If you did free-spirited school with youngers, was it hard to buckle down later?

[snickelfritz]

Let's say that in the early grades you ran school as a free-spirited, it's a beautiful day to take off and go to the park, experience.

 

Was it hard to develop more of a schedule, and stick to it, later? To get in 4 and 5 hours of school.

 

Did you find that it occurred naturally, or did you have to make a conscious effort to put more time in?

[Jill- OK]

*But*...I plan to 'ramp up' in later years, as opposed to waking up one day and deciding to totally change approaches, and that might make a difference. (This wasn't totally thought out with my olders, but that's how it worked out and then I adopted it as a principle, lol).

 

In other words, it's not just loosey-goosey and then an overnight change to a rigorous, sit-down school day; it's gradually adding a little more each year and increasing expectations.

 

I'm pretty free-spirited...but even the Littles have a dedicated time to sitting down and doing what I ask, when I ask it. That time just gradually ramps up in terms of content and length, over the years.

 

Following the Charlotte Mason principle of short lesson times has been a wonder for our homeschool; having an understanding with my kids that I will try not to ask more than they can handle, if they'll give me their best effort when I do ask, has seemed to lend itself well to the practice of increasing workload year by year. (My two ninth graders have a pretty typical schedule, and things are going pretty smoothly, thus far).

 

Also, just our core subjects are firm and formal, in early years; we still do a smattering of foreign language, history, science, etc., but they're couched in informal, fun activities or simple read alouds and copywork. Those only become 'must do', sit-down, formal subjects in later years.

 

ETA: I didn't really answer your question about taking off for the park, etc., did I? ;-) The blathering about short lesson times, etc., was part of my thought process, but what I meant to say was that because of all those things (short lessons, only core subjects done formally), we have a lot more flexibility. Truthfully, though, we don't have a long school day, even now, with two high schoolers, because I plan it that way. We purposefully school year 'round (mostly) so that we can have both a short work day and week. Sometimes that's switched around, and sometimes the time is lengthened, but flexibility is a big part of why I homeschool, so it makes sense for us to have a certain amount built in to our schedule.

 

HTH.

Edited January 10, 2009 by Jill, OK

[Pamela H in Texas]

We were nice and free when the kids were little. It didn't take much effort to buckle down when we decided to do so. I have a feeling we were a little more free to begin with than what you're talking about too.

[Tammyla]

Nope. I was a little harder on my first learning how to home school here. My poor dd was my guinea pig so to speak.

 

imo&e...Little ones grow up very fast.:grouphug:

[swellmomma]

It has been a little hard, but that has more to do with my kids personalities than the ages etc. I let them basically have 2 years of very little school, the first year we were deschooling, and working on behaviour and emotional issues. The second year I had my dd premature just 2 weeks into the school year so school got side tracked and other than english and math we did very little for the year. This year it has been hard to get them up to where I want in their schooling, so first term was spent building up and fighting with them, this term so far so good, they seem to get what I expect, know we are dong more than just english and math and are not fighting it as much. Both have issues that make listening to authority hard, so it took some time for them to catch on that I wasn't going to change my mind about school when they use their stalling techniques etc (it worked for them in ps, and for 2 years we did little so it made them think what they did worked yikes), But over all they are coming around.

 

I have decided not to follow the same pattern I did with them with the younger two. I still leave most of my little's day open for play and exploration, but I am getting them used to sitting and working for a set period of time. I will build up on that time as they grow. I still will be pretty relaxed until the logic stage, BUT not as relaxed as I was with my older 2.

[chiguirre]

To a certain extent, the ramping up is a natural process as the assignments in curricula get longer. I've noticed that this year with ds, we have about 50% more work to do than we did last year in the curricula we've continued, LLATL Red and R&S Math 2. I didn't have to plan this, it just happened. Now that we're on hiatus from LLATL, we're doing WP LA 1 along with R&S Grammar 2 and WWE 1. Our days are about the same length as LLATL, although it's easier (and more tempting) to skip something when time is tight. OTOH, if you have goals in mind, you either keep the daily schedule or work weekends, so it evens out in the end.

[Ellie]

No, it wasn't difficult, although we didn't ever actually do 4 or 5 hours:blink: When my dds reached the age where that might have become a reality, they started taking classes at the community college.

[lllll]

..

Edited March 23, 2013 by 3kt68
corrections

[LaxMom]

We were pretty loose for the first couple of years. For K we just puttered around, did some FLL, ETC and conceptual math, all on a completely ad hoc basis. First grade was pretty much the same, but with SOTW reading and a very literature-centric science. Last year, we got a bit more into a school routine, and this year we have my laminated schedule, which we pretty much follow.

 

This is 3rd grade, though, and we certainly don't have 5 hours of school work. Maybe 3 1/2, if we stretch each subject to fit the time allotted (which doesn't happen often) and we only have a full school schedule 3 days a week because we have morning activities on Tuesday and Friday. (We have school year round, though) In that time, we cover (in order) grammar, spelling, handwriting, math, piano practice, French, history, Latin, chemistry and geography. Reading is still ad hoc, but she's always got a book going, so I don't worry about that.

 

No issues segueing into a more definite routine, with more subjects. I think that would depend largely on the ages of the kids, though. As ksva pointed out, it would be more difficult to suddenly switch up on olders (in either direction, I suspect).

[bookmomma]

Your kids are young now. So you shouldn't do a strict routine. They can't take it (physically, metally, emotionally), and it would drive you crazy to try. I would say grade K is for learning to love learning--playing games, beginning math and phonics/reading. Then 1st and 2nd grade are harder. They are trying to learn so much all at once and it is difficult for them. They need to follow at least the basics (reading, writing, math), and leave the rest as your flex-point; depending on how your day is going, you can do history, literature, etc.

 

I say, once they have the basics down--by 3rd grade--then are usually ready for more sit-down work for longer periods of time.

 

Just tune in to their abilities and you'll know what to do.

Edited January 10, 2009 by bookmomma
fingers move too quickly