Anyone NOT identify with a HS philosophy?

[mommy5]

:iagree:

 

One of the mistakes I made early on was NOT researching different methods or philosophies. I used the boxed curriculum everyone else was and thought that was it. I think it's best to research philosophies MORE AFTER a year of homeschooling. You'll have an idea of child's abilities and your goals. Not that you need to use a philosophy as a box, it should be a launching pad.

 

We stuck with the box for three years. Oh, I'd have changed in a heartbeat if I'd known how much was available.

 

I call our style adapted classical. LCC resonates with me and works well for my son. We modify and tweak as needed. Do I think everyone needs a philosophy to hold onto? No. I do think we need to understand the vision for our children, which can change. I do think we need an end goal in sight, also subject to change.

 

I totally agree! Our first year I just used what other people recommended. Which only was ok. I felt like a failure in many ways and didn't "LOVE" any of the curriculum we had chosen. Then I found Charlotte Mason and fell in love. After that year, I realized that there were other things I would change and started doing a more classical approach with still a lot of Charlotte Mason philosophy. I had to realize that there were different (a lot of different) publishers of curriculum and there was something that would fit our children out there ...

[jenangelcat]

I don't.

 

What works for one kid and parents isn't necessarily going to work for all. I've read all the books, take what I like and I teach the kids in ways that work for them and me.

[5LittleMonkeys]

When I started to homeschool I researched various methods and philosophies of homeschooling and I came away with the belief that none of them, as a whole, were going to work for me and my family. We are too diverse, unique, and quirky. I pulled my dc from public school because I saw them being squished into the cookie cutter form that the system wanted all the dc to fit into. Those methods I researched would have caused me to do the same thing to my dc.

 

My main goal for my dc's education was to create a unique learning environment for each of them, even if that meant 5 different styles and methods. One where I educate the child, not teach according to a plan. One where their weaknesses could be worked on but their strengths could be nurtured and honed. We all want well rounded students, but I'd rather have dc who can do a few things exceptionally and amazingly well, instead of being average in all things.

 

So, my philosophy is different for each of my children. One works best with a more CM\classical approach, one works better with an almost strictly traditional model, and one is a mixture of unschooling, classical and traditional, which I just call the school of Erin. My two little ones haven't divulged their learning styles or strengths to me yet, but when they do I feel good about the fact that I will be able to meet them where they are and nurture them as individual, unique beings instead of forcing them to conform to any one model of education.

[Jayne J]

I think that reading and thinking about different homeschool philosophies is the way that many parents think through what they believe is true about the nature of children and the nature of learning. We all have some ideas about what we believe is the truth about the way our kids learn, even if our idea is that our kids learn in unique, non-cookie cutter ways, and we should adapt our schooling to our specific family. If some people find that they agree with what CM or SWB or Montessori said about those issues, then it seems likely that they will agree with what that philosophy says about other specific issues. Of course one can become so involved in research that the teaching never gets done, but it seems like a good question for parents to struggle with and to at least attempt to answer if they do not already have answers.

 

Which is *not* to say that those who don't ascribe to a specific philosophy haven't answered those questions--maybe they just needed less help:D.

[4everHis]

I don't think you are shallow. Read this post it's brilliant - My Biggest Homeschooling Mistake: Over-thinking Methods & Philosophies - it's on my homeschool inspiration list.

 

Personally, I like Charlotte Mason, Latin Centered Curriculum / Circe / good books. I also like things from WTM, unschooling, Waldorf, and believe in the value of real life being an education - if my kids are out trying to make a fire with a bow drill, they are learning many valuable things. I don't have a label for us - we're just trying to do our best.

 

That was excellent! Thanks for sharing.:)

[Caribbean Queen]

I found this article puzzling.

My Biggest Homeschooling Mistake: Over-thinking Methods & Philosophies

It said, "I never realized that we ought to do what works for us, fits our temperaments, and helps us achieve the goals we are working toward."

