Alveary Opinions? (and some bonus Facebook drama)

[GoodnightMoogle]

I’m really intrigued by the Alveary. I am ever on the search for a nice history/literature program and I really like what I’ve seen from their model so far. 

I always love hearing from people about the good and the bad of a program they use. Please give me all your opinions!

As a thanks for reading my post, I bequeath to you some Facebook drama. Cindy Rollins (author of Mere Motherhood and she does that podcast “The Mason Jar”) and Angelina Standford have openly made very disparaging comments about this curriculum. Denouncing it, saying it is not rigorous, implying they have some kind of agenda (I mean…don’t we all?) and calling their recommended books “low-quality.”

Here’s what drives me crazy about this kind of Facebook rhetoric:

1. It’s disrespectful. It’s a bad look when people who call themselves Christians are openly bad-mouthing a curriculum made by other Christians. They could have done it in a constructive way, but it honestly seemed more demeaning and dramatic than helpful. Which leads to the second thing that drives me crazy:

2. The criticism was vague and unhelpful. “Not rigorous” they exclaim, with nothing to back that up. The Alveary teaches Shakespeare and Plutarch like any other basic Charlotte Mason curriculum, so whatever it is I wouldn’t call that gentle. Furthermore, they call their books “age-inappropriate” and too-easy, then proceed to give no examples. Can we move on from vague-booking and just be honest?

Here’s feedback that would actually be helpful. “The Alveary uses x book at x grade and here is where I think that would be more appropriate for the average student, and why.” Or “The Alveary uses x book and here is why I think it is not a good choice, and furthermore,  here are a few ideas for better choices for that age and subject.” That would be a lot more helpful than smugly saying “they have an agenda!” Then locking the comments. Classic.

This didn’t feel like something I could post on Facebook anywhere so I’m posting it here. I’ve been stewing over this for a while with no one in real life to talk with about it! I really respected those women so it was kind of disappointing to see them talking like that to a public forum, especially since they hold so much sway in the Charlotte Mason world.
 

Anyway, please give me some “robust” comments on the Alveary (the joke is, they also mocked the Alveary by putting “robust” in quotations…it was pretty immature). The end 😂.

 

 

 

Edited April 14 by GoodnightMoogle

[8filltheheart]

I know nothing about Alveary and I dont pay any attention to homeschool businesswomen, so my comment is strictly a general observation. There are a lot of bloggers/private school wannabes who profess to offer either classical or CM materials that make me wonder if they have a clue about grade/age appropriate content. Since there is zero regulation, they can make whatever claim they want and there is no one to hold them accountable. I recent followed a FB link to a supposed classical model and Archimedes and the Door of Science is one of the books listed for high school physical science.  (I think my kids read it in 3rd grade.) And....SOTW vol 1-4 are listed for high school history. Vol 1 is for ages what, 6-10?  Ridiculous content. People don't know what they don't  know and swallow garbage as truth. (Same goes for a lot of supposed educational materials that qualify as junk by my standards. 😉 ) Guess what? On FB they are adored and hallowed as Great! Fabulous! You have to try it!! If you dare utter the truth that they are below grade level and subpar......not pretty.

Sigh, so if someone just said something off the cuff about how poor the quality of something is, I sympathize with them. It is what the homeschool market is inundated with bc parents want easy, self-teaching, done in 2 hrs, and requires zero parental involvement/effort. 

 

[GoodnightMoogle]

53 minutes ago, 8filltheheart said:

Sigh, so if someone just said something off the cuff about how poor the quality of something is, I sympathize with them. It is what the homeschool market is inundated with bc parents want easy, self-teaching, done in 2 hrs, and requires zero parental involvement/effort. 

