Homeschooling the easy way: Have the kids teach themselves

[Koala]

Are you a homeschooling mom? Do you have too much to do and too little time to do it? Well Cindy over at Get Along Home has the answer for you: Let the kids teach themselves!

Just get them reading. This might sound too simple to a more hands-on, buttoned-up kind of mom, but once my kids know how to read, I put most of the work off onto them. Now the teaching is up to them, and facilitating their self-teaching is my job. I assign quite a bit of independent work to my readers, but until a child is reading, phonics and math is enough. Let me repeat that: It is enough. You’ve got this already! Of course we do sciencey stuff together, and field trips, and handicrafts, and life skills, but the only regular mom-sits-down-with-one-kid-at-a-time things are math and phonics.

Nice. For this she saved them from the evils of public/private school.

getalonghome.com/2013/09/choosing-perfect-names-dust-bunnies/

[GeoBQn]

Damn, for once it isn't an Abigail post.

[Koala]

Damn, for once it isn't an Abigail post.

Yes, let's not disturb Abigail. She's probably in her room. Resting. And being pregnant. And planning a vacation while eating expensive chocolates and rejoicing her her poverty. :P

[browngrl]

It seems to me that the best reason to homeschool is to give your children more/better education than they could have received from a more traditional school environment. However, homeschooling as done by fundies seem to be all about less/minimally adequate education. Every fundie mom seems to cut education for their children to the bare bones with as little subject matter and hands on teaching as is possible.

[Koala]

It seems to me that the best reason to homeschool is to give your children more/better education than they could have received from a more traditional school environment. However, homeschooling as done by fundies seem to be all about less/minimally adequate education. Every fundie mom seems to cut education for their children to the bare bones with as little subject matter and hands on teaching as is possible.

For many of them, I suspect it's because they never wanted to educate them in the first place. They only want to control them.

[formergothardite]

Are you a homeschooling mom? Do you have too much to do and too little time to do it? Well Cindy over at Get Along Home has the answer for you: Let the kids teach themselves!

Nice. For this she saved them from the evils of public/private school.

getalonghome.com/2013/09/choosing-perfect-names-dust-bunnies/

So basically my public schooled kids get more one on one teacher interaction each school day than her homeschooled kids? If your solution to educating your children is to not actually do it, then it is time to put them back in school because you aren't cut out for homeschooling.

[rward]

I feel so bad for these kids. I love to read and learned to read very early, but I don't learn other things well from reading. YouTube has been a tremendous boon to me because watching videos and listening to verbal explanations helps me out immensely. Lots of people are like me. I'm not even sure people who learn best from reading are the majority of learners. I seem to recall there are 4 or 6 learning styles, and reader is just one of them.

[Jana814]

This sounds like something the Duggars would do. And probably a few others we talk about on here.

[FeministShrew]

Homeschool seems to be like a whole of other things - you get out what you put in. My exh's wife homeschools her younger child because of learning issues that the school district refused to help with. She has regularly scheduled classes & researches curriculum to find what works for them. Her daughter's reading/math skills have really improved, & she's more confident because of that.

I have a fundie friend who's hubby decided to pull the kids out of evil public school without even discussing it with her or the kids. She has 5 kids, & when someone remarked how tiring it must be to homeschool them, she said, "Not at all. I just pop the homeschool dvds in & they watch tv all day." They had worksheets to fill out, & grading those was the extent of her "teaching." (No, I don't know what curriculum uses dvds. I was too appalled to ask.)

[Ariel]

That method will work for like 1 kid out of 100. That magical kid who has already developed intrinsic motivation for learning before college.

Most adults don't even have intrinsic motivation for education, let alone a broad enough interest to cover all the subjects necessary to get through high school.

If my mom had taught me to read and just let me teach myself the rest I'd be highly versed in Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, and Ancient Egypt. I would have given up math after long-division and I would have given up science once I realized it was more than the kid's science experiment kit.

