Does anyone keep their kids in their own time periods & how hard is that?

[Amber in AUS]

I am a perfectionist by nature and like to start at the beginning of everything. My kids are 18 months and then 20 months apart, but are worlds apart in terms of academics/readiness.

 

My DD1 4.5yo is reading at a solid Grade 1 level and growing out of sight every day. She is bright and easily completing the work i ask of her. Other than reading she really isn't being challenged. Every new thing i introduce she 'gets' straight away and is ready to move on. She is going to be ready to start history later this year/early 2010.

 

DS 3yo on the other hand is a typical boy, showing no signs of being ready to do anything except dig in the sand pit, bounce on the trampoline etc. That is perfectly fine with me and i am not going to push him one bit as he is one very head strong little guy, but i want him to start at the beginning for history too when his time comes.

 

So if i start DD1 with history later in the year or next year whenever i think she is ready he wont be ready to participate. He will probably be 2 years behind her starting point at least and DD2 may be ready to start with him or may be 1 or 2 years behind him, depends how she progresses.

 

So does anyone keep their kids in their own time periods? How hard is it to keep them separate so i can start them all at the beginning? If you are going to suggest delaying DD1 until DS is ready that's OK but what do i do in the meantime? We are doing loose geography this year - read about a country, oral narration, draw picture, colour flag, locate in Atlas & on world map, sup reading and hand on creative activity.

 

Sorry this turned out much longer than i intended.

[WTMCassandra]

Why not begin with your DD and let your DS play with Legos on the floor and see what he picks up? He might pick up on quite a bit. I've heard many other moms testify that their littles who were just along for the ride suddenly piped up with all kinds of facts learned while they were "not listening."

 

My children are 23 months apart and I've always kept them together for history, although I must say that my DD is a bit of a late bloomer and my DS is pretty academic, so they are not too far apart in actual ability.

[Amber in AUS]

Thanks WTMCassandra. That was what i had in the back of my mind, to start her and let him do his own thing (in our space) but when it comes to actually starting him off formally I'd start from Ancients with him. Then i'd have 1 in 3rd or 4th year of history and 1 possibly 2 in 1st year of history, that's the challenging part. How hard would that be? Does anyone do it?

 

The hard part is making the decision. Either charge on and possibly regret not combining from the start or delay now for smoother sailing later.

 

If DD1 wasn't so far ahead having only 3y 2m between all of them i would keep them all together for history science aiming for the middle road, but that isn't a reality, sigh, more work for me.

[WTMCassandra]

I personally think my head would split open if I were trying to do two different history time periods at once. I would fold him in to her schedule, but at his own level. She might be reading a Landmark book on a topic that he's reading a picture book on, and she might be doing a geography map while he colors a picture, but at least you're on the same topic.

 

I don't know, perhaps others can chime in here who have done more than one time period at the same time and lived to tell about it. I don't want to be a wet blanket on your parade.

 

If I were you I would go ahead and start on your DD now and not hold her back. Let your DS listen in and see what happens. If you decide he needs his own history time at his own time period, you can start that later. Just be kind to yourself and remember that history at these ages is mostly exposure and teaching them that it's fun.

[Laura Corin]

I do my two boys separately. There is a 3 1/2 year gap between them, but intellectually it's closer to a 4 1/2 year gap. I tried teaching them together, but felt that neither of them was getting a good history education doing it that way.

 

What I would do: start your daughter on SOTW when you think she is ready (bearing in mind that getting to SOTW 4 at a young age is emotionally difficult - the story of the 20th century is hard for anyone to bear, let alone a young elementary school child). Perhaps start her out early, if you think she's ready, but take it slowly, letting her learn a lot around the subject. She should then arrive at the end of the SOTW books at around age 10. By that time, she can be doing a lot of the reading herself, freeing up your time to continue working with your youngers.

 

With your younger: let him sit in if he likes, but otherwise wait until you think he is ready.

 

Best wishes

 

Laura

[Peela]

I do mine together but I have a friend whose daughters are two years apart, and because the older has some learning challenges and the younger is a bright spark, she keeps them separate- so that the older isn't humiliated by the younger's blooming abilities.

I think it works for them because the mother has trained both girls to work very independently. Wheras I actually like to sit on the couch to read with my kids and discuss history together, and my kids are close enough in age that we can do that at a similar level. It would be a lot of extra work for me to do 2 separate levels- but for my friend, it works better to have her daughters doing completely different work so there is no comparing.

[Cornerstone Classical]

We just made a big change to do ours separately, because my DS is advanced. I kinda like it because I get more one on one time with them. And doing things individually. It has made them feel more important, and they get more individual attention. I have gotten a lot more smiles and hugs this week already! They are happy now to be "engaged" at their own level. more work for me, but I've just taken turns with them. But it's worth it to see good attitudes!