It can go both ways too. I think Ambleside is probably the most infamous for assigning books that would be awfully challenging for most children at the ages recommended (I’m looking at you, Peter Pan for a 6 year old). It’s tough, though, to gauge because it can be so child dependent. That’s why I wish they would stop all the secrecy and just say which book that they thought was too easy, so I could check it out! When I watched the Alveary’s YouTube videos on their book lists, nothing struck me as particularly out of place, but nor am I familiar with all of the books. 
 

I want to read good books to my kids, and challenge them too, but it’s tough to parse through all the bias. There are some flavors of Charlotte Mason purists that would exclude most, if not all, modern books for children, which I think does them a disservice. 

 

[caffeineandbooks]

21 minutes ago, GoodnightMoogle said:

I think Ambleside is probably the most infamous for assigning books that would be awfully challenging for most children at the ages recommended

Perhaps this is your answer.  Isn't Cindy Rollins one of the major contributors to Ambleside?  So that would be her baseline of what "rigorous" and "age appropriate" should look like.  I'm with you: there are some excellent books on that site, but following the plan as written would be too much in my house.

[GoodnightMoogle]

3 hours ago, caffeineandbooks said:

Perhaps this is your answer.  Isn't Cindy Rollins one of the major contributors to Ambleside?  So that would be her baseline of what "rigorous" and "age appropriate" should look like.  I'm with you: there are some excellent books on that site, but following the plan as written would be too much in my house.

I guess I just value her opinion and really wish I knew which books she was criticizing so I can tell if she is being a too-conservative curmudgeon or if her insights are legitimate. 
 

People get so secretive when talking about curricula on Facebook sometimes! Not just Alveary; I see it with other things too. They’ll be like “I didn’t like the values in some of the books we had to read.” I’m like, hello, what values and which books?? Everyone is always so vague like there’s a curriculum police out there. 
 

All I’ve been able to find, Alveary-wise, is that some people didn’t like the choice of “Hidden Figures” this year as part of the history (their  history rotates and I think this year was modern). And some people will mention that some of the older kids’ books had a more liberal bent to them. 

[Likaly]

Frankly speaking, I quit Facebook several months ago when I had to follow my own advice to kids about its waste. As for the reading lists, I do not trust others to say what kids should read; the list is made by their own interests and passions. Besides, I buy a lot of books from Europe, and I like their language much more than any modern bestseller, etc. American NY etc., winning book. It's like you are reading Rick Riordan, and then you open the pages of Stephen Fry and say, WOW, why did I start the first book in the beginning? 

As for the literature, I could not find (maybe yet) a good curriculum for kids. The one, which really teaches critical thinking and logic. Right now, it's a bunch of bits of here and there. 

[Nichola]

I think Cindy and Angelina only allow AO to be recommended on their Facebook page (at least that’s how it was in the past…I’m not on there anymore, so I don’t know if that’s changed). They see AO as the standard, and they often quote Charlotte Mason’s idea about giving children the best books, which they would define as the best-written books. I’m not familiar with the Facebook incident you mentioned, but based on things they’ve said on their podcasts (in general, not about the Alveary in particular), I would suspect that it wasn’t just one book that they had a problem with. I think it probably has more to do with the way the Alveary is choosing books in general. Just looking through the Alveary’s videos, I do see a difference in their recommendations versus Ambleside’s. The Alveary seems to choose at least some books based on the illustrations or because they look fun, where AO is more concerned with always giving kids the very best written language, regardless of the appearance of the book. The two groups are prioritizing different things. I think Cindy and Angelina would say the Alveary’s “fun” book choices are okay for free time but they wouldn’t consider them appropriate for school, at least not for literature class. If you really want to understand Cindy’s thinking about this, listen to her podcasts about the Building Blocks of Stories. I think that might give you some insight on why she prefers certain curricula over others.

I don’t know a lot about the Alveary, but it doesn’t appeal to me personally because I like to choose my own books and create my own reading lists, and I want to be able to reuse books for my younger kids. The Alveary has new book lists every year, so that wouldn’t work well for me. 

