"Tyranny" of Textbooks? NOT A DEBATE

[PachiSusan]

There is another thread talking about this book. It's not really what I'm asking about though the title brought it up for me.

 

Until I came to this forum, I have never run across a subset of people who really think text books are the spawn of the devil and should be avoided at all costs.

 

Of course I'm exaggerating, but I hope through the hyperbole, you get the point.

 

I don't understand why text books are tools to be AVOIDED. Could someone explain it to me so that I can see what I'm missing and understand that POV a little better?

 

Where I'm coming from: There is room for all types of learning and some kids thrive on text books and workbooks and some shrivel up and die if they have to read one more text book, and every type of learner in between.

 

I've always seen text books and workbooks as a must have for school.

 

I've rarely been exposed to "living books" and teaching history with "historical fiction" and all the things that go with the more Charlotte Mason'y teaching/learning styles until this forum. Perhaps that's why I don't get it?

 

Please, this isn't to debate whether textbooks are useful or not - It's really for me to try to understand a POV I personally need help understanding. :)

 

It's also quite possible that I've completely mis-read the "anti-textbook" crowd, and thus this post as well.

[lewelma]

here is a thread from the high school board on the same topic. http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/450867-why-are-textbooks-considered-bad/

[PachiSusan]

By "not for debate" I mean that I am not looking to be derisive against textbooks but to understand the reasoning behind it. I said it to assure I was not putting the thought process down and didn't want anyone else to do so either. I simply wanted to understand.

 

I don't understand what you are saying. You don't want a debate about whether textbooks are useful, but you want people to explain their views? I'm pretty sure that will lead to a debate, but not necessarily a nasty one.

 

Personally, I use some textbooks — especially for math. I don't see any problem with textbooks as a concept, but I didn't like the very dry ones I used in public school as a kid much. You can use textbooks and still read books about the subject, and you can even use the textbook as a guide as to which types of books to read.

[PachiSusan]

Thank you. I will go read it. I am pretty sure from the length of the thread that it myst containt andwer. Is this a topic that is more related to the high school years?

 

 

here is a thread from the high school board on the same topic. http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/450867-why-are-textbooks-considered-bad/

[lewelma]

I think it is more related to the high school years, because you can easily avoid textbooks up to about 8th grade. At that point, many classes become textbook based, so if you don't want to use textbooks, you need to have a good reason.

 

For me, I will definitely have my children use textbooks for math and science, but english will be taught by interaction with me and my knowledge, and history will be taught with nonfiction books, not textbooks. History for us is about discussion, interaction, thinking -- not about systematic coverage of all topics. We do 10 topics in depth each year, rather than a survey which is more common in a textbook.

 

Ruth in NZ

[PachiSusan]

Ha ha, Ruth!! I got to pg 2 of that thread and I POSTED IN IT!!!!!!! In fact your post in it about reading textbooks was one I was blown away with. I didn't remember the thread subject as being this one!

[Mom0012]

I don't think there is anything wrong with using textbooks. I have just found that using living books for history and science has been a far more enjoyable way for us to learn through the elementary and middle school years. I'm sure we will be using at least some textbooks in high school though, and we've used them in elementary for math and grammar.

[momma2three]

I don't know, I LOVE textbooks. I remember always being so excited ever September to get all of my new textbooks for the year. I'd go home and read them all. And then at the end of the year I'd be so sad that we'd never finished the textbooks.

 

I imagine it's a rejection of the idea that "everything you need to know" could possibly be fit in this one book, mass produced for national (or state) consumption with no room for individual interests?

[Candid]

I lean away from big comprehensive text books on history because they are usually written in large publishing houses by a team of people who are trying to cover as many bases in terms of state level history mandates. This makes for a dull book. On the other hand there are single era or event textbooks that I do use because they are written by usually one expert in that particular topic and generally they are both more interesting and more in depth not only giving more facts but highlighting controversies in scholarship and thinking about a time period.

 

For younger students, it is easy to avoid texts as students get older it does get harder.

