Better-Late-Than-Early Folks, Advise me on Math, Please!

[vonbon]

Some of this may depend on introvert/extrovert nature--- an introvert may be most comfortable working on their own much of the time, while an extrovert will crave companionship and struggle to focus if it is withdrawn. In that case it may be enough for the teacher/mom/dad to sit nearby working on something of their own.

 

Thanks, you're right.  My daughter is definitely high on the extrovert side of the scale!  She craves companionship.  Actually this is the one major challenge of homeschooling for us: not as much interaction with her peers as she'd like--which would be a ton, if judged by her preference.  

 

Realizing that she's very capable of independent work in various ways and even with math if she is confident with the material.  But I think I was trying to push her to quickly in the direction of independence with newer material. 

[vonbon]

Yeah, perfectly normal.  Lots of kids are not terribly independent at that age.  And in fact, depending on personality, you may have a child that NEEDS that interaction to learn.  My DD does not.  She prefers to function as independently as possible and is not into lots of collaboration and discussion.   DS is the opposite.  He actually retains better, stays more focused, stays more interested if he has someone to bounce things off of, discuss with and generally share.  He does not learn well in a vacuum.  

 

Thanks.  This helps me re-set my expectations (DD is my first; sometimes it's hard to know if I'm expecting too much or too little.)  I would prefer to learn alone and, now that I reflect on it, I see that DD and I are very different in that way--

[OneStepAtATime]

Thanks.  This helps me re-set my expectations (DD is my first; sometimes it's hard to know if I'm expecting too much or too little.)  I would prefer to learn alone and, now that I reflect on it, I see that DD and I are very different in that way--

Totally get that.  It was hard to figure out how to balance my kids.  They are sooooo different.  And they are both different from me.  

 

As she gets older maybe you can help her create a study group of peers, or a group with a common goal.  Maybe a book club or a writing club or a math club.  Her need for interaction as she learns may actually increase in the pre-teen/teen years.

[BlsdMama]

Start at 4 (or so) with Cuisenaire rod play, and don't miss out on the critical window of early learning (in a fun way) due to some misguided ideology.

 

Bill

 

So, Bill, we've been on this merry go round togethre before.    I have no issue with this as I think 24 hours a day is long in the life of a child and they need "tools" to play with - just as I believe they *need* building toys, open ending toys, shapes, blocks, and other items that are considered mathematical in nature.... But I do not categorize this as "formal" math.

 

 

Delay it too often the road-to-ruin and an excuse for educational neglect. Those are bad paths. not being real about this is a shame in the home education community.

 

"Formal" (in the learning context) means intentional and methodical, which are great ideals in early math education.

 

"Formal" does not mean using developmentally inappropriate means, despite the assault on early education by zealots who'd lead parents down a bad path.

 

There is a critical window for learning, and children should get deep enrichment from a young age using developmentally appropriate means in a deliberate fashion. Neglect is injurious to young children.

 

Bill

 

We truly must differentiate between INTENTIONAL delay and NEGLECTFUL delay.  Intentional delay of formal math does not in any way relate to neglectful delay.  They are two different horses, goodness they might even be animals of entirely different species.

 

 

Nah, it is due to a decade of reading this forum and seeing too many threads from parents who "delayed" math now desperate because their little Johnny or Jane is 9 or 10 years old and horribly behind doing basic figures. And it is hard to read about the panic of parents who bought into the siren-song.

 

The negative repercussions of "delay" are a persistent theme on this forum. Especially when post-delay, parents then turn to the driest, shallowest, and most "procedural" math education programs possible. It is a recipe for disaster.

 

Better to start early with fun, effective, and appropriate means that turn a developing child mind onto math.

 

Bill

 

This, frankly, is totally crap.  If you're talking about the results of unintentional home life and a serious lack of willingness of someone to provide a nurturing home life that includes limited screen time and exposure to concepts, then let's call it that.  Let's not call it delaying math.  The OP is asking if anyone has INTENTIONALLY chosen to delay math and to what end.  We PURPOSEFULLY and INTENTIONALLY delayed math in order to avoid issues in higher math that we experienced with my oldest daughter.  Oldest DD had consistent and thorough teaching from the age of 5 with manipulatives.  (We started with Saxon K.)  After watching her struggle mightily with the move to Algebra, I researched the best route to avoid this in subsequent children.

 

While  you do not agree with my findings, they are no less valid.  

 

The biggest danger I see, and I see it with programs like Teaching Textbooks, is a parent that is not adept at math.  I struggle with higher math (above Algebra II.)   Because I struggle with math beyond Algebra II, we've had to work out a plan so that our children don't suffer because of this.  And, while my husband did take (and ace) Calc I and II, he hasn't retained what he learned years and years ago in college.    So what does that have to do with early math? I know some mamas struggle with basic math.  They (the parents) would do best to work through a consistent program from early on so that they feel comfortable.  If they do not feel comfortable with sixth grade math, then they should be doing 4th and 5th grade math in the earlier years so that they are equipped to help.  This is the biggest issue I see with delaying formal math - the parent assumes because the child is a fairly independent learner that they should be able to "figure it out."   Beyond that, the other (major) issue is not checking math consistently.  Because math skills and concepts build on top of one another, if you go three weeks without checking your child's math then they could be in a world of hurt and confusion by the time you figure out there is a problem.  (That's the perk of TT and I suspect why many people do better with TT. )  This is yet another example of why it's important to choose curriculum not solely based on rave reviews but on your own personal strengths and weaknesses in your home.

 

BTW, congratulations on your son's math success.  That is absolutely nothing to sneeze at and you should be very proud.

[Spy Car]

So, Bill, we've been on this merry go round togethre before.    I have no issue with this as I think 24 hours a day is long in the life of a child and they need "tools" to play with - just as I believe they *need* building toys, open ending toys, shapes, blocks, and other items that are considered mathematical in nature.... But I do not categorize this as "formal" math.

 

 

 

We truly must differentiate between INTENTIONAL delay and NEGLECTFUL delay.  Intentional delay of formal math does not in any way relate to neglectful delay.  They are two different horses, goodness they might even be animals of entirely different species.

 

 

 

This, frankly, is totally crap.  If you're talking about the results of unintentional home life and a serious lack of willingness of someone to provide a nurturing home life that includes limited screen time and exposure to concepts, then let's call it that.  Let's not call it delaying math.  The OP is asking if anyone has INTENTIONALLY chosen to delay math and to what end.  We PURPOSEFULLY and INTENTIONALLY delayed math in order to avoid issues in higher math that we experienced with my oldest daughter.  Oldest DD had consistent and thorough teaching from the age of 5 with manipulatives.  (We started with Saxon K.)  After watching her struggle mightily with the move to Algebra, I researched the best route to avoid this in subsequent children.

 

While  you do not agree with my findings, they are no less valid.  

 

The biggest danger I see, and I see it with programs like Teaching Textbooks, is a parent that is not adept at math.  I struggle with higher math (above Algebra II.)   Because I struggle with math beyond Algebra II, we've had to work out a plan so that our children don't suffer because of this.  And, while my husband did take (and ace) Calc I and II, he hasn't retained what he learned years and years ago in college.    So what does that have to do with early math? I know some mamas struggle with basic math.  They (the parents) would do best to work through a consistent program from early on so that they feel comfortable.  If they do not feel comfortable with sixth grade math, then they should be doing 4th and 5th grade math in the earlier years so that they are equipped to help.  This is the biggest issue I see with delaying formal math - the parent assumes because the child is a fairly independent learner that they should be able to "figure it out."   Beyond that, the other (major) issue is not checking math consistently.  Because math skills and concepts build on top of one another, if you go three weeks without checking your child's math then they could be in a world of hurt and confusion by the time you figure out there is a problem.  (That's the perk of TT and I suspect why many people do better with TT. )  This is yet another example of why it's important to choose curriculum not solely based on rave reviews but on your own personal strengths and weaknesses in your home.

