Are there children who just do not "take to" the classical method?

[Maverick_Mom]

I've just read the chapter in TWTM entitled "Some People Hate Homer," and it's got me thinking. This chapter addresses the usefulness (or "Usefulness," as Pooh would say :)) of classical education for students in general. But I'm wondering if there are some students for whom the methodology is too intensive. I'm not talking about students with special needs but rather about students who, for whatever reason (natural bent? learning style?), don't thrive with this approach. Or should we look at the classical method as a really, really healthy soil in which every student should be trained to grow?

[hsingscrapper]

That, my dear, is the beauty of homeschooling.

 

Not every method is going to work for every child.

 

My boys and I are science-resistant. Once we adopted more of a Charlotte Mason-style approach to it, they got into it more. I have an experiment book that we were given called The Backyard Scientist and I like it because the experiments are really simple, low mess and cheap. It's just enough mess to get the boys excited but really easy and quick cleanup which works nice for me.

 

I think you can employ some of the time suggestions without necessarily using the depth of work or vice versa. Use all of the work suggestions but just keep your lessons shorter.

 

HTH

[Carol in Cal.]

Audio learners and good readers.

 

I can imagine that very kinesthetic learners or extremely social children might not do as well with this approach as with another one. Still, if my DD were very kinesthetic, I would probably have done more with experiments and projects and rythmic bouncing while memorizing things. If she learned much better in a noisy, social setting, I could have provided her with one (although I would probably have done so in a local private school that I really liked but that was a poor fit for her need for a quiet learning environment.)

 

I can honestly say that classical education, to the extent that I have done it, has worked extremely well for my DD. She doesn't have an innate passionate interest in anything in particular to drive her, but she has become passionate about archeology, history, and wild nature--both because of this approach and because homeschooling has freed up so much time for her to explore these areas and to coordinate her learning throughout the curriculum to pursue those interests. She is much more well-rounded and well-educated than I can imagine her having become in any school setting.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I think that the more rigorous classical schedule (which comes out more in the upper grades) isn't for every student. But I think that all children can benefit from some of the hallmarks of a classical education - good books, a chronological history of some kind, setting a good foundation of basics and build from there. . .

[cathmom]

I first saw the original TWTM at a friend's house. I sat there reading it until we had to leave. Then I bought it. I thought - this is it! This is exactly the way I want to homeschool! I love it!

 

Turns out my oldest hates history, and he hated having all the subjects filtered through history. So we dropped it. Unfortunately, my second dc would have loved learning like this all the way from the beginning, but since we dropped it with the oldest, we dropped it with her.

 

Now we do some of it.

[Suzanne in ABQ]

Both of my children absolutely hated narration. It upset them so badly, they practically got physically ill. They are both such perfectionists, they would try to retell the story/lesson word for word. They just couldn't break it down, or choose what was most important. It got down to trying to narrate a sentence at a time. It was like pulling taffy through a needle to get them to narrate anything. I tried every tip and method I could find, for about two years, and then I gave up. So, we had review questions and discussions instead.

 

They're older now, and can finally narrate (at ages 11 and 12). They outline and rewrite from their outlines. They're actually pretty good at it, considering they haven't always done it. I guess we're becoming more "classical" as they get older. It's still good.

[mamaof2andtwins]

I think that the more rigorous classical schedule (which comes out more in the upper grades) isn't for every student. But I think that all children can benefit from some of the hallmarks of a classical education - good books, a chronological history of some kind, setting a good foundation of basics and build from there. . .

 

:iagree:

[fivetails]

I'm not talking about students with special needs but rather about students who, for whatever reason (natural bent? learning style?), don't thrive with this approach.

 

Mine fit into both of your catagories there - for ds10, the classsical method would not work due to his disabilities....for dd12, it's the "wouldn't thrive with this approach". It's so not a good fit for her - I can just imagine the chaos that would ensue if I tried to implement a classical model here. Aye!

 

I think it's fantastic if it works for other children though - as was said above, not every method works with every child... :)

[cillakat]

Or should we look at the classical method as a really, really healthy soil in which every student should be trained to grow?

 

Classical education is just referring to specific topics that should be covered (strong emphasis on language, logic, math, history in sequential systematic style....) but how you go about teaching it is entirely up to you. It's certainly easiest with an auditory/sequential learner who loves writing and worksheets but really with enough creativity, one can make it entirely kinesthetic, game oriented etc.....or enough of a mix to at least make it doable for a child who is otherwise resistant.

 

:)

K

[Alana in Canada]

Classical education is just referring to specific topics that should be covered (strong emphasis on language, logic, math, history in sequential systematic style....) but how you go about teaching it is entirely up to you.

 

Well, yes, and no. In very broad strokes, classical education is a method for teaching children--a method based on what they are capable of at different stages of maturation. "re-telling" at the "grammar" stage or the younger years, making connections at the dialectic upper grammar or middle school stage and becoming aware of persuasion and arguments and constructing those connections and building onall the knowledge heretofore to "present" a point of view about a topic at the rhetoric stage--that's the "methodology" of Classical education.

 

That said, you can do it for any kind of learner--you can do it with any content subject: Latin or History, Math or Grammar. The itty bitty details are totally up to you.

[Colleen in NS]

I'm wondering if there are some students for whom the methodology is too intensive.

 

Here's how I see it:

 

setting a good foundation of basics and build from there. . .

 

To me: math, grammar, writing, spelling, reading, talking/making connections with whatever content areas. And all of these by whatever means works with my child. We don't "do" hours of history or science each week, but I emphasize skills so that later my kids can dive into these areas with zest and without difficulty (although they do read a lot in these areas - just not a lot of projects organized by me or exact coordinating of books anymore - though we have an overall scheme - chrono history and lit., one science per year). I think that WTM is organized to show how you *could* conduct a science program or a history program, but I think the heart of it is to teach skills consistently and as far as kids can go, using content reading, so that they can enjoy their studies on their own when they grow up.

 

I tried every tip and method I could find, for about two years....They're older now, and can finally narrate (at ages 11 and 12). They outline and rewrite from their outlines.

 

You persevered and they finally got the skills! Yay!

 

Classical education is just referring to specific topics that should be covered (strong emphasis on language, logic, math, history in sequential systematic style....) but how you go about teaching it is entirely up to you. It's certainly easiest with an auditory/sequential learner who loves writing and worksheets but really with enough creativity, one can make it entirely kinesthetic, game oriented etc.....or enough of a mix to at least make it doable for a child who is otherwise resistant.

 

:iagree:

[Peela]

I think it can be adapted to most kids. But not necessarily done as the WTM lays out. There are even classical unschoolers. Classical is a fairly broad category.

I think it has more to do with the parents' enthusiasm and passion about what classical means to them, being convinced that is how they want to educate their kids, and then being willing to adapt that to their own children and situation. It the parent is not convicted, they won't be able to hang in there through the hard times. Its not the easiest path, in many ways.

I have a son that is not that keen on classical but I just make it work for us- and he does end up enjoying parts of it. He also doesn't know anything different. But I make my own program and make it work for us, rather than try and make us fit too closely into someone else's idea of a classical mould. Within reason, anyway.