 

I also cringe just a little when folks talk about teaching history and using historical fiction. Historical fiction is fine for younger children, but you shouldn't be misled into thinking you are getting into the time period's way of thinking. That probably isn't happening. Instead you are reading what the time period would be like for modern people. For more on this theme, see this blog post: http://iwouldneverwearorange.blogspot.com/2009/06/fie-on-historical-fiction.html

[shanvan]

I lean away from big comprehensive text books on history because they are usually written in large publishing houses by a team of people who are trying to cover as many bases in terms of state level history mandates. This makes for a dull book. On the other hand there are single era or event textbooks that I do use because they are written by usually one expert in that particular topic and generally they are both more interesting and more in depth not only giving more facts but highlighting controversies in scholarship and thinking about a time period.

 

Can you share some examples or any real gems for history? I'm in the process of putting together a booklist for next year. Currently working on the 10th graders list, but will also be looking for books for my 6th grader later.

 

For younger students, it is easy to avoid texts as students get older it does get harder.

 

I also cringe just a little when folks talk about teaching history and using historical fiction. Historical fiction is fine for younger children, but you shouldn't be misled into thinking you are getting into the time period's way of thinking. That probably isn't happening. Instead you are reading what the time period would be like for modern people. For more on this theme, see this blog post: http://iwouldneverwe...al-fiction.html

 

 

I completely agree about historical fiction.

[SarahW]

I believe there are textbooks and then there are textbooks. A textbook is a systematic introduction of a topic, starting from the simplest ideas and gradually teaching familiarity with the more complicated. So from what I'm using Mr. Q and KISS, and even LOF, fall into that category for me. And then there are the textbooks, the overly-comprehensive, written by subcontractors, books with too many stupid questions in the margins.

 

With the first type of textbook I find it easy for me to add in additional materials on various topics as needed to keep things interesting. The second type is like a prison.

 

I like reading "living books" as a supplement, but I believe in the systematic approach, even on the lowest level. Maybe I take the classical approach too seriously, but I believe in building a solid familiarity with the basic body of knowledge. When it comes to something like science I, uh, wouldn't have ever thought to introduce the terms "biotic" and "abiotic" to my kid while reading a random book from the library. But now that we know it we can discuss it over french toast (maple syrup is biotic, so is sugar, that doesn't make it healthy for you).

 

For subjects a know something about I am much more willing to wing it without using one single textbook. I feel comfortable finding those interesting one-subject books written by an expert, and then lining them up in a somewhat logical fashion. But when it comes to subjects I am shaky in I really don't want my kid to be ignorant of something just because of my own limitations. So I bring in an expert (a real expert) to teach both of us.

[Laura Corin]

I agree that it's a missed opportunity to avoid all textbooks when there are some great ones out there and they suit some children/families well.

 

L

[8filltheheart]

I don't eschew textbooks in favor of historical fiction. ;) I'm another one that is not comfortable with that description. Biographies and non-fiction books on topics are not the same as educating via historical fiction. :)

 

That said, we don't use textbooks until we have to for multiple reasons. They "pre-digest" history and science and give the student the Reader's Digest condensed "highlighted" version of information. Textbooks written for lower levels of education are not written by experts in their field but mass produced by textbook publishers based on the narrow definition of scope/sequence requirements.

 

Conversely, whole books go into far more depth, give students the opportunity to process the bigger picture, and require students to discern key details themselves. They are well-researched and written in an engaging manner.

 

For an interesting insight into textbook publication, try reading the Harold Jacobs thread on the high school forum. His textbook publisher is getting out of the business.

[shanvan]

here is a thread from the high school board on the same topic. http://forums.welltr...considered-bad/

 

I think this thread really gets into all of the issues with textbooks. Just like living books, there are good and bad textbooks. It also relates the difficulties students can have with a more difficult text (not poorly written, just difficult).

 

There are a myriad of reasons, both good and bad, that people might avoid textbooks. Still, if you check out the classified board it's apparent that quite a few people still use them.

 

It really isn't surprising that you have not run into people who question textbooks until coming to this board. Not too many public school parents are delving into the nitty gritty of the content being read by their kids. There are some, but mostly homeschooling (or afterschooling) parents are going to be spending their time thinking about the best way to convey information or teach skills.