Without a philosphy how could she know her goals? How could she know what works? How could she know she is looking to fit her childrens' temperments, instead of being like me, who doesn't value that?

 

 

.

[NorCalMom]

I found this article puzzling.

 

It said, "I never realized that we ought to do what works for us, fits our temperaments, and helps us achieve the goals we are working toward."

Without a philosphy how could she know her goals? How could she know what works? How could she know she is looking to fit her childrens' temperments, instead of being like me, who doesn't value that?

 

 

.

 

I can't speak for the author, but for me the goals come first. The first thing I did was to list what I wanted for my children. After much trial and error in working within different philosophies and throwing many by the wayside, I'm finally figuring out what does actually work in helping me achieve those goals. For me, it is very eclectic. And, I would add that there were many times that I got bogged down in the method that those goals were forgotten.

Edited April 8, 2012 by cowgirl
Spelling

[Walking-Iris]

I always knew I wanted to homeschool so I spent a lot of time in my first pregnancy and my oldest ds's early years researching and reading any homeschooling/education book I could get my hands on at the time. I definitely started to figure out where I would fit in certain philosophies/methods before I even started the real job of teaching my ds. And as he has grown I've changed things to grow with him. And now that I have my two little ones, I feel that I know enough about what I believe works for our family to be able to adapt to their growing personalities and needs.

 

But I do imagine that if I had pulled my ds out of public school in 1st, 2nd grade and didn't really already know the extent of the homeschooling terrain, I would just want something fast. I would probably want to follow a book like WTM or a boxed curriculum like Calvert etc. just to quickly get started. I would probably get a lot of workbooks for different subjects pretty quickly. And then I imagine that those who like what they've found stick with it and those who found a rhythm and comfort level with these things would begin to research more and slowly start to adapt to different things as their confidence was built.

 

But I definitely would want the three r's to be set right away if I pulled my child from school, the philosophy would come later. I think those of us who have always done this have had more time to ponder and think before we set our goals for the nuts and bolts.

[Caribbean Queen]

I can't speak for the author, but for me the goals come first. The first thing I did was to list what I wanted for my children. After much trial and error in working within different philosophies and throwing many by the wayside, I'm finally figuring out what does actually work in helping me achieve those goals.

I still don't "get it." How could someone decide goals with no philosophy?

How do I know if I want Christian or secular? Liberal arts, or 3 Rs? Child-led, or teacher led? Great classics, or Vampires in Underpants Babysit in the Treehouse - the comic book?

Some people think the proper time to teach reading is 8-10 years old. Other's start instructing their newborns with Teach Your Baby to Read. ;)

Doesn't it all come back to our philosophies?

 

Practically, one the main differences in approaches to homeschooling is between the Core Knowldge folks and the Progressive/Child-centered philosophy. I am a Core Knowledge gal and appreciate this article by E.D. Hirsch. Which side of the fence you are on in this debate largely determines how you will conduct your homeschool.

Loved this. Bookmarked the article.

[AnnaM]

I still don't "get it." How could someone decide goals with no philosophy?

How do I know if I want Christian or secular? Liberal arts, or 3 Rs? Child-led, or teacher led? Great classics, or Vampires in Underpants Babysit in the Treehouse - the comic book?

Some people think the proper time to teach reading is 8-10 years old. Other's start instructing their newborns with Teach Your Baby to Read. ;)

Doesn't it all come back to our philosophies?

 

 

Loved this. Bookmarked the article.

 

I don't think it takes a philosophy to know what you want for your children academically. I am not sure I believe it even takes one to know how you want to achieve those goals. I knew I wanted a Christian curriculum because we are a Christian family, I knew I wanted a mix of text, living books, and hands on/unschoolish type things because of trial and error and because I knew that is what I would enjoy teaching. There was very little "deep thinking" involved. I just did what worked.

 

When I started homeschooling, I already had a general idea of how my children learned and I picked my curriculum based on a combination of that and my goals for their education. We tossed what didn't work and we embraced what did.

