What defines a "rigorous" education?

[Michelle T]

I often read here about a "rigorous" education. But what is that exactly? What makes an education rigorous? Is it defined by how long the school day is, or how difficult the curriculum, or subjects studied, or something else?

 

Do you consider your homeschool to be rigorous? Is that a goal of yours?

 

Is a rigorous education possible for a child who truly struggles to learn, one with LD's? Or is it only for the average or the gifted child?

 

Michelle T

[JenniferB]

Good questions. I'm interested in reading some answers also. I consider two of my curriculum choices rigorous, which are Rod & Staff English and Math. I chose them for their rigorousness, because I felt like my daughter needed extra practice in both of these important areas. I call these texts rigorous because there is plenty oral work, written work, drill, review, practice, and challenge questions. There's also no fluff, the artwork is plain and b&w, there are no crossword puzzles or games, and I can't imagine anyone misunderstanding these texts for fun-time. When we work through them we both know it will be "work" and not "fun", so we just plug along and do the work, and see the skills in those areas improve. I wonder if this is how others would descirbe rigorous. :glare: I'm looking forward to reading other comments.

[Pongo]

I think we have a rigorous home school style but we are like that with athletics also. Some kids play soccer in the Fall with the town league, my dd does, but she also plays on a club team and travels and has practices several nights a week, her soccer schedule is more rigorous than that of many of her friends, but it is what she chooses to spend her time on.

 

As far as in the home school environment, I translate it by challenging them and having a very through scope and sequence. I base much of my curriculum on how complete I think the S & S is, if I feel it is lacking, I will add a supplement to it. I want them to think, be challenged and be given more learning opportunities then they would get elsewhere. If I thought, for one second I was doing a poor job, and felt their PS peers were getting a better education, I would have no problem putting them in school. I have high expectations, not just for them but also for myself. I am very critical of myself and this means I get a lot done. As long as the kids are still happy and we are getting our studies done...all is well:001_smile:

They are asked every year if they want to try a year at school, no takers yet:glare:

 

Oh, about time, my 1st grader does about 2-3 hours . My 3rd grader does about 3-4 hours and my 5th grader works about 5-6 hours a day. Kids are up at 6:30am, I cook a big breakfast most days, after chores it's about 7:30 am and they start. We are done after lunch on most days. I run a pretty tight ship, type A personality:) it's truly the only way I can function,

[Janice in NJ]

A rigorous education is one where the momma is always tired.

And her shirt is always untucked.

And all of the family's meals come out of boxes.

 

Tee Hee. Just kidding. ;)

 

I have no idea how to answer that question in a general way, so I won't. :D

It's kind of like try to explain what a big house is or what makes a salad good or what kind of wine is best. I have failed to define that word in a general way as far as education goes, and believe me - I've tried. I know what "rigorous" looks like around here; to some it's below par; to some it might be above. Personally? I always feel like things are rigorous when I'm failing to meet "my" expectations.

 

Can you tell that I'm beginning to dislike that word? *chuckle* :001_smile:

 

I do hope you get the answer that you're looking for though. :001_smile:

 

Peace,

Janice

 

Enjoy your little people

Enjoy your journey

[LisaKinVA]

To dh and I, a "rigorous" course of study is one that is thorough and challenging enough for each child. What that exactly means (curriculum choices, subject depth) may be slightly different for each child as well. Standards for completed work should be "high"

 

Don't take me to mean that *everything* in school has to be challenging. I believe there can and should be some fun involved even in a "rigorous" course of study. For example, many science, history and art projects reinforce the learning, but my dc consider those fun (I, on the other hand, consider them work :tongue_smilie:).

[Crimson Wife]

Is a rigorous education possible for a child who truly struggles to learn, one with LD's?

 

Yes, if one defines "rigor" as challenging the child to stretch beyond his/her comfort level. Obviously, what a child with an LD will find "rigorous" is going to be different from what an average one will find "rigorous", and that in turn is going to be different from what an advanced one will find "rigorous".

[Amber in AUS]

Yes, i agree with previous posters i think rigorous means thorough and challenging for the child which means it will be different for every kid.

[fractalgal]

I often read here about a "rigorous" education. But what is that exactly? What makes an education rigorous? Is it defined by how long the school day is, or how difficult the curriculum, or subjects studied, or something else?

 

Do you consider your homeschool to be rigorous? Is that a goal of yours?

 

Is a rigorous education possible for a child who truly struggles to learn, one with LD's? Or is it only for the average or the gifted child?

 

Michelle T

 

Rigorous has several definitions.

 

When I think of a rigorous education in general I am thinking of a college-preparatory education.

 

Mathematically rigorous is the following:

A proof or demonstration is said to be rigorous if the validity of each step and the connections between the steps is explicitly made clear in such a way that the result follows with certainty. "Rigorous" proofs often rely on the postulates and results of formal systems that are themselves considered rigorous under stated conditions.

[Peri]

I often read here about a "rigorous" education. But what is that exactly? What makes an education rigorous? Is it defined by how long the school day is, or how difficult the curriculum, or subjects studied, or something else?

