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

[Guest]

WHAT

 

No

 

How did even happen? That's crazy stem to stern! Plus hippos are crazy scary!

 

Quaker parrots are so common in some places in the us now that some ppl don't even realize that the last naturally occurring north American parrot species went extinct some years ago.

[Guest]

Pablo Escobar did it:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/05/160510-pablo-escobar-hippos-colombia/

 

I thought about watching Narcos at one point just to see if the hippos were in it. Well, sort of. It's so fascinating.

I'm cross posting but you should! Watch! Narcos! Its wicked good. Especially season 1.

[ktgrok]

 

 

Did you know that hippos are an invasive species in South America now? I don't know why I'm absurdly fascinated by this, but I kind of am. When you say "invasive species" you think of kudzu and English ivy and maybe the striped mosquitoes or that crazy walking fish thing. But HIPPOS. Clearly someone should've stuck with their donkey.

 

Seriously! I got all excited that Capybaras are now invasive in Florida (but not where I live). But hippos? How does that happen??? It's not like one accidentally snuck on board a boat, like rats do. 

Edited November 4, 2016 by ktgrok

[Farrar]

Seriously! I got all excited that Capybaras are now invasive in Florida (but not where I live). But hippos? How does that happen??? It's not like one accidentally snuck on board a boat, like rats do. 

 

Capybaras made it to Florida! I hate all rodents... except the capybara. Also, Florida. Is there any species that won't thrive in Florida?

[Farrar]

Also, who needs kilts when we have hippos, donkeys, and capybaras!

[ktgrok]

Capybaras made it to Florida! I hate all rodents... except the capybara. Also, Florida. Is there any species that won't thrive in Florida?

 

Polar bears?

[ktgrok]

Also, I really want a mini donkey one day. 

[maize]

Polar bears?

 

I always feel sorry for polar bears at the zoo in hot climates. They look so wilted.

[maize]

I'm out of likes, but please consider all hippo/donkey/capybara/etc. posts liked.

[JoJosMom]

Seriously? Where in South America? And how the heck did hippos get out into the wild breeding there?

 

That is fascinating. I mean, I think of hippos as more likely to be endangered than to be invasive. And it's not like rats that could sneak over in cargo ships, or plants someone might have just wanted in their yard...

 

 

Pablo Escobar did it:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/05/160510-pablo-escobar-hippos-colombia/

 

I thought about watching Narcos at one point just to see if the hippos were in it. Well, sort of. It's so fascinating.

 

ETA: So that article downplays them. I read something elsewhere saying there were definitely already more than a hundred. And that they simply don't know where they are and how far they've spread because of how solitary the hippos are.

 

 

WHAT

 

No

 

How did even happen? That's crazy stem to stern! Plus hippos are crazy scary!

 

Quaker parrots are so common in some places in the us now that some ppl don't even realize that the last naturally occurring north American parrot species went extinct some years ago.

 

Bad news, peeps.  There was a special on one of the Geek TV channels LAST NIGHT and y'all missed it.  You were probably wasting time and teaching math to your children.  Not me.  I watched TV during math time and learned that Pablo Escobar imported three cows and a bull and when he went on the run his private zoo went to heck.  Now there are at least 32 healthy, healthy hippos producing 8 new ones per year.  A couple have been put in zoos and a few have wandered off the reservation.  There aren't enough zoos for them and the government can't afford to move them.  So they are feeding them and trying to keep them calm, well-fed hippos while they try to figure out a long-term plan.

 

See?  Math is overrated.

 

You're welcome.

 

 

(ETA:  I am eternally confused as to why people care what a person who has never homeschooled thinks about how they homeschool.)

Edited November 4, 2016 by JoJosMom

[Spy Car]

First of all I asked and he said he sees the premise of the op as inherently neglectful.

 

 

Please don't attempt to falsely mischaracterize my words, because that is not what I said.

 

What I said to your question was:

 

"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."

 

And that is beyond any doubt in my mind.

 

Bill

[Farrar]

So... you just were saying that apropos of nothing? She asked if you thought the OP was neglectful and you said it was a harmful philosophy, but it's not about her? Or this thread? You do realize that literally no one talked about independent math in this thread until you brought it up. That's something that some advocates of the better late philosophy espouse, but no one espoused it here. Sigh. Why am I beating my head against the wall though? Let's go back to talking about hippos.

[Jean in Newcastle]

From the Forum Guidelines:

 

"Answer questions that are posted but don't use these questions as an excuse to springboard into criticism. For example: If someone asks, "What are your kids dressing up as for Halloween?" don't launch into an explanation of how evil Halloween is. If someone asks, "Is Halloween evil?" have a ball. (Conversely: if someone posts, "We don't do Halloween; what can we substitute?" don't take this as an opportunity to prove to them that Halloween is really just fine.)"