 

Or maybe I do have a philosophy, we just call it the "do what works philosophy"?

 

Sorry my thoughts are kind of scattered today.

[momma2three]

I too disagree that new homeschoolers shouldn't research philosophy and pick one. I know that I did a great deal of research, and feel very happy that I could hit the ground running.

 

My advice would be more along the lines of: research all the different philosophies you come across, but keep in mind that very few people strictly adhere to one. Most people pick and choose what works for them AND what works for their kids, and you have to remember that just because something works for someone else doesn't mean that it will work for you.

[Singingmom]

That could have been one of the best blog posts I have ever read. Thank you!

 

:iagree: that was brilliant and beyond helpful to me as a newbie! Thanks for posting this!

[mom2koh]

It's funny because we struggled with this.

 

I love CM and sooooo want to be able to say we are CMers here. I have several friends who use AO to T and love it. However, we are not the type to be completely CM. My kids are too active with activities for daily nature walks and such.

 

We are not school at home type of people either. We try to be int he school room at our desks each morning. However in 15 minutes we are sprawled out on the floor following one rabbit trail or another.

 

Unschooling..... Um my hubby would have a cow if I told him we were doing this. :lol:

 

Classical holds a big draw to us. However, we just can't seem to pull it together to adhere to the scheduling in WTM. The majority of my curriculum is pulled from WTM. We just go with the flow here.

 

This year we tried a box curriculum. Didn't work. Next year we are going back to a little of this and a little of that type of thing. To tell the truth? I couldn't be happier about my choice to just use what works for each of my munchkins.

 

For people who are new to homeschooling? I tell them talk to as many people as they can. Visit a co-op. Yes they can read the books. I even loan out my well worn copy of WTM (LOVE the book lists in there). See what will work for them. But, I remind them they are choosing this path because they are thinking of their child! Then I tell them to continue to think of their child. Don't get caught up in one philosophy over another. Don't feel the need to rush and buy the latest program, or buy into the newest philosophy. It may not work for their child. Then the whole reason for them homeschooling (focusing on their child) is lost.

[Mrs Twain]

Disclaimer--I am a strong adherent to E.D. Hirsch's eduational philosophy, and the following is my opinion based on my pro-Core Knowledge view. If you don't agree, then feel free not to read this.

 

There is a debate going on here, and I would postulate that the main issue is between a Core Knowledge viewpoint and a Progressive viewpoint.

 

The Core Knowledge folks can't understand how anyone can have goals without having a philosophy. Of course you need to have an understanding of where you are going before you plan how you are going to get there. The Core Knowedge people do things like plan what information and skills their children need to learn by grade or by stage. They choose curricula based on whether they will help them to accomplish specific academic goals which fulfill the long-term education plan.

 

On the other hand, Progressives say that they don't need to choose or even to research any philosophy. They just go with what "works" for each child every year. Some say that they have goals, but I would guess that their goals are things like having a peaceful homeschool where the children feel happy and non-stressed. Curriculum choices are based at least in part on the current interests of the children or family.

 

If you are a Core Knowledge person like me, then I would urge you to beware of Progressive influences. You will often hear or read things such as these:

 

Rigor in eduation is unnatural and destructive to a child's love of school.

The curriculum should be based around or follow the child's interests.

Children should not be forced to study for long periods, but allowed to play almost all day.

Teaching your child to read early will destroy his love of reading.

Don't worry about teaching [fill in the blank] until the child is "ready".

Drill and kill (particulary in math) should be avoided at all costs.

Testing (especially standardized testing) is bad/unnecessary.

Textbooks are bad/useless/evil.

Etc.

 

If you hear things like this, a red flag should go up in your mind that a Progressive is talking. I would encourage all of you who embrace the Core Knowedge path to stay on track and not be guilted into abandoning your goals for ideas that sound romantic but which do not in general produce good outcomes.