That being said, if the Alveary appeals to you, go for it. There’s nothing wrong with trying it out to see if you like it.

 

[Rosie_0801]

Do you need someone else's opinion of what books to read when there are so many reasons to read or not read any book at all?

Is 'King Solomon's Mines' a dreadful piece of sexist, racist, colonial rubbish? Well, yeah.

Is 'King Solomon's Mines' of historical value as the beginning of the 'Lost World' genre? Well, yeah.

Did reading it to my daughter turn her into a racist, misogynist with a colonial mindset? Of course not.

Did reading it to my teenaged daughter expose her to a mindset she doesn't normally dwell in and a genre she's never read? Yup.

Did it teach her something about how to apply cultural relativity? A bit, yeah.

Would I give it to a 9yo boy with no commentary and expect him to intuit all of what I hadn't bothered to explain? Nooo.

Would I try to sell it as a worthy novel to anyone of African descent? Also no.

 

A friend of mine was reading 'Pride and Prejudice' to her dd in K because she was verbally precocious. I also read it to my daughter in K, even though she was barely verbal, because she was already familiar with the characters from watching the mini-series and that made it more accessible to her than 'Winnie the Pooh.' 

People publishing lists can only go by general principles, and they don't know what you are going to tell your kids about it. They don't know whether sad books are permitted in your household. Some people steer right away from that sort of thing, others use them to help their kids process the inevitables of life. Some kids are frightened of sad books, others find them validating. Etc.

Anyway, if you want to know about a particular book, people around here aren't shy about stating their pros and cons. 🙂

And yay for libraries. If a book sucks, you can send it right back with a clear conscience!

[ScoutTN]

9 hours ago, Rosie_0801 said:

Do you need someone else's opinion of what books to read when there are so many reasons to read or not read any book at all?

Is 'King Solomon's Mines' a dreadful piece of sexist, racist, colonial rubbish? Well, yeah.

Is 'King Solomon's Mines' of historical value as the beginning of the 'Lost World' genre? Well, yeah.

Did reading it to my daughter turn her into a racist, misogynist with a colonial mindset? Of course not.

Did reading it to my teenaged daughter expose her to a mindset she doesn't normally dwell in and a genre she's never read? Yup.

Did it teach her something about how to apply cultural relativity? A bit, yeah.

Would I give it to a 9yo boy with no commentary and expect him to intuit all of what I hadn't bothered to explain? Nooo.

Would I try to sell it as a worthy novel to anyone of African descent? Also no.

 

A friend of mine was reading 'Pride and Prejudice' to her dd in K because she was verbally precocious. I also read it to my daughter in K, even though she was barely verbal, because she was already familiar with the characters from watching the mini-series and that made it more accessible to her than 'Winnie the Pooh.' 

People publishing lists can only go by general principles, and they don't know what you are going to tell your kids about it. They don't know whether sad books are permitted in your household. Some people steer right away from that sort of thing, others use them to help their kids process the inevitables of life. Some kids are frightened of sad books, others find them validating. Etc.

Anyway, if you want to know about a particular book, people around here aren't shy about stating their pros and cons. 🙂

And yay for libraries. If a book sucks, you can send it right back with a clear conscience!

I wish we could “like” your posts, Rosie. 
 

OP, go with what works for your kids and don’t worry about what others think. 

[Zoo Keeper]

12 hours ago, Rosie_0801 said:

Do you need someone else's opinion of what books to read when there are so many reasons to read or not read any book at all?

Is 'King Solomon's Mines' a dreadful piece of sexist, racist, colonial rubbish? Well, yeah.

Is 'King Solomon's Mines' of historical value as the beginning of the 'Lost World' genre? Well, yeah.

Did reading it to my daughter turn her into a racist, misogynist with a colonial mindset? Of course not.

Did reading it to my teenaged daughter expose her to a mindset she doesn't normally dwell in and a genre she's never read? Yup.

