Curriculum with direction?

[DragonFaerie]

I was reading something on another thread that got me thinking (man, I HATE that! :tongue_smilie:). At what age might you start considering your child's "future plans" when planning your curriculum? I mean, if you have a child who is possibly interested in a science-related future career, when might you start to be more science-oriented in your curriculum choices (heavier on the science, lighter on the history, for example)? Or going with lighter science in favor of extra Spanish and French (or whatever) for a kid who is really into languages? Would you ever start choosing a director at all? Do you think that's just for high school electives? Or not even until college? Or would you start following your younger child's lead?

 

ETA: Just to clarify, I don't mean stop teaching any subject. I just mean at some point maybe going less or lighter on the subjects they're not really gravitating toward.

Edited September 2, 2012 by DragonFaerie

[regentrude]

At what age might you start considering your child's "future plans" when planning your curriculum? I mean, if you have a child who is possibly interested in a science-related future career, when might you start to be more science-oriented in your curriculum choices (heavier on the science, lighter on the history, for example)? Or going with lighter science in favor of extra Spanish and French (or whatever) for a kid who is really into languages? Would you ever start choosing a director at all? Do you think that's just for high school electives? Or not even until college?

 

I see the goal of school and high school education to give my children a broad education that prepares them to enter any field in college. I do not consider high school (or earlier years) as the time to specialize.

 

If I have a STEM oriented student, I need to prepare him well in math and science so that he can succeed in college. At the same time, I need to teach him well in literature, history, and languages because he will not have much exposure to these subjects in college, and this may be the only time he studies certain subjects. The same goes for a humanities interested kid: I need to prepare him for the major, but since he won't be taking much math and science in college, high school may be his only chance for a thorough education in these subjects.

 

For me, the time to specialize is in college.

 

My kids' special interests are important for choosing the electives in high school - but in the five core subjects math, science, English, history and foreign language, each will receive a thorough grounding that prepares them for anything.

A word of caution about specializing: my science loving kid who was firmly planning to be a biologist or biophysicist she was six years old has now, as a Junior, discovered her love for literature analysis... all bets are off as to what she wants to study. Teenagers change their mind. I want to educate them in a way that keeps all doors open.

[ErinE]

For me, the time to specialize is in college.

 

My kids' special interests are important for choosing the electives in high school - but in the five core subjects math, science, English, history and foreign language, each will receive a thorough grounding that prepares them for anything.

A word of caution about specializing: my science loving kid who was firmly planning to be a biologist or biophysicist she was six years old has now, as a Junior, discovered her love for literature analysis... all bets are off as to what she wants to study. Teenagers change their mind. I want to educate them in a way that keeps all doors open.

 

:iagree: What regentrude said...

[DragonFaerie]

So y'all are saying that even if you have a science-oriented kid, you would spend an equal amount of time on history and foreign language and everything else even right up through high school? I'm not talking about dropping other subjects in favor of the preferred. I mean like using just one history text for 30 minutes a day, and spending 90 minutes a day doing two different science programs with extra labs.

[Farrar]

I wouldn't. Honestly, by age 12 or 13, I hope that the kids and I will have some concept of what subjects they really shine in and we can do some more focus on them. Particularly in high school, I wouldn't let any child get out of doing the basics in any subject, but I would expect (and would hope that the child would gravitate toward doing) more work at a higher level for some subjects.

[regentrude]

So y'all are saying that even if you have a science-oriented kid, you would spend an equal amount of time on history and foreign language and everything else even right up through high school? I'm not talking about dropping other subjects in favor of the preferred. I mean like using just one history text for 30 minutes a day, and spending 90 minutes a day doing two different science programs with extra labs.

 

The way I plan our courses is (now for high school age): 1 credit each year in the five core subjects for everybody, which means roughly one hour of time spent daily on each of these subjects. Plus extra time (1-2 credits, i.e. daily hours) each year for electives (which may be in the core subjects if my child so chooses).