 

If anyone needs help in creating goals for your homeschool, I think a great place to start is with the Core Knowledge K-8 Sequence which can be downloaded for free here:

http://www.coreknowledge.org/download-the-sequence

 

You may not agree with the K-8 Sequence or any other Scope and Sequence completely, but I think it is helpful to have a starting place for planning. It is also valuable to look at an independent resource to find out if there are any gaps in your curriculum.

 

I don't mean to offend anyone, but IMO this is a very important issue which many homeschoolers do not understand. If anyone is interested here again is the link to one of Dr. Hirsch's articles which I find enlightening:

http://www.memoriapress.com/articles/hirsch.html

[momtoamiracle]

I don't think you are shallow. Read this post it's brilliant - My Biggest Homeschooling Mistake: Over-thinking Methods & Philosophies - it's on my homeschool inspiration list.

 

Personally, I like Charlotte Mason, Latin Centered Curriculum / Circe / good books. I also like things from WTM, unschooling, Waldorf, and believe in the value of real life being an education - if my kids are out trying to make a fire with a bow drill, they are learning many valuable things. I don't have a label for us - we're just trying to do our best.

 

 

what a wonderful blog post! thanks for sharing!

[besroma]

I think more experienced homeschoolers err when they advise newbies to figure out their homeschool philosophy before they even start homeschooling. (I also think it's an error to figure out their children's learning styles before they start homeschooling, but that's another discussion, lol.)

 

 

:iagree:

[NASDAQ]

I don't think that CORE Knowledge is a philosophy. It's a specific body of knowledge that Dr. Hirsch's organisation believes that American children should acquire. I haven't gotten the impression from Dr. Hirsch's books -- I've read at least three -- that he is particularly fussed on a given pedagogical method. His central insight is that children need to acquire a set of knowledge (rather than skills) and should do so by the time they enter high school.

 

Dr. Hirsch's works are specific to group schooling. I'm not schooling a group of children; I have one at a time. I have certain preferences because of who I am, but at the end of the day, I would do whatever was necessary to impart the information to my child. It really doesn't matter to me if a given method works better for The Average Child, because that isn't the one I've got.

 

It's a mischaracterisation to say that this sort of pragmatic approach is progressive. The progressive school has very set ideas about how children ought to learn and be taught. They are not neutral between, say, direct instruction vs. discovery learning. They believe discovery learning to be superior, and direct instruction to be unacceptable (or at least undesirable). The pragmatist is willing to us either, depending on what works in their home school and for their specific child.

[mamajag]

One of the best conference speakers I ever heard state that she would NOT share specifics about what she did, rather she'd share specifics about what she did wrong. She had people try to pry her for answers on specifics & she finally said that what she does works for her, but the biggest mistakes homeschooling mamma's make is trying to be like Jane because Jane loves what she's doing and her kids are happy. She'd btdt & didn't want to help others become victims in that sense.

 

I find that approach incredibly insulting and would have walked out on such an overwhelmingly patronizing speaker. I like hearing about what works for other people. It sometimes gives me fantastic insights into situations with my own children, and many times I have come to realize that XYZ curriculum is not for us even though I had been tempted by the advertisements. I would never substitute their judgment for mine, but it is incredibly useful information. The only way sharing this information is harmful is if you believe the person you're talking to is so weak mentally that they can't resist doing what everyone else is. There is no difference between telling what works versus what did not work as either way the above-mentioned weak individuals would be unduly influenced.

[birchbark]

I don't know if this is as much a debate about whether to have a philosophy, as it is a debate on how to arrive at one.

 

Do you arrive at a philosophy by reading other people's ideas?

Do you arrive at a philosophy by watching/working with your children?

Or do you do a mixture of both?

 

I like the idea of researching philosophies after you have some homeschooling experience under your belt. I believe I read recently that Ruth Beechick said the same.

[Sk8ermaiden]

Disclaimer--I am a strong adherent to E.D. Hirsch's eduational philosophy, and the following is my opinion based on my pro-Core Knowledge view. If you don't agree, then feel free not to read this.

