Ruth Beechick Books: anyone reading any right now?

[Hunter]

I'm reading library copies of The Three R's and You Can Teach Your Child Successfully. The library ordered A Biblical Home Education, but it's still on order.

 

I found an affordable used copy of You Can Teach Your Child, so soon, hopefully, I will have my own copy of that book.

 

I really like the spelling instructions in The Three R's.

 

Is anyone interested in discussing the Beechick books and her philosphies?

[queenie]

I just started reading You Can Teach Your Child Successfully so I would love to discuss once a read a little bit more of it!!

[Rebel Yell]

I have all of the books you mentioned, plus Common Sense Writing.

 

Looking forward to the discussion!

[Hunter]

Oh, EXCELLENT!! I really want to talk about these books!

[Hunter]

What do you all think about the fact that just 50 words make up 50% of all written words? And that if there are about 1000 words that make up 90% of all written words, that it stands to reason that random copywork and dictation WILL cover these words?

[Hunter]

What do you think about the math scope and sequence in You Can Teach Your Child Successfully? Would you feel confident using it as the checklist to pick and choose your way through Strayer-Upton Arithmetic or another vintage text? I really like S-U, but get very insecure in book 3, about what to cover and what to skip.

[FO4UR]

What do you all think about the fact that just 50 words make up 50% of all written words? And that if there are about 1000 words that make up 90% of all written words, that it stands to reason that random copywork and dictation WILL cover these words?

 

 

That sounds like Spalding.  

 

I've contemplated dumping A&P in favor of dictation pulled from literature.  I would then pull focus words out from the passage to analyze and work on visualization ala CM.  I've long said that A&P would be CM if it used real passages from literature.  There is a fear, however, in moving away from the didactic.  There is security (however false it may be in reality) in completing a program.  If you did dictations consistently, I think you'd have to cover the most common 1000 and the some.

 

One caveat, I think the 1000 words means roots.  Ex.  cry/crying/cried = 1 word

 

I do know, without a doubt, that simply learning words in isolation does not work for my struggler.  We have to dictate in sentences for anything to stick, and then it has to be reviewed religiously.

 

 

I'll have to dig my RB book out for this conversation.

[Hunter]

Sticking with a program is comforting, and being comfortable is important. I don't know anything about A&P, though.

 

I'm really getting set on what I like for my own self-education and junior college prep. And I have things that I like for primary. I'm just still a bit fuzzy on how to get from primary to junior college prep as efficiently as possible, being able to stick with some things for at least a few levels. I crave consistency.

 

I'm thinking maybe the Beechick books might be able to provide some of the consistency I crave, even if I'm filling in the scope and sequences with whatever is handy.

[kalphs]

The first Ruth Beechick book I read was, "Language and Thinking for Young Children" followed up with "The Three R's."
Presently, I am reading, "You Can Teach Your Child Successfully." 
Her counsel is gentle, yet effective. 
 

[Hunter]

Many people have accelerated the rigor of topics assigned to grade levels by about 2 years, to fit in at least a couple years of AP courses in high school. RB scope and sequences are oldschool 1990's more developmentally appropriate, less fear based and rigorous. Is anyone liking RB, but accelerating it?

 

I like the numbers assigned to the levels of rigor. I'd rather label the student as working a year ahead, than assign low numbers to high level topics. I know others feel differently. I'm wondering if people focusing on rigor have no place for Beechick: or if they like the method, but just assign different numbers to the scope and sequence; or just skip a child ahead a grade.

 

Or are you thankful for a developmentally appropriate scope and sequence, and take advantage of the breathing room?

[Denise in Florida]

I love her books. I used the 3Rs series for the first three years of schooling and then the You Can Teach Your Child for grades 4 - 8.  She was my major influence and I modeled most of our schooling after her methods.

 

I give her books the highest recommendation.   :thumbup:

[FO4UR]

Many people have accelerated the rigor of topics assigned to grade levels by about 2 years, to fit in at least a couple years of AP courses in high school. RB scope and sequences are oldschool 1990's more developmentally appropriate, less fear based and rigorous. Is anyone liking RB, but accelerating it?

 

I like the numbers assigned to the levels of rigor. I'd rather label the student as working a year ahead, than assign low numbers to high level topics. I know others feel differently. I'm wondering if people focusing on rigor have no place for Beechick: or if they like the method, but just assign different numbers to the scope and sequence; or just skip a child ahead a grade.

 

Or are you thankful for a developmentally appropriate scope and sequence, and take advantage of the breathing room?

 

 

I like the simplicity.  The 3 R's K-3 is a slim book.  

 

In the past, I've read other books with overwhelm and then sat down with The 3 R's and breathed. 

 

 

I was reading YCTYCS today, and I like how she defines reading levels.  It gives me permission to push my 9yo into reading for her own information, which is part of her desire to have HER OWN school.  It also tempers my anxiety over my oldest who still needs more fluency reading.

 

I take her writing as one interpretation.  Excellent, but not the only way.

[LindaOz]

Is anyone interested in discussing the Beechick books and her philosphies?

Yes please. I love her books and find them very inspiring.

[Hunter]

I saw a post on another forum where a mom has been using the math scope and sequences in Three R's and You Can Teach with Ray's, so using them with Strayer-Upton sounds doable.