 

I think that we can safely say "if someone asks, "Better late than early folks advice me on math please", don't take this as an opportunity to prove to them that they are practicing educational neglect."

[Spy Car]

So... you just were saying that apropos of nothing? She asked if you thought the OP was neglectful and you said it was a harmful philosophy, but it's not about her? Or this thread? You do realize that literally no one talked about independent math in this thread until you brought it up. That's something that some advocates of the better late philosophy espouse, but no one espoused it here. Sigh. Why am I beating my head against the wall though? Let's go back to talking about hippos.

 

That is not the question she asked. 

 

She asked: "And you see this, or enabling of this, in this thread?"

 

Frankly, I'm sick of the lying going on in this thread. So, as you took heat when an issue you care about "a lot" was raised by you, I'm taking the same.

 

People can enable neglect or they can condemn neglect. We both know it is a problem. Everyone knows that's true.

 

I'm out.

 

Bill 

[Spy Car]

From the Forum Guidelines:

 

"Answer questions that are posted but don't use these questions as an excuse to springboard into criticism. For example: If someone asks, "What are your kids dressing up as for Halloween?" don't launch into an explanation of how evil Halloween is. If someone asks, "Is Halloween evil?" have a ball. (Conversely: if someone posts, "We don't do Halloween; what can we substitute?" don't take this as an opportunity to prove to them that Halloween is really just fine.)"

 

I think that we can safely say "if someone asks, "Better late than early folks advice me on math please", don't take this as an opportunity to prove to them that they are practicing educational neglect."

 

I responded to questions, Jean. You all are too much.

 

Lost respect for many over the past few days. 

 

Bill

[Farrar]

Honestly, I don't feel like I've taken much heat on here about direct educational neglect per se and I wouldn't say I did. I feel like a lot of people on this board are willing to overlook it when it's someone else or when the government gets involved. Not because they don't adequately teach their own children or believe in adequately educating children in general, but out of a sense of libertarian non-involvement and a belief that any government involvement is bad and threatens them, even though they're doing a good job.

 

But that wasn't really within the scope of the thread.

 

She asked if you saw the enabling of educational neglect in this thread. You said the better late philosophy was harmful and neglectful. But... somehow it's not about this thread or the people in it? That *wasn't* an affirmative answer? I almost feel like you're gaslighting us here, Bill. We say, where is the neglect and support for hands off *in this thread* and you say, the better late philosophy is harmful and neglect! But, we're not to take that as saying you believe there is support for educational neglect in this thread?

Edited November 4, 2016 by Farrar

[Jean in Newcastle]

Honestly, I don't feel like I've taken much heat on here about direct educational neglect per se and I wouldn't say I did. I feel like a lot of people on this board are willing to overlook it when it's someone else or when the government gets involved. Not because they don't adequately teach their own children or believe in adequately educating children in general, but out of a sense of libertarian non-involvement and a belief that any government involvement is bad and threatens them, even though they're doing a good job.

 

But that wasn't really within the scope of the thread.

 

She asked if you saw the enabling of educational neglect in this thread. You said the better late philosophy was harmful and neglectful. But... somehow it's not about this thread or the people in it? That *wasn't* an affirmative answer? I almost feel like you're gaslighting us here, Bill. We say, where is the neglect and support for hands off *in this thread* and you say, the better late philosophy is harmful and neglect! But, we're not to take that as saying you believe there is support for educational neglect in this thread?

 

I am against educational neglect.  But I'm also against making assumptions when people don't know all the facts.  Many times when people post "I see educational neglect" threads, they don't know the answers to basic questions about how much work is actually being done in the home, whether there are learning disabilities or if someone is speaking with hyperbole or not.  In those cases I always advise that people actually find out the facts before making assumptions.  I would advise the same to many of the friends and family members who accuse homeschoolers of harming their kids by homeschooling to begin with.  You know, the people that we advise passing the bean dip with because they've made assumptions without really knowing what is going on.  When people truly know the facts then it is the time to speak out against educational neglect.

 

When it comes to this thread, I had some questions for the OP that would have helped us to advise her more specifically if she had chosen to answer them.  I don't think that she has to answer them, mind you.  And I can see how someone wouldn't want to answer them in a thread that has become contentious with accusations of neglect.  I don't know if I am totally a "better-late-than-early folk".  I do think (and advised up thread) that at least a partial transition be made around age 8, which is younger than some would suggest and older than others would suggest.  But I think that it is ok for people to have different educational philosophies and methods and trust that they still have their children's best educational interest at heart. 

 

[maize]

Lesson learned:

 

Don't bang your head against a brick wall. It makes the wall feel bad.