So yes, I still do a full, rigorous history credit each year for the science interested kid, not an abbreviated or watered down version. The science minded child might choose to spend the time reserved for electives on extra science in addition to the one mandatory science credit each year.

 

Likewise, I would still teach my humanities bound child one rigorous math credit each year, progressing according to his abilities, not just his interests. (By which I mean: if my child is capable of studying calculus, he will study calculus, whether he intends to be a science major or an English major.) But he may choose to spend the extra time reserved for electives on humanities pursuits.

Edited September 3, 2012 by regentrude

[DragonFaerie]

I wouldn't. Honestly, by age 12 or 13, I hope that the kids and I will have some concept of what subjects they really shine in and we can do some more focus on them. Particularly in high school, I wouldn't let any child get out of doing the basics in any subject, but I would expect (and would hope that the child would gravitate toward doing) more work at a higher level for some subjects.

 

This is what I was asking. By around age 12 or 13 you'll start seeing what subjects are their "thing," if I understood you correctly.

 

The way I plan our courses is (now for high school age): 1 credit each year in the five core subjects for everybody, which means roughly one hour of time spent daily on each of these subjects. Plus extra time (1-2 credits, i.e. daily hours) each year for electives (which may be in the core subjects if my child so chooses).

So yes, I still do a full, rigorous history credit each year for the science interested kid, not an abbreviated or watered down version. The science minded child might choose to spend the time reserved for electives on extra science in addition to the one mandatory science credit each year.

 

Likewise, I would still teach my humanities bound child one rigorous math credit each year, progressing according to his abilities, not just his interests. (By which I mean: if my child is capable of studying calculus, he will study calculus, whether he intends to be a science major or an English major.) But he may choose to spend the extra time reserved for electives on humanities pursuits.

 

I would completely expect this by high school.

 

Just for the record, I'm not talking about doing this with my kiddos. They're way too young yet. I was just curious since another thread got me thinking about it.

[Farrar]

So yes, I still do a full, rigorous history credit each year for the science interested kid, not an abbreviated or watered down version.

 

I don't think there should be a watered down version. On the other hand, I think that the minimum in all your core subjects for high school is probably only 50-60% of the work of high school. The rest is elective. That certainly matches my own experience of high school. By my senior year, more than half my courses were "elective" - extra history, regional literature classes, creative writing, French, Italian, Russian...

[SFM]

I wouldn't. Honestly, by age 12 or 13, I hope that the kids and I will have some concept of what subjects they really shine in and we can do some more focus on them. Particularly in high school, I wouldn't let any child get out of doing the basics in any subject, but I would expect (and would hope that the child would gravitate toward doing) more work at a higher level for some subjects.

 

:iagree:

 

Although, my oldest is only 8 I find that I tend to lean more this way as well. Not watering down the other subjects but fine tuning the things they are interested or gifted in. I knew by the time I was in 7th grade that I had a passion for history and I am so glad that my parents really encouraged that and allowed me to double up on classes to fine tune my passion.

[momma2three]

I see the goal of school and high school education to give my children a broad education that prepares them to enter any field in college. I do not consider high school (or earlier years) as the time to specialize.

 

If I have a STEM oriented student, I need to prepare him well in math and science so that he can succeed in college. At the same time, I need to teach him well in literature, history, and languages because he will not have much exposure to these subjects in college, and this may be the only time he studies certain subjects. The same goes for a humanities interested kid: I need to prepare him for the major, but since he won't be taking much math and science in college, high school may be his only chance for a thorough education in these subjects.

 

For me, the time to specialize is in college.

 

My kids' special interests are important for choosing the electives in high school - but in the five core subjects math, science, English, history and foreign language, each will receive a thorough grounding that prepares them for anything.

 

Well said. I wouldn't let my kids cut back on any of the core subjects (which I'd consider to be English, literature, math, science, history, 1 foreign language, and something to do with the arts: art history, music appreciation, drawing, etc) until college.

 

For two reasons. First of all, with a solid foundation, they can go into any field of study they want. Secondly, colleges want to see high school students with a strong course of study of these subjects.

