What type of Homeschooler am I?

[mom2agang]

I WAS looking at al the different types of Homeschooling methods and I can't say I am a type. My friend says Everyone has a type. But I don't see it. MY Home I like STRong math,Grammar/writing, Spelling, Handwriting.(MUS,Practical arithmetic,Hake,IEW,Spelling workout,Italics) But for history and science We just pick a time period we are interested in. We love the literature type. Most of the time they just read the book and most of the time they don't even do a narration. Sometimes we'll ask what the book is about. But we will do hands on activities with the books, example if they cook a dish we will etc. I do some WTM with the grammar and language arts. But mostly I'm a free bird Type. Which she says is not a type. AM I A TYPE? :bored:

[ByGrace3]

Eclectic is a type ;)

[Parrothead]

Eclectic is a type ;)

 

Exactly!

[Ellie]

Eclectic is a type ;)

 

Yup.

[Durriyyah]

Eclectic is a type ;)

 

 

Yep, I was going to say that. I don't see why you have to fit into a box anyway. Everyone has a leaning, but it doesn't always go only in one direction.

[Farrar]

I actually think eclectic isn't really a type. It's just a way of saying you don't fit into other pre-set types. But so what if you don't? I think there's too much emphasis on these definitions in homeschooling, honestly. And that being a "type" is more important than finding your own philosophy and way. Isn't it so much better to read through things and come to your own conclusions about what is the best way to educate?

[Hunter]

You emphasize skills, and are more relaxed about content than the average family here. That is a type. It is important to know yourself, and how you are different from average. It helps you to put the advice others give you in context when they give it.

 

Over the years or decades we all tend to drift a bit among the methods, but often we can still see patterns among the drifting and adapting. There is nothing wrong with wanting to identify the patterns we see and attempt to use that information.

 

I have always focused on skills before content. Back in the 90's I first rejected Classical because I only knew of content heavy versions. I invented an ultra-radical version of LCC before the book was ever written. You might enjoy reading Art Robinson's website. You don't need the curriculum itself, but I learned a lot by reading the articles at his website. I also liked part 2 of Climbing Parnassus.

 

Your question is as valid as a new runner asking people to describe her gait.

[Ellie]

I actually think eclectic isn't really a type. It's just a way of saying you don't fit into other pre-set types. But so what if you don't? I think there's too much emphasis on these definitions in homeschooling, honestly. And that being a "type" is more important than finding your own philosophy and way. Isn't it so much better to read through things and come to your own conclusions about what is the best way to educate?

:iagree:

[ChicoryChick]

Eclectic is a type ;)

 

:iagree:

[BugsMama]

Meh, fitting into boxes has never really been my thing. I don't see the need to be a "type".

[Crimson Wife]

I would consider an emphasis on the 3 (or 4 if you are religious) R's a "type".

[Ruthie in MS]

Meh, fitting into boxes has never really been my thing. I don't see the need to be a "type".

 

 

 

Me either, but I would say that if I were to fit any "type" it would be eclectic and it looks like that is what you are too.

[regentrude]

Eclectic is a type ;)

 

 

Yep!

[Amy Jo]

Read this. I'm going to re-read it right now.

[alpidarkomama]

I definitely just gave up and call myself eclectic. Unschoolers tell me that they do XYZ because they unschool, and assume I don't do XYZ because I don't call myself an unschooler. We might do XY but not Z. Then when I told someone else we pretty much did WTM-style, they said, "OH! School at home!" which it most certainly doesn't resemble IMHO. So....... whatever! :)