[eternalsummer]

Just because someone agrees with you about something doesn't mean they will agree with you about everything; it is easier to see who a person is by how he (neutral English pronoun he) treats his opponents than by how he treats his allies.

 

 

What I am trying to say is that Bill's attitude here does not surprise me, because this is how he (and to be honest, many many many people on these boards and elsewhere) deal with opposition to something they are used to both taking for granted and having taken for granted (that is, an opinion that fits in with the opinions of their social circle and especially their society at large).  I would say that if you frequent a community where you are in the minority in important ways, you are used to the feeling of beating your head against a brick wall, and generally you either persevere (DH is like this) or you give up (I am like this - I don't respond to threads about politics, social issues, race, etc etc. as much as possible)

 

 

[ktgrok]

 

 

People can enable neglect or they can condemn neglect. We both know it is a problem. Everyone knows that's true.

 

I'm out.

 

Bill 

 

Is it a problem IN THIS THREAD? 

[JoJosMom]

Now I shall share some of my most awesome parenting advice:  I always tell my child that, even in the lowest situations, there is always something to be learned.  Today I have learned (or been reminded) that music is inextricably linked to the human soul and there is music to fit every situation.  Voila:

 

 

 

 

Once again, you're welcome. :)

[eternalsummer]

I dunno, I am okay with continually confronting the actual argument until it is defeated, and not obfuscating.  In this case I don't have much experience (my oldest is 11 and public schooled) or knowledge (my formal training in pedagogy is English/History for secondary school)/

[ElizaG]

OP -- if you're still following this thread -- there's a series of podcasts here [ETA: fixed link] from people associated with Raymond and Dorothy Moore, who popularized the phrase "Better late than early."  I haven't listened to much of it yet, so I don't know how much they say about math, but thought you might be interested.  The first one features a woman who was homeschooled in a western logging camp in the 1930s and early 40s.

 

There are also some old posts on math here, taken from an e-mail list for families following the Bluedorns' approach.  They all seem to have used Saxon (sorry!), but there might be some helpful comments about the adjustment period.

Edited November 4, 2016 by ElizaG

[BlsdMama]

Oh my gosh, Bill - do you realise that 'behind' is relative ? And that you, and your experience is not the standard for what is 'behind' ? That the school version of 'ahead' and 'behind' is arbitrary ?

 

I can't believe you're still talking about neglect, as if any of us actually recommend it.

 

And I'm still not over the way you think some of us are too dumb to provide what a Finnish preschool does...

 

 

 

Could I love this post more?  

 

My thoughts to a T.  

[Farrar]

I dunno, I am okay with continually confronting the actual argument until it is defeated, and not obfuscating.  In this case I don't have much experience (my oldest is 11 and public schooled) or knowledge (my formal training in pedagogy is English/History for secondary school)/

 

I'm okay with confronting the argument. I think it's actually pretty worth having. About what the Moores meant, about what the OP meant, about how it's used colloquially in homeschooling, about what constitutes "late", about the difference between "formal" and "informal" learning, about how to be purposeful and organized without doing formal learning... I don't think the meat of the discussion is the issue here. I think it's the grandstanding and the inability to respond to specific questions. I mean, several people asked where the neglect and overly independent support was in this thread. Bill responded by saying better late than early is harmful. We said, okay, so you see it in this thread. He accused us of mischaracterizing his words. It's a total merry-go-round.

[Farrar]

I was thinking about men's and women's communication in this thread too... Or, about the work of schooling and raising kids. I *do* see people come on this board and say things like, "I've totally failed my kid at math!" (among other things). And I think we, as a group, tend to read that as an emotional statement, not a statement of fact. Especially because it's typically followed up with a litany of all the things they tried, all the struggles they've had. And we think, I've struggled with a kid over something. I've felt like a failure at something. And we do swoop in to say, you're not a failure. Because it's emotional communication. And it's not a plea to be reassured exactly, but I think all of that is how women communicate.

 

But men don't tend to communicate that way. They tend to say, I tried a, b, and c and I'm working my rear end off here and I need new ideas. Not, *I* haven't figured it out, but *this problem isn't figured out* - not, *I* have failed at fixing this but *the problem refuses to be solved*. Which is fine. But it's a really different framing.

 

So I wonder if, when you throw in that this is a man who has never experienced a child who struggled with anything significantly, who doesn't have wide experience with a variety of kids, like those of us who are former education or child specialists or who just have several kids, there's just an inability to read what people are saying about their experience as anything but failure and neglect. When the rest of us read it radically differently... 

[Spy Car]

Is it a problem IN THIS THREAD? 

 

Of course it is, because of the attempted character assassination of one questioning the model.

 

This helps enable the shuckers who make money feeding the misery (people like Oliver DeMille of TJE and Art Robinson) and it damages children's prospects.

 

They are the enemies of good home education, not me.