 

BTW, congratulations on your son's math success.  That is absolutely nothing to sneeze at and you should be very proud.

 

My contention is that to do an age appropriate "math lab" sort of approach at an early age a parent needs to learn (or get re-acquainted) with the laws of mathematics (at least as they apply to arithmetic) so they can help their young students discover mathematical concepts with an active parent/facilitator.

 

When this sort of learning environment exists a child grows up with math being a native language (if you will). I see no advantage to missing an important window in a child's intellectual development. The key is to build knowledge and love of learning using means that are age appropriate and appropriate to the individual student. 

 

Too often IMO "formal" is conflated with using inappropriate materials, and a false dichotomy gets set up between "pushing" bad textbook approaches and doing nothing, which is a false choice. 

 

If you think it is crap that many dozens of parents that have bought into "delay" have come to this forum panic-stricken and consumed with feelings of guilt that they failed their children when those kids are horribly behind at 9 or 10, then we've been reading different forums.

 

Are there ways in the early years to intentionally and methodically introduce math concepts in ways that are hands-on, fun, clear, and that test reasoning skills that don't necessarily involve the child opening a book? Sure. Some of the most effective means of reaching these young people IMO. But most of their parents would need to crack books, because this sort of approach is more work for teachers that mindlessly working through a book using the remnants of one's own distant math education.

 

This commitment to parent education and serious involvement of children in math exploration at a young age is not what I'm sensing is the norm in the "better-late-than-early" camp, where early education seems (mostly) unintentional, and where the late start is most often followed by further parental opting out, with the easiest "independent" programs following the late start. I don't think you are being real about the pervasiveness this problem.

 

We are living in a global economy in the 21st Century. A terrible math education will limit life opportunities.

 

Bill

[Farrar]

We didn't do a program for math in kindy - we read a lot of living math books, played games, played with C-rods, etc. I don't regret that a bit. I also don't consider it "formal" math. And then, one of my boys was ready to start math in first grade. He did okay. All was fine. But for the other kid... it was a massive disaster. And we spent the better part of a year not doing any formal math. He's now well ahead of his twin in math. Not way, way ahead, but doing just fine and starting algebra 1 in 7th grade, which I consider to be perfectly good and on track. And I suspect he would be even more ahead if I had just waited another year and we hadn't had to spend a year trying to lessen his anxiety issues around math - issues that have cropped up and delayed his progress over and over since then.

 

I agree that being purposeful is important. I think waiting until 6th or 7th grade to introduce explicit math instruction and math book work as in the Benezet case is wrongheaded and way too extreme, though I greatly dislike anyone who cries that a child's life and prospects are over at age 12 for any reason save violence or treatment of a scale way worse than anything in this thread. But formal =/= purposeful and vice versa. They're just different concepts in terms of how they are used in virtually every conversation on this board. But just coming from the other end - there are people who regret not having done enough earlier, but there are also those of us who regret trying to do too much earlier.

 

In general, I don't see people who started formal math at 7 or 8 having kids who lagged way behind. I think it's the parents who missed the boat around then and suddenly realize their kids are a couple of years from high school and don't know how to do long division who have the freak outs. Or the parents who just stayed too "low key" for way too long, never really fully doing any program and going at a glacier pace during middle and upper elementary who hit a similar moment (I actually can think of a family I know in this situation and while the kids are smart, they are definitely going to hit a point where their options to move into other schooling choices are limited by their math skills very soon yet they are struggling to pick up the pace).

[Lang Syne Boardie]

One thing I've learned the hard way is not to assume that a parent is as capable as they make themselves sound, at choosing math concepts to lead their child to discover through play and other informal means.

 

The worst was the homeschooling mother who spoke eloquently about "learning math through daily life," who was, herself, incapable of adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing fractions. She had never completed algebra in school (she was homeschooled)...she didn't know WHAT she didn't know. So her children knew nothing about math. They didn't cook with measuring cups and spoons, didn't do woodworking projects with rulers and yardsticks, didn't use math language when divvying up cookies amongst the children, didn't compare things...she didn't know to do that.

When I tutored her 15yo daughter, we started with the definition of subtraction. She'd never learned what "subtract" means. Her 12yo brother couldn't tell time, or read a calendar. She was embarrassed, ashamed, and angry. She did get through it all and was able to go on to college after several years' very hard work. But I don't see that result, which was only possible through extreme determination on her part (plus the entire lack of learning disabilities, which nobody would have even known about...), as "proof" that leaving her in ignorance for 15 years until a diligent teacher showed up, is a workable strategy!

 

Now, most homeschooling parents are not going to be in THIS bad shape, because most people got to have access to an education somewhere, and know that their child must get from colors, shapes, and 1+1=2 through high school algebra and geometry, at the least. And obviously, there must be some plan to move along that path. So even if they delay, or choose alternative methods, they are cognizant of their responsibility...this is what I believe, but it's also what I will NEVER assume again. I'm not going to assume that all people everywhere can totally wing it, or that ignoring math (talking a good game but not doing it) for three years will somehow result in sudden diligence and persistence when the child turns 9.

 

If someone asks me if delaying math is fine, I'm going to ask them exactly what they mean by that. If they mean that it's all going to be incidental to everyday life, even if nobody's living a mathematically rich life in their home, and that they aren't even going to be curious about traditional scope and sequence (any that has been proven effective for anyone, anywhere), and how to move from one skill to the next, then I'm not going to say that's just fine. If they say they have studied math instruction and are very aware of the concepts, and are looking forward to helping their child discover those mathematical truths through play, games, activities, and "labs" around the house, I'm going to tell them that I think it's brilliant and good luck!

 

 

[BlsdMama]

 

If you think it is crap that many dozens of parents that have bought into "delay" have come to this forum panic-stricken and consumed with feelings of guilt that they failed their children when those kids are horribly behind at 9 or 10, then we've been reading different forums.

 

 

This commitment to parent education and serious involvement of children in math exploration at a young age is not what I'm sensing is the norm in the "better-late-than-early" camp, where early education seems (mostly) unintentional, and where the late start is most often followed by further parental opting out, with the easiest "independent" programs following the late start. I don't think you are being real about the pervasiveness this problem.

 

We are living in a global economy in the 21st Century. A terrible math education will limit life opportunities.

 

Bill

 

I'm curious if you read the link I provided.  I'll better explain what I think is crap.  You said: "Nah, it is due to a decade of reading this forum and seeing too many threads from parents who "delayed" math now desperate because their little Johnny or Jane is 9 or 10 years old and horribly behind doing basic figures"   I contend that all is lost because Johnny and Jane can't do basic figuring at ten.  That's ridiculous.  I will tell you that I actually HAVE a non-mathy child that didn't have practice doing basic figures (intentionally and purposefully) and I began her with formal curriculum around 5th/6th grade - I'm fairly certain it was sixth but we run our school years together so I can't give you a definite date.  Not *only* is she not mathy, but she is dyslexic and dyslexics (as a general rule of thumb) have a challenging time with memorizing basic math facts, though not generally with concepts to be fair.  I think the problem here isn't a lack of math introduction before age ten.  I think you're talking about a slacker for a homeschool parent who, when she began math with her child, wouldn't get off her tailfeathers and teach, wouldn't consistently correct, and didn't hold accountability after the introduction of real math.  Frankly, I'm trying to figure out what is so incredibly instrumental in 1st through 4th grade that it simply cannot be quickly and efficiently learned from age 10 and going forward?  And it is possible I just do *not* know and really would benefit from it being explained.  Do read the link. I'd be curious your take on it.  (Truly, not sarcastically.)