 

 

Then there is the issue of texts in public schools being revised constantly and the reading level going downhill with each revision. It really happens. Before I stopped teaching the elementary school where I taught was in the process of choosing a new reading curriculum. The one the committee ended up with had lots of bells and whistles, but was at least 1-2 grade levels behind the 'old & outdated' curriculum they were tossing. I am highly suspicious of modern textbooks for that reason.

[Erin]

I don't know, I LOVE textbooks. I remember always being so excited ever September to get all of my new textbooks for the year. I'd go home and read them all. And then at the end of the year I'd be so sad that we'd never finished the textbooks.

I was the same way, particularly regarding my literature anthologies. I read them cover to cover. :) And my school always used texts that included the entire book/poem/play/etc. rather than just selections.

I vividly remember reading Flowers for Algernon and The Importance of Being Earnest, for example, out of my lit. text books in high school.

[Corraleno]

I generally dislike textbooks designed for ES/MS/HS for these reasons:

 

1. often written by committees, with no coherent writing style or POV

2. throw in everything but the proverbial kitchen sink in order to cover as many state standards as possible

3. most are horribly designed, and look more like the back of a cereal box than a book

4. content is too often predigested & dumbed down

5. the questions and assessments are often little more than regurgitation, with no critical thinking required

 

That said, I do use HS textbooks for math & foreign language, although the ones I like are single-author (or joint authors) and the design is totally plain and "old-fashioned" — e.g. Athenaze, Wheelock, Jacobs, Foerster, etc.

 

For science, I prefer intro-level college texts. They are authored by experts in their fields (not "curriculum development specialists"); they have a more coherent style & POV; the material covered is what the author feels is necessary, not what a bunch of school boards feel should be crammed in there; and the design does not assume that the reader is a helpless idiot who needs 8 levels of headings and 12 different colors with "key terms" pre-highlighted and a "Connections!" sidebar on every page.

 

For history, I use TTC lectures, nonfiction, biographies, and primary sources.

 

Jackie

[Farrar]

I'm open to textbooks. They're just never my default.

 

I have found that there are a lot more great textbooks known in the homeschool world than I ever knew when I was teaching professionally. I did come to see them as the enemy when I was teaching... because they kind of were. I also think schools overinvest in them, to be honest, so there's a financial piece there that I have issues with. But I'm much more open to them now that I've seen better ones that I typically had a choice of using either as a learner or later as a teacher.

[tammyw]

 

 

Oh definitely. Not all textbooks are the same. That is for sure.

 

I do blame crappy textbooks for ruining history and science for me in elementary though.

 

That was me too. Dry, dry, dry textbooks with dry teachers and I hated science and history. I'm recovering by homeschooling and reading some really amazing historical non- fictions books!

[KrissiK]

Let me give you a real life example of why I avoid textbooks. We did California history this year. I bought a textbook, because I didn't really know what else to do. We read the book. The boys groaned. It was dry. Small snippets of information. We read half a page about the Donner Party. A brief mention of Jedediah Smith. A bit about Charles Fremont. And then.... I read from this book "Pioneer California: Tales if Explorers, Indians and Settlers." By Margaret Roberts. Not historical fiction -historical narrative. My kids were wide-eyed. Jedediah Smith's encounter with a grizzly bear, the horrors the Donner party faced, Portola completely missing Monterey Bay. Now, this is history. Not just dates and facts, but people and reasons and color. This is why I have no use for textbooks -at least not for history text books.

[momma2three]

I guess my issue is that... not all of history is terribly interesting. And I say that as a history person! The case can be made that in the early years it can be, or should be all fun... but there's never going to be an exciting story about the Teapot Dome scandal or Marbury v. Madison. A history textbook offers a big picture survey of everything, and should still leave plenty of time to devote to the fun stuff. A book that tells exciting tales about pioneer heroes fighting bears is fun, but it's also leaving out a lot of stuff that's actually far, far more important to a real understanding of history. Which, as I said, is fine in the younger grades, but at a certain point I think it's just not enough.

[SarahW]

... but there's never going to be an exciting story about the Teapot Dome scandal

 

But at least it has a cool name! :thumbup1:

 

But yes, it would take a really talented lecturer or author to pull all the threads together and make it interesting. I've sat in lectures like those and understanding something complicated and seeing all of the drama of it come together is amazing. Usually only happened in grad school though... :glare:

 

This thread reminds me of the line in the 6th HP book, where Harry suddenly realizes that what Mr. Binns is saying might actually be interesting in the hands of a different professor...and then falls back asleep.