 

They can study extra things at any time. Right now that looks more like rabbit trails and little thematic units.

[Karen in CO]

I see the goal of school and high school education to give my children a broad education that prepares them to enter any field in college. I do not consider high school (or earlier years) as the time to specialize.

 

If I have a STEM oriented student, I need to prepare him well in math and science so that he can succeed in college. At the same time, I need to teach him well in literature, history, and languages because he will not have much exposure to these subjects in college, and this may be the only time he studies certain subjects. The same goes for a humanities interested kid: I need to prepare him for the major, but since he won't be taking much math and science in college, high school may be his only chance for a thorough education in these subjects.

 

For me, the time to specialize is in college.

 

My kids' special interests are important for choosing the electives in high school - but in the five core subjects math, science, English, history and foreign language, each will receive a thorough grounding that prepares them for anything.

A word of caution about specializing: my science loving kid who was firmly planning to be a biologist or biophysicist she was six years old has now, as a Junior, discovered her love for literature analysis... all bets are off as to what she wants to study. Teenagers change their mind. I want to educate them in a way that keeps all doors open.

 

What she said....

College is the time to specialize. My ds has a talent for languages and hates math. He took math through pre-calc in high school, but had many more foreign language elective credits than were required. I required the same from him as I would have if he had wanted to specialize in something while letting him explore his interests with his electives. I think a well-rounded education has served him well in college.

 

Seriously, in elementary school, he wanted to be a writer. In middle school he wanted to be an artist. In high school, he wanted to be an astronaut, then he then he wanted to be a spy. He's majoring in international relations with a minor in Japanese.

Edited September 3, 2012 by Karen in CO

[Karen in CO]

I wouldn't. Honestly, by age 12 or 13, I hope that the kids and I will have some concept of what subjects they really shine in and we can do some more focus on them. Particularly in high school, I wouldn't let any child get out of doing the basics in any subject, but I would expect (and would hope that the child would gravitate toward doing) more work at a higher level for some subjects.

 

My ds didn't find his thing until he was 15 or 16. We thought he was going in a completely different direction until he was older when we found he has an amazing ear for languages. Please don't expect a 12 or 13 year old to have a direction. I never found "my thing" until I was in college and took a required class in a different science field. At 12, I was pretty sure I was a humanities person, or at least I hoped I was.

[regentrude]

On the other hand, I think that the minimum in all your core subjects for high school is probably only 50-60% of the work of high school. The rest is elective. By my senior year, more than half my courses were "elective" - extra history, regional literature classes, creative writing, French, Italian, Russian...

 

If you go by the minimum graduation requirements, yes - but that is not what we are doing; we orient ourselves at the admission requirements of the most selective schools: four years each of math, science, English, history and foreign language to the tune of at least 1+ hour per day, more for the dual enrollment courses and lab sciences. This being 50% would mean ten school hours (time on task), not counting extracurriculars and volunteer work. Not what I want for my kids, and also not the typical high school experience.

Senior year or not, my kids will still have those required five subjects.

Edited September 3, 2012 by regentrude

[sagira]

I agree completely with regentrude. We can always go deeper and offer more challenging material, but I wouldn't compromise on quality or quantity in other areas. My goal is well rounded individuals who think for themselves and are comfortable with both history and science.

[FairProspects]

Well, I do think there is a time to specialize, and I tend to think it is the last 2 years of high school.

 

Ideally, a student would have all 5 core areas every year of high school, but in reality, most students will be dropping some subject in 11th or 12th grade for a double up in an area they plan on pursuing as a career. Personally, I ended up dropping Calculus 2 but doubled up on English, taking both Creative Writing and Honors Literature senior year.

 

It probably depends how far up each sequence a student gets by the end of high school, but I wouldn't have a problem with a junior or senior specializing and dropping one subject to double up on another. (Heck, I think I'll be lucky to drag my dyslexic ds through 2 years of foreign language let alone 4.)