 

BTW, I'm not a Holt fan and I'm not in the "better late than early" category.  I know, it's deceiving. I sound like it from this conversation. :P

 

 

 

One thing I've learned the hard way is not to assume that a parent is as capable as they make themselves sound, at choosing math concepts to lead their child to discover through play and other informal means.

 

The worst was the homeschooling mother who spoke eloquently about "learning math through daily life," who was, herself, incapable of adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing fractions. She had never completed algebra in school (she was homeschooled)...she didn't know WHAT she didn't know. So her children knew nothing about math. They didn't cook with measuring cups and spoons, didn't do woodworking projects with rulers and yardsticks, didn't use math language when divvying up cookies amongst the children, didn't compare things...she didn't know to do that.

 

When I tutored her 15yo daughter, we started with the definition of subtraction. She'd never learned what "subtract" means. Her 12yo brother couldn't tell time, or read a calendar. She was embarrassed, ashamed, and angry. She did get through it all and was able to go on to college after several years' very hard work. But I don't see that result, which was only possible through extreme determination on her part (plus the entire lack of learning disabilities, which nobody would have even known about...), as "proof" that leaving her in ignorance for 15 years until a diligent teacher showed up, is a workable strategy!

 

Now, most homeschooling parents are not going to be in THIS bad shape, because most people got to have access to an education somewhere, and know that their child must get from colors, shapes, and 1+1=2 through high school algebra and geometry, at the least. And obviously, there must be some plan to move along that path. So even if they delay, or choose alternative methods, they are cognizant of their responsibility...this is what I believe, but it's also what I will NEVER assume again. I'm not going to assume that all people everywhere can totally wing it, or that ignoring math (talking a good game but not doing it) for three years will somehow result in sudden diligence and persistence when the child turns 9.

 

If someone asks me if delaying math is fine, I'm going to ask them exactly what they mean by that. If they mean that it's all going to be incidental to everyday life, even if nobody's living a mathematically rich life in their home, and that they aren't even going to be curious about traditional scope and sequence (any that has been proven effective for anyone, anywhere), and how to move from one skill to the next, then I'm not going to say that's just fine. If they say they have studied math instruction and are very aware of the concepts, and are looking forward to helping their child discover those mathematical truths through play, games, activities, and "labs" around the house, I'm going to tell them that I think it's brilliant and good luck!

 

 

Tibbie, I *have* to think that is a long shot from what we're discussing here.   But I do think you're wise when you say that you are going to be precise in what you say when you put a stamp of approval on delaying math.  I tend to assume most of us here are classically bent and I forget sometimes that is no longer the fact on this board.  So weird how TWTM forums have transitioned through the years.  I still find it beyond strange that we have public school parents (no homeschooling) and unschoolers advising here.  It isn't that what they say lacks value, it's simply that they lack experience and application.

[kolamum]

We started with Saxon {K} & dropped it to do what's dubbed "living math" our kids learned basic concepts through games, books, & hands on application. When they hit a certain grade/age I wanted to be sure we had no gaps, & admittedly teaching without a curriculum is hard work on Mamma. I slipped my eldest into Teaching Textbooks & he tested 2 grade levels ahead of where he was. We went with that for 2 years, anyway but I just felt it wasn't challenging enough for him & in the end we landed in MUS.

 

Moving to MUS without starting there is kinda hard because it's a mastery programme & each book focuses on a specific topic at hand. My boy straddled 2 books when we made the switch & I went with the "lower" book to be sure he had the right tools to accomplish the job. My only regret is that I didn't let him move at an accelerated pace through that book for fear he'd "miss" something. It was quite silly of me, to be honest, but it all worked out in the end. He's now in high school & at grade level surfing along just fine. In fact there are still days when I wonder if he should be challenged more, where other days I know his plate is full. 

FWIW, so many websites offer free lessons on their websites I reckon you could easily try out each curriculum to get a great idea of which one would best suit your child. I went with TT when I did because I wanted something my kid could do solo because *I* needed the math break after having to be "on duty" so much as the math teacher without the use of a curriculum. :)

[Sahamamama2]

My contention is that to do an age appropriate "math lab" sort of approach at an early age a parent needs to learn (or get re-acquainted) with the laws of mathematics (at least as they apply to arithmetic) so they can help their young students discover mathematical concepts with an active parent/facilitator.

 

I agree with this. I remember when my girls were little, purchasing all these lovely math manipulatives and then thinking, "Now what?" I truly had no idea what to do with them at that point. :blushing: I certainly had never used a C-rod before in my life. I was raised entirely on (poorly taught) procedural math, and I was still struggling to grasp certain concepts in my 40s. I realized that without more guidance, these manipulatives were going to be little more than expensive toys. These resources were helpful to me in learning how to do "math labs," back in those early days:

 

Hands-On Standards (Grades Pre-K & K)

Hands-On Standards (Grades 1 & 2)

Hands-On Standards (Grades 3 & 4)

 

Those books taught me how to use the manipulatives to teach basic mathematical concepts.

 

Next topic:

 

Bill, I do think that sometimes, in your zeal, you underestimate the enormous effort that many homeschool moms put out on behalf of their children, over years and years of their lives. You tend to come across as though you think we are all neglectful and lazy, doomed to ruin our children's lives because we don't do things exactly your way. Do you realize you do that? Do you have any idea how offensive and hurtful that is?

[Spy Car]

 

Next topic:

 

Bill, I do think that sometimes, in your zeal, you underestimate the enormous effort that many homeschool moms put out on behalf of their children, over years and years of their lives. You tend to come across as though you think we are all neglectful and lazy, doomed to ruin our children's lives because we don't do things exactly your way. Do you realize you do that? Do you have any idea how offensive and hurtful that is?

 

This is a misperception on your part. I'm well aware of the hours and effort that I've put into my child's home education, and that is with just one child (who also attends public schools). I understand and honor the difference of carrying the full load (especially with multiple children).

 

I don't get the feeling most homeschoolers are lazy, far from it. I think most work very hard.

 

But there are sub-sets of the HS community that from my perspective enable what I consider educational neglect. I'm sure you know this is true yourself. Is it painful to know it? Sure. But better to be honest about the problem instead of helping enable it IMO.

 

Bill

[mellifera33]

Education Unboxed  is a great resource for those who are wondering what to do with c rods.

 

MEP  is a great free program for math. The activities are fun and remarkably "thinky" for young kids. 

 

Ronit Bird's materials are awesome for kids with dyscalculia. 

 

None of them are independent. 

 

This doesn't really address the OP's question, but the above resources are great to pull from if one is wanting to avoid boring, worksheet-based math in the early grades. 

[Guest]

But there are sub-sets of the HS community that from my perspective enable what I consider educational neglect. I'm sure you know this is true yourself. Is it painful to know it? Sure. But better to be honest about the problem instead of helping enable it IMO.

 

 

 

And you see this, or enabling of this, in this thread?

[Spy Car]

And you see this, or enabling of this, in this thread?

 

I think the better-late-than-early movement that follows up educational neglect in young childhood with shallow "independent" math education has done tremendous harm in the home education community.

 

So I guess my answer is: Yes.