[Guest]

 

Or are you thankful for a developmentally appropriate scope and sequence, and take advantage of the breathing room?

 

ds is only 6, so developmentally appropriate is a huge plus for me. I accelerated my older kids by one year during the actual 1990s, but lived to regret it.

 

YCTYCS is sitting on my shelves right now and probably exactly what I need to reread and discuss.

 

My kid realistically is not going to live in a dorm for four years and I am not grooming him for a professional career, but I would like for him to have as close to a college education as I can provide, both to keep him from being exploited by those who are able to attain a higher level of socioeconomic "success" than ourselves and because poverty is a much less bitter pill to swallow when a person has a rich inner mental life.

 

During the '30s, my grandfather said that he could always tell a well educated man because he was never bored, no matter how poor he was.

 

ds will be poor. I don't have any control over that.

[nansk]

Ruth Beechick's The 3Rs were the first homeschooling books I read. I was grateful for the common-sense, easy-to-follow guidelines. Those 3 slim books gave me confidence that I could teach reading, spelling and arithmetic without feeling inadequate.

 

I still re-read the 3Rs books from time to time, although my dd is older now. I even bought the three books for my sister, who has two little ones. She likes them, too, even though she is not a homeschooler.

 

I also read You Can Teach Your Child Successfully after that and liked it well enough to buy the whole set (3Rs and You Can Teach Your Child Successfully). I liked the chapter about teaching logic via advertisements. But it is less secular-friendly than The 3Rs. And once I found The Well-Trained Mind, I did not (could not) go back to You Can Teach Your Child Successfully.

[nansk]

I saw a post on another forum where a mom has been using the math scope and sequences in Three R's and You Can Teach with Ray's, so using them with Strayer-Upton sounds doable.

 

Ray's Arithmetic and McGuffey's Readers are quite popular among members of the BasicallyBeechick Yahoo group.

But some of the Beechickers go on to doing Robinson, which is the most un-Beechick method I can imagine.

 

[Hunter]

ds is only 6, so developmentally appropriate is a huge plus for me. I accelerated my older kids by one year during the actual 1990s, but lived to regret it.

 

YCTYCS is sitting on my shelves right now and probably exactly what I need to reread and discuss.

 

My kid realistically is not going to live in a dorm for four years and I am not grooming him for a professional career, but I would like for him to have as close to a college education as I can provide, both to keep him from being exploited by those who are able to attain a higher level of socioeconomic "success" than ourselves and because poverty is a much less bitter pill to swallow when a person has a rich inner mental life.

 

During the '30s, my grandfather said that he could always tell a well educated man because he was never bored, no matter how poor he was.

 

ds will be poor. I don't have any control over that.

 

I think maybe you are touching on some of why I like the Beechick books. I think they do help lower-income first-generation homeschoolers prepare for a life where they will never be bored and are less likely to be exploited.

 

One of my signatures is about shooting for stars without the resources to get there, can get you lost in outer space. When the only goals one knows about are unattainable, it can be discouraging instead of inspiring, and limiting instead of door-opening.

 

Beechick is doable.

 

The first edition of TWTM is partially doable for me, but the later editions of TWTM and so many other curricula are too much for ME.

[Hunter]

Ray's Arithmetic and McGuffey's Readers are quite popular among members of the BasicallyBeechick Yahoo group.

But some of the Beechickers go on to doing Robinson, which is the most un-Beechick method I can imagine.

 

 

Thanks! I did not know about this group. I requested to join, but still have not heard back from the group.

[Kareni]

Before I began homeschooling (when my daughter was a seventh grader) I'd read lots of books about homeschooling; however, the one that made me feel that I could do it was Ruth Beechick's

 

You Can Teach Your Child Successfully: Grades 4-8.

 

[i'd also read The Well-Trained Mind and was impressed by it.  As a homeschooler, I'd say I was WTM inspired (for example, my daughter studied history chronologically) but I did not follow it completely.]

 

Regards,

Kareni

[Guest]

 

 

One of my signatures is about shooting for stars without the resources to get there, can get you lost in outer space. When the only goals one knows about are unattainable, it can be discouraging instead of inspiring, and limiting instead of door-opening.

 

 

You are fortunate that you didn't know me when I first found out that there were no full scholarships to Stanford for my Charles Wallace-esque golden haired boy who nicknamed his sister "Amoeba" as a preschooler and begged for Stephen Hawking and Charles Dickens for bedtime stories, so he enlisted in the Army and volunteered to go to Afghanistan instead.

 

I was not a very nice person.

 

I'll check my library if people want to start with something other than YCTYCS but I was planning on rereading it anyway. It's been a looooooooong time. I think Amoeba was nineish when I bought it.

[FO4UR]

I think maybe you are touching on some of why I like the Beechick books. I think they do help lower-income first-generation homeschoolers prepare for a life where they will never be bored and are less likely to be exploited.

 

One of my signatures is about shooting for stars without the resources to get there, can get you lost in outer space. When the only goals one knows about are unattainable, it can be discouraging instead of inspiring, and limiting instead of door-opening.

 

Beechick is doable.