[PachiSusan]

Thank you so much, Ladies!! Keep 'em coming! I"m getting a picture of why the thought process is there... :thumbup1:

[elegantlion]

We used textbooks sparingly in elementary and middle school. One science series drove ds to tears on the first page. I read the page (thankfully I'd gotten the book from paperback swap!) agreed that the page really said nothing and we ditched it.

 

I don't dislike textbooks, I dislike bad textbooks.

 

I also like college entry level texts, but ds isn't quite at that level is some areas. I've been looking at British publications and own some Edexcel IGCSE books and we used the IB Theory of Knowledge book from Cambridge this year. I'm currently reading through the English language and Literature book in preparation to use it next year. I truly appreciate the TOK and English text as they speak intelligently to the student, use graphics as necessary, but not simply to fill the page.

[8filltheheart]

I guess my issue is that... not all of history is terribly interesting. And I say that as a history person! The case can be made that in the early years it can be, or should be all fun... but there's never going to be an exciting story about the Teapot Dome scandal or Marbury v. Madison. A history textbook offers a big picture survey of everything, and should still leave plenty of time to devote to the fun stuff. A book that tells exciting tales about pioneer heroes fighting bears is fun, but it's also leaving out a lot of stuff that's actually far, far more important to a real understanding of history. Which, as I said, is fine in the younger grades, but at a certain point I think it's just not enough.

 

:confused1: Excellent books exist that cover the big picture in-depth and offer a thorough "real understanding of history" without having to be written in textbook form. I personally don't use"fun" as part of the definition on how I select a book. Well-written and engaging, yes, but "fun" no.

 

For example, two excellent series that are easy to incorporate into history for specific areas of focus for upper elementary/middle school studies are The American Heritage Junior Library series and The Military History of WWII by Trevor DuPuy. There are numerous titles out there covering broad areas of history w/o having to be confined to textbook format. For higher reading levels, for example, Paul Johnson's A History of the American People is not a textbook but still offers thorough broad coverage.

[PachiSusan]

 

I also hate snippets of information splashed randomly all over the page. I never know what to read first or second. The information feels disjointed

 

I guess you don't like Kingfisher, DK, or Usborne books then. :lol:

 

That's one thing that bugs me too. LOL I want an engaging book, but not a text, something with a nice "voice", but not just bullet points.

[beaners]

I guess my issue is that... not all of history is terribly interesting. And I say that as a history person! The case can be made that in the early years it can be, or should be all fun... but there's never going to be an exciting story about the Teapot Dome scandal or Marbury v. Madison. A history textbook offers a big picture survey of everything, and should still leave plenty of time to devote to the fun stuff. A book that tells exciting tales about pioneer heroes fighting bears is fun, but it's also leaving out a lot of stuff that's actually far, far more important to a real understanding of history. Which, as I said, is fine in the younger grades, but at a certain point I think it's just not enough.

I think all of history is VERY interesting if done right. This is not to say that everyone would find it as interesting as I do, but no textbook I have come across has made me interested in history. I have no problem with my kids spending their entire school career mostly reading living history books verses using a history textbook. I don't think this would ever end up giving them a poor history education.

 

But I do agree that with some subjects, at some point you do need this kind of condensed, get to the point approach because there is only so much time and textbooks can be convenient.

 

Absolutely! Marbury v Madison isn't interesting? Hello, Midnight Judges! These things were interesting and important when they happened, or there would be no reason for us to need to know them today. It can be hard to fit in enough background information to show why these things are interesting, but that doesn't mean the events themselves are boring.

 

You know what I love (as an adult) about being free to read regular non-fiction books about topics instead of textbooks? There are SO MANY things that are up for debate. It's good for me to read the conflicting viewpoints by equally respected people in a field, and I think that can be good for children too. Textbooks, by their nature, are sort of forced to authoritatively declare "this is the way it happened, and this is why," even when there is debate within the field. It is good that children can learn about a topic in general without getting bogged down by the million little nitpicks experts have, but I also love that we have the time and opportunity to dig deep and explore topics that are interesting to us.