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

I am sure that you are aware that there are plenty of countries in which formal education commences at age seven, with a gentle start. Finland is one such country, and it consistently achieves excellent, internationally competitive, results. Now, children growing up in such countries are of course not "behind", but rather on target, together with their peers, because their whole system is set up differently. Replicating these models in countries where school generally starts earlier could have certain negative consequences, of course, because completely different scopes and sequences are the norm in those countries. However, it's clear that it is indeed very possible to begin formal education at a range of ages and achieve good results.

 

I am wondering what your thoughts are on the practice of commencing formal education a little later, but then diving in to do the exact same things you are advocating. Is it the age at which children begin formal education that matters to you, or is it only the "shallow" education that you believe often follows that you have a problem with?

 

Even if you've seen certain trends, I'd not assume that because someone announces that they start formal education a little later they also follow that later start up with a "shallow" education.

 

The Finns provide very deep and rich experiences for pre-school children.

 

The Finnish model is not a model one of neglect, as much as some try to suggest that it is as an excuse not to educate young children.

 

Following up non-education with hands-off "independent" learning for beginning students does not offer many options for a rich educational experience. This latter model is double-neglect, not a deep and enriched experience following a late start.

 

Bill

[Farrar]

I think the problem is that literally every response in this thread talked about decent resources, being purposeful, starting "late" being still in elementary age... and yet Bill's response was still accusatory. I was braced for it before I even opened the thread. Look, anyone who knows my responses to things on this board or reads my blog knows that I can be really outspoken against education neglect in the homeschool world. But in a conversation like this, it's just not there. I didn't see anyone supporting educational neglect here, in part because I don't consider not doing math book work at age 5 or 6 anywhere near educational neglect. And I do read Bill's response as saying that I was educationally neglecting my first grader for taking a long break from trying to do any formal math.

 

I feel like what Tibbie posted about how we have to be careful not to mistake "math in real life" for "avoiding doing math" is much more helpful. It doesn't mean that a more informal, living math approach can't be done and made to work well in the early grades. But just saying you're doing that doesn't accomplish it. It takes actual work to make it happen.

[Guest]

Start at 4 (or so) with Cuisenaire rod play, and don't miss out on the critical window of early learning (in a fun way) due to some misguided ideology.

 

Bill

But look at the seven posts that preceded this rigid exhortation from you... Which you have just repeated in different words half a dozen times. There is no way anything there can be construed as abhorent double wrong.

 

Your anecdote about your public school'd son is not useful, and no one up thread of your opening comment has given evidence of the neglect you seek to eradicate through....? Superior tone? Virtual shaming?

Edited October 29, 2016 by OKBud

[mellifera33]

I wonder if the horror stories of 10 year olds who can't figure out 5+7 are a result of delayed instruction plus a learning disability. My very anecdotal experience: my 9 y/o has dyscalculia, and despite several years of what I consider solid instruction, has some trouble with grade-level math. If he had only experienced living math, he would be completely lost. On the other hand, my more typical 6 y/o, who had only had "living math" and MEP reception level before this year, has immediately picked up on skip counting, adding and subtracting, inequalities, etc. In other words, delaying formal instruction for a typical kid might be fine, assuming they actually are in an enriched environment, but delayed instruction plus learning disability = disaster. 

[Spy Car]

But look at the seven posts that preceded this rigid exhortation from you... Which you have just repeated in different words half a dozen times. There is no way anything there can be construed as abhorent double wrong.

 

Your anecdote about your public school'd son is not useful, and no one up thread of your opening comment has given evidence of the neglect you seek to eradicate through....? Superior tone? Virtual shaming?

 

I guess we won't have a meeting of the minds. And when the future threads follow the pattern of the past decade, I won't be surprised. 

 

Double-neglect is a failed model. 

 

Bill

[Farrar]

This forum is one of the most unfriendly toward educational neglect I know of in the homeschool world. It's one of the things I value about this community - that despite a lot of different practices and types of families, the thing that unites this board is a deep value of learning. Not expecting trig in middle school is not the same as educational neglect. I think that's what seems bizarre and out of place about Bill's posts whenever this subject comes up. There are people in the homeschool world who are practicing educational neglect and it disturbs me deeply and I do occasionally see people on this board engaged in the "none of my business" approach about other families, which I think is a shame. But this board isn't one of those places. Yet Bill is determined to tell us it *is* one of those places. That we are all supporting educational neglect here. It's jarring and feels hurtful in a community that's so committed to learning.

[Guest]

I wonder if the horror stories of 10 year olds who can't figure out 5+7 are a result of delayed instruction plus a learning disability. My very anecdotal experience: my 9 y/o has dyscalculia, and despite several years of what I consider solid instruction, has some trouble with grade-level math. If he had only experienced living math, he would be completely lost. On the other hand, my more typical 6 y/o, who had only had "living math" and MEP reception level before this year, has immediately picked up on skip counting, adding and subtracting, inequalities, etc. In other words, delaying formal instruction for a typical kid might be fine, assuming they actually are in an enriched environment, but delayed instruction plus learning disability = disaster.

Yes this is __absolutely__ a huge potential problem in choosing to begin formal school later than normal. Anyone who conscientiously decides to do it needs to know how to recognize learning difficulties.

 

Actually ANYONE educating any child needs to do that, really.

 

And of course that is often done without cracking a textbook.

[Spy Car]

This forum is one of the most unfriendly toward educational neglect I know of in the homeschool world. It's one of the things I value about this community - that despite a lot of different practices and types of families, the thing that unites this board is a deep value of learning. Not expecting trig in middle school is not the same as educational neglect. I think that's what seems bizarre and out of place about Bill's posts whenever this subject comes up. There are people in the homeschool world who are practicing educational neglect and it disturbs me deeply and I do occasionally see people on this board engaged in the "none of my business" approach about other families, which I think is a shame. But this board isn't one of those places. Yet Bill is determined to tell us it *is* one of those places. That we are all supporting educational neglect here. It's jarring and feels hurtful in a community that's so committed to learning.

 

Bolded is my point exactly. Plenty of "gurus" making money selling a failed model, with disastrous results. 

 

I've read too many "anything you do at home is better than what happens in schools" type posts/threads over the years to believe there isn't a pass given to neglect too often here too. I never said or suggested that neglect is typical of WTMers, as I don't believe it is the case. But lampooning positions of others is par for the course.

 

Bill

[SparklyUnicorn]

Thank you all for the suggestions so far. Two clarifications: first, we use and practice math every day.

 

 

 

The OP added this.  So while I don't know if she is using c-rods, she is not saying she is doing nothing.  So this doesn't conflict with Bill's advice nor with what everyone else here is discussing.

 

I don't agree it has to be c-rods in particular, but I don't know if Bill was insisting this was the only good method out there. 

 

What gets me is Bill, you don't post for long periods of time and then you swoop down to poke the homeschoolers.  We don't like being poked and in this case I can't see a good reason for it. 

[Jean in Newcastle]

I don't understand lampooning someone who is asking for constructive advice because she wants her child to succeed in math.  Now some follow up questions can indeed be helpful in understanding where the OP is coming from so that we can provide the best constructive advice.

 

OP - when you say that you do some math every day, are you following some kind of scope and sequence (whether it is from a book or not) that tells you what things should be covered in the younger grades?  Simply relying on math opportunities as they come up can lead to holes because sometimes important skills and concepts just don't come up organically.  So my suggestion is that you do find and follow some kind of scope and sequence so that your "living" math can cover the range of underlying skills and concepts necessary to start a formal math program, whether it is Saxon 5/4 or not. 