[EmiGirl]

My husband said that's how his mom did it. She gave them the work (read: wisdom books) and let them do it on their own.

[Mudball]

Are you a homeschooling mom? Do you have too much to do and too little time to do it? Well Cindy over at Get Along Home has the answer for you: Let the kids teach themselves!

Nice. For this she saved them from the evils of public/private school.

getalonghome.com/2013/09/choosing-perfect-names-dust-bunnies/

Well, she does science stuff with them. She takes them on field trips. She does handicrafts with them. She teaches them life skills. She sits down and does math and phonics with them. That kind of sounds like more than a little to me. :think:

I don't know what to make of it, really. Is she exaggerating that it's just so easy once they learn to read and trying to minimize what she does with them (and failing)? Or...

There are a lot of curriculum (online and on paper) that are work texts. They are meant to be pretty much read and worked through and learned on your own. Even K12 seemed to fall into that category when we used it for 3rd grade. I don't really see a problem with it as long as an adult is nearby to help should there be an issue the child needs help with.

I will be the first to admit homeschooling got tons easier when my daughter mastered reading and writing, but I will also be the first to admit it didn't become anywhere near as easy as that blogger claims it is. :liar:

[TrueRebel1]

::Sigh:: I was homeschooled myself, and this is one of the aspects of homeschooling that irritates me to no end.

On one hand, I think many teachers (public, private, homeschooling) forget the principle of teaching the child to teach themselves and to love learning. School can become so dull that the child never seeks learning new things, and when the teacher tries to teach them, it goes in one ear and out the other. So I do believe in the concept of teaching the child to be their own teacher, in a certain regard.

BUT.

That does not take the place of a teacher! Even if you know how to read, and enjoy learning, there are few children who are self-motivated learners. I am not a such a person, but my older sibling was. So my homeschooling parents assumed that I could teach myself by the time I was 7 years old, too. As a result, because I did not know how to motivate myself and monitor my own learning, I dropped out of school at 14. And my parents didn't even notice. However, I loved learning...WHEN there was someone teaching me!

It's all about the individual child. Their learning types. Their abilities. Their interests. There is no one-size-fits-all education. Not in public school, not in homeschool. Yet how many fundie quiverfull homeschool families flaunt their cookie-cutter, well-controlled children who are being processed thru their "schooling" as being *so much better* than their public-schooled peers. There may be some, such as my older sibling, who flourish in that setting. But for those who don't, it's a sad tale.

[Hisey]

Well, she does science stuff with them. She takes them on field trips. She does handicrafts with them. She teaches them life skills. She sits down and does math and phonics with them. That kind of sounds like more than a little to me. :think:

I don't know what to make of it, really. Is she exaggerating that it's just so easy once they learn to read and trying to minimize what she does with them (and failing)? Or...

There are a lot of curriculum (online and on paper) that are work texts. They are meant to be pretty much read and worked through and learned on your own. Even K12 seemed to fall into that category when we used it for 3rd grade. I don't really see a problem with it as long as an adult is nearby to help should there be an issue the child needs help with.

I will be the first to admit homeschooling got tons easier when my daughter mastered reading and writing, but I will also be the first to admit it didn't become anywhere near as easy as that blogger claims it is. :liar:

No, she does "sciency stuff". Probably drops a Methol tablet into soda, or adds food coloring to milk. Wow, kids look! It's a . . . (checks notes ) it's a chemical reaction!

Very different from the intensive science course my daughter is taking, and loving every minute of. Learning science is so much better than occasionally doing "sciency stuff."

The thing is, if dinner isn't made your headship will "rebuke" you. If the baby isn't fed and changed, he will cry. If the house isn't cleaned, you'll feel irritated. But nothing bad will happen (and no one will complain) if Junior doesn't learn much science or history or math this month. It can wait till next month, or next or next. . .

I can't stand the way these fundies take the easy way out and tell their kids to read about whatever they want to learn (or watch DVDs). That takes the load off mom AND it keeps the kid sitting quietly for a few hours (at least that's the hope). These women have way too much to do to spend a couple hours sitting and explaining geometry.

