loads of _real_ life experience (studying under Suzuki in Japan, I believe, actual teaching of how many students now, & some could say true "mentoring" of parents who are so unsure of how to teach writing, etc.) Andrew P. doesn't have a PhD and doesn't seem to feel any need whatsoever to claim one! His results speak for him.

[Spy Car]

Isn't it a little ironic that someone whose primary message is "get off conveyor belt education" feels the need to use a PhD title in the first place?

 

And why would he so need a PhD title? Credibility, perhaps? Authority? Isn't there anything else that could give him credibility?

 

And then to use an unearned, empty title? And to continue using it? That says a lot about him & his own insecurities. I just think it's ironic that here he is selling this idea of "you don't need the status quo education" (ie, the titles, ....) when he apparently feels he needs a title, even unearned.

 

Contrast him with Andrew Pudewa..... Andrew P. has loads of _real_ life experience (studying under Suzuki in Japan, I believe, actual teaching of how many students now, & some could say true "mentoring" of parents who are so unsure of how to teach writing, etc.) Andrew P. doesn't have a PhD and doesn't seem to feel any need whatsoever to claim one! His results speak for him.

 

I agree with you on Oliver DeMille. But not on Andrew Pudewa.

 

Pudewa claims to be the "Director" of a non-existent "Institute." He also claims a "Certificate of Child Brain Development from "The Institutes for the Achievement of Human Potential." Like this "certificate" is some sort of meaningful credential, when the facts are this "institute" is involved in promoting quack-medicine.

 

Worst of all—in my point of view—Andrew Pudewa and Oliver DeMillie actively cross promote one another. The only difference is Pudewa (to his credit) doesn't claim phony advanced degree. But claiming to be the "Director of an Institute" is just as unearned and empty a title as DeMille's degrees. Not that much contrast methinks.

 

Bill

[Joy at Home]

I agree with you on Oliver DeMille. But not on Andrew Pudewa.

 

Pudewa claims to be the "Director" of a non-existent "Institute." He also claims a "Certificate of Child Brain Development from "The Institutes for the Achievement of Human Potential." Like this "certificate" is some sort of meaningful credential, when the facts are this "institute" is involved in promoting quack-medicine.

 

Worst of all—in my point of view—Andrew Pudewa and Oliver DeMillie actively cross promote one another. The only difference is Pudewa (to his credit) doesn't claim phony advanced degree. But claiming to be the "Director of an Institute" is just as unearned and empty a title as DeMille's degrees. Not that much contrast methinks.

 

Bill

 

 

***yawn*** This again.

 

institute: a society or organization, or the building it uses;

 

There is NOTHING out of sorts with Pudewa naming is homeschooling business an "Institute". I think most intelligent adults do not believe he is insinuating that his business is a credentialed institute of higher education. Your continued insistence that he is somehow being dishonest for calling his business an "Institute" is tiring, really.

 

I'll defer to our previous thread on this topic . . .

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=303773&highlight=iew&page=11

 

Lisa

Edited October 11, 2011 by Momto5girls

[Veritaserum]

Wow, such great insight. I don't know much about TJed, but now I'm glad that the bookstore that I almost ordered the books through couldn't get them! Does anyone have any insight on the rigor of WTM/LCC. I know I'm opening a can of worms on this one... and I'm not trying to get to "this is better than that" for responses. But if I'm understanding them correctly LCC is more heavy in LA areas and WTM is more history heavy? So depending on what you have as a goal for your dc, either one might be the "more rigorous fit" so to speak.

 

I think whichever one "speaks" to you is what you run with. :) I'd actually like to read LCC just to see if there's anything useful in it for me or my kids. I'm pretty happy with our modified WTM approach, though. :)

[Veritaserum]

Isn't it a little ironic that someone whose primary message is "get off conveyor belt education" feels the need to use a PhD title in the first place?

 

And why would he so need a PhD title? Credibility, perhaps? Authority? Isn't there anything else that could give him credibility?

 

And then to use an unearned, empty title? And to continue using it? That says a lot about him & his own insecurities. I just think it's ironic that here he is selling this idea of "you don't need the status quo education" (ie, the titles, ....) when he apparently feels he needs a title, even unearned.