 

Textbooks aren't bad. They just aren't always the right tool for what we are covering at this time and at this level.

[PachiSusan]

I don't think there is anything wrong with using textbooks. I have just found that using living books for history and science has been a far more enjoyable way for us to learn through the elementary and middle school years. I'm sure we will be using at least some textbooks in high school though, and we've used them in elementary for math and grammar.

 

 

I am learning this as well. We still use a text book for History, but the books and the DVD's we watch really make it come more alive and be more enjoyable.

[PachiSusan]

I lean away from big comprehensive text books on history because they are usually written in large publishing houses by a team of people who are trying to cover as many bases in terms of state level history mandates. This makes for a dull book. On the other hand there are single era or event textbooks that I do use because they are written by usually one expert in that particular topic and generally they are both more interesting and more in depth not only giving more facts but highlighting controversies in scholarship and thinking about a time period.

 

For younger students, it is easy to avoid texts as students get older it does get harder.

 

I also cringe just a little when folks talk about teaching history and using historical fiction. Historical fiction is fine for younger children, but you shouldn't be misled into thinking you are getting into the time period's way of thinking. That probably isn't happening. Instead you are reading what the time period would be like for modern people. For more on this theme, see this blog post: http://iwouldneverwe...al-fiction.html

 

 

That's a very good point. For as much as I love the AG Historical Fiction books, I cringe when a little 8 year old girl is touting the modern feminist thought processes...

[PachiSusan]

I, personally, dislike them for the early grades--don't think they are evil or whatever, but I dislike them and don't plan to use them for history, science, and reading, because I think they are plainly more boring than living books. I remember being sat in the reading circle in school and reading the boring stories round-robin when I would have much preferred to read a real book. I remember skimming the surface of topics in science and becoming interested, but no, it was time to move on. And I personally never became interested in history until I, as an adult, came across living books. What do you do as an adult when you are interested in something about history or science? You find a book about it (or google it, or ask someone) and read about it, you don't grab a textbook. They work for some folks though, but not for me.

 

 

I have to say that I was one of those "school geeks" that LOVED my text books. I used to read them cover to cover in grade school and especially in history.

[PachiSusan]

I don't think they are evil. I simply don't prefer them for many subjects, especially in the earlier grades. I find them to be boring and dry. I do use some because in some cases it's way easier than the alternative. For example, I think it would be difficult to put together my own math curriculum using only living books. Not impossible, but not ideal for sure.

 

 

I couldn't think of the first thing to do to make a math curriculum without text books.

[PachiSusan]

Sarah, I think we are similar in approach to texts. I guess I've been really lucky because in all my school experience, most of my books were of the first kind.

 

I believe there are textbooks and then there are textbooks. A textbook is a systematic introduction of a topic, starting from the simplest ideas and gradually teaching familiarity with the more complicated. So from what I'm using Mr. Q and KISS, and even LOF, fall into that category for me. And then there are the textbooks, the overly-comprehensive, written by subcontractors, books with too many stupid questions in the margins.

 

With the first type of textbook I find it easy for me to add in additional materials on various topics as needed to keep things interesting. The second type is like a prison.

 

I like reading "living books" as a supplement, but I believe in the systematic approach, even on the lowest level. Maybe I take the classical approach too seriously, but I believe in building a solid familiarity with the basic body of knowledge. When it comes to something like science I, uh, wouldn't have ever thought to introduce the terms "biotic" and "abiotic" to my kid while reading a random book from the library. But now that we know it we can discuss it over french toast (maple syrup is biotic, so is sugar, that doesn't make it healthy for you).

 

For subjects a know something about I am much more willing to wing it without using one single textbook. I feel comfortable finding those interesting one-subject books written by an expert, and then lining them up in a somewhat logical fashion. But when it comes to subjects I am shaky in I really don't want my kid to be ignorant of something just because of my own limitations. So I bring in an expert (a real expert) to teach both of us.

 

[PachiSusan]

I agree that it's a missed opportunity to avoid all textbooks when there are some great ones out there and they suit some children/families well.