Did it teach her something about how to apply cultural relativity? A bit, yeah.

Would I give it to a 9yo boy with no commentary and expect him to intuit all of what I hadn't bothered to explain? Nooo.

Would I try to sell it as a worthy novel to anyone of African descent? Also no.

 

A friend of mine was reading 'Pride and Prejudice' to her dd in K because she was verbally precocious. I also read it to my daughter in K, even though she was barely verbal, because she was already familiar with the characters from watching the mini-series and that made it more accessible to her than 'Winnie the Pooh.' 

People publishing lists can only go by general principles, and they don't know what you are going to tell your kids about it. They don't know whether sad books are permitted in your household. Some people steer right away from that sort of thing, others use them to help their kids process the inevitables of life. Some kids are frightened of sad books, others find them validating. Etc.

Anyway, if you want to know about a particular book, people around here aren't shy about stating their pros and cons. 🙂

And yay for libraries. If a book sucks, you can send it right back with a clear conscience!

^

Rosie speaks with common sense, as usual.  🙂  Giving this a "like" the best I can.

 

 

[Zoo Keeper]

Also wanted to mention that as far as I know,  neither Cindy Rollins nor Angelina Stafford is actually a *creator* or *advisor* of Ambleside Online (a member of the Advisory or Auxiliary).  Possible happy former users and endorsers, but not the ones who determine what is AO.

And whatever someone else recommends,  I happily peruse other people's booklists and then choose what makes the most sense for the child in front of me at the time.  That is one of the major benefits of homeschooling.  I'm sure someone out there will think that some of my choices were sub par.  Oh well.

Best is such a relative term, isn't it. 😉 

 

 

 

Edited April 15 by Zoo Keeper

[Homeschoolingmy3boys]

I haven't been on here for quite some time...but popped on to look for ideas for science.  🙂  We have used the Alveary for the past seven years so I can vouch the good and the bad.  Overall, it is a solid program...rigor well that is why I love it... you get all grades when you sign up and you can go up or down in grades as needed.  They do have reasons for the why of what they do.  I am one of the mentors over there and can tell you my honest opinion if you want to PM me.  No curriculum is perfect and you will tweak as you go, but I love that it has everything and I can take and leave what I need.  I love the classics and I feel this has a happy medium of the modern and the classics for today.  I know many AO users want to stay with just the classics but there are good modern books out there too.  Another problem I see with AO is they stay too long in the British history and I find that the Alveary does a sweep of other cultures that AO might miss out on so I guess it depends what your focus area and what you want more of.  I find the elementary years and middle school to be solid...I do feel they are still tweaking the high school but it has come a long way.  They are growing and learning too...and I appreciate the research behind why they do what they do.  Please excuse my errors...just typing a quick few thoughts.  🙂

[alpinegrace]

A couple years ago I purchased the membership for The Alveary. I printed out all the resources and everything, but didn't actually end up using it. Pros: it is similar in my opinion to Ambleside.(I used Ambleside for 2 years.) As someone else said, Ambleside is notorious for scheduling books above grade level. I don't recall feeling like the books scheduled with Alveary were dumbed down at all. In fact, there is a popular blogger (Heritage Mom) who spoke highly of them simply for their booklists! She was the one who actually convinced me to pay for it! Everything is much more organized than Ambleside imo too. They have some really great resources for planning out your year, so I think the cost is worth it if your set on a Charlotte Mason style homeschool. 

That being said, that style of education just doesn't work for MY family. I decided that I needed to simplify my life. I have 7 kids, so I really minimize our homeschool to the essentials. My number one priority is "its gotta get done!" If there is too much going on, things will not get done. So really, we're just not Charlotte Mason homeschoolers, though I still glean some of her principles and use them in our school. 