 

Contrast him with Andrew Pudewa..... Andrew P. has loads of _real_ life experience (studying under Suzuki in Japan, I believe, actual teaching of how many students now, & some could say true "mentoring" of parents who are so unsure of how to teach writing, etc.) Andrew P. doesn't have a PhD and doesn't seem to feel any need whatsoever to claim one! His results speak for him.

 

:lol: Yeah, you'd think the PhD (real or fake) would work against him among his group of followers because they tend to completely devalue a traditional college education. They want their kids to be "free" from all the trappings of the conveyor belt. They want their kids to be entrepreneurs, which is probably why you see so many home-based business within the TJEd community--many of which exist to instruct people on how to do TJEd. Most of the TJEders I know do not have college degrees. Perhaps that plays into why they do not value them for their children.

 

I think entrepreneurship is a fine track, but it's not for everyone and may be made easier/possible by education at an accredited institution of higher learning. I disagree with educational methods that limit a child's opportunities to just one option. I want my children to be prepared to become doctors, lawyers, etc. or entrepreneurs or to pursue whatever careers they desire. :)

 

***yawn*** This again.

 

institute: a society or organization, or the building it uses;

 

There is NOTHING out of sorts with Pudewa naming is homeschooling business an "Institute". I think most intelligent adults do not believe he is insinuating that his business is a credentialed institute of higher education. Your continued insistence that he is somehow being dishonest for calling his business an "Institute" is tiring, really.

 

I'll defer to our previous thread on this topic . . .

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=303773&highlight=iew&page=11

 

Lisa

 

:iagree: While I strongly dislike that Pudewa promotes DeMille, I don't have the same beef with him about false credentials.

Edited October 11, 2011 by Veritaserum

[Spy Car]

***yawn*** This again.

 

institute: a society or organization, or the building it uses;

 

There is NOTHING out of sorts with Pudewa naming is homeschooling business an "Institute". I think most intelligent adults do not believe he is insinuating that his business is a credentialed institute of higher education. Your continued insistence that he is somehow being dishonest for calling his business an "Institute" is tiring, really.

 

I'll defer to our previous thread on this topic . . .

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=303773&highlight=iew&page=11

 

Lisa

 

It is a flaudulent use of the term "Institute" to claim your homeschool business is an educational Institutue and that you are a Director of an Institue, when there is no such institute. It is totally bogus!

 

Bill

[Joy at Home]

It is a flaudulent use of the term "Institute" to claim your homeschool business is an educational Institutue and that you are a Director of an Institue, when there is no such institute. It is totally bogus!

 

Bill

 

The business IS the institute . . . it's the name!!! You are too narrow in your definition of institute, Bill. Does anyone really think there is a brick and mortar academic institute associated with IEW? It is a name he has chosen which, by definition, meets the criteria for an institute. He is a speaker, trainer, and educator; using workshops and training conferences to teach his philosophy of writing. Meets the definition of Institute to me. You may have opinions of Pudewa based on his certification and associations with TJE, and that's fine. But here, I'm just not seeing what you see.

 

Lisa

[yvonne]

Worst of all—in my point of view—Andrew Pudewa and Oliver DeMillie actively cross promote one another.

 

This does bother me, too. More so that Pudewa would promote DeMille. I respect what Pudewa's done, though I know his approach to teaching writing is not everyone's cup of tea.

 

Sorry to derail the op. Should not have mentioned AP.

Edited October 11, 2011 by yvonne

[FairProspects]

Does anyone really think there is a brick and mortar academic institute associated with IEW?

 

Actually, yes I did. My only previous experience with institutes was with those funded by academic universities and government grants as think tanks. That was exactly what I thought when I heard the name. I'm sure he can technically call his business whatever he wants, but yes, there are people who will associate it with an academic institute.

[Spy Car]

The business IS the institute . . . it's the name!!! You are too narrow in your definition of institute, Bill. Does anyone really think there is a brick and mortar academic institute associated with IEW? It is a name he has chosen which, by definition, meets the criteria for an institute. He is a speaker, trainer, and educator; using workshops and training conferences to teach his philosophy of writing. Meets the definition of Institute to me. You may have opinions of Pudewa based on his certification and associations with TJE, and that's fine. But here, I'm just not seeing what you see.

