| Author | |
Bookswithtea
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 07 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2621
|
| Posted: Aug 05 2008 at 9:03am | IP Logged
|
 |
|
Mary shared a quote from Debra Bell about teaching our children "how" to learn, versus trying to teach "everything".
While I don't know how it would work for math and science, I suppose its possible it could work for history. So for that subject alone, and considering all the years a child is homeschooled, what time periods/centuries would you leave out?
__________________
Blessings,
~Books
mothering ds'93 dd'97 dd'99 dd'02 ds'05 ds'07 and  due 9/10
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JodieLyn
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 06 2006
Location: Oregon
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12234
|
| Posted: Aug 05 2008 at 11:22am | IP Logged
|
|
|
You know I was thinking about this the other day.. I don't think it's so much necessary to leave out things as to spend less time and resources covering some.
You know.. I bet if you think about it you can see it from your own education.. they hit the "highlights" and don't bother with the rest.
I think for Science you'll also find that you plan to leave out good sections anyway.. like are you going to cover astronomy and oceanography and chemistry and biology and anatomy and quantum physics and then in those are you going to cover everything? 
And math.. while there's a progression once you hit a certain point there's different things to learn.. like business accounting or how to calculate statistics (you should know something about them of course) or calculus or whatever. Most of us can make it through life without even algebra ;) and even college may not need more than through algebra2.
At some point you have to specialize.
__________________
Jodie, wife to Dave
G-18, B-17, G-15, G-14, B-13, B-11, G-9, B-7, B-5, B-4
All men who have turned out worth anything have had the chief hand in their own education.
-Sir Walter Scott
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Kathryn UK
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 27 2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 924
|
| Posted: Aug 05 2008 at 12:30pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
JodieLyn wrote:
| At some point you have to specialize. |
|
|
That is one of the big differences between the British and American education systems. Here in the UK there is a lot more specialisation, earlier. From age 16 most students study only three or four subjects, and at university they will only study a single subject. Maths, English and science are the only compulsory subjects up to 16 - everything else is optional after 14.
I think there are pros and cons to both the UK and US approaches - your breadth or our depth. Ultimately, though, you can't have both. Something has to give. It is a matter of deciding what balance between the two works best for individual children. How to choose what to leave out? Good question, but I don't have an answer 
__________________
Kathryn
Dh Michael, Rachel(3/95) Hannah(8/98) Naomi(6/06)  (11/07)
The Bookworm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Bookswithtea
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 07 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2621
|
| Posted: Aug 05 2008 at 4:10pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Sigh...Kathryn, I think the British system makes so much more sense than ours. My mom is British and my uncles all are doing well in the world after finishing your version of high school and then going into trades (one is a plasterer and the other is in banking).
__________________
Blessings,
~Books
mothering ds'93 dd'97 dd'99 dd'02 ds'05 ds'07 and due 9/10
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
TracyQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1323
|
| Posted: Aug 05 2008 at 5:12pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Wow Kathryn! That is absolutely FASCINATING! I had NO idea there is such a difference!
How long in University is a person then???
I just heard that in the U.S. it's most likely a person will not finish college in 4 years (their Bachelors Degree), and that it'll more likely take 5 years. I also heard that many places want you to now have a Masters Degree, adding on 2 more years of college.
No wonder kids are up to their eyeballs in debt by the time they graduate college, and can't even find jobs that pay enough to survive on their own!!!
__________________
Blessings and Peace,
Tracy Q.
wife of Marty for 20 years, mom of 3 wonderful children (1 homeschool graduate, 1 12th grader, and a 9th grader),
homeschooling in 15th year in Buffalo, NY
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Erin
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5814
|
| Posted: Aug 05 2008 at 5:14pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Kathryn UK wrote:
That is one of the big differences between the British and American education systems. Here in the UK there is a lot more specialisation, earlier. From age 16 most students study only three or four subjects, and at university they will only study a single subject. Maths, English and science are the only compulsory subjects up to 16 - everything else is optional after 14.
I think there are pros and cons to both the UK and US approaches - your breadth or our depth. Ultimately, though, you can't have both. Something has to give. |
|
|
Kathryn
Every time you write about the British system I am fascinated by how similar the Australian system it to Britain, We just must be more British than I realised.
Books,
It has always been my contention that there is no way you can cover all history periods, I would strongly agree with Debra Bell. Give your dc the SKILLS and hopefully the desire and they will be learning their whole life long. I'm sure there are many things that you are learning now that you never knew before.
Bookswithtea wrote:
| what time periods/centuries would you leave out? |
|
|
Well what you decide here is really your choice. You need to ask yourself "Is it really important that we cover the Vikings?" for example. As a Catholic I would make certain that dc have some idea of Church history and in particular the 'sticky parts' The Reformation for example must be covered and the English period of Elizabeth and Mary. I tend to go by dc's interest too, I figure if they are not interested then they won't remember anyhow.
__________________
Erin
Faith Filled Days
Seven Little Australians
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Kathryn UK
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 27 2005
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 924
|
| Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 11:26am | IP Logged
|
|
|
TracyQ wrote:
Wow Kathryn! That is absolutely FASCINATING! I had NO idea there is such a difference!
How long in University is a person then??? |
|
|
In England and Wales three years for a bachelor's degree. Scotland has a different system, with four year university courses. A master's adds an extra year.
Many university courses are very narrowly focused as it is possible to specialise within a single subject ... so for example, my degree is in history and I concentrated on medieval history. Over the entire three years I took courses on British history between 400AD and 1750AD, European history between 400AD and 1500AD, and from 1800AD onwards, medieval universities, and the reign of King Henry II (1154-1189). Apart from a short Latin course, that was it. I could have chosen a broader range of courses, but medieval history is my thing .