I think if you are committed to the Charlotte Mason style, the Alveary could be a beautiful place to start. The longer I homeschool, the more I believe that consistency is more important than method. If that's the method that you think will work for your family, then who cares what some lady who you've never met thinks! But that goes for my opinion too! haha

[sjwhit]

Interesting that they call the books age inappropriate. Rollins has always been about Ambleside, where the books are IMO very age inappropriate. As in, the Year 1 books are so far beyond what any normal 6 year old would retain, let alone be interested in. I am a firm believer that kids are usually way more capable than we give them credit for, but some of the stuff there is overkill in that regard. But that's just my opinion 🙂

[sjwhit]

On 4/14/2024 at 8:48 PM, GoodnightMoogle said:

I’m like, hello, what values and which books?? Everyone is always so vague like there’s a curriculum police out there. 

This annoys me so much, too!

[Homeschoolingmy3boys]

On 4/14/2024 at 10:44 PM, Nichola said:

I think Cindy and Angelina only allow AO to be recommended on their Facebook page (at least that’s how it was in the past…I’m not on there anymore, so I don’t know if that’s changed). They see AO as the standard, and they often quote Charlotte Mason’s idea about giving children the best books, which they would define as the best-written books. I’m not familiar with the Facebook incident you mentioned, but based on things they’ve said on their podcasts (in general, not about the Alveary in particular), I would suspect that it wasn’t just one book that they had a problem with. I think it probably has more to do with the way the Alveary is choosing books in general. Just looking through the Alveary’s videos, I do see a difference in their recommendations versus Ambleside’s. The Alveary seems to choose at least some books based on the illustrations or because they look fun, where AO is more concerned with always giving kids the very best written language, regardless of the appearance of the book. The two groups are prioritizing different things. I think Cindy and Angelina would say the Alveary’s “fun” book choices are okay for free time but they wouldn’t consider them appropriate for school, at least not for literature class. If you really want to understand Cindy’s thinking about this, listen to her podcasts about the Building Blocks of Stories. I think that might give you some insight on why she prefers certain curricula over others.

I don’t know a lot about the Alveary, but it doesn’t appeal to me personally because I like to choose my own books and create my own reading lists, and I want to be able to reuse books for my younger kids. The Alveary has new book lists every year, so that wouldn’t work well for me. 

That being said, if the Alveary appeals to you, go for it. There’s nothing wrong with trying it out to see if you like it.

 

The book lists don't change every year many are repeated depending on the grade.  If they find a book doesn't work for the general public then they listen and think of which is best.  I do like the research behind their intent and I do know they all have good hearts and are trying to produce as close to Mason in today's society.  Yes, they do have a 4 year cycle of history similar to TWTM.

Rigor has been one of those things peope have discussed.  In our experience these past seven years, I found the elementary years to be solid.  There is a nice balance.  I had one gifted kid using the Alveary and it was a good mix of enough to cover a broad area and then time in the afternoon for him to pursue his interests and deep dive into things that interested him.  For highschool, I have had to tweak a bit more but the early years I felt were perfect. 

[Homeschoolingmy3boys]

On 4/14/2024 at 3:51 PM, 8filltheheart said:

. I recent followed a FB link to a supposed classical model and Archimedes and the Door of Science is one of the books listed for high school physical science.  (I think my kids read it in 3rd grade.) And....SOTW vol 1-4 are listed for high school history. Vol 1 is for ages what, 6-10? 

That actually is not true, I have used the Alveary for seven years and the Archimedes book was used in I believe 6th grade (years back) and the SOTW book was only used parts out of it for 5-7th grade (a couple of years ago).  HTH 🙂  You gotta love social media, I agree doing your homework is essential!  Their main spine for high school for US is usually History of the American People or The Short History of the US by Remini.

 

 

[8filltheheart]

31 minutes ago, Homeschoolingmy3boys said:

Actually posted by me, but I am just copying from your post above:

I recently followed a FB link to a supposed classical model and Archimedes and the Door of Science is one of the books listed for high school physical science.  (I think my kids read it in 3rd grade.) And....SOTW vol 1-4 are listed for high school history. Vol 1 is for ages what, 6-10? 