 

The first edition of TWTM is partially doable for me, but the later editions of TWTM and so many other curricula are too much for ME.

 

 

See...now...I was made to memorize this in college. (It was music theory, where the attrition rate was 50% every semester (6 semesters of theory). )  "It is better to aim too high and miss the mark, than to aim too low and hit it."  

 

My kids may not be Nobel Peace Prize winners or the President or a CEO of a major corporation or a neurosurgeon who saves countless lives...or ...or...or....but whatever they do become they can have the integrity, the intelligence, the tenacity, the humility, the generosity that makes great people history changers.

 

 

I see the point about getting lost in outer space though.  We need to make sure that they land somewhere in the target range.  BUT, it's a fine line between preparing a kid for the realities of the real world, and discouraging them from shooting for the moon.  There needs to be a balance - shoot for the moon, but build a safety net.  BECAUSE, it is that outlier homeschool kid who encourages Powers That Be to give other homeschoolers a chance.  We (as a community) need a few of our kids to be AWESOME!  Shoot for that moon, I say.

 

 

 

 

You are fortunate that you didn't know me when I first found out that there were no full scholarships to Stanford for my Charles Wallace-esque golden haired boy who nicknamed his sister "Amoeba" as a preschooler and begged for Stephen Hawking and Charles Dickens for bedtime stories, so he enlisted in the Army and volunteered to go to Afghanistan instead.

 

I was not a very nice person.

 

I'll check my library if people want to start with something other than YCTYCS but I was planning on rereading it anyway. It's been a looooooooong time. I think Amoeba was nineish when I bought it.

 

 

This does concern me.  My dyslexic is also asthmatic.  He's not going to have military as an option.  I think I'm going to have to prepare him to build a strong safety net.  Learn how to DO something, and learn how to market yourself.  Learn how to fix things so you don't need to hire that out.  Learn how to live inexpensively so you have TIME after work to LIVE.  

 

 

The military is not a bad option for lots of kids.  It's a great risk when deployed, but can make for a good career in the military and a good lead into a civilian career after retiring.  I wouldn't be surprised if my 7yo enlisted.  He would do well.

 

 

It's been on my mind lately to continue schooling for myself now so that I can teach at the college level and my children can have a Child of Faculty tuition rate.  I would truly enjoy working at my alma mater (which is not far away since we moved - 40min commute).  It would muddy the waters with how to homeschool in the present, however.

 

Random rambling...hijack...but I do think a Beechick education would prepare a nice safety net.  It's a nice Basic Education.  A gifted kid could take that Basic and use their own interests and abilities to build a life beyond the mainstream.

[Hunter]

There are so many bad things that can happen by shooting for the moon or the stars. Real life is not a feel-good made-for-TV movie where the underdog wins.

 

If I'd had my youngest stick with American School instead of being shamed into having him drop out to do something "better" he would have graduated with a diploma instead of needing to take the GED.

 

There were many days instead of studying what we wanted, or what was useful, we studied what would hopefully get my youngest into a 4 year college.

 

There were days I overdid and overspent, instead of being able to focus on the present, my own wellbeing, and our home and family.

 

I worried about getting in 2 years of calculus in time to take the AP BC Calculus test. My son ended out in a college where the "College Algebra" course was just intermediate algebra and equivalent to algebra 2. They only offered that course and a survey of mathematics that was even easier. To take any other math, students had to go the main campus in a city 45 minutes away. I didn't prepare my younger for the school he went to, and he ended out dropping out. So unlike his brother, he earned neither a high school or college diploma.

 

My older son, in contrast, did NOT shoot for anything but what was RIGHT under his nose. He did his correspondence course and only what little more he needed to prepare for the junior college. He earned a 2 year degree in business at the junior college, and at 19, he was the first college graduate in the family, and left for Las Vegas, and has done well there. He chose Las Vegas because the rents were so low compared to the fairly high wages.

 

A two year degree in business management or accounting is attainable for most first generation families. Many satellite junior colleges in smaller towns offer those 2 degrees and a liberal arts transfer degree, but often nothing else. Accounting is the best choice for the introverts and Business management is the best choice for the extroverts.

 

If I had to do it over, I'd have prepared my spectrum kid for an accounting degree and have skipped the higher maths for bookkeeping, and more English. Spectrum boys need lots of English and communication in general, and English that is in The Three R's all the way through high school. I would have had him earn his accounting degree, and then if he'd really wanted to do something else, then he could have done it afterwards.

 

 

 

 

[LindaOz]

The first edition of TWTM is partially doable for me, but the later editions of TWTM and so many other curricula are too much for ME.

Interesting. I am rereading the first edition of TWTM at the moment and finding it excellent. I love the emphasis on method and process - less about specific programs maybe. I find I can apply the principles to my own resources easily (Australian resources in my case).

 

RB is so much about process too. She gives methods that apply to whatever resource/book you choose to use.

[Guest]

Hunter, I just wanted to clarify that I'm not a first generation family. My grandfather was wealthy orthopedic surgeon who invested wisely in the stock market, my mother graduated from Swarthmore, my father designed guidance systems for ICBMs during the Cold War, and my childhood involved Country Clubs and Dog Shows.

 

People can and do make bad investment decisions, have high medical and legal bills, and sometimes disinherit their children.