 

There is a problem. Not dealing with it honestly helps enable the problem. The personal attacks (and often vile ones) are a problem. 

 

Good early math education requires intentional teaching, a method, and parent/teacher involvement. Thinking a young child can independently teach themselves math is a siren-song. 

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

I was thinking about men's and women's communication in this thread too... Or, about the work of schooling and raising kids. I *do* see people come on this board and say things like, "I've totally failed my kid at math!" (among other things). And I think we, as a group, tend to read that as an emotional statement, not a statement of fact. Especially because it's typically followed up with a litany of all the things they tried, all the struggles they've had. And we think, I've struggled with a kid over something. I've felt like a failure at something. And we do swoop in to say, you're not a failure. Because it's emotional communication. And it's not a plea to be reassured exactly, but I think all of that is how women communicate.

 

But men don't tend to communicate that way. They tend to say, I tried a, b, and c and I'm working my rear end off here and I need new ideas. Not, *I* haven't figured it out, but *this problem isn't figured out* - not, *I* have failed at fixing this but *the problem refuses to be solved*. Which is fine. But it's a really different framing.

 

So I wonder if, when you throw in that this is a man who has never experienced a child who struggled with anything significantly, who doesn't have wide experience with a variety of kids, like those of us who are former education or child specialists or who just have several kids, there's just an inability to read what people are saying about their experience as anything but failure and neglect. When the rest of us read it radically differently... 

 

Nah. I'm not obtuse, nor unfamiliar with the way people communicate, I understand when hard-working people have had a bad day and need to vent.

 

There is a world of difference between dealing with struggles with best efforts and creating failure through neglect. Polar opposite issues. Not ones to conflate.

 

Bill

[Farrar]

And... yet another non-answer. I still don't know from any of that if Bill thinks anyone in this thread suggested that young children teach themselves math or if he thinks any of us supported educational neglect. No clue.

[Sahamamama2]

Also, I really want a mini donkey one day. 

 

I want goats. Later, when math is done, we'll get goats.

[Farrar]

I want goats. Later, when math is done, we'll get goats.

 

Few people are aware, but early in the homeschool movement, Raymond Moore brought a goat to a homeschool convention and was kicked out. He left saying, "You'll never win the world series! I mean... you'll always be accused to neglecting your kids!"

[Spy Car]

And... yet another non-answer. I still don't know from any of that if Bill thinks anyone in this thread suggested that young children teach themselves math or if he thinks any of us supported educational neglect. No clue.

 

Art Robinson says young children can teach themselves math, and he's a homeschooling "guru" who has a tremendously negative influence on home education.

 

Why do you (all) attempt to personalize every issue by suggesting (falsely) that it's some sort criticism of someone on this thread ? That is a strange phenomenon. 

 

And why attack me for raising an issue you say matters to you a lot? 

 

An honest discussion and acknowledgment of the problem that the better-late-than-early movement has contributed to would be better than the attempted character assassination of a straw-man that's taking place. 

 

Bill

[PeterPan]

The not very funny part for those in the situation, is that sometimes the most nurturing thing to do is leave well enough alone so you don't cause a phobia. You're right that most difficulties can be remediated. Some just won't because sometimes brains are uncooperative. Nurturing the hell out of ptsd won't necessarily fix it. You might roll your eyes at my extreme example, but extreme examples really do happen to some people!

 

Ironically, there's an eye therapy for PTSD that actually works.  But that's just a total rabbit trail.  Apparently it's something about getting them to use both sides of their brain while they process the trauma, to get all the disparate pieces to reconnect.  

 

 

I haven't seen Marilyn Burns mentioned yet, but her books are great as far as setting up a math lab and also in transitioning to recording math and doing math on paper. Burns was a big deal when I was in grad school 20 or so years ago, but kind of fell out of vogue because her stuff isn't as easy to put into grade stratified levels.

 

I like AIMS as well, but it is relatively hard to find their books now-they have gone to all online delivery, which makes it kind of expensive.

 

Check out "themailbox.com"-this is the website of Mailbox magazine, which has traditionally been a major purveyor of cute folder games and adorable worksheets. I believe you can print out a set number per month for free, and if it's stuff your DC likes, a subscription to one grade level of the magazine allows access to back issues in that grade and a large archive of materials for all grade levels. I use a lot of their stuff for my younger math club kids who are not quite ready for MathCOUNTS yet.

 

I've got a bunch of Marilyn Burns stuff to use with ds.  As you say, it's sort of open-ended and time-consuming to translate over to homeschooling.  Some of the books are set up as units, and just their whole estimate for how long things take doesn't translate over well.  I find myself spending a lot of time to sift through their stuff just to figure out how to work through with him what was a relatively simple concept.  I hate that gap between my idealism and what I actually make happen, ugh.  