 

Just be careful and don't advance too quickly, always take into consideration the level of the "whole child". Academically, as well as, physically and emotionally.

 

HTH!

[Lisa in the UP of MI]

I have three kids with about the same spacing as you do (and we will probably have more children) and I plan to keep them all together with regards to the history cycle. My oldest dd has a September birthday so I'm not sure if I'll start when she turns 6 or 7. I'm leaning toward age 7 even though she is very bright (as is ds), and part of the reason is so that it will be easier to bring ds into the studies. For the next two years we will do some sort of unit studies. I'm considering FIAR and geography/culture studies, or maybe we'll just go with their interests. When we do start the history cycle I want to do Hideaways in History or something similar, spread out over 2-4 years. My kids love to play-act and I know that they will really enjoy pretending to be people from the past. And I think they'll remember more this way too. I would imagine that all of the kids will join in, even if they aren't school age, and will still get the feeling of chronological history. Well, as much as you can at a young age!

Good luck with your decision!

[Dayle in Guatemala]

I tried that once. Once. I will never do it again.

 

It was just too much to keep up with! I keep my dc on the same cycle and give them different projects during our studies. I also give them different independent reading to work on concerning the time period. It's much better!

[Tami]

To those who separate kids to increase difficulty and challenge, I have a question.

 

Why not to do separate, age-appropriate programs in the SAME time period? I don't see why working the same time period and providing challenge is mutually exclusive?

 

Just curious on this.

[Melissa B]

I find it much easier to do each child separately. I tried to keep everyone in the same time period, but it was so time consuming trying to find books at each level for each child. And each child would be interested in some different aspect of the same time period. Worst, it seemed I was holding my oldest back by choosing a "spine" everyone would understand and projects in which everyone could participate. And I really felt I was being consumed by homeschooling and scheduling.

 

Now, we use a curriculum that already has lesson plans and projects assigned so I don't have to make them and each child uses the level suitable to her academic level. I have found it much easier and much more enjoyable for everyone. :)

[Jen in PA]

I had planned to keep my dc separate, but my 3 year old ds does listen in on everything my 1st grader has done this year. So imagine my surprise when we made a replica of an Egyptian burial chamber a couple of months ago.... dd was meticulous about all sorts of things, and I was proud of how involved she got in the project. Then my sweet 3 year old took a little cat figurine out of my china cabinet and added it to be the "temple cat." I hadn't realized he was paying attention to our read alouds, and I was really thrilled. So I will have to make the decision when he starts 1st grade -- if he keeps absorbing what we are working on, I'll have to come up with a new plan.

[Garga]

It might depend on how much you supplement with your history program.

 

I read tons of books in addition to SOTW about the time period we're studying--biographies, stories, factual books. I read so much each day my voice hurts a little bit by the end of the day. So, if I wanted to teach my kids two different time periods, I wouldn't be able to do as much supplementing.

 

If I didn't supplement so much, then it would be ok. Or, I guess, if my guys could read the supplemental materials themselves...but they prob. couldn't because a lot is way above their level. I kind of simplify it as I'm reading.

 

Oh, and we also do many (most) of the activities in the SOTW workbook, so again, I think I'd just run out of time during the day if we did two sets of projects each week.

[Amber in AUS]

Thanks for your input everyone.

[FO4UR]

My dc are 26mo apart and then 14mo apart.

 

My first plan is to start the Ancients while my eldest is a young 6 (soon), fold in my middle dc at year 3, and then hold my little man off until we cycle back to yr1 (hopefully before he turns 7yo).

 

My second plan is to start ds off on AO when he turns 6, dc#2 2yrs later, and dc#3 2yrs later. Dc#3 will start a bit late, but I think he is going to be my late bloomer anyway. By the time Dc#3 is starting formal work, dc#1 should be fairly independant in most subjects......*should be*:tongue_smilie:

 

As for now, I am just starting off with ancients. I really prefer the laid out reading list of AO, but also prefer keeping in the same time period.

[Melmc]

We just started homeschooling this year. I have a 5th, 3rd and K. We're doing ancients. I couldn't imagine doing history separate. We do so many extra activities and read alouds it just wouldn't work. I even set up Montessori type works for them to do during our history time and they asked if I could leave them out all the time. Anyway, mine would miss out if I separated them because I couldn't put together all that stuff for the different time periods.

 

What helps me is finding a curriculum that separates out readings by ages. I use BP and find books for all three sets of ages K-2, 3-4, 5+. There are two spines, Usborne for younger two, Kingfisher for the older one. We have awesome family discussions that spring up at the oddest times, such as Dairy Queen. And just the other day, my five year old drew a picture of the Hyksos invading Egypt so even though she's just tagging along, she's getting stuff out of it, too.

 

Now if all you're going to do is read and narrate then separating them might work, but I couldn't see it if you wanted to do all the extras and hands-on stuff to make history really come alive.