 

L

 

 

Yep. There are some great ones out there. And stinkers... :huh:

[TracyP]

I loved textbooks as a young student but shy away from them now. I did often find them interesting, but I realize now that I never actually learned much from them. Even though some of them piqued my interest, I never took the initiative to learn more. With a quality textbook and the freedom to pursue rabbit trails, I'm sure textbooks aren't evil. ;)

 

I stay away from them for all the reasons others already listed. You typically get a broad overview but little depth. They are written by committee where as I prefer books with a single author who is an expert in their field. The textbooks take all the info and give it to "predigested" as pp noted. Lastly, I find living books to be far more interesting.

[PachiSusan]

 

Science is a huge one I have a hard time finding something I'm happy with.

 

 

Me too. I think I will be forever researching. I can't seem to find what I'm looking for...I don't think it exists. LOL

[beaners]

 

I couldn't think of the first thing to do to make a math curriculum without text books.

 

 

I could do this through early algebra, but I love math and am overly confident. ;) There are many, many trade books on different parts of arithmetic, and you can do a large portion of it with manipulatives. We use a math book, but I've normally already taught the topics while we're talking in the car or playing around with the budget at the kitchen table.

[CyndiLJ]

I have found that I love AND hate textbooks! We are homeschooling at a lower level than some are, but I have found that most high school textbooks of today are more like the college texts of yesteryear in that they are trying to cover waaaayyyy too much ground too quickly. I also think most textbooks published today are filled with too much in terms of entertaining snippets, and there is no true cohesive flow to them.

 

For millions of students, high school needs to be high school, not mini college, and they need textbooks that are solid, appropriate, and well laid out. What I have loved about homeschooling is discovering the TERRIFIC textbooks written at all levels intended to be marketed to the homeschool family. Having looked at Notgrass' textbooks and approach, I thought it was so well done...as is Mystery of History. I also love the Connect the Thoughts series which is foundational and builds over and over again. There are other texts that are great as well, even though I may not have elected to use them for one reason or another. I have often found myself asking why schools don't get such great books.

 

I have found as well, that the texts for special ed or ELL from AGS and Globe Fearon are solid, well illustrated, definitely not overly busy, and do very well at developing vocabulary. Are they dumbed down? For some...sure they are...for others, they are a Godsend and allow us to teach higher level content at a pace and with language that helps a kid hang on to what they are being taught.

 

However, I do wish there were more programs developed at the high school level that were richer in hands on activities (not worksheets...that is not an "activity" though some textbook companies label it as such) or project oriented. I know there are a couple out there, but they are a bit much for me to handle.

[PachiSusan]

 

I could do this through early algebra, but I love math and am overly confident. ;) There are many, many trade books on different parts of arithmetic, and you can do a large portion of it with manipulatives. We use a math book, but I've normally already taught the topics while we're talking in the car or playing around with the budget at the kitchen table.

 

 

My very "in the box" mind is blown. I truly cannot fathom how to do math without a book - without actually teaching concepts. I rarely used manipulatives, but I guess where my hiccup comes from is that I *hear* people saying *no books* or *living books* and I just don't see how it can be taught like that. I am sure I am not understanding what people are saying. LOL

[TracyP]

Just to be clear, there are *very* few people on here that are talking about math when they say they don't use textbooks. For most, math and a foreign language require a textbook.

[tammyw]

Who else thinks that there should be a spin-off thread of all the best and most interesting books for elementary and middle school history? :)

[Alte Veste Academy]

A pretty good explanation of problems with textbooks...

 

http://www.edutopia.org/textbook-publishing-controversy

 

Also, kids' feelings about a subject are commonly linked with their feelings about that subject's textbooks, as described in the video linked below. I hated history with a purple passion in school. Or I thought I did, anyway. Now I love history, and I realize it was really just the overly broad, never-detailed-enough-to-be-interesting textbook approach to history that I disliked. (I will allow that there was generally poor teaching of the subject, which helped hinder any affection I might have otherwise developed.)

 

http://www.stevesheinkin.com/Confession.html

 

http://www.stevesheinkin.com/index.html (nifty little video down the page to endear the writer to you :tongue_smilie:)

 

(Incidentally, Steve Sheinkin is truly writing history with the interesting bits left in. We have loved all his history books here!)