 

I'll have to look at the Mailbox stuff.  I've seen the printed books, but I hadn't thought much about them for ds.  So far he's doing really well with printed materials from TCR (Teacher Created Resources), and so I'm open to more.  

 

As far as the comment about dyscalculia and Spy Car, well that kind of makes the assumption that high expectations are the problem.  I actually think the problem with math instruction for those kids is small vision, lack of mathematical thinking, RIGIDITY, and over-reliance on formulaic curricula because the instructor/tutor/parent can't think mathematically and flexibly.  I don't *know* Spy Car to know if he's rigid, but I'd like to think that he isn't and that he would probably have a heart and kick in his good mathematical sense and get flexible.  It takes a LOT of imagination and flexibility to work with a dc with disabilities. Personally, I find my 2E dyscalculia student WAY more FUN to teach than my (merely) ADHD student.  ADHD, the most common disorder on the boards, is a total pain in the butt to teach and it's so easy to get behind due to the very nature of ADHD. 

 

But how we got on any of that, I don't remember. I think a little imagination could go a long way, just imagining that other people have different situations, different abilities to make things happen, different desired outcomes, etc.  A lot of people don't CARE if their kid never gets beyond Algebra 2 in high school, something that is a goal for some boardies for 8th or 9th.  There's just a whole world out there who lives a different way, and it's not neglect, just different.

[Farrar]

Art Robinson says young children can teach themselves math, and he's a homeschooling "guru" who has a tremendously negative influence on home education.

 

Why do you (all) attempt to personalize every issue by suggesting (falsely) that it's some sort criticism of someone on this thread ? That is a strange phenomenon. 

 

And why attack me for raising an issue you say matters to you a lot? 

 

An honest discussion and acknowledgment of the problem that the better-late-than-early movement has contributed to would be better than the attempted character assassination of a straw-man that's taking place. 

 

Bill

 

No one talked about Art Robinson. Where is this even coming from? Most of the threads about Robinson on this board have, like, one or two supporters (sometimes just a curious person) and a few dozen people warning them about how dangerous and wrong the guy is. Like, I don't disagree with you about Robinson one iota. But no one was talking about that. Not even a tiny bit.

 

Can you not see how coming to this thread, where we're saying, are you directing this at us? And proclaiming how horrible the Robinson method is makes it sound like you're accusing someone in this thread of supporting the Robinson method? I don't know how else to read this. Why else mention Art Robinson in this thread? Or are you just trolling us and parodying yourself at this point. I mean, the Art Robinson thing sounds like a parody of what we're saying you're doing.

[Spy Car]

 

As far as the comment about dyscalculia and Spy Car, well that kind of makes the assumption that high expectations are the problem.  I actually think the problem with math instruction for those kids is small vision, lack of mathematical thinking, RIGIDITY, and over-reliance on formulaic curricula because the instructor/tutor/parent can't think mathematically and flexibly.  I don't *know* Spy Car to know if he's rigid, but I'd like to think that he isn't and that he would probably have a heart and kick in his good mathematical sense and get flexible.  It takes a LOT of imagination and flexibility to work with a dc with disabilities. Personally, I find my 2E dyscalculia student WAY more FUN to teach than my (merely) ADHD student.  ADHD, the most common disorder on the boards, is a total pain in the butt to teach and it's so easy to get behind due to the very nature of ADHD. 

 

 

Thank you for a kind post. 

 

I think I have a pretty long history of advocating for creative ways to encourage hands-on, fun, and effective means to turn children's minds on to math, and have shared many of those ideas over the years as a forum participant.

 

Education should be about nurturing a child's gifts, not some pressurized drive to meet unreasonable expectations. I gear my son's home education to his needs. If I had a child with different needs and abilities, I trust I'd do the same it adjusting to the child. Rigidity is not my bag.

 

I home educate math to share the same advantages of one-on-one nurture that I assume motivates most of you.

 

Bill 

[Spy Car]

No one talked about Art Robinson. Where is this even coming from? Most of the threads about Robinson on this board have, like, one or two supporters (sometimes just a curious person) and a few dozen people warning them about how dangerous and wrong the guy is. Like, I don't disagree with you about Robinson one iota. But no one was talking about that. Not even a tiny bit.

 

Can you not see how coming to this thread, where we're saying, are you directing this at us? And proclaiming how horrible the Robinson method is makes it sound like you're accusing someone in this thread of supporting the Robinson method? I don't know how else to read this. Why else mention Art Robinson in this thread? Or are you just trolling us and parodying yourself at this point. I mean, the Art Robinson thing sounds like a parody of what we're saying you're doing.

 

You brought up Ray Moore, who said you shouldn't teach a child until they are 8, or, 10, or 12, whether that can read or not  :lol:

 

Bill

[BlsdMama]

Please don't attempt to falsely mischaracterize my words, because that is not what I said.