 

I'm still learning how to be poor and I have far too much respect for you to misrepresent myself.

 

My library doesn't have 3Rs, but there is a used copy I can afford if I have people to talk to about it, bounce ideas off of, and be accountable for implementing them instead of running off after the next shiny thing.

[Hunter]

I meant first-generation as first-generation homeschooler.

 

My family stopped doing the country clubs and dog shows when I was 6. Bad investments–yup, I know all about those. I think I was about four when grandpa made a bad one, and promptly had a stroke, and left his wife and my dad totally unprepared for their new lives. What a mess.

 

My mom was American and took me to the USA when I was 6. By the time I was 7 we were living in a welfare slum. I was outside digging in the dirt with sterling silver spoons, and would trade them to the other kids for plastic shovels and "good" stainless steel spoons. :lol: Adults in the neighborhood were collecting my mom's spoons.

 

My mom's family had been new money, so she was able to adapt to her new life easier than my dad. My dad's family had a really really hard time and never really adapted.

 

My copy of The Three R's is a library copy. I'm going to try and buy my own copy soon, but I might have some time between bringing back my copy and purchasing my own. I have a copy of You Can Teach in the mail.

 

Did your family show dogs? My grandmother showed poodles and my mom showed labs.

[birchbark]

We  :001_wub:  Ruth Beechick over here. I was sad that I didn't discover her wisdom until I'd been homeschooling several years.

 

I think some who are not familiar with RB may get the idea from this thread that her methods lead to a more "basic" or "non-rigorous" education. Not so. She does promote waiting for developmental readiness, so it may look a lot gentler in younger years. She also prioritizes the 3R's.

 

RB has an amazing wealth of experience. She taught for many years in settings that ranged from a schoolhouse in Alaska to universities. She also spent many years in the early homeschool movement. Because she began writing when homeschoolers did not have the plethora of curriculum options they do now, her advice often centers on how to teach and how to use a curriculum or a book as a tool. This makes her especially pertinent to those who are looking to simplify and streamline curriculum. I find her counsel practical, efficient, and reassuring.

 

RB's perspective is very Bible-based. She also takes a dim view of a Latin emphasis, which may turn off some classical educators. I would read her anyway as the subject doesn't come up much and there are many nuggets of wisdom to be had. I find she meshes very well with classical and Charlotte Mason.

 

For those who are unfamiliar with Ruth Beechick, I recommend Amongst Lovely Things' post Ruth Beechick 101.

 

[JaneEyre]

Thanks! I did not know about this group. I requested to join, but still have not heard back from the group.

 

If its the same group I'm a member of,  there was an email sent out a few days ago that said if someone else didn't want to take it over it was going to be closed.  That might be why you haven't heard back.

[nansk]

If its the same group I'm a member of,  there was an email sent out a few days ago that said if someone else didn't want to take it over it was going to be closed.  That might be why you haven't heard back.

 

I saw two volunteers, so it may stay active.

 

OTOH, the original owner is a WTM member, too. So perhaps, OP, you may want to start a Beechick social group here instead. :)

 

[nansk]

RB has an amazing wealth of experience. ...

Because she began writing when homeschoolers did not have the plethora of curriculum options they do now, her advice often centers on how to teach and how to use a curriculum or a book as a tool. This makes her especially pertinent to those who are looking to simplify and streamline curriculum. I find her counsel practical, efficient, and reassuring.

 

...there are many nuggets of wisdom to be had. I find she meshes very well with ... Charlotte Mason.

 

For those who are unfamiliar with Ruth Beechick, I recommend Amongst Lovely Things' post Ruth Beechick 101.

 

100% agree with all of this. I loved her "natural method" of teaching children to read, write and spell using regular story books.

 

The one reason I could not totally embrace the Beechick method was this:

 

 

RB's perspective is very Bible-based.

Her 3Rs books were still easy to secularize - I just ignored the bits about the Bible and used other story books for copywork instead. But I find it difficult to agree with her opinions in You Can Teach Your Child Successfully and in her online articles. I could still have made do with it, but then I found TWTM. It provided me with a roadmap upto 12th grade using mostly secular books and it is equally easy to follow.

 

I still recommend The 3Rs to young mothers.

[Hunter]

Thanks for the information about the group and links. I wish someone would just hit "approve" though, so I could read through the archives.

 

Birchbark, I think some people who are very focused on rigor might read the math scope and sequence and some of the Bible bits and right away put the book down. I absolutely can see someone who is rigorous also be a Beechick fan, and in the past there were many who were. I just don't meet them today. As Nansk says, they just latch onto the TWTM in most cases. It's a shame because I think there are a lot of rigorous people who with a few extremely minor tweaks might find Beechick a better fit than their main "rigorous" resource. Beechick is common sense if nothing else.

 

I read You Can Teach Your Child in the 90s, but I realize now why I didn't latch on to it. My son was past the math, and really should have been placed in the K-3 language arts. No one back then that I knew, or in the books, was taking spectrum boys and placing them back in K-3 language arts. So when the 4-8 instructions didn't hit the mark in any areas, I probably didn't do more than partially skim the book.