 

Do you consider your homeschool to be rigorous? Is that a goal of yours?

 

Is a rigorous education possible for a child who truly struggles to learn, one with LD's? Or is it only for the average or the gifted child?

 

Michelle T

I think that a rigorous education is a thorough education that really makes the child think and not just get by. Its not really difficult or long, but more of being sure the child has a good grasp on the subject which will make further education more easy on the child. For example, my DD was going into the 5th grade in the public school system but still had not been drilled with her multiplication tables and was going onto division still not comfortable with multiplication. I think this is just wrong. Division, being the flip side of multiplication, will only be harder when multiplication is still hard. The whole thing would have been easier if the tables had been drilled. What does this have to do with making math easier and more thorough? Well the child can really take a look at how mathematical equations work when they don't have to struggle to figure out what 8*7 is. They can actually get to the thinking process when they know their facts. For me this is what rigorous means.

 

I think all children should get a rigorous education but I don't know about LD's. (Not that I don't think they can. I just don't know. I might be overlooking something.) I think the hardest thing about learning is realizing that there is nothing you can't accomplish. You just need to buckle down and focus.

[Peela]

A rigorous education is one where the momma is always tired.

And her shirt is always untucked.

And all of the family's meals come out of boxes.

 

Tee Hee. Just kidding. ;)

 

I have no idea how to answer that question in a general way, so I won't. :D

It's kind of like try to explain what a big house is or what makes a salad good or what kind of wine is best. I have failed to define that word in a general way as far as education goes, and believe me - I've tried. I know what "rigorous" looks like around here; to some it's below par; to some it might be above. Personally? I always feel like things are rigorous when I'm failing to meet "my" expectations.

 

Can you tell that I'm beginning to dislike that word? *chuckle* :001_smile:

 

I do hope you get the answer that you're looking for though. :001_smile:

 

Peace,

Janice

 

Enjoy your little people

Enjoy your journey

 

Oh, I love your answer Janice, and I can relate!

 

I have a kid with LDs but he is uneven- he can read and comprehend at a very high level and is well read compared to most schooled kids.He is good but not brilliant at maths, can spell and do grammar pretty well. But his writing level is very average if not below.

I don't tend to idealise 'rigorous' any more, because of my LD child. I am more concerned with challenging each child, not overwhelming them, covering most bases, getting through the days with some sense of humour intact. I no longer aim for the heights that many here do- I am more into finding a good balance between academics and lifestlye.

[Beth in SW WA]

Rigorous is a relative term. You define it for yourself & your family.

 

For some, schooling until noon may seem rigorous. For others, it may mean something else.

 

For us, rigorous means well-read, well-thought, well-trained mind & heart. It often takes 6-hour school days, plus evenings & some weekends to achieve that goal.

 

It doesn't always seem like "school" since we have become history nerds. My family is watching Luther tonight, cuddled up on the couch -- for fun. Learning has become a way of life.

 

It wasn't always like this here at our home. Over the years, we were busy building houses, ministries, makin' & adoptin' babies -- and I confess, I did not self-educate as I should have in my 20's and mid-30's.

 

My epiphany came late.

 

I'm w/ Janice. Mama is ALWAYS tired :)

[ElizabethB]

Rigorous does not have to be long or painful.

 

When I worked with Webster's Speller with my daughter in K, we worked for 10 minutes a day...but, we only worked when she was fresh and focused, I would wait a while and let her play if she wasn't ready to focus and learn. We also sometimes had fun, we laughed at "nonsense" syllables (they all actually are part of important words, but were run out of the schools by people who were afraid of rote learning and anything that they couldn't see a direct benefit from) and I would sometimes let her pick which she wanted to do for the day--spell 8 words or read 20. We reviewed a few syllables daily, and the syllables ca, ce, ci, co, cu, cy, and sca, sce, sci, sco, scu, scy for months. (sci as in sci-ence)

 

By the end of the year, she had learned more reading and spelling than many children who worked for far longer amounts of time.

 

Our math work is not nearly as efficient, unfortunately. And, she forgot most of the addition facts she learned last year over the summer! We now have a bunch of math games, next summer we'll play some, it's painful enough the first time, why do it twice.

 

Strangely enough, she remembers multiplication facts fairly easily. (We're not trying to learn them yet, she's just learned some incidentally as we discuss things, she picks them up quick and doesn't seem to forget them.) I've been reading all the math facts posts avidly, we seem to be in good company.

[Rosie_0801]

I think rigorous could be when the kids feel confident in their understanding of a wide range of topics (not just academics,) to a reasonable depth. Reasonable, of course, is going to depend on the person involved. My plans at this stage include a lot of gentle curriculum choices, because I don't think dry or too hard are the best markers of rigorousness. Anything that has the kids developing skills and learning content at the right speed for them is rigorous. Challenging, but achievable is the ideal, I think.

Anyway, my kids are only 20 months and -2 months so it'll be fun to see how I change my view later.

:)

Rosie

[Tami]

I am of a similar opinion to Peela. You take your child as far as he or she can possibly go, but not past that. We must be students of our children to know the limits, knowing when to push a little and knowing when to flex a bit. This is true whether our children have special needs or not.