 

What I said to your question was:

 

"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."

 

And that is beyond any doubt in my mind.

 

Bill

 

 

You should visit.  I'll make you coffee, even cold press.

 

You can meet my children who had NO early math.  None.

 

I doubt you'd think them neglected.  It could be insightful, a learning experience for you, 'cuz, well, I find you the interesting sort Bill, and I think you can be taught.  I haven't given up on you yet.  ;)

[ElizaG]

(Sorry, I posted the wrong link above - the podcasts are here. )

 

The Moores, and most other authors who recommend "delayed formal academics" (for lack of a better phrase), do also tend to encourage independent work, at least in some subjects, when the heavier studies are started.  This is usually more like age 10 or even 12, rather than 8.  In the meantime, the children are supposed to have been spending time on work and play activities that build up their self-discipline and ability to concentrate.  IIRC, both the Moores and Bluedorns suggest that children can be running their own small business by age 8 or 10.

 

There's a strong precedent for this in US educational history, which has come up a bit in other recent threads.  One-room schoolhouse methods were heavy on self-study.  Working youths and adults, from Nathaniel Bowditch to Frederick Douglass, educated themselves by reading classics and textbooks.  There are pros and cons to this approach, but when the teacher's resources are limited -- as they nearly always are, in both home and school education -- ISTM that there's a great deal to be said for it.

 

In any case, the early years are not about leaving children to their own devices.  They're about building strong relationships and putting foundational skills in place.  This tends to be quite demanding for the adult, which I suspect is one reason why modern practices, based on group child care (aka "early childhood education"), have switched more toward formal sit-down learning. 

 

That said, I do use Cuisenaire rods and even workbooks with my little ones.  When I need a break from the harder stuff.   ;)

[Farrar]

You brought up Ray Moore, who said you shouldn't teach a child until they are 8, or, 10, or 12, whether that can read or not  :lol:

 

Bill

 

In a joke about a goat? In a thread with a title borrowed from the guy's book. [sarcasm] Yeah, that was a super serious statement. [/sarcasm] 

[Spy Car]

In a joke about a goat? In a thread with a title borrowed from the guy's book. [sarcasm] Yeah, that was a super serious statement. [/sarcasm] 

 

But he's an influence of the sort under discussion.

 

I don't know how young children are supposed to run their own home enterprises when they can't read or write, but...

 

Bill

[Spy Car]

You should visit.  I'll make you coffee, even cold press.

 

You can meet my children who had NO early math.  None.

 

I doubt you'd think them neglected.  It could be insightful, a learning experience for you, 'cuz, well, I find you the interesting sort Bill, and I think you can be taught.  I haven't given up on you yet.   ;)

 

I could probably use a little extra coffee today.

 

Bill

[lllll]

nm 

 

Edited November 5, 2016 by cathey

[wapiti]

You can meet my children who had NO early math.  None.

 

 

FWIW, it might be really helpful both for this discussion and for the OP's original question to clarify more details of your experiences.  Without going back to look, I recall you mentioned playing games and such, math you used in daily life, yes?

 

So when you say they had no math, I take that to mean, at a minimum, that you used no math program and perhaps didn't intentionally teach them.  Ok.  But, adding and subtracting, (1) was this ever discussed explicitly, or (2) did your kids pick these skills up entirely implicitly without discussion, or (3) did your kids *not* have these skills when starting Saxon 5/4 (do I have the right edition) and then they learned quickly after starting the text?

 

Specifically, what math skills did your kids have when starting Saxon 5/4, whether learned implicitly or explicitly, and what are the prerequisites for that text, so that they could be compared?  (e.g. when did they first write numbers, when did they understand simple addition, when did they learn place value, and before starting the text or after)

 

I'm trying to get at the practical reality for OP, first, that most programs organized by grade level have some prerequisite skills for each level except for the beginning.  (I know nothing about Saxon 5/4, so I don't know whether that applies there too.)  And second, how learning those prerequisite skills (if any) can work for some families where the learning is not via a math program and possibly also entirely implicit (even though it sounds like in OP's case, there may have been some explicit math learning, just not with a program).

Edited November 4, 2016 by wapiti

[barnwife]

I want goats. Later, when math is done, we'll get goats.

Our goats are amazing. I grudgingly admit I wasn't sold on the idea of goats when we got them. But they are fabulously fun. 

[Guest]

This thread is the gift that keeps on giving. Hubris is always highly entertaining to me.

[BlsdMama]

FWIW, it might be really helpful both for this discussion and for the OP's original question to clarify more details of your experiences.  Without going back to look, I recall you mentioned playing games and such, math you used in daily life, yes?