[Hunter]

A short memorial biography on Beechick. She was an AMAZING lady. So eclectic.

http://www.mottmedia.com/pages/publications/ruthbeechick.html

[Hunter]

The Three R's Introduction:

 

When any learning or developmental process is laid out in steps, the typical American reaction is to try and move children through the steps earlier and faster. Our ambitious, achievement oriented culture seems to demand this.

 

There are other considerations besides moving up the steps:

 

Optimal timing

Quality/foundation

Enjoyment

 

How important do you think these 3 considerations are?

 

If a student CAN move ahead, SHOULD they move ahead? Always?

[Hunter]

...about fourth grade, the level where children can use their reading skills to learn history or science or any other subject found in books. In terms of age, the time varies widely.

 

Does anyone wait to start SOTW (or their first history cycle) until the student is reading at a 4th grade level?

[Guest]

 

The military is not a bad option for lots of kids.  It's a great risk when deployed, but can make for a good career in the military and a good lead into a civilian career after retiring.  I wouldn't be surprised if my 7yo enlisted.  He would do well.

 

 

Thank you for your kindness. The military (and also how my dd is paying for her education) are my own private hells. I hope that if your 7yo makes a career/life choice that is as horrifying to you that you will receive as much support and as little judgement as you have given me.

 

I meant first-generation as first-generation homeschooler.

 

Well, that I am, unless you count my poor Mom's attempt to write a check to a correspondence school, toss me a box of books, and call it done in 1979ish. ;)

Did your family show dogs? My grandmother showed poodles and my mom showed labs.

 

We're Sheltie people. Our house was only zoned for four adult dogs, so Mom lost interest in Breed pretty quickly and was very involved in AKC Obedience while I was growing up. She's been in the ring with Russ Klipple a few times and her favourite picture of me is one I can't STAND,  where I am the epitome of adolescent awkwardness, but receiving the award for Highest Scoring Junior Handler in Trial.

 

After I left the fold, she moved on to Agility, sheep herding, and other less mainstream doggie adventures. She is very well respected in her dog training community.

 

3Rs are ordered! The shipping brought it up to a "Oh, MOM! Not  AGAIN!" charge on my credit card, but our library is moving from ILL to Zip books and we used to have a copy so I couldn't bring myself to save $8 by sending a classic like this to the shredder. :(

 

Birchbark, thank you so much for the link. That did a lot to refresh my memory and also calm me down about my 6yo's reading, which is somewhere between just fine and really fantastic compared to my other children at this age, but not what I see the other kids on this forum doing.

[Hunter]

I'm trying to decide whether I want to try and buy 3R's sooner or later. In the past when I couldn't afford books, or couldn't store them because I was so mobile, I took really good notes, and later on I appreciated the notes more than if I had the book.

 

I am just itching to highlight and take notes in 3R's, though.

 

I stopped skimming it, and am carefully reading it, start to finish.

[Hunter]

Iron Ethel Flint, blessings and safety to your children!

 

I'm going to have to google shelties. I don't know what they are. :lol:

 

Which correspondence school did you use, if you don't mind saying?

[Guest]

Iron Ethel Flint, blessings and safety to your children!

 

I'm going to have to google shelties. I don't know what they are. :lol:

 

Shetland Sheepdogs. I'm such a dork! They're actually nasty, yappy little ankle biters if they aren't raised right and they look like miniature collies. I've never owned one as an adult and actually have tons of issues about dogs that are more appropriate for the therapist's couch than a homeschooling forum. ;)

 

It's still nice to be able to remember the good times and OMFG, talk about a WASTE of the grammar stage! The details about dogs and dog shows I still remember and never use are downright hilarious. ;)

 

Which correspondence school did you use, if you don't mind saying?

 

It was University of Nebraska-Lincoln and I don't remember if I ever finished a semester. I have fond memories of the teachers and it could have been a good fit if I hadn't already been so damaged by the public schools. She would have needed a strong homeschooling community and to put the same energy into homeschooling that she did into dog shows to have had even the slightest chance of succeeding, so I give her a lot of credit for trying.

 

 

The funny thing about shooting for the stars is that sometimes our adult children internalize the values and goals we want for them, like mine did "the value of a college degree" even when the spaceship costs them their lives.

 

Every time I type those flowery euphemistic accolades about my kids into my sig line, I know no one sees the tears or how much happier I would be if I could say "free lance mechanic, part time marijuana grower, Giants fan and all around good guy" and "Housekeeper at the Motel 6, devoted wife to Joe for 7 years, and mother of five".

 

The irony does not escape me that my mother cries just as hard about me leaving the 'burbs and the rat race of the Country Club lifestyle and probably wishes that she had taken me to see Barry Manilow instead of Pete Seeger and bought a bottle of Round-Up instead of a subscription to Mother Earth News.

 

Ugh, I totally set myself up for this and I NEED a Ruth Beechik thread way more than I need a hijacked "All about Ethel" thread!

 

So I see a lot of negativity toward postponing the rigor these days and the funny thing is that I chafed against it when it was in style and accelerated my 90s kids by at least a year. We burned out. I'm looking for the wisdom I rejected now so that little ds can enjoy every step of the homeschooling journey and, wherever life takes him, have fond memories of homeschooling that stick with him as well as my fond memories of dog shows, and be able to learn new things that interest him instead of defining himself by what he has to do to pay the rent and buy groceries and defining himself as a "failure" because the ivies were never an option in the first place.