 

31 minutes ago, Homeschoolingmy3boys said:

That actually is not true, I have used the Alveary for seven years and the Archimedes book was used in I believe 6th grade (years back) and the SOTW book was only used parts out of it for 5-7th grade (a couple of years ago).  HTH 🙂  You gotta love social media, I agree doing your homework is essential!  Their main spine for high school for US is usually History of the American People or The Short History of the US by Remini.

I think you need to read my post more closely bc I stated that I know nothing about Alveary and was simply making a generic comment. Even in the part you quoted I stated I had followed a link to supposed classical school. 🙄 I didn't mention Alveary at all.

[Homeschoolingmy3boys]

Just now, 8filltheheart said:

 

I think you need to read my post more closely bc I stated that I know nothing about Alveary and was simply making a generic comment. Even in the part you quoted I stated I had followed a link to supposed classical school. 🙄 I didn't mention Alveary at all.

Good grief, I was just letting people know that was not accurate from wherever you got the comment...I think this is why I got off of social media for so long...I was just trying to help.  Your comment is not very helpful, I think we all know what you said about you not knowing anything about it.  Why are people so touch these days?  Aren't we just trying to help each other?  Guess I'll be leaving again no time and energy to deal with this petty behavior.

[8filltheheart]

2 minutes ago, Homeschoolingmy3boys said:

Good grief, I was just letting people know that was not accurate from wherever you got the comment...I think this is why I got off of social media for so long...I was just trying to help.  Your comment is not very helpful, I think we all know what you said about you not knowing anything about it.  Why are people so touch these days?  Aren't we just trying to help each other?  Guess I'll be leaving again no time and energy to deal with this petty behavior.

I'm was not being touchy nor petty. You weren't actually clarifying anything bc no one suggested that Alveary included those. My OP was directed toward people venting about low quality academics and being empathetic to that sentiment.  Low quality abounds everywhere and I included those as an example of what an online "school provider" incorporated that people thought was "great."  

[Nam2001]

On 4/14/2024 at 9:44 PM, Nichola said:

I think Cindy and Angelina only allow AO to be recommended on their Facebook page (at least that’s how it was in the past…I’m not on there anymore, so I don’t know if that’s changed). They see AO as the standard, and they often quote Charlotte Mason’s idea about giving children the best books, which they would define as the best-written books. I’m not familiar with the Facebook incident you mentioned, but based on things they’ve said on their podcasts (in general, not about the Alveary in particular), I would suspect that it wasn’t just one book that they had a problem with. I think it probably has more to do with the way the Alveary is choosing books in general. Just looking through the Alveary’s videos, I do see a difference in their recommendations versus Ambleside’s. The Alveary seems to choose at least some books based on the illustrations or because they look fun, where AO is more concerned with always giving kids the very best written language, regardless of the appearance of the book. The two groups are prioritizing different things. I think Cindy and Angelina would say the Alveary’s “fun” book choices are okay for free time but they wouldn’t consider them appropriate for school, at least not for literature class. If you really want to understand Cindy’s thinking about this, listen to her podcasts about the Building Blocks of Stories. I think that might give you some insight on why she prefers certain curricula over others.

I don’t know a lot about the Alveary, but it doesn’t appeal to me personally because I like to choose my own books and create my own reading lists, and I want to be able to reuse books for my younger kids. The Alveary has new book lists every year, so that wouldn’t work well for me. 

That being said, if the Alveary appeals to you, go for it. There’s nothing wrong with trying it out to see if you like it.

 

Just wanted to clarify that Cindy actually had several episodes on her podcast interviewing people using many different CM curriculum options.  SCM, Alveary, CMEC, etc… They certainly favor AO, that’s for sure, but I typically get good answers in their group about other options as well.