 

So when you say they had no math, I take that to mean, at a minimum, that you used no math program and perhaps didn't intentionally teach them.  Ok.  But, adding and subtracting, (1) was this ever discussed explicitly, or (2) did your kids pick these skills up entirely implicitly without discussion, or (3) did your kids *not* have these skills when starting Saxon 5/4 (do I have the right edition) and then they learned quickly after starting the text?

 

Specifically, what math skills did your kids have when starting Saxon 5/4, whether learned implicitly or explicitly, and what are the prerequisites for that text, so that they could be compared?  (e.g. when did they first write numbers, when did they understand simple addition, when did they learn place value, and before starting the text or after)

 

I'm trying to get at the practical reality for OP, first, that most programs organized by grade level have some prerequisite skills for each level except for the beginning.  (I know nothing about Saxon 5/4, so I don't know whether that applies there too.)  And second, how learning those prerequisite skills (if any) can work for some families where the learning is not via a math program and possibly also entirely implicit (even though it sounds like in OP's case, there may have been some explicit math learning, just not with a program).

 

 

Getting to the practical reality is this:  (Good question, btw.)  I *did* have several sorts of elementary "workbooks" around and about for them to fiddle at.  We do play and own a crazy number of boardgames and they learn them early and play them often.  Many of these are "euro" games which call for a bit more logic and sense than typical.  We have games like Uno, Prime Climb, etc.  We have shape blocks and accompanying puzzles.  We do soduku.  I don't know how a child would get to age 7-8 without knowing how to count, add, subtract, or count money.  Even intentionally *not* doing curriculum OR choosing to *not* teach in a "math lab" sort of way, they intrinsically pick these things up.  If you have 20 hens and collected 13 eggs, the children do sort through that 7 of those slackers better get to work. ;)  My children, down to DD age 8, can play Pepper, Pinochle, etc.  DD age 10 can play cribbage fairly well.  

 

So it could be that it is a mathy environment, but I'd say no more than just typical and living life?  We have to double and triple *every* recipe, lol, so by the time they are 8-10 and helping make muffins,  they can figure out 1/2 and 1/2 is a whole, kwim?  

 

Now, my oldest *only* had formal math.  She began with Saxon K.  That said, without older sibs, they aren't as money aware - counting, recounting, they don't have sibs to play boardgames with all the time, they aren't taught vicious card playing, ;) and we weren't letting her go crazy in the kitchen by 10.  (I was a wee bit neater and in control then, lol.)

 

So what did they not know?  They hadn't been formally introduced to multiplication and division.  I'm poking through Abbie's 5/4 math.  They had to be explicitly taught place value and how to subtract/add 3-5+ digit numbers. 

 

If you've taught a few children through middle school, go back to the 5th grade text.  You'll be surprised, I think, to see how simple early 5th grade math really is. It just really isn't anything your average 10 year old can't pick up and figure out without a little explicit teaching.

 

And, for the life of me, I cannot fathom what is SO vital in math, that a 5-9 year old simply MUST work at a table, working at concepts, pen and paper in hand, that if they do not get this, then all is lost forever.

 

The gaps I mention above are taught in all of about a week.  I'd love to say my kids are insanely bright.  I'm a little biased and I think they're wonderful, but I wouldn't say any of them are exceptionally gifted at math.  Nope.  Just plain old normal kids, not even particularly mathy except the 12yo.  

 

So can we talk about what IS taught in K-4?  Please add yours, but I know simple addition, subtraction, intro to multiplication, place value, clocks/time telling, money, skip counting.   And I definitely don't want to dismiss anyone's hard work, but kids pick up the concepts of addition and subtraction pretty much as easy as breathing.  Money, telling time, and skip counting at age 9/10 can be taught readily in a week.  I'm open to hearing what I'm missing and why it's so vital, but I am just *not* seeing it. 

 

ETA: I think the biggest danger in all of this is that if mama is just in a habit of live and let live and won't change the ways of no math later in the game.  If she is in danger of pooh-poohing and saying, "Meh, math isn't that important.  It'll get done," and does not make herself available to then teach math and answer math questions *or* if she doesn't follow along faithfully that she is going to hit a wall where she cannot teach/help/do math in a few years, then this is not for you.  I feel comfortable (now) teaching my children through Algebra II at which point my oldest was done (and she is currently taking Stats in college and doing mediocre but she is *not* remotely mathy) and my second is taking College Algebra with Finite Limits (essentially their Pre-Calc and gets paired with Trig in the second semester and then onto Calc I) and he is doing fine.  Frankly, I'd say DD #3 (mathless until she was double digits) is more adept at math than the oldest DD and not quite as solid as DS #2 who seems to be naturally mathy.  DD#4 (same math plan as #3) is very naturally talented at math.  I wonder sometimes, as she is my out of the box girl, if early formal insistence would have killed that for her?  No telling really.  At any rate, after teaching a couple each way, I am carrying on with delayed formal math and no "math lab" type teaching until age 10.