In theory, the specialisation during the last two years of "high" school means that students are more advanced in the subject they plan to study when they start university.
__________________
Kathryn
Dh Michael, Rachel(3/95) Hannah(8/98) Naomi(6/06) (11/07)
The Bookworm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Bookswithtea
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 07 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2621
|
| Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 11:49am | IP Logged
|
|
|
See, that just makes so much more sense! I don't think my uncles attended past 16. That means that the last two years of high school there are what we do and then re-do in the first two years of college here.  What a waste of time and money!
__________________
Blessings,
~Books
mothering ds'93 dd'97 dd'99 dd'02 ds'05 ds'07 and due 9/10
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
TracyQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: New York
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1323
|
| Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 11:56am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Bookswithtea wrote:
| and then re-do in the first two years of college here. What a waste of time and money! |
|
|
Well, it's not a waste of time and money according to the universities who are getting ALL that money, and requiring so much extra in terms of content to graduate! That's why there's SUCH a problem now with our sytem, and why the government just had to take this issue up in the legislature! It IS truly maddening and dumbfounding! 
__________________
Blessings and Peace,
Tracy Q.
wife of Marty for 20 years, mom of 3 wonderful children (1 homeschool graduate, 1 12th grader, and a 9th grader),
homeschooling in 15th year in Buffalo, NY
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
~Rachel~
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 29 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 677
|
| Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 7:39pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Having been part of the British system and teaching my kids now via an American system of sorts , I have to add there really are pros and cons to each.
Personally I like the idea of less specialisation in school, but prefer the English university system... but I think it really depends on the schools you attend 
As for history, I like to read through a spine (think Our Island Story) and gloss over the areas DS is uninterested in, while focusing on those he IS interested in
__________________
~Rachel~
Wife to William
Mum to James 13, Lenore 8
Lighting a Fire
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
lapazfarm
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 21 2005
Location: Alaska
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6082
|
| Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 8:02pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
See, I think one of the problems is that Americans WANT IT ALL.
If we specialize earlier, and little Tommy goes the trade school route, then what if he wants to be a dentist, or a lawyer, or an engineer when he grows up? We certainly don't want to be responsible for limiting his options at all! Heck, they don't even have to pick a major for the first two years of college.
So, we sacrifice the chance at real depth in any subject at all, so that we keep all of our "options" open for as long as humanly possible.
It really is ridiculous if you ask me.(Which, of course, no one does!LOL!)
__________________
Theresa
us-schooling in beautiful Fairbanks, Alaska.
LaPaz Home Learning
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JodieLyn
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 06 2006
Location: Oregon
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 12234
|
| Posted: Aug 06 2008 at 8:08pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
It is rediculous Theresa.
I also wonder how much of it is misplaced pride or oneupsmanship type of stuff.
I mean.. could you have said when you were in high school that you wanted to be a stay at home mom homeschooling your children and didn't need a college degree for that?
In my experience not going to college is a "lesser" goal and therefore less desirable, less acceptable.. You know.. if Tommy loves cars and how they work and could be a great mechanic.. he's probably still being pushed by someone somewhere to have higher aspirations and go to college and get a "real profession".
__________________
Jodie, wife to Dave
G-18, B-17, G-15, G-14, B-13, B-11, G-9, B-7, B-5, B-4
All men who have turned out worth anything have had the chief hand in their own education.
-Sir Walter Scott
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
CrunchyMom
Forum Moderator
Joined: Sept 03 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6385
|
| Posted: Aug 07 2008 at 2:22am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Intelligence in the Classroom
What's Wrong With Vocational School?
Aztecs vs. Greeks
I think that this series of op-ed articles by Charles Murray are very pertinent to the discussion here!
I really wanted to hear him speak but missed it and I haven't yet had time to listen, but others have told me this lecture on the subject was also excellent!
Four Simple Truths For Bringing America's Schools Back to Reality
__________________
Lindsay
Five Boys(6/04) (6/06) (9/08)(3/11),(7/13), and 1 girl (5/16)
My Symphony
[URL=http://mysymphonygarden.blogspot.com/]Lost in the Cosmos[/UR
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Bookswithtea
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 07 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2621
|
| Posted: Aug 07 2008 at 7:45am | IP Logged
|
|
|
lapazfarm wrote:
See, I think one of the problems is that Americans WANT IT ALL.
If we specialize earlier, and little Tommy goes the trade school route, then what if he wants to be a dentist, or a lawyer, or an engineer when he grows up? We certainly don't want to be responsible for limiting his options at all! |
|
|
Thank you so much for saying this. I kept trying to say something like this but it wasn't coming out right. This is exactly what is frustrating me! Its not that I idealize or long for living during prairie times. I long for the choice to help a child specialize early on with no regrets, for a culture that respects men who work with their hands as well as those who are paid for what they know in their heads. Do you know how often I hear hs families say,
"Well, these days a child needs to have a master's just to compete in the market."
And it makes me want to scream, "If that's true, then there is something very very wrong with the way we view education here." 
__________________
Blessings,
~Books
mothering ds'93 dd'97 dd'99 dd'02 ds'05 ds'07 and due 9/10
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Bookswithtea
Forum All-Star
Joined: July 07 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2621
|
| Posted: Aug 07 2008 at 10:00am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Crunchymom, those articles are *amazing*! I cannot believe he was even heard in the WSJ, considering how "elitist" he sounds to the politically correct ear. 
I've saved them on my computer. Thank you for sharing.
__________________
Blessings,
~Books
mothering ds'93 dd'97 dd'99 dd'02 ds'05 ds'07 and due 9/10
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
4Real Forums : Living Learning
Topic: From the century thread...how/how much