 

There is a debate going on here, and I would postulate that the main issue is between a Core Knowledge viewpoint and a Progressive viewpoint.

 

The Core Knowledge folks can't understand how anyone can have goals without having a philosophy. Of course you need to have an understanding of where you are going before you plan how you are going to get there. The Core Knowedge people do things like plan what information and skills their children need to learn by grade or by stage. They choose curricula based on whether they will help them to accomplish specific academic goals which fulfill the long-term education plan.

 

On the other hand, Progressives say that they don't need to choose or even to research any philosophy. They just go with what "works" for each child every year. Some say that they have goals, but I would guess that their goals are things like having a peaceful homeschool where the children feel happy and non-stressed. Curriculum choices are based at least in part on the current interests of the children or family.

[/url]

 

It sounds like you are saying that progressives are the ones in this thread saying they have no need of a philosophy, but core knowledge people do?

 

I guess I disagree. I would absolutely put myself in the core knowledge camp. I have goals for my daughter's education. I want her to be at or above (preferably above) grade level at all times, and to test well. I also want her to enjoy learning and to learn to think critically. I want her to get into the most academically-rigorous private school in the city for high school. Her learning style and interests will have a strong hand in my choice of curriculum, as long as it is a curriculum that will get the job done skill-wise. But I have no desire or need of a philosophy. I will do lots of googling and forum-searching, make a short list of curricula, then get more in-depth or hands on looks at them and pick what I feel will be best for her, adapting as needed. Usually there's also a good bit of asking my mom her opinion (she was an excellent elementary teacher for 30 years.)

 

When I think of researching and choosing a philosophy, I just can't fathom why I would want to box in my daughter's learning in that way. Maybe that stems from the fact that I haven't heard anything about any philosophy that remotely appeals to me. Who knows. But not having a philosophy doesn't mean you don't have strong academic goals.

 

Though I am confused, because what I bolded in your quote is exactly what I do and plan to keep doing. Are you saying you can only do that if you have a philosophy, or that that is the philosophy? Because as best I can tell, my philosophy is "Teach her what she needs to know, in the most enjoyable way possible."

[momma2three]

I find that approach incredibly insulting and would have walked out on such an overwhelmingly patronizing speaker. I like hearing about what works for other people. It sometimes gives me fantastic insights into situations with my own children, and many times I have come to realize that XYZ curriculum is not for us even though I had been tempted by the advertisements. I would never substitute their judgment for mine, but it is incredibly useful information. The only way sharing this information is harmful is if you believe the person you're talking to is so weak mentally that they can't resist doing what everyone else is. There is no difference between telling what works versus what did not work as either way the above-mentioned weak individuals would be unduly influenced.

 

:iagree:

 

What's the point of giving a talk if you're not going to share your expertise? And "my children are FANTASTIC. Totally a secret method to get there, though. Sorry!" does not count as expertise.

[boscopup]

:iagree:

 

What's the point of giving a talk if you're not going to share your expertise? And "my children are FANTASTIC. Totally a secret method to get there, though. Sorry!" does not count as expertise.

 

:iagree:Maybe some people can get stuff out of that. I dunno. I can't. I need specifics. That doesn't mean I'll follow you over a cliff! When I listen to SWB give specifics, it's helpful, even if I don't follow everything she says to do. A lot of people can talk up a good method that sounds great... until you try to implement it, and you find it's just near impossible.

[Kathryn]

I too disagree that new homeschoolers shouldn't research philosophy and pick one. I know that I did a great deal of research, and feel very happy that I could hit the ground running.

 

My advice would be more along the lines of: research all the different philosophies you come across, but keep in mind that very few people strictly adhere to one. Most people pick and choose what works for them AND what works for their kids, and you have to remember that just because something works for someone else doesn't mean that it will work for you.