 

What is the reason you want to delay the formal study of math?  Is it because you want to delay seat work in order to concentrate on hands on learning?  Is it because you don't want to set aside time for formal study?  Is it something else?  Knowing if there are practical or philosophical reasons behind your questions will help us to point you in the right direction.  There are many reasons why people take different approaches.  Success depends on finding the right approach to meet the real underlying needs and circumstances. 

 

To answer your question, I personally think that 3rd grade (about 8 or 9) is the best time to switch to a more formal study of math because 3rd grade math starts to slowly move from just the concrete level of skills and concepts to some more abstract concepts that aren't as easily taught organically in everyday life.  You could do a mix though of "living" and formal math at this age to accommodate that fact. 

[Farrar]

Bolded is my point exactly. Plenty of "gurus" making money selling a failed model, with disastrous results. 

 

I've read too many "anything you do at home is better than what happens in schools" type posts/threads over the years to believe there isn't a pass given to neglect too often here too. I never said or suggested that neglect is typical of WTMers, as I don't believe it is the case. But lampooning positions of others is par for the course.

 

Bill

 

What I see on this board is people who are so anti-schools and anti-government and generally libertarian in their attitudes that they feel that *for others* it's none of their business what goes on in the home in terms of education. I won't deny that I disagree with that - I've tried to call people out on it before. However, I have only rarely seen that attitude applied on this board to giving advice to anyone asking for it sincerely or to anyone about their own children's education. Certainly not to the extent that you need to swoop into random threads and chastise and mansplain to us all about when there's no evidence of it happening in that particular thread - just to ward it off in the homeschool world (a world you're not even part of) generally.

[Guest]

Bill, you need to butt out.

 

 

Ayup.

[Farrar]

Ooh, that's a trigger word for Bill. I believe the last time I used it I was accused of a heinous and gender based attack. 

 

He might listen to you though :)

 

It is a gender based attack.  :lol:  Actually, dh got majorly online mansplained to the other day. We were laughing about it. He was like, ooh, so that's what that's like.

[Farrar]

All men should be subject to multiple experiences of mansplaining till they get it, and solemnly swear to never do it again.

 

I have very little tolerance for men setting themselves up as experts when they're not. It's a facet of their gender privilege they seem remarkably unaware of of.

 

We're so far off topic now... but... The thing of it is... I think I probably mansplain. I think I learned it early as a defense mechanism against sexist men. Like, I can even pinpoint the high school seminar when I probably got my start mansplaining. If you do it well enough, I think it works on some men. Of course, then society labels you as a bossy know-it-all or a general b word...

[Spy Car]

The OP added this.  So while I don't know if she is using c-rods, she is not saying she is doing nothing.  So this doesn't conflict with Bill's advice nor with what everyone else here is discussing.

 

I don't agree it has to be c-rods in particular, but I don't know if Bill was insisting this was the only good method out there. 

 

What gets me is Bill, you don't post for long periods of time and then you swoop down to poke the homeschoolers.  We don't like being poked and in this case I can't see a good reason for it. 

 

This will make 20291 posts. Hardly an infrequent poster. Not your level, but...

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

That still doesn't answer the question whether you think it is fine to "delay" (or "start later") a few years and then follow up with a rigorous education, or whether you think that intentionally starting later and preceding that later formal start with an approach that is fun for children but still enables them to learn lots also causes the circumvention of some crucial window.

 

I ask this because nothing about the OP's question suggested that she wasn't following something like the Finnish model. That was an assumption on your part, as far as I can see? I am not doubting that what you have observed exists, I am just doubting whether it is right to assume that this is what is happening here, especially in the face of updates offered. Having statements like the ones you made thrown at you can be very discouraging, particularly if they do not apply.

 

 

I think that teaching younger children math concepts in creative and fun ways that are intentional and has a method falls under the rubric of "formal education." I said this previously.

 

So the first part would depend on what is (or is not) being taught. If little to nothing is being learned I suppose it is possible to catch up (with diligent effort), but why waste the time in the first place when there are great fun ways to open a young child's mind to math? Those who start early can just keep rocketing forwards, and those who start behind can be needlessly stressed trying to make up years doing nothing. Why take that path?

 

Bill

[Rosie_0801]

So the first part would depend on what is (or is not) being taught. If little to nothing is being learned I suppose it is possible to catch up (with diligent effort), but why waste the time in the first place when there are great fun ways to open a young child's mind to math? Those who start early can just keep rocketing forwards, and those who start behind can be needlessly stressed trying to make up years doing nothing. Why take that path?

 

If you're dealing with dyscalculia, that path doesn't lead to the destination you're talking about.

 

 

Dyscalculia is very interesting.

[maize]

I think that teaching younger children math concepts in creative and fun ways that are intentional and has a method falls under the rubric of "formal education." I said this previously.

 

So the first part would depend on what is (or is not) being taught. If little to nothing is being learned I suppose it is possible to catch up (with diligent effort), but why waste the time in the first place when there are great fun ways to open a young child's mind to math? Those who start early can just keep rocketing forwards, and those who start behind can be needlessly stressed trying to make up years doing nothing. Why take that path?

 

Bill

Children's brains develop in different ways and at different rates.

 

You had a child who was able and ready to soak up math concepts at an early age. Not all children are. In some cases it really is better to wait a couple of extra years for brain maturation rather than frustrating a child by pushing them early to grasp concepts that they individually are not ready for yet.

 

You have one child, Bill; it is unreasonable to extrapolate from your experience with that child and assume that all kids are ready for the same concepts at the same age.

 

I've had, among my half dozen kids (still a very small sample) one who enjoyed multiplication at age three and one who still struggles with addition within twenty at age eight. What was good for the one child as a preschooler was completely inappropriate for the other.

 

You're the expert only on your own kid--and actually, you don't have any idea even how things would have gone with him had you taken a different approach. It is entirely possible that he could have done no formal math prior to age 8 and still be exactly where he is now in mathematical accomplishment given a different path.

[....]

If you're dealing with dyscalculia, that path doesn't lead to the destination you're talking about.

 

 

Dyscalculia is very interesting.

 

I wish I could like your post, Rosie.

 

For anyone who is feeling bad their kid isn't learning calculus in 3rd grade, here's an article that convinced me to relax, slow down my oldest daughter (who tested as gifted in ps) and just enjoy learning math:  http://www.artofproblemsolving.com/articles/calculus-trap

 

 

 

 

 

Edited to add: I hate to mention the gifted thing, but it gives a better snapshot of what's going on in this circus.

Edited October 30, 2016 by Evanthe

[Sahamamama2]

This is a misperception on your part. I'm well aware of the hours and effort that I've put into my child's home education, and that is with just one child (who also attends public schools). I understand and honor the difference of carrying the full load (especially with multiple children).

 

I don't get the feeling most homeschoolers are lazy, far from it. I think most work very hard.

 

But there are sub-sets of the HS community that from my perspective enable what I consider educational neglect. I'm sure you know this is true yourself. Is it painful to know it? Sure. But better to be honest about the problem instead of helping enable it IMO.

 

Bill

 

Granted, there are neglectful homeschoolers. IME, there are neglectful "everythings" out there. Pick any category. I'm sure someone doing Job X is neglectful at it.

 

It isn't that I disagree with your assertions that rankles, Bill. It's that you tend to come onto a thread (like this one) that has nothing to do with your soapbox, and yet you still get up on your soapbox, I'm not exactly sure why. It does seem to me that you jump at any opportunity, even if it isn't really there, to read EDUCATIONAL NEGLECT into a situation where it certainly isn't an issue. Simply because the OP mentions the word "late," is it justifiable to caution her against missing out on "the critical window of early learning" due to "misguided ideology?" I think that's a leap on your part.