 

On the other side, we have an emphasis on a well-rounded education, not merely one that we can "get by" with under the letter of the law. Being well-read is not required by law, for example, but it is one aspect of academic rigor in my mind.

 

Good question - I needed to think about The Big Picture today!

Edited December 3, 2008 by Tami

[PeterPan]

That's funny. Rigorous would NOT have been one of the words I would have thought of as a goal for my dd's education. Rigor is what happens incidentally, on the way, as we do our best in a world that doesn't care about doing your best anymore.

[Beth in SW WA]

That's funny. Rigorous would NOT have been one of the words I would have thought of as a goal for my dd's education. Rigor is what happens incidentally, on the way, as we do our best in a world that doesn't care about doing your best anymore.

 

:iagree:

 

Sad, isn't it? So when we expect excellence, we're considered mean, Type A or worse yet...draconian :)

[sagira]

All interesting answers. I wonder what SWB would define as rigor.

 

To me, rigorous means: high standards, hard work, the best books, attention to detail and a broad, liberal education with an emphasis on the arts too.

[Nan in Mass]

I tend to think of a rigorous curriculum as one in which the input is at a high volume and level and the output is expected to be at a high volume and level. It usually involves lots of reading, writing, thinking, memorizing, and time. This tends to mean that the basics are thoroughily covered without worry about boringness or time-consuming-ness or hard work or lots of memorization, and that then it goes considerably beyond the basics. "Rigorous" tends to work best for children who are willing to work hard at something without being able to see the immediate benefits, but who truly will benefit from it eventually. In other words, they have to have faith, and that faith has to be justified often enough that they continue to have faith. Either that, or the consequences of not working hard at it have to be awful enough to them that they are willing to put in that hard work whether they eventually benifit or not. It also works best if it is begun fairly early and carried on for years, so that there is plenty of time to thoroughily learn the basics, and plenty of time to work on more advanced material. That's what I think rigorous means, anyway.

 

Do I aim for rigorous? I suppose it depends on the subject. Some subjects just don't seem to work well unless you go for rigorous. Math is like that. It is very hard to go even a little way unless you thoroughly learn the basics.

 

Some subjects can be enjoyed on a less than rigorous level, but need to be tackled rigorously if you intend to go far into them. Take science. After about middle school, if a child is especially curious about science, it becomes almost impossible to explain anything complicated without going deeply into how it works. For example, if a child asks how we know what the sun is made of, you can say that we look at the type of light coming from it. That might be enough, but for a more curious child, you might also wind up having to explain about electrons acting as standing waves and the energy being quantized. My children tended to want their answers all the way down to the actual reason why, not just at a surface level, so I found that it was pretty useless to do non-rigorous science with them. Rigorous science, tedious as it is at times, at least provided enough background that when my children wanted the "real" answer, it didn't take days and they could understand and remember it. For them, this was enough of a benefit that they were willing to put up with the hard work.

 

And some subjects can be enjoyed at a fairly high level without ever getting (what I think of as) rigorous. We've never gotten rigorous with French, but my son can understand a native speaker, read a book, or watch a movie. We never did rigorous phonics or comprehension or "readers", but my son can read adult-level material.

 

I like TWTM because it takes this into account.

 

I try to take into account the benefits of learning a particular subject rigorously for each particular child. This means guessing about their future, which is scary, but since my children are slow enough that they can't learn every subject rigorously, I don't have much choice. Only some subjects are going to be learned rigorously.

 

I also think it is of benefit to learn something in a rigorous way so that you know what is involved and how to do it, in case you ever want to.

 

Can an LD child do this sort of rigorous? Probably. But it is probably going to take longer. Possibly much longer. And as a result, the price might be WAY WAY too high. I think you have to weigh the benefits very carefully, and make sure that they truly outweigh that higher price LD children have to pay. I could have taught my older one to spell well, but it would have taken a whole lot of time, time that I thought would be better spent on helping him to excell in something that he was naturally good at. We worked on it until he was making only a few mistakes per paragraph, and then I told him he'd have to have someone proofread for him, always. Modern technology makes this a perfectly reasonable compromise, I think, anyway. We opted to make a lopsided person who was good at something and functioning at the rest, rather than a well-rounded person who was mediocre at everything. And I was glad we had that choice. Some people have to work very hard to be functioning in only the most important of the academic things, and aren't able to reach beyond that. I guess this is where a good assessment of the learning differences is helpful, since it lets you see where your time would be best spent. Predicting the future is always a two-edged sword, though, because it can also cause you to put limits where they aren't needed. Raising children, any children, requires lots of guesswork.

 

Ok. Sorry I've rambled on and on about this. But it is something I've put lots of thought into, since I have brightish children, none of whom are particularly academic-minded, and one of whom is wired a bit differently. Rigorous would probably be possible for all of them, but would it help them or hurt them? I keep having to decide that, on an almost daily basis.

 

Hope all this helps someone

-Nan

Edited December 3, 2008 by Nan in Mass