 

:iagree: I think it helped me tremendously to research before getting started. I made far fewer mistakes than many I've read about when choosing curricula. I also had a better idea of what I didn't want to do. Yes, I've changed some things and reevaluated along the way, but I never felt like I was married to a philosophy and so it was easy for me to do so.

[stripe]

There is a debate going on here, and I would postulate that the main issue is between a Core Knowledge viewpoint and a Progressive viewpoint.

 

I totally disagree that these are the sides of any debate.

 

There are many people who advocate for specific academic outcomes who have nothing to do with Hirsch/Core Knowledge. SWB / WTM would be an example.

 

I also think the term philosophy and style are being used in many different ways.

 

I think the creators of Mater Amabilis had an interesting point when they distinguish between structure and components:

 

"A Charlotte Mason structured education attempts to follow the methodology set out in CM’s own writings as closely as possible. Children follow a set, formal course of study, using a highly efficient method which allows children to cover a broad range of subjects in the course of a short school day.

 

"A Charlotte Mason influenced education gleans ideas such as living books, narration, short lessons and nature study from CM and applies them to a range of different styles of education –“ a particular curriculum, literature based education, relaxed homeschooling or even unschooling."

 

I think also many people just want, say, a decent education for their kid without feeling like they have to join a homeschooling religion.

[Laughingmommy]

I think also many people just want, say, a decent education for their kid without feeling like they have to join a homeschooling religion.

 

:lol: Love this quote!

[NASDAQ]

I think also many people just want, say, a decent education for their kid without feeling like they have to join a homeschooling religion.

 

I will consent to joint the homeschooling religion, but only if I get to be a Bishop. Or a Cardinal. Also, we need hats.

[mudboots]

Sorry for the multiquotes... chalk it up to being a newbie. :001_smile:

 

I think it is wise to decide whether you are a core knowledge person or a progressive. This is an important decision in the big picture of the education of your kids.

 

This seems like one of the most basic decisions a newbie would need to make. The decision for our family was so obvious that I hardly remember thinking about it. It seems like a starting point, though, for finding a philosophy that might fall somewhere on a progressive-to-artificial continuum. Hirsch's article was good food for thought - thanks for that link!

 

The forums are great when they explore a philosophical issue. It's good to think about what you are doing and why.

 

...you can't be sure that you're even in the proper neck of the woods for your family.

 

Here, too... when I found these forums, I knew they fit our family, although I didn't necessarily know why. But when something fits, it's a clue to our hsing style (desiring diversity, maybe?). We may already have a philosophy, even if we don't know the name of it... and we're just looking for the things that fit.

 

They way we do school changes as my son's needs change. I now know I don't have to he stuck with one philosophy. I can pull from different philosophies and do what works. It is good to understand the philosophies and experiment with the styles, but be flexible.

 

Yes, I think it's valuable to understand the basic philosophies so that if something isn't working, you can draw from a stocked toolbox. I loved the blog post linked early in this thread, but she may underestimate the value of her research. It just needed to be balanced. Although I haven't gone overboard on the philosophy research, I spend too much time researching curriculum. (I'm excusing myself as a newbie who is thisclose to placing next year's order. :D But still... I can relate to the need to place most of the focus on my actual children.)

 

What I'm wondering is -- is part of the reason we are resisting being boxed in is because we don't want to join a group of either woodsprite chasing, uniform wearing, Latin declension intoning, or nature crazy stereotypes? Is there something about those stereotypes that makes us want to reject them?

 

This is one of the reasons I was reluctant to homeschool in general, at least. As a Christian + homeschooler, I figured there was no way to escape a certain stereotype.

 

I realized I don't want to be defined in any way except for as me, the individual. I think homeschooling brings that out in people, the desire to NOT be defined by a group.

 

YES.

Edited April 10, 2012 by mudboots

[thefragile7393]

I guess I am a mash too for now. I lean mostly towards CM but I throw in a lot of recommendations from WTM, we do unit studies, some computer games, even some workbooks, like from Spectrum, at times.