Edited November 4, 2016 by BlsdMama

[....]

So can we talk about what IS taught in K-4?  Please add yours, but I know simple addition, subtraction, intro to multiplication, place value, clocks/time telling, money, skip counting.   And I definitely don't want to dismiss anyone's hard work, but kids pick up the concepts of addition and subtraction pretty much as easy as breathing.  Money, telling time, and skip counting at age 9/10 can be taught readily in a week.  I'm open to hearing what I'm missing and why it's so vital, but I am just *not* seeing it. 

 

 

 

For my living math kids, these are my goals (K-4th):

 

Whole numbers, reading and writing them

less than, greater than, equal

skip-counting

place value/expanded notation with the base 10 blocks

addition

subtraction

multiplication

division - maybe start long division, maybe not (depends on the kid)

commutative property

money

time

rounding

how to measure with a ruler

Roman numerals (simple ones)

really, really simple fractions (like 1/2)

[fralala]

Ironically, there's an eye therapy for PTSD that actually works.  But that's just a total rabbit trail.  Apparently it's something about getting them to use both sides of their brain while they process the trauma, to get all the disparate pieces to reconnect.  

 

 

EMDR. A beautiful and healing experience for me. In case anybody was interested in this particular rabbit trail...

 

BlsdMama, your home sounds like a joyful and magical place! Today one of the questions on my second grader's Singapore Math test was "which of these is the heaviest?" and it had a picture of a feather, an apple, a paper clip, and a car...

[idnib]

An honest discussion and acknowledgment of the problem that the better-late-than-early movement has contributed to would be better than the attempted character assassination of a straw-man that's taking place. 

 

Can you start a new thread, then, instead of using OP's advice thread? Inserting it here has started all kinds of drama and you'll probably agree has not actually assisted the OP in his/her particular situation one iota.

[wapiti]

Getting to the practical reality is this:  (Good question, btw.)  I *did* have several sorts of elementary "workbooks" around and about for them to fiddle at.  We do play and own a crazy number of boardgames and they learn them early and play them often.  Many of these are "euro" games which call for a bit more logic and sense than typical.  We have games like Uno, Prime Climb, etc.  We have shape blocks and accompanying puzzles.  We do soduku.  I don't know how a child would get to age 7-8 without knowing how to count, add, subtract, or count money.  Even intentionally *not* doing curriculum OR choosing to *not* teach in a "math lab" sort of way, they intrinsically pick these things up.  If you have 20 hens and collected 13 eggs, the children do sort through that 7 of those slackers better get to work. ;)  My children, down to DD age 8, can play Pepper, Pinochle, etc.  DD age 10 can play cribbage fairly well.  

 

So it could be that it is a mathy environment, but I'd say no more than just typical and living life?  We have to double and triple *every* recipe, lol, so by the time they are 8-10 and helping make muffins,  they can figure out 1/2 and 1/2 is a whole, kwim? 

 

Thank you, BlsdMama!  I think your whole post will be very helpful for OP, so I hope she is still around to read this.  

 

Just my opinion, but I admit that I have a hard time referring to a living math approach as no math.  Not all families may naturally incorporate as much living math as BlsdMama and I might be concerned that lurkers here might misinterpret "no math."  I have doubts that how to do this is intuitive for all parents and that learning early math is intuitive for all children.  For example, not everyone might think to ask their kids to triple the recipe or whether every chicken laid an egg...  Some parents may not have an understanding of a sequence looks like and what skills the parents are using in daily life that they might include the kids on.  That's where I think BlsdMama's post is so helpful - the parent needs to understand the big picture, what one family has done or didn't do, what happened next when they started a program, how that went and where that led in the long run, and what sorts of details were involved.

 

The different timetables for math development in the early years are a funny thing.  Maybe it would help to describe them as akin to the development of reading skills, where there's a range within that window of time.  (The caveat is that math and language development may be asynchronous.)

 

What comes after this early learning period may be a separate question for OP.  What feels vaguely disconnected to me is the idea of going from a living math experience for early learning, which by its nature comes with a rich physical context to elucidate the concepts, to Saxon, which seems sort of opposite, as that philosophy is learning by repetition.  OP seemed interested in alternatives to Saxon and accordingly might benefit from additional families' experiences where "living math" was the early learning method followed by a program at some point in time - what did the transition look like?

 

(OP, if you're around, I still think your path boils down to choosing a program and a level that seem suitable for your goals and your student's individual needs, then filling in any random missing prerequisite skills as seems appropriate for the level you want to start in, and I think the MM topic books are one possibility to fill such holes.)

Edited November 4, 2016 by wapiti