 

You remind me of the robot on "Lost in Space," waving its arms and calling, "Warning! Warning! Will Robinson! Danger! Danger!" Except with you it is always "Educational Neglect! Lazy Homeschoolers! Delayed Math Ruins Lives!" -- because someone asks how to start her eight year old on a more formal math program? I don't get it.

[Sahamamama2]

Bill --

 

Let's suppose that I am one of those neglectful, slothful, math-dunce homeschool moms you like to talk about...

 

... and I come here, to the Well-Trained Mind boards... :blink:  [How the heck did I end up here?]

 

... and I post exactly what the OP posted about wanting to start more formal math work with my eight year old...

 

... and it reads, "If you delay starting a formal math program, when do you start and what do you use? Do you do anything in particular to prepare your students for the transition?" (which I think is quite friendly and positive-sounding, actually)...

 

... and I read your first response, alluding to my "misguided ideology"... :001_unsure:

 

Tell me, how does what you've said change anything, except the direction of the thread? So now, instead of actually answering the OP with something practical and useful, we get to clarify to you once again that, nooooo, this isn't another one of those instances of gross neglect that you somehow keep seeing on these forums.

 

Tell me, how could what you said even reach a mother like the one you seem to assume is posting? Because I can tell you that, if I were that mother, your comment would not even begin to make sense to me. It would fly right over my empty head. And since I am not that mother, and am not misperceiving what you are saying, it is simply offensive.

 

I think that if a person truly wants to see math education improve for homeschooled students, then that person will refrain from derailing countless math threads with accusations of "Neglect!"

Edited October 30, 2016 by Sahamamama2

[Guest]

If you're dealing with dyscalculia, that path doesn't lead to the destination you're talking about.

 

 

Dyscalculia is very interesting.

Aye. I've one of those myself.

[SarahW]

Well, Bill beat me to it, but I agree that nearly all Americans misunderstand what is going on with Finland. Here in NL kids "go to school" at age 4, but (but!) for the first two years there's not a single worksheet, textbook, or even many pencils in the classroom. But there is a robust early elementary education going on, and much the same happens in Finland. I'm just so tired of Finland being trotted out as proof for things that aren't related to it at all. :off rant:

 

I have a knee jerk disdain for the term "better late" in general. Nearly didn't open the thread because the title made me feel gross. I realize I have issues. But I do think it's very possible for people to use the term to explain away their own laziness and neglect. "Oh, I don't need to do any curriculum at all before 10!" "What to do with kids over 10? Oh, they just teach themselves!" Double educational neglect, yes. Sure, lots of us on this forum don't do that. But the stats on "views" indicates that many threads here get a LOT of outside readers. This is a public forum, accessible by Google to anyone without even making a login. And apparently there are still "how to homeschool" books being published which push one or both lines. And we can't criticize(/worry about?) homeschoolers directly (because myob) so the only way to fight it is to disagree with those lines over and over and over until maybe they become so socially unacceptable that people stop saying them. :off rant:

 

I don't understand the "better late" philosophy. I don't understand when people say that you have to wait until there's armpit hair before a kid can understand algebra either. My kid started doing algebra, but he is late in writing, I guess. But that's responding to where he's at and his interests. I don't see the need to commence an overarching philosophy about it?

 

Maybe at the beginning of this thread it could have been clarified that the OP wasn't saying that she didn't skip number sense activities at all, and that she doesn't intend for her kids to teach themselves all of math from zero without much help? Apparently, that's not what she meant? But yeah, from the title that's what I assumed too. Maybe just because I have issues?

 

I will say however, that I'm not going to go back and parse all the competing vocabulary and views, but that I feel that once again the English speaking world has, comparatively speaking, a deficient understanding of early childhood education. Sure, there's nods to Montessori or Waldorf here and there, and some CM ideas in the homeschool world, but in day to day practice I wonder how much these things are actually carried out in an effective manner. I see what the Bluedorns are reacting against, but I think they swing too far the other way. And with this overall social deficiency, the implementation of their method can be too often negative. Totally random academic-ese musings over the 2nd cup of coffee too early on a DST Sunday morning...  

 

Y'all who are doing great for you kids, keep on carrying on.  :thumbup1:

[eternalsummer]

On the whole, I think it is wise to avoid giving advice to your average homeschooler (or any kind of schooler) based on your experience with either a very bright or learning disabled kid without qualifying it as such (and realizing that your experience may not be that generalizable).

 

So while it is well and good that Bill's 8 year old is doing trig, or whatever, that doesn't mean that the average 8 year old (or, imo, an advanced 8 year old) who hasn't started a formal curriculum yet is either woefully behind or even materially behind. 

 

I look at it like this: I taught myself to read at 4 from the Sunday comics.  In kindy I read to the class; in 1st I didn't have to do spelling, in 2nd I was reading at a middle school level.  By high school, though, I was reading at a college level, and so were several of my classmates, some of whom didn't learn to read until they were taught at 6.  The 2 years of delay, in the end, meant absolutely zero (especially, I bet, once you account for actual IQ differences). 

 

 

 

Regarding algebra being generally targeted at adolescents - I think this is related to the theory that for *most* kids, there is a stage at which the brain becomes able to absorb and understand those kinds of processes.  

 

For your kid it could certainly be earlier - he's gifted, right?  For another kid it might be later, or it might be never.  But for the average kid, 11-14 seems to be a good age to introduce algebra.

[eternalsummer]

 

 

Maybe at the beginning of this thread it could have been clarified that the OP wasn't saying that she didn't skip number sense activities at all, and that she doesn't intend for her kids to teach themselves all of math from zero without much help? Apparently, that's not what she meant? But yeah, from the title that's what I assumed too. Maybe just because I have issues?

 

 

Part of it is board culture, maybe  - I assumed that since she was posting here, she likely has some commitment to educating her kids (most people who frequent these boards do) and thus when she said

 

"transition"

 

in the first post, I figured she meant transitioning from one type of math to another.

 

 

But then she clarified directly in Post #7, so pretty much everything after that arguing about how neglectful it is to not do math with your young children was off-topic.

[SparklyUnicorn]

I think that teaching younger children math concepts in creative and fun ways that are intentional and has a method falls under the rubric of "formal education." I said this previously.

 

So the first part would depend on what is (or is not) being taught. If little to nothing is being learned I suppose it is possible to catch up (with diligent effort), but why waste the time in the first place when there are great fun ways to open a young child's mind to math? Those who start early can just keep rocketing forwards, and those who start behind can be needlessly stressed trying to make up years doing nothing. Why take that path?

 

Bill

 

So you are essentially getting hung up on semantics?  You are calling these things formal and some other people are not.  How do you know what the OP is actually doing?  She has not said. 

[SparklyUnicorn]

This will make 20291 posts. Hardly an infrequent poster. Not your level, but...

 

Bill

 

I didn't spend the bulk of my posts picking on people.