IMO, the only fundie who does a decent job homeschooling is Zsuzsu. She puts time and effort into it, even if her choices are a bit odd (6 years of penmanship?)

[bananacat]

Oh yes, because children are known for having the foresight, motivation, and planning ability to direct their own educations. Surely there's no way this could go wrong. :roll:

I'm all for allowing children to choose their interests to some extent, but they still need the guidance of adults, especially to encourage them to pursue subjects that don't come easily to them. I mean, I have the internet at my fingertips and with enough time on my hands I would learn everything on Wikipedia about historical linguistics and neurological disorders, but I would never choose to learn all about the civil war or European history, because those subjects don't interest me.

[YPestis]

Oh yes, because children are known for having the foresight, motivation, and planning ability to direct their own educations. Surely there's no way this could go wrong. :roll:

I'm all for allowing children to choose their interests to some extent, but they still need the guidance of adults, especially to encourage them to pursue subjects that don't come easily to them. I mean, I have the internet at my fingertips and with enough time on my hands I would learn everything on Wikipedia about historical linguistics and neurological disorders, but I would never choose to learn all about the civil war or European history, because those subjects don't interest me.

Exactly. This is the problem with fundies (and nonfundies too!). Some parents are so enthralled with their children, or so utterly overwhelmed with everything that they convince themselves their children are "motivated, self-learners" and therefore need no guidance.

Well, let me ask you this. How many kids are "motivated" enough to "discover" the joys of fractions? Or conjugating verbs? Even in high school, how many will realize the true importance of learning linear algebra and the Kreb cycle (ugh)?

The fact is while most kids have intellectual curiosity, they also have short attention spans, and do not have the maturity to understand why certain "boring" items must be taught in order for get to the "fun" stuff. How many kids will want to take chemistry or read Shakespeare on their own? I bet you plenty of smart kids who want to be doctors and writers would hate those subjects, yet without adult guidance (and not of the DVD variety) many would forgo those subjects because because they prefer the "fun" subjects of pig dissection and "professional writing".

It's why fundie excuse that kids will "self-teach" is bogus. Their version of pushing a child to be self-motivated mainly consists of finding a curriculum that will minimize mom's teaching time with kids. That is NOT "self-learning". Take it this way. Med school's last two years is clinical science, with different rotations each month that consists of core rotations and those picked by students. Each night, after a day at the hospital, each student is encouraged to read up on the diseases they see, their pathology and diagnosis. This helps to also prepare them for end of rotation exam. That is "self-learning". There is general guidance and a curriculum, with exams at the end, but each student is expected to study up on on their own and encouraged to focus on the diseases they see in clinic. The curriculum requires guidance and teaching by the attendings and residents, even as it expects students to study up on their own. Fundies want to forego the teaching part and jump straight to the "self-studying" part. Nice.

[chaotic life]

There is some merit in allowing children to teach themselves. Now, her early teaching is precisely in line with public school and my personal biggest pet peeve about public school. Public schools, by their very nature of mass education, must focus on teaching children to learn to read first, so that the children can read to learn later. Consequently, the first 3 years of schooling are focused nearly exclusively on reading, writing, phonics and math. What they call content subjects are far, far too inadequate in my opinion those years. 'Anything that is not "core" related to the 3 R's is done at a much smaller scale and poorly covered to my personal standards.

So, she's basically giving her earl learners exactly what the public schools provide and nothing more. Frankly, I homeschooled for years because I wanted a BETTER education for my children. I'm unhappy that I have a child in elementary school now and watching the educational process that focuses heavily on reading and math skills and ignores so much of the other subjects that I typically teach that age. So, I have to supplement at home now, since I'm not in a place to homeschool my last two littles the way I truly want to.