[Farrar]

My ds didn't find his thing until he was 15 or 16. We thought he was going in a completely different direction until he was older when we found he has an amazing ear for languages. Please don't expect a 12 or 13 year old to have a direction. I never found "my thing" until I was in college and took a required class in a different science field. At 12, I was pretty sure I was a humanities person, or at least I hoped I was.

 

Having taught middle and high school for many years, I feel like kids at this age are just happier when they have more control over what they're learning about and can specialize to some extent. I don't think that means you need to go into that field. It's hardly permanent at that age. And a good education should be broad enough and deep enough in every field to get a child into a good college so they have that option if they choose to take it. I would never short change a child's math, science, or English. However, if the question is at what age do I intend to start tailoring the subjects more to my kids' interests, then yes, by the end of middle school, I definitely hope to be doing that. Before that point, we follow rabbit trails now a little, but my kids aren't super into that and as long as they're up for it, I want to give them as broad an exposure as they'll take to all kinds of content subjects. And the real focus is going to be skills in the elementary years anyway.

 

ETA: I think what I'm trying to say is that I see the child's investment in their education as really key beginning around that age and certainly by the start of high school. And if they don't find their "thing" until later, that's fine. I just want it to be a partnership at that point. And I think turning over greater control of what the elective study is a big piece of that. Algebra, Geometry, a year of US history, four years of science, etc. etc. are not negotiable, but a lot of other things can be and that's the age at which I think kids should be taking control of what they study - while they're at home, while they're still young and being guided by the parent.

Edited September 3, 2012 by farrarwilliams

[Farrar]

One of the things that always appalls me a little about education in some countries and in some places here in the US is that kids are tracked really, really young sometimes. So kids have to chose vocational or college bound by age 14 or so. And there's no way to alter that path.

 

One of the great things about homeschooling is that I feel like a child can be gung ho into one subject and you can beef that up for them. And then, two years later, they're not so much anymore. And better that they figured that out before going and majoring in it in college. But then you can change gears and beef up a different subject. Or make everything more well rounded.

 

I know that a lot of people on this board are hoping to follow a pretty set path for schooling at every stage, but I just don't plan to.

[jujsky]

I wouldn't be inclined to go lighter with any subjects, but I might go heavier with subjects that interest them.

[regentrude]

I think what I'm trying to say is that I see the child's investment in their education as really key beginning around that age and certainly by the start of high school. And if they don't find their "thing" until later, that's fine. I just want it to be a partnership at that point. And I think turning over greater control of what the elective study is a big piece of that.

 

I absolutely agree that students should have a say in their education. I wrote about our requirements which may seem restrictive, but I'd like to explain how this is possible with the kids actually having a lot of freedom within this framework and ownership of their education. For example, they get to choose:

-the focus of their history studies. DD's history leans more towards arts and literature focused, DS will choose a strong military history focus.

-literary works to study. I would say DD selects to 80% of her own literature, with few mandatory works added by me.

-topics of their writing assignments.

-which of the sciences they want to study at high school level and for which they want to do college level work in high school.

-their foreign language.

They are completely free to design their daily schedule and work on whatever subject they choose for how long, as long as it averages out over the course of months.

And, of course, they pick the remaining electives.

So my point is, not actually specializing does not preclude the students from being strongly involved in, and making decisions about, their education. Like you, I consider this an important goal.

Edited September 3, 2012 by regentrude

[Joyoflearning]

And a good education should be broad enough and deep enough in every field to get a child into a good college so they have that option if they choose to take it. I would never short change a child's math, science, or English. However, if the question is at what age do I intend to start tailoring the subjects more to my kids' interests, then yes, by the end of middle school, I definitely hope to be doing that. Before that point, we follow rabbit trails now a little, but my kids aren't super into that and as long as they're up for it, I want to give them as broad an exposure as they'll take to all kinds of content subjects. And the real focus is going to be skills in the elementary years anyway.