[Code Lyoko]

Well, Bill beat me to it, but I agree that nearly all Americans misunderstand what is going on with Finland. Here in NL kids "go to school" at age 4, but (but!) for the first two years there's not a single worksheet, textbook, or even many pencils in the classroom. But there is a robust early elementary education going on, and much the same happens in Finland. I'm just so tired of Finland being trotted out as proof for things that aren't related to it at all. :off rant:

 

I have a knee jerk disdain for the term "better late" in general. Nearly didn't open the thread because the title made me feel gross. I realize I have issues. But I do think it's very possible for people to use the term to explain away their own laziness and neglect. "Oh, I don't need to do any curriculum at all before 10!" "What to do with kids over 10? Oh, they just teach themselves!" Double educational neglect, yes. Sure, lots of us on this forum don't do that. But the stats on "views" indicates that many threads here get a LOT of outside readers. This is a public forum, accessible by Google to anyone without even making a login. And apparently there are still "how to homeschool" books being published which push one or both lines. And we can't criticize(/worry about?) homeschoolers directly (because myob) so the only way to fight it is to disagree with those lines over and over and over until maybe they become so socially unacceptable that people stop saying them. :off rant:

 

I don't understand the "better late" philosophy. I don't understand when people say that you have to wait until there's armpit hair before a kid can understand algebra either. My kid started doing algebra, but he is late in writing, I guess. But that's responding to where he's at and his interests. I don't see the need to commence an overarching philosophy about it?

 

Maybe at the beginning of this thread it could have been clarified that the OP wasn't saying that she didn't skip number sense activities at all, and that she doesn't intend for her kids to teach themselves all of math from zero without much help? Apparently, that's not what she meant? But yeah, from the title that's what I assumed too. Maybe just because I have issues?

 

I will say however, that I'm not going to go back and parse all the competing vocabulary and views, but that I feel that once again the English speaking world has, comparatively speaking, a deficient understanding of early childhood education. Sure, there's nods to Montessori or Waldorf here and there, and some CM ideas in the homeschool world, but in day to day practice I wonder how much these things are actually carried out in an effective manner. I see what the Bluedorns are reacting against, but I think they swing too far the other way. And with this overall social deficiency, the implementation of their method can be too often negative. Totally random academic-ese musings over the 2nd cup of coffee too early on a DST Sunday morning...  

 

Y'all who are doing great for you kids, keep on carrying on.  :thumbup1:

Yeah, I think both you and Bill overreacted to the OP's title because you do have issues and make assumptions without actually looking into the facts.  We all have our hot buttons.  I do too.  Absolutely.  Human nature.  The fact that just the title alone made you feel icky before you ever actually read a single post in this thread kind of definitely says this is a hot button for you and you were not reacting based on the facts of this particular thread.  It happens.  

 

What gets frustrating is when someone then jumps all over the OP without actually bothering to read the OPs posts in detail and accept that their original assumption may not have anything to do with reality.  I try to recognize my hot buttons and NOT react until I have more facts.  Not always easy but I know that some of my assumptions are based on irrational feelings, not fact, so I try very hard.  The other problem is that jumping all over a poster without actually LISTENING to what the poster is saying doesn't open up a dialogue, it shuts it down and makes it contentious.  Bill seemed to fail to recognize that on this thread.  It then derailed the thread.  

 

I read her initial post and realized I needed additional clarification to understand whether her children had had any math instruction, not so I could jump all over her but so I could offer helpful suggestions if possible.  She did clarify later on that they do a lot of things with math, they just hadn't started a formal program with books or workbooks or whatever.  She is asking for help with resources.  She was also expecting more independence for her oldest than what is probably realistic.  Lots of people stepped up to the plate and offered great suggestions, in a friendly and constructive manner, which will hopefully be very helpful to her.    And then there were the posts by Bill...who made assumptions, failed to acknowledge that his assumptions might not be based in fact, who continually made this thread his personal soap box for his own agenda and was not particularly helpful to the OP.

 

As for Finland, yes there are a lot of people who do not understand the Finnish model.  I don't know that OP is really hoping for debate on the Finnish model vs. other types of education, though, so I am not going to address that here.

 

OP, I hope you have found some useful information in this thread.  Best wishes.

Edited October 30, 2016 by Code Lyoko

[fralala]

Math Mammoth worked well for me as a conceptually strong program that could be accelerated as needed. Other good options for conceptual understanding would be Singapore Math or Math in Focus, also Beast Academy though I prefer to use that more as a supplement. For pre-algebra, we like Jousting Armadillos and Art of Problem Solving; there are lots of good options at the high school level.

 

Agree with these-- although we didn't delay formal math, after completing Singapore Math 1(A and B), my first grader was testing at a 3rd grade level according to Common Core standards. It lays a strong conceptual foundation (for teacher and student!), and even with an older child who likely already understands certain concepts, I'd rather start at the beginning of a program like SM and, as the above poster suggested, accelerate as needed.

 

The other thing I like doing with kids of any age, but especially with a child who has not had "formal" math, is to find out what strategies they're using to solve problems before even "teaching." Allowing them to explain these is, to my mind, a great way of helping develop number sense and helping them become mathematical thinkers.

 

Early math, when done poorly, can convey an entirely wrong notion-- that there is one right way to solve problems, that it is irrelevant to the experience and lives of children, that the right answer is the single most important thing, that answers should come quickly, that being good at math means not struggling or asking questions. Even as I am about as far from a better-late-than-early folk as there is in my own life, I find these beliefs quite crippling at the highest levels of math-- so maybe I am not so far off, ideologically, from those who delay math as I might think.

[maize]

Well, Bill beat me to it, but I agree that nearly all Americans misunderstand what is going on with Finland. Here in NL kids "go to school" at age 4, but (but!) for the first two years there's not a single worksheet, textbook, or even many pencils in the classroom. But there is a robust early elementary education going on, and much the same happens in Finland. I'm just so tired of Finland being trotted out as proof for things that aren't related to it at all. :off rant:

 

I have a knee jerk disdain for the term "better late" in general. Nearly didn't open the thread because the title made me feel gross. I realize I have issues. But I do think it's very possible for people to use the term to explain away their own laziness and neglect. "Oh, I don't need to do any curriculum at all before 10!" "What to do with kids over 10? Oh, they just teach themselves!" Double educational neglect, yes. Sure, lots of us on this forum don't do that. But the stats on "views" indicates that many threads here get a LOT of outside readers. This is a public forum, accessible by Google to anyone without even making a login. And apparently there are still "how to homeschool" books being published which push one or both lines. And we can't criticize(/worry about?) homeschoolers directly (because myob) so the only way to fight it is to disagree with those lines over and over and over until maybe they become so socially unacceptable that people stop saying them. :off rant:

 

I don't understand the "better late" philosophy. I don't understand when people say that you have to wait until there's armpit hair before a kid can understand algebra either. My kid started doing algebra, but he is late in writing, I guess. But that's responding to where he's at and his interests. I don't see the need to commence an overarching philosophy about it?

 

Maybe at the beginning of this thread it could have been clarified that the OP wasn't saying that she didn't skip number sense activities at all, and that she doesn't intend for her kids to teach themselves all of math from zero without much help? Apparently, that's not what she meant? But yeah, from the title that's what I assumed too. Maybe just because I have issues?

 

I will say however, that I'm not going to go back and parse all the competing vocabulary and views, but that I feel that once again the English speaking world has, comparatively speaking, a deficient understanding of early childhood education. Sure, there's nods to Montessori or Waldorf here and there, and some CM ideas in the homeschool world, but in day to day practice I wonder how much these things are actually carried out in an effective manner. I see what the Bluedorns are reacting against, but I think they swing too far the other way. And with this overall social deficiency, the implementation of their method can be too often negative. Totally random academic-ese musings over the 2nd cup of coffee too early on a DST Sunday morning...