 

Anyway, I think textbooks can be a useful tool. But I do believe that the vast majority of them are...not the best option available. As an outline, very useful!

[beaners]

 

My very "in the box" mind is blown. I truly cannot fathom how to do math without a book - without actually teaching concepts. I rarely used manipulatives, but I guess where my hiccup comes from is that I *hear* people saying *no books* or *living books* and I just don't see how it can be taught like that. I am sure I am not understanding what people are saying. LOL

 

 

Not using a textbook doesn't have to mean you don't teach anything. You know the concepts right? Why can't you teach them without a book? Ready? Without looking at a book, can you teach me how to count? How about adding and subtracting? Multiplying and dividing? Shapes and basic geometry? Fractions, decimals, percents? Money, measurement, time? How to read and write graphs?

[MomatHWTK]

... Shapes and basic geometry? Fractions, decimals, percents? Money, measurement, time? How to read and write graphs?

 

Uh... not beyond the basic ones, not really, not completely and definitely not conversions, and no. Sorry, it's been about 30 years and many other topics studied in the meantime.

[PachiSusan]

Not using a textbook doesn't have to mean you don't teach anything. You know the concepts right? Why can't you teach them without a book? Ready? Without looking at a book, can you teach me how to count? How about adding and subtracting? Multiplying and dividing? Shapes and basic geometry? Fractions, decimals, percents? Money, measurement, time? How to read and write graphs?

 

Honestly? I could not teach decimals and percents without a book,. LOL

[beaners]

Haha, well I would be comfortable doing it without a book, and I still use one, so I'm not saying anyone has to do it that way. But if you know how and why to do something, teaching it is possible. :)

[Cmm]

Susan, here:

 

http://www.educationunboxed.com/decimals.html

[lewelma]

Kind of the opposite of what this thread is asking, but we had a very interesting discussion as to why textbooks are useful and how to develop the skill to read them. A lot of people really helped me to formulate exactly why I think it is critical to give your students the ability to learn from a textbook and how to teach the skill over a period of years. http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/467812-developing-advanced-reading-skills/

 

Ruth in NZ

[Kathie in VA]

It seems I lost my response... I'll try again...

For me, it's the snippets. Lots of snippets of information is all history seemed to me when i was growing up. Yes there were stories but they never seemed to connect to me so I tended to forget them or worse, I'd confuse the order. I dreaded the idea of having to teach that to my kids. Then I read the WTM and discovered SotW. I liked that because it is a narrative of history. We read some, then read more about that time or people or place from other sources. We even read some literature that related. Learning the history before reading the lit really helped to follow the literature and it added so much to the history. When we continued the history we simply continue the narrative. Further research shows that there are many narrative history spines out there.

[lewelma]

I also dislike the snippets in history textbooks. Instead, we use mostly nonfiction books and the occasional historical fiction. I choose 10 topics for 10 months and we really dig in. Here is my book list for modern history for my 10 and 13 year old:

 

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/474422-teaching-what-really-happened-how-to-avoid-the-tyranny-of-textbooks-get-students-excited-about-doing-history/#entry4984648

[PachiSusan]

Kind of the opposite of what this thread is asking, but we had a very interesting discussion as to why textbooks are useful and how to develop the skill to read them. A lot of people really helped me to formulate exactly why I think it is critical to give your students the ability to learn from a textbook and how to teach the skill over a period of years. http://forums.welltr...reading-skills/

 

Ruth in NZ

 

 

I remember that post. It was one of the most helpful insightful post on the subject ever. Hands down.

[SarahW]

Who else thinks that there should be a spin-off thread of all the best and most interesting books for elementary and middle school history? :)

 

 

The part of my pp about doing "just books" for an area I'm comfortable with was for real. I've made my own plan for history using a compilation of books. The book lists are listed here, though as a warning, Ancients 1 is the only thing really done, since that's what my kid is doing right now, everything else is just in the drafting stages, and I split the four periods differently from most, and, uh, some of the books (especially for EM and Modern) I haven't thoroughly reviewed yet, sooo....yeah. :blushing: I hope to share something more professional at some point, but for now, that's what I've come up with so far.