 

I do not see education as "job training", so I don't see my homeschooling journey as easier than yours because my kid only has to know enough to clean your kid's dorm; both of our kids may want to read the same library book someday and I want my kid to enjoy it just as much as your kid does, so he needs to understand history and language and science and math and art and....

 

....there won't be college professors to tell him about the things I forget or remedial Math and English classes if I messed up or a gas station he can stop at if he forgets to fill the tank of his spaceship before he shoots for the stars.

[Hunter]

Iron Ethel Flint :grouphug:

[Hunter]

"When you wait for the optimum time, things go easier, faster, and better."

[FO4UR]

The Three R's Introduction:

 

When any learning or developmental process is laid out in steps, the typical American reaction is to try and move children through the steps earlier and faster. Our ambitious, achievement oriented culture seems to demand this.

 

There are other considerations besides moving up the steps:

 

Optimal timing

Quality/foundation

Enjoyment

 

How important do you think these 3 considerations are?

 

If a student CAN move ahead, SHOULD they move ahead? Always?

 

 

I had typed up a long response earlier today and deleted it b/c I didn't want to offend...or sound as Pollyanna-ish as I really am.  (I knew how to potty-train before I had toddlers. kwim.  Now I'm spouting off about how to launch (my 11, 9, 7, 1 yo) kids into outer space.  Really.  I see how my lack of experience here may be blinding me.  Maybe I need to believe in St. George a while longer b/c the Dragon is scary.

 

 

That said:

 

Optimal timing

Quality/foundation

Enjoyment

 

 

These points give my rambling an organized structure, so I'll try.

 

 

Optimal timing and a quality foundation are required for the BASIC safety net education. This is what you do when at 18yo everything you ever wanted to do doesn't work out.  dh lost a ROTC scholarship b/c of his allergies.  He didn't understand the concept of Safety Net and crashed.  (He, thankfully, got back up...but that took time.)  Another family member realized at about age 18 that he was flying w/o a net, quickly and strategically made his plan,  and now he's at a point where few people reach in terms of $, power, and general quality of life.  His kids will go to any college they want.  He built his net out of a military career, and now he's free to soar...and he just might make it to that moon.  Even if he "fails" his current ambitions, he will hit higher than anyone else in his growing-up-circle.  If he fails, he will hit his net and not the concrete.  He's a self-educator by nature.  He succeeds at pretty much everything he deems worthy of his time.  I hope my boys emulate his tenacity.

 

 

RB provides an excellent safety-net education.  This is the part parents need to GIVE, the ability to self-educate, to think, to plan, to work, to GRAB opportunity when it goes by.  

 

 

Parents cannot GIVE the Shoot-for-the-Moon education.  That HAS to be the self-motivated.  A parent can give every opportunity, but it will be squandered if the STUDENT doesn't have the internal drive to choose an opportunity and make it theirs.  This can be an Ivy or a State U.  This can be a family business.  This can be a house full of the Great Books.  The old cliche' "You can take a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." applies.  Sometimes we hope for the crystal clear blue lake, but can only find a muddy pond.  The horse has to drink, whether he likes it or not, if he wants to live to see the crystal clear blue lake.  We are sometimes more disappointed in the muddy water than they are, but the Wiser knows that the clear blue won't be appreciated without the experience of the muddy.

 

 

Practically speaking, I aim to teach my children to provide for themselves, take care of themselves, and be good people.  If they make it to this BASIC level, I trust that they will find their moon.  My grandpa always told me when I came to point of Big Decision that I cannot go wrong.  I've always approached things with that attitude.  It may be Bad Option #1 and Bad Option #2, but I cannot choose wrong...I can only make an educated choice and keep moving.  Own it and carry on.

 

 

I think it's easy as a parent to blame ourselves for things that were never our responsibility in the first place.  Sometimes a child rejects the safety net we are trying to build for them.  Sometimes they blame us b/c the moon looked closer to earth when they were little.  

 

Hunter, I hope your youngest is finding his way. :grouphug: 

 

 

 

 

The funny thing about shooting for the stars is that sometimes our adult children internalize the values and goals we want for them, like mine did "the value of a college degree" even when the spaceship costs them their lives.

 

Every time I type those flowery euphemistic accolades about my kids into my sig line, I know no one sees the tears or how much happier I would be if I could say "free lance mechanic, part time marijuana grower, Giants fan and all around good guy" and "Housekeeper at the Motel 6, devoted wife to Joe for 7 years, and mother of five".

 

The irony does not escape me that my mother cries just as hard about me leaving the 'burbs and the rat race of the Country Club lifestyle and probably wishes that she had taken me to see Barry Manilow instead of Pete Seeger and bought a bottle of Round-Up instead of a subscription to Mother Earth News.

 

Ugh, I totally set myself up for this and I NEED a Ruth Beechik thread way more than I need a hijacked "All about Ethel" thread!