 

Lisa

 

Calling it an "institute" does not make it an institute. Being a speaker and giving workshops (etc) does not make one the Director of an Institute. There is no institute. So his claim to be the Director of an Institute is hollow and false.

 

And he promotes Oliver DeMille and TJE and they in turn promote him.

 

Bill

[Jim]

From my dictionary:

 

Institute - noun - An organization set up to promote or represent the interests of a particular cause or group of people.

 

IEW - a company that promotes the ability to write.

 

Organization - A number of people joined together for a particular purpose.

 

IEW as an organization - Andrew P. and his employees joined together to promote a writing product with the hopes of also earning a living.

 

Institution - noun - A large organization where people live or work together, such as a hospital or a college.

 

So institute is not the same as institution and neither definition means they have to be sanctioned by some other high and mighty group.

 

By the way, who sanctions the sanctioning group?

 

You can say terms mean what you want. But there are actual definitions and Andrew P's company fits the definition of an institute, regardless of whether you want to believe it or not.

 

The arguement is so old and, I agree, "boring." Both of these guys offer something that I find interesting on some level. I'm an IEW fan, though it may not be the answer for all. It works well for us. I also use WTM products, including WWE, and they work well for us, but may not work for everyone.

 

I simply fail to see the point of the entire personal attack in the context of this forum. Attack the method if you want, not the person behind it. Isn't that one of the rules of having a proper argument?

[momma aimee]

TJE is a fraud perpetrated by a known con-man. His "degrees" are phony, and he runs a phony "college."

 

The man's education methods have done serious harm to children's educations and to the finances of those he's taken advantage of with his expensive, but ineffective materials.

 

Bill

 

B ill you and I rarely agree so I must point out this time that we do. :)

 

The following statement should give you a feel for DeMille’s worldview:

 

The New World Order, which George Bush has made part of everyday vocabulary, is world government. It is sponsored by Satan and his followers, whose power is based on secret combinations, secret oath-bound societies, world financial institutions, New Age religious organizations, and a number of global movements including humanism, communism, socialism, fascism, nazism, democratic socialism, feminism, Marxism, environmentalism, and monopolistic capitalism.

 

http://timesandseasons.org/index.php/2008/05/a-thomas-jefferson-education/

[Spy Car]

In the UK, where respect for the English language still apparently matters, Mr Pudewa would be in legal trouble.

 

From the Wikipedia article on Institutes:

 

In the United Kingdom and the Isle of Man the title 'Institute' is a protected word and companies or other organisations may only use that word if they are "organisations which are carrying out research at the highest level or to professional bodies of the highest standing".[1] Furthermore, if a company is carrying on a business under a different name to the company name, that business name must comply with the Business Names Act. Use of the title 'Institute' requires approval from the Secretary of State. Failure to seek approval is a criminal offence. [2]

 

The term Institute has never been a synonym for "small business venture." Using it as such is a perversion of the English language.

 

Bill

Edited October 12, 2011 by Spy Car

[Jim]

I'll stick to the definitions offered by those very same organizations that qualify as institutions under your definition.

 

From the Cambridge dictionary. I made sure I was using the UK version.

 

institute noun

/ˈɪnt .stɪ.tjuːt//-tuːt/ n [C]

 

 

 

Definition

 

an organization where people do a particular kind of scientific, educational or social work, or the buildings which it uses.

 

Again, no mention of the size of the organization.

 

 

Boring, and showing extreme inflexibility.

 

Since when did Wikipedia qualify as a trusted organization? Looking at the definition of the term there and scrolling down it invites me to add to the content of the page.

 

As Wikipedia states:

 

Wikipedia is written collaboratively by largely anonymous Internet volunteers who write without pay. Anyone with Internet access can write and make changes to Wikipedia articles (except in certain cases where editing is restricted to prevent disruption or vandalism). Users can contribute anonymously, under a pseudonym, or with their real identity, if they choose.

 

 

I can add to the conversation/definition anonymously. Oh, that adds confidence to anything I read within their pages.

Edited October 12, 2011 by Jim