 

ETA: I think what I'm trying to say is that I see the child's investment in their education as really key beginning around that age and certainly by the start of high school. And if they don't find their "thing" until later, that's fine. I just want it to be a partnership at that point. And I think turning over greater control of what the elective study is a big piece of that. Algebra, Geometry, a year of US history, four years of science, etc. etc. are not negotiable, but a lot of other things can be and that's the age at which I think kids should be taking control of what they study - while they're at home, while they're still young and being guided by the parent.

 

One of the great things about homeschooling is that I feel like a child can be gung ho into one subject and you can beef that up for them. And then, two years later, they're not so much anymore. And better that they figured that out before going and majoring in it in college. But then you can change gears and beef up a different subject. Or make everything more well rounded.

 

I know that a lot of people on this board are hoping to follow a pretty set path for schooling at every stage, but I just don't plan to.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

[Mom-ninja.]

then he then he wanted to be a spy. He's majoring in international relations with a minor in Japanese.

 

So.....he will be a spy. :tongue_smilie: Completely joking

 

 

My oldest loves and lives science. We still do the same amount of history if he didn't love science. I will say that I've thrown in The Story of Science along with our other history course because I want him to know that science *is* history and not just present and future.

 

As for diving deeper into science he does that with his own free time. He reads science related books for free reading, he is always doing little experiments and projects. I can never find my scotch tape or batteries. He is constantly tinkering. I give him free reign and give supplies as needed. None of his projects, experiments, or free reading has to be related to anything we're studying at that time in science.

 

I also try to tie other topics into science related things and vice versa when I can in order to grab his attention. We were just doing a lesson in WWE and the passage was history. I can't remember right now what the topic was (it's 3 am and I don't feel well) but I brought up Einstein (his idol) and Einstein's history like where he was born and raised and why that was significant to know. Along with what happened in Germany building up to and during WWII and how that played a huge role in Einstein's life and ultimately directly influenced WWII. So I got in a good history lesson with Einstein. :001_smile:

[Mandy in TN]

If we are being flat honest, some of this just frankly depends on ability. Some children could go to college and major in just about anything they want. Some children are going to be lucky to get into college.

 

More important than broad or rigorous subject matter, I want my sons to be responsible, decent, moral persons who possess positive and productive physical and mental habits. I want them to be able to apply these habits to whatever they choose to do in life whether that is a tinker, a tailor, a soldier, or a sailor. Neither my self worth nor theirs hinges upon any of them having a college degree.

 

So, keep in mind that this is the place from which I operate. Some kids will have enough work getting through alg1, geometry, alg2 and 2 years of foreign language. Many kids simply will not make it through Gilgamesh or Beowulf or Shakespeare. I know that some here will be mortified at the thought, but this is the reality. (But guess what- this doesn't mean that they won't be able to go to college and do just fine. It won't be Harvard or MIT, but let's face it most kids don't go to these schools.)

 

If a parent and child decide to spend high school getting a cosmetology license or a welding apprenticeship instead of completing broad, rigorous high school classes, then that is their choice and it may be the very best thing for their situation.

 

 

It probably depends how far up each sequence a student gets by the end of high school, but I wouldn't have a problem with a junior or senior specializing and dropping one subject to double up on another. (Heck, I think I'll be lucky to drag my dyslexic ds through 2 years of foreign language let alone 4.)

:iagree:My dyslexic son struggled through 2 years of Latin that I do think helped his English and 2 years of Spanish. He took college algebra through dual enrollment and that is the highest level of math he will ever take. I am just thrilled he made it through that class. He also took US History 1 and 2 and Computer Applications through dual enrollment. He did read quite a bit of rigorous literature, but I don't know that it has been or will be of particular value in his life.