 

So I see a lot of negativity toward postponing the rigor these days and the funny thing is that I chafed against it when it was in style and accelerated my 90s kids by at least a year. We burned out. I'm looking for the wisdom I rejected now so that little ds can enjoy every step of the homeschooling journey and, wherever life takes him, have fond memories of homeschooling that stick with him as well as my fond memories of dog shows, and be able to learn new things that interest him instead of defining himself by what he has to do to pay the rent and buy groceries and defining himself as a "failure" because the ivies were never an option in the first place.

 

I do not see education as "job training", so I don't see my homeschooling journey as easier than yours because my kid only has to know enough to clean your kid's dorm; both of our kids may want to read the same library book someday and I want my kid to enjoy it just as much as your kid does, so he needs to understand history and language and science and math and art and....

 

....there won't be college professors to tell him about the things I forget or remedial Math and English classes if I messed up or a gas station he can stop at if he forgets to fill the tank of his spaceship before he shoots for the stars.

 

 

:grouphug:   Maybe I needed your little hijack.  Thanks for sharing.  The last sentence is striking!

 

 

I hope your kids are able to escape unscathed from the situations that hurt your heart.  You have given them more than you realize, I'm certain.

[Hunter]

The divorce was hard on my youngest. He wasn't financially independent yet, and he wasn't across the country like my older son was. He did what he did to be safe. I guess. Maybe. I don't know the whole story and can only guess. Both he and I were left with few options. I know I did the best I could, and I assume he did the same.

 

I just really wish he could have entered the implosion with some more basic skills and fewer advanced ones that he didn't have the chance to apply to the world he found himself in.

 

Thanks for choosing to post that after all 4blessingmom.

[nansk]

Thanks for the information about the group and links. I wish someone would just hit "approve" though, so I could read through the archives.

 

PMing you.

 

[nansk]

"When you wait for the optimum time, things go easier, faster, and better."

 

Yes, this was RB's philosophy, and I agree with it. She claimed that when she waited until the third grade to teach her students cursive writing, she could teach them in a couple of weeks! And I am sure she did.

 

It is the opposite of the SWR/Cursive First philosophy. But I think RB based this on her long experience with teaching children and the Cursive First teachers base their ideas on their (vastly different) experience.

 

But I agree with waiting for the time to be right. Even with phonics, I waited until dd was 4.75 years old before starting Blend Phonics. We did the entire book in 3 months and at the end of it, she was reading at a second grade level. I am sure if I started  earlier, it would have taken much longer. Even now, as she struggles with Maths, I am giving her time to mature and be ready. We are doing a third grade word problem solving book (slowly) in fourth grade.

[FO4UR]

The divorce was hard on my youngest. He wasn't financially independent yet, and he wasn't across the country like my older son was. He did what he did to be safe. I guess. Maybe. I don't know the whole story and can only guess. Both he and I were left with few options. I know I did the best I could, and I assume he did the same.

 

I just really wish he could have entered the implosion with some more basic skills and fewer advanced ones that he didn't have the chance to apply to the world he found himself in.

 

Thanks for choosing to post that after all 4blessingmom.

 

 

He evidently had the skills to do what he had to do to be safe.  :grouphug:  

[Hunter]

I am really liking the 3R's. It is validating and organizing and applying so many of the things I have been learning long term and recently.

 

3R's really lines up with Alpha-Phonics and some of Don Potter's free O-G frosting resources for it. 3R's is really validating my gut to just go with O-G frosting, instead of full out, for right now, at least.

 

One of my sayings for awhile has been just because a little is a little good, doesn't mean a lot is a lot good. I'm feeling like less is more with the O-G right now.

 

Both Romalda Spalding and Ruth Beechick say to hold off cursive and I'm learning that with the style I am now teaching, I think holding off produces better handwriting, never mind being quicker to teach. And cursive first requires a totally vintage approach to content instruction, because tit takes so long before the student can write at all. Manuscript-first offers me some more options in all the other subjects.

 

Another of my sayings is about using different curricula that don't play nicely together. I feel like I'm finding some stuff right now that plays nicely together, so even if they are not the "best", that's okay.

 

I really think I'm going to need to buy this book, and sooner, rather than later. It really is the foundation for You Can Teach. I really wish I'd known I needed to read the 3R's for my spectrum middle schooler.

 

[ElizaG]

The most recent Ruth Beechick book I've read was Heart and Mind: What the Bible Says About Learning.  Not sure I agree with all of it, but there are some thought-provoking ideas there.  It's been a while since I read The 3 R's, but this might be a good time to dig it out.  

 

Hunter, not wanting to sidetrack your thinking -- well, maybe a little ;)  --  but I've had you in mind recently, ever since I came across the writings of Ella Frances Lynch.   She was an advocate of homeschooling who wrote articles and books from the 1910s to the 1940s.   Although she had no children of her own, she had the experience of having been taught at home by her Irish-American parents (who I think might have been passing on family traditions that went back to the "hedge schools").    She also taught at her own schools that were designed to approximate the home environment.   In her day, she corresponded with thousands of families and was listed in Who's Who, but her ideas seem to have been buried along with her.  

 

Anyway, her system had a lot in common with Ruth Beechick's.  It was meant to be for anyone, and didn't require any special materials.  It combined moral formation, solid discipline, and house or farm chores; relatively brief teacher-intensive lessons based on classic literature; and free time for the child to use in self-directed studies or projects.  Primary arithmetic was taught through common-sense methods, and she tended to go slowly in the early years.  Higher math was self-taught, similar to Robinson.