 

Y'all who are doing great for you kids, keep on carrying on. :thumbup1:

 

Our own experiences necessarily color the way we see things. I tend to be very positive towards delaying formal academics because my mom took a "school can wait" approach and, in my family, it worked out fabulously. My memories of those early childhood years are of a rich and, frankly, idyllic life. She didn't do anything that Bill would have recognized as intentional and formal teaching of math--there was no plan being followed. But there was life, and numbers and number relationships were part of it. We had math manipulatives as toys and we played with them frequently. I remember figuring out for myself when I was about 7 what it meant when we said "4 times 3" or any other multiplication sentence--I'd been watching older siblings (in school already) working on flashcards and my brain lit up with the discovery that four times three meant putting together four sets of three. When I entered third grade the next year (my mom used to keep us home until we turned eight then send us to school) I was one of only two children in the class who got 100% on the multiplication pretest--I hadn't memorized any multiplication facts, but I knew what the operation actually meant and how to figure out the answers.

 

Throughout my school years I observed that most students seemed to take a passive approach to learning--they waited for a teacher to tell them what to do and how to do it and didn't seem to think for themselves. I was head and shoulders ahead of everyone as a problem solver--I was used to approaching the world with curiosity and figuring out relationships and potential solutions on my own. I excelled at things like math competition problems that classmates struggled with. I tended to attribute this to my early childhood experiences and specifically to a lack of early formal instruction; I had never learned to think inside the box because there had been no box.

 

Was I right? I don't know. Maybe I would have been that way anyway. I certainly don't see any evidence though that those carefree early years harmed either myself or my siblings--all of whom have been successful in academics and in life.

 

When it comes to personal experiences, I think the best we can do is to share: "this is what I did/experienced, this is how it turned out for me/my kids". To extrapolate beyond that and assume that any situation with surface similarities is the same or will turn out the same is to presume knowledge that we don't actually have.

Edited October 30, 2016 by maize

[Guest]

The other thing I like doing [...], is to find out what strategies they're using to solve problems before even "teaching."

 

 

 

+1, and I'd extend this to all other areas of study.

 

Kids/people have native wisdom. How can we teach them excellently without first knowing what they are already working with?

[deerforest]

I haven't read any of the other posts beyond the first few on the first page so ignore my feedback if it's irrelevant now.

 

DD had strong conceptual math understanding with no interest in procedural learning. After a handful of attempts of math curricula, we stuck to an exclusively living math approach with lots of games, books, manipulatives, cooking, short lived living math club, videos, etc until Beast Academy first came out. She took to it right away and we had a huge success with it. She is a strong math student today doing well with Foerster's Algebra I in 7th. We did some AoPS for pre-algebra but math is not her true love and she has no interest on spending that much time on it.

 

So, we are a one family sampling of delayed start of formal math added to years of living math with a child who has been tested as moderately gifted but math is not her true love.

Edited October 30, 2016 by deerforest

[....]

But I do think it's very possible for people to use the term to explain away their own laziness and neglect. "Oh, I don't need to do any curriculum at all before 10!" 

 

I don't understand the "better late" philosophy. I don't understand when people say that you have to wait until there's armpit hair before a kid can understand algebra either. 

 

You really don't have to buy curriculum for a kid that age.  You can read real books, watch documentaries, do projects, go on field trips, etc.  You don't even need a curriculum to teach writing at that level.  Copywork, dictation and narration can come straight from their reading.  

 

And people with a relaxed approach can look just like diehard classical homeschoolers, too.  My oldest is teaching herself Latin.  She has read several versions of the Iliad and Odyssey.  She's currently reading The Mabinogion and I'm on the look-out for a good Beowulf translation.  These are all on TWTM Rhetoric section reading lists.  I'm not making her do these things, she genuinely enjoys those kinds of books.  In fact, she got mad at me the other day, because I wouldn't look at The Mabinogion with her (Oh my goodness, that book is weird!).   :tongue_smilie:     

 

I'm guessing you don't understand why anyone would delay teaching something or formal schooling, because your kids didn't need that.  One of my kids did not start formal schoolwork until age 8.  I've posted about this a bunch of times.  She had signs of Asperger's that would go away and come back (which is not Asperger's).  She could not focus or sit still.  All she wanted to do all day was paint, draw, run around and play.  She's not like that now (at almost 12).  For some reason, she just needed that time...   :001_rolleyes:  

 

I'm just saying that not all kids follow their Instruction Manual.     

[....]

On the whole, I think it is wise to avoid giving advice to your average homeschooler (or any kind of schooler) based on your experience with either a very bright or learning disabled kid without qualifying it as such (and realizing that your experience may not be that generalizable).

 

 

On one hand, I actually agree with you (and I do warn people sometimes that my kids aren't real typical), but....if we started every post with "my kid tests in the gifted range", it would really annoy people after awhile and it sounds pretentious.

[lllll]

nm 

 

Edited November 5, 2016 by cathey

[Bluegoat]

Well, Bill beat me to it, but I agree that nearly all Americans misunderstand what is going on with Finland. Here in NL kids "go to school" at age 4, but (but!) for the first two years there's not a single worksheet, textbook, or even many pencils in the classroom. But there is a robust early elementary education going on, and much the same happens in Finland. I'm just so tired of Finland being trotted out as proof for things that aren't related to it at all. :off rant:

 

I have a knee jerk disdain for the term "better late" in general. Nearly didn't open the thread because the title made me feel gross. I realize I have issues. But I do think it's very possible for people to use the term to explain away their own laziness and neglect. "Oh, I don't need to do any curriculum at all before 10!" "What to do with kids over 10? Oh, they just teach themselves!" Double educational neglect, yes. Sure, lots of us on this forum don't do that. But the stats on "views" indicates that many threads here get a LOT of outside readers. This is a public forum, accessible by Google to anyone without even making a login. And apparently there are still "how to homeschool" books being published which push one or both lines. And we can't criticize(/worry about?) homeschoolers directly (because myob) so the only way to fight it is to disagree with those lines over and over and over until maybe they become so socially unacceptable that people stop saying them. :off rant:

 

I don't understand the "better late" philosophy. I don't understand when people say that you have to wait until there's armpit hair before a kid can understand algebra either. My kid started doing algebra, but he is late in writing, I guess. But that's responding to where he's at and his interests. I don't see the need to commence an overarching philosophy about it?

 

Maybe at the beginning of this thread it could have been clarified that the OP wasn't saying that she didn't skip number sense activities at all, and that she doesn't intend for her kids to teach themselves all of math from zero without much help? Apparently, that's not what she meant? But yeah, from the title that's what I assumed too. Maybe just because I have issues?

 

I will say however, that I'm not going to go back and parse all the competing vocabulary and views, but that I feel that once again the English speaking world has, comparatively speaking, a deficient understanding of early childhood education. Sure, there's nods to Montessori or Waldorf here and there, and some CM ideas in the homeschool world, but in day to day practice I wonder how much these things are actually carried out in an effective manner. I see what the Bluedorns are reacting against, but I think they swing too far the other way. And with this overall social deficiency, the implementation of their method can be too often negative. Totally random academic-ese musings over the 2nd cup of coffee too early on a DST Sunday morning...  

 

Y'all who are doing great for you kids, keep on carrying on.  :thumbup1:

 

Better late than early really is just a phrase that only makes sense in a school environment where there are widespread inappropriate expectations in terms of child development.

 

If you wanted to write it out in an explanation, you'd say that academic subjects ought to be introduced when children are ready to learn them.

 

Since English speaking countries mostly have inappropriately early academic expectations for small children, that looks like doing things "late".  That particular phrasing, then, is ironic - it is pointing out that "late" is actually "on-time."  In other times and places with different expectations, it wouldn't make sense.