 

My average joe struggled through 2 years of high school Spanish. He completed 6 credits of high school level science- none of them AP, dual enrollment, or CLEP. He liked art, so he had a number of fine art and art history credits including 2 humanities classes through dual enrollment. He finished pre-calc at home his junior year and instead of taking calc his senior year he took precalc-alg and precalc-trig through dual enrollment. He also took psychology, US history 2, and composition through dual enrollment. The classes he completed through dual enrollment took care of 5 general studies requirements for his college degree- the fine arts requirement, both math/ practical reasoning requirements, the social sciences requirement, and the western history requirement. His second humanities class and his composition class transferred as electives. He is set to jump into his degree requirements. He only read 1/2 or maybe 1/4 of literature that the oldest read.

 

I don't think that my oldest was shorted by taking less rigorous math and only a few less rigorous, typical science courses. He took what he was able to take. I don't think that my second was shorted not taking Latin or by reading less and less rigorous literature. He enjoyed the science he covered even though it wasn't particularly rigorous and he took the art classes not because he plans to be an artist, but because he enjoyed them.

 

They both are now in college and my oldest is beginning his junior year. Neither were top tier college material and no amount of rigorous material or broader courses would have changed that.

 

Do whatever is best for your family and your children. This is something that you will need to evaluate independent of other families' experiences. If a more narrow, focused path makes sense for your child, go for it. Your/ their journey through home education in high school may not look like anyone else's journey and that is alright. ;)

 

Mandy

Edited September 3, 2012 by Mandy in TN

[Seshet]

I don't think specializing has to be separate from a well-rounded education. I don't/won't ever cut back on a subject I feel is important. However, if they want to cut back on a course they asked to add in, I'm fine with that. If they want to add extra courses or make their courses even more rigorous, we'll do that.

 

I want them to get a well-rounded education. They are expected to take Math, Language Arts/English, Art, Music, Science, and History every year from K on. They start a foreign language by 2nd or 3rd grade. They have to take Geography for several years. They take all of those subjects in elementary & they carry on through High School.

 

However, they can ask to add courses. They can ask to add specific topics to a course. They can do that any year. Even in elementary, I am more than happy to incorporate their interests, as long as it doesn't mean short changing a required subject. They know, if the courses they asked to add start to interfere with their work in any required course, those extra courses will be cut. They could just pursue their interests on their own time, and with some of their interests they do. However, the more academic ones & ones related to what they want to do with their lives, they often ask to add to the school day. I have a very hard time saying no to things like extra Science courses or additional Math programs. Unless I really have reason to believe that something they want to add to the day will disrupt or interfere with their required work, I will let them try whatever they ask to add (as long as we can afford it).

 

I want to encourage them to follow their dreams. However, I also need to make sure that they are prepared for life after graduation, which includes life skills, job skills, and being prepared to get into & succeed in any college they want. So, I strike a balance between courses for a well-rounded education, skills they'll need in life, and specialization in the areas they hope to pursue as careers. It takes a bit of work, organization, time, and effort, and the kids don't have the short days many homeschooled kids have, but we maintain that balance quite nicely.

[EKS]

I actually did the opposite. I knew my son was going to get an excellent science education in college (likely to the exclusion of the humanities), so I squeezed in as much history and literature as I possibly could.

 

That said, from the time he was small, I made sure he got a solid math education, and starting in 6th grade, I made sure I was using rigorous science resources.

[abba12]

It seems I'm in the minority on this one, and it's a great example of why I tell parents over and over that your homeschool will depend completely on your personal priorities and aims, and you just can't compare families. As a graduated homeschooler, I, and most of the others I knew, did have tailored high school years. It was the done thing in our area back then. One of the key aims of homeschooling was a completely individualized education, and as such, a child who hated history usually dropped it by 10th grade, in favor of having time to spend on some work experience, or extra science study, or whatever. There was no point studying something you would never use when that time could be spent studying something you could. Also, one of the biggest aims of homeschooling was not to put knowledge in their head, but to teach them how to learn so they could put knowledge in their own heads, and give them a love of learning so they wanted to.