 

E.F.L. (as her followers called her) wrote a series of three articles for the 1913 Ladies' Home Journal that told readers to how teach their own children at home from age 5 to 10.  I was just about to start a thread to share this link.  Since you brought up Ruth Beechick, I'm wondering if it might be interesting to compare the advice in these articles to that in The 3 R's.   I think, for the most part, they do play nicely together.   :001_smile:

[nansk]

The most recent Ruth Beechick book I've read was Heart and Mind: What the Bible Says About Learning.  Not sure I agree with all of it, but there are some thought-provoking ideas there. 

 

Yes, RB wrote a good number of books, although The 3Rs and YCTYCS are the most well-known. There is another of her books I am keen to read, called How To Write Clearly. But it is not easy for me to obtain here in Singapore, and, I figure the advice will probably be similar to other writing books I have acquired.

[FO4UR]

I am really liking the 3R's. It is validating and organizing and applying so many of the things I have been learning long term and recently.

 

3R's really lines up with Alpha-Phonics and some of Don Potter's free O-G frosting resources for it. 3R's is really validating my gut to just go with O-G frosting, instead of full out, for right now, at least.

 

One of my sayings for awhile has been just because a little is a little good, doesn't mean a lot is a lot good. I'm feeling like less is more with the O-G right now.

 

Both Romalda Spalding and Ruth Beechick say to hold off cursive and I'm learning that with the style I am now teaching, I think holding off produces better handwriting, never mind being quicker to teach. And cursive first requires a totally vintage approach to content instruction, because tit takes so long before the student can write at all. Manuscript-first offers me some more options in all the other subjects.

 

Another of my sayings is about using different curricula that don't play nicely together. I feel like I'm finding some stuff right now that plays nicely together, so even if they are not the "best", that's okay.

 

I really think I'm going to need to buy this book, and sooner, rather than later. It really is the foundation for You Can Teach. I really wish I'd known I needed to read the 3R's for my spectrum middle schooler.

 

This might be feeding your book addiction, but....

 

Recipe for Reading is a $25 manual that outlines a bare-bones O-G education.  One can add as much or as little to it, according to student need.

 

 

Dancing Bears is the most efficient learn-to-read program.  At 10-15min a day, it plays nicely with all the other currics in your day.  (Apples & Pears Spelling is a different monster.  Finding LA that plays nicely can be a trick, unless you plan around A&P.)

 

The 3R's requires the teacher to think and plan for the individual student, and THAT is probably the key to it's success.  

 

 

 

I think the cursive issue is student-dependent.  Looking in my irl circles, the adults that have beautiful handwriting learned cursive first.  That could be as a result of the focus on penmanship itself and not the timing.  idk.  The quality of penmanship does NOT represent the quality of the person's over all education, however.  It's important, but I am putting less emphasis there.

 

 

 

I think "best" is so subjective.  If you understand how to teach it.  If it covers what it needs to cover.  If it fits into the day.  It's best for you.  I don't think buying 3R's is going to radically change anything you do. It's too similar to what you already have.  It's a great little book, and I'd recommend it to a HS newbie (or someone struggling to get their own feet underneath of them)....but you are no newbie.  

 

Take notes.  Glean the wisdom and then put the books down and plan for your individual students.  (That's the advice I'm trying to give myself.  heh heh...)

[Hunter]

The most recent Ruth Beechick book I've read was Heart and Mind: What the Bible Says About Learning.  Not sure I agree with all of it, but there are some thought-provoking ideas there.  It's been a while since I read The 3 R's, but this might be a good time to dig it out.  

 

Hunter, not wanting to sidetrack your thinking -- well, maybe a little ;)  --  but I've had you in mind recently, ever since I came across the writings of Ella Frances Lynch.   She was an advocate of homeschooling who wrote articles and books from the 1910s to the 1940s.   Although she had no children of her own, she had the experience of having been taught at home by her Irish-American parents (who I think might have been passing on family traditions that went back to the "hedge schools").    She also taught at her own schools that were designed to approximate the home environment.   In her day, she corresponded with thousands of families and was listed in Who's Who, but her ideas seem to have been buried along with her.  

 

Anyway, her system had a lot in common with Ruth Beechick's.  It was meant to be for anyone, and didn't require any special materials.  It combined moral formation, solid discipline, and house or farm chores; relatively brief teacher-intensive lessons based on classic literature; and free time for the child to use in self-directed studies or projects.  Primary arithmetic was taught through common-sense methods, and she tended to go slowly in the early years.  Higher math was self-taught, similar to Robinson.

 

E.F.L. (as her followers called her) wrote a series of three articles for the 1913 Ladies' Home Journal that told readers to how teach their own children at home from age 5 to 10.  I was just about to start a thread to share this link.  Since you brought up Ruth Beechick, I'm wondering if it might be interesting to compare the advice in these articles to that in The 3 R's.   I think, for the most part, they do play nicely together.   :001_smile:

 

Thank you! I'm looking forward to following up on EFL!

 

I'll ask the library to buy Heart and Mind.