 

For me, each subject has 'mandatory knowledge' and 'optional knowledge'. All children need to know basic algebra and geometry, but lets face it, how many of us have ever used calculus, or even trig. All kids need to know the general facts of science, but they don't necessarily need high level knowledge, for example, every child should know what photosynthesis is as a general concept that effects our daily lives, but I don't consider memorizing the periodic table to be a terribly important life skill. All children should have an overview of history and general knowledge, but there's a difference between understanding the industrial revolution, and learning names, dates and indepth details, when have you ever recalled those facts since high school? And all kids should know how to read at an adult level, but most will never need to read Shakespeare.

 

Most importantly, we will all 'miss' things, we can't teach our children everything they will ever want to know, so if my children ever wish to know these more advanced things, or things I have neglected to teach, my top priority is giving them the ability and curiosity to teach themselves. One way to do that is to follow their interests and teach them to learn what they want to learn. My husband is currently teaching himself trig because he wants to know it for a newfound hobby. In high school he spent that time as an apprentice, and had he been forced to study trig instead of apprenticing, he probably would have hated it, forgotten all the trig within a year or two anyway, and missed an opportunity that WAS beneficial to him at the time.

 

Most subjects tend to move from what I personally consider mandatory knowledge to optional knowledge around the grade 8 or 9 mark, so this is where I would really begin to allow a lot more diversity, depending on where my child wants to be. The way I see it working in my home is grades K-4 being math and english heavy, with fun science and history and other electives built in in a non-formal manner, think magic school bus, science experiment books, history documentaries, museum trips, etc. Grade 5 we begin to get serious and grades 5-8 are spent formally studying the 'core subjects' to the level I consider necessary. Since history is often taught as a 4 year cycle, that fits pretty perfectly. 4 years is plenty of time to formally cover the fundamentals and even a fair bit of indepth science. Then grade 9 is where choices come in, kids start to be old enough to do things outside of school, like work or apprentice, or take some college courses. We start to focus on interest areas and where they think they'd like to go, and really individualize it to get them where they want to be when they graduate. I would still require math until advanced algebra and geometry are complete, and english would be mandatory right through, but individualized for their needs, but I don't see any other subject being compulsory at that point (of course, they must be doing SOMETHING, just doing english and math is not an option either, progress has to happen, just not necessarily in science and/or history)

 

That's my take on it, but I obviously have different goals and ideas about education than many people here, being from Australia where college is not considered a default choice, and having aims for homeschooling outside of academics.

[IsabelC]

I agree with a lot of what the pp said. If you have the desire and ability to specialize a little bit, a little earlier, why not do it? There's always going to be a fine balance, because education has a number of distinct purposes, including to learn general adult level knowledge, and to prepare one for a future career or life path. But that balance is always going to be a bit easier to achieve in a home education setting.

 

being from Australia where college is not considered a default choice

I don't know what part of Australia you're from, and maybe it's a social milieu thing, but college was certainly a default choice for me and everybody I went to school with.

 

 

 

ETA: I'm guessing y'all are drawing a distinction between adding things you have room for, and adding things that mean something else is squeezed out? I also wonder whether it would change if we considered curriculum choices to be more similar to extra curricular choices, for which it seems accepted to specialize as early as you like?

Edited September 4, 2012 by Hotdrink

[Hunter]

Over the decades, I've had my pet educational philosophies that I've wanted to follow with my boys and now with my tutoring students. But philosophies take back seat to life sometimes, and things played out in ways I NEVER expected.

 

College doesn't always take place at 18 or ever. College isn't always direct entry into a 4 year college. Some students walk a crooked path, or a circular path.

 

If you focus on character, learning to work hard, physical and mental health, and spirituality, a student can only get so lost in life. They might make some unusual moves or mistakes, but will find their way eventually, sometimes to places the parents cannot even BEGIN to imagine. As was mentioned by abba12, as long as they are working HARD at SOMETHING, it'll be okay.

 

My oldest started specializing at 12. I fought him tooth and nail. He fought me back. At 14 he was more than 100 pounds and almost a foot bigger than me. Growing to manhood was a confusing time for him being brought up in domestic abuse. I let some things slide with him, and others I would have literally died before slacking on. He was correct, right across the board, in the things I let him slack on. I was wrong. He always wanted to work in retail. He's been VERY successful in retail :001_huh: I don't get it, but... it's his life.

 

My younger son appeared to be headed for a STEM career, and had probably only read 5 pieces of fiction in his life. At 15 he started devouring Shakespeare and Greek Literature and started planning for a degree in Classics. :001_huh: Then he decided a couple years later he didn't want to complete the volume of work that would require, and started looking more at computers again. I didn't correctly see either of those sudden shifts coming.

 

So I had a pretty bad record of predicting what either of my boys would do. But all I did "right" with my younger really didn't help him much. And all I did "wrong" with my older, was what led to his current success. Go figure.

 

So character and health first, and just remember a door seldom closes FOREVER just because an 18 year old didn't do xyz before he was 18, if he wants to kick it open later. A few years after my oldest had graduated from college and was financially secure, he tossed around the idea of quitting his job, moving back East and going to art school. The divorce was over and I was housed again, and I could have let him live with me. We could have made it all happen if he wanted it badly enough. But he didn't.

 

I've seen one friend go back to school in her 40s and after proving herself at the junior college was recruited by many selective colleges in the city. I went with her to look at many of them, because it was free food. You really can TOTALLY muck up your life, I mean TOTALLY TOTALLY TOTALLY muck up your life and still get recruited by the best :lol: They just think it makes you interesting. :smilielol5:

Edited September 4, 2012 by Hunter

[abba12]

I don't know what part of Australia you're from, and maybe it's a social milieu thing, but college was certainly a default choice for me and everybody I went to school with.

 

 

I think in many ways it depends on the school you attend, I know some schools where everyone seemed to plan to go to uni. But in my area, among my friends and family, I only know 3 who went to uni. I know a half dozen went to tafe, 2 went and got traineeships, and another 4 or so went straight into the workforce. Maybe it's our economic area, a lower income area of brisbane, but practical training like tafe and traineeships have generally been preferred among the people I know. It's getting harder to get by in office and corporate work without that uni degree, I know that much, but the general attitude I tend to encounter is that, unless you want to do something that requires uni courses, there's no point going for the sake of going. On the other hand, when I talk to Americans, most of them never seem to use the degrees they worked for, some of them never intended to use them in the first place (people who majored in music or literature etc). Of the Aussie uni students I know, one of them hates the field he's in and is trying to switch, one couldn't get work in the field he studied for, and only one is really where he wants to be.

 

Uni has it's place, don't get me wrong, if your kiddo wants to be a doctor or lawyer they'll be going to uni. I've just never seen it as an automatic next step from high school. There's so many options.

[Mandy in TN]

It seems I'm in the minority on this one, and it's a great example of why I tell parents over and over that your homeschool will depend completely on your personal priorities and aims, and you just can't compare families. As a graduated homeschooler, I, and most of the others I knew, did have tailored high school years. It was the done thing in our area back then. One of the key aims of homeschooling was a completely individualized education, and as such, a child who hated history usually dropped it by 10th grade, in favor of having time to spend on some work experience, or extra science study, or whatever. There was no point studying something you would never use when that time could be spent studying something you could. Also, one of the biggest aims of homeschooling was not to put knowledge in their head, but to teach them how to learn so they could put knowledge in their own heads, and give them a love of learning so they wanted to.

I'm someone who has BTDT with two home educated graduates and I am right there with you.

 

If you focus on character, learning to work hard, physical and mental health, and spirituality, a student can only get so lost in life. They might make some unusual moves or mistakes, but will find their way eventually, sometimes to places the parents cannot even BEGIN to imagine. As was mentioned by abba12, as long as they are working HARD at SOMETHING, it'll be okay.

:iagree:

 

More important than broad or rigorous subject matter, I want my sons to be responsible, decent, moral persons who possess positive and productive physical and mental habits. I want them to be able to apply these habits to whatever they choose to do in life whether that is a tinker, a tailor, a soldier, or a sailor.

:D

 

Mandy