Her ideas on independent readers has SOME merit. It depends upon how it plays in action. Older children absolutely should be doing a lot of self-teaching. The problem is if you don't guide and supervise that process. You should not be setting children lose the minute they are independent readers. You should be transitioning them. Independent readers cannot read other subjects at the same pace they can learn them, therefore they NEED support until middle school years to continue to learn. Even if you are allowing them to be self-guided, you should be checking in with them to monitor what they are learning. The WORST thing you can do is allow them to learn something incorrectly and fail to catch and correct those mistakes, because those are the foundations they build everything else they learn upon. Also, as the parent educator, you should be guiding that self-learning process.

This is where I firmly break with unschooling philosophies. I truly believe that unschooling can work for a motivated learner to a certain extent. However, even the most motiviated self learning is going to avoid subjects they find either boring or difficult. If you do not continue to guide and require those boring/difficult subjects be covered and covered adequately, then you will allow a child to put massive gaps in their education.

So, I can see merit in some of what she's saying, though I firmly disagree with how she approaches early learning, I cannot argue that it works well for brick and mortar schools. However, there are limitations and guidance that a home educator should STILL be guiding, monitoring and influencing education. Frankly, if you are just going to toss them out on their own for learning, then you are committing educational neglect and will fail to properly educate them.

[lizziesmom]

::Sigh:: I was homeschooled myself, and this is one of the aspects of homeschooling that irritates me to no end.

On one hand, I think many teachers (public, private, homeschooling) forget the principle of teaching the child to teach themselves and to love learning. School can become so dull that the child never seeks learning new things, and when the teacher tries to teach them, it goes in one ear and out the other. So I do believe in the concept of teaching the child to be their own teacher, in a certain regard.

BUT.

That does not take the place of a teacher! Even if you know how to read, and enjoy learning, there are few children who are self-motivated learners. I am not a such a person, but my older sibling was. So my homeschooling parents assumed that I could teach myself by the time I was 7 years old, too. As a result, because I did not know how to motivate myself and monitor my own learning, I dropped out of school at 14. And my parents didn't even notice. However, I loved learning...WHEN there was someone teaching me!

Have you been handicapped or hampered as a result of essentially dropping out at 14? That is the thing that scares me the most of this type of homeschooling -- by the time someone realizes they've missed out on important things it's probably too late to fix it. Also, when a lot of the reason being given for homeschooling is that the public schools are failing to teach the kids, how is essentially plugging your kid into a computer with a dvd any better? How do you get feedback? Who monitors and challenges the kids? etc. etc.

[TrueRebel1]

Have you been handicapped or hampered as a result of essentially dropping out at 14? That is the thing that scares me the most of this type of homeschooling -- by the time someone realizes they've missed out on important things it's probably too late to fix it. Also, when a lot of the reason being given for homeschooling is that the public schools are failing to teach the kids, how is essentially plugging your kid into a computer with a dvd any better? How do you get feedback? Who monitors and challenges the kids? etc. etc.

Was I handicapped as a result of dropping out of homeschool at 14? Yes and no.

Now that I'm 30, I realize that the information I've retained and use is equivalent to that of my peers who graduated. So I don't feel that I'm handicapped information-wise because I didn't finish high school.

What *has* handicapped me is 1) Lack of interest in continuing education. At 14, school seemed pointless and stupid, so I had no desire to pursue college or any type of further education. And I now know that I would have bettered myself by pursing more education (beyond high-school). 2) Lack of common ground with my peers. Granted, many sheltered home-schoolers have this problem, so even if I'd graduated it might not have made a difference. But it can be hard when everyone else is talking about XYZ experience in high-school and I have no common ground to share! 3) Lack of self-confidence. This connects with handicap #1. Whenever you drop out of something, it sets you up for poor self esteem issues! You constantly battle the feeling that you aren't smart enough, or good enough, or motivated enough, to do the things that normal people do. Thus you're less interested in pursuing alternative things that could prove to yourself that you are just as smart as everyone else, but merely taking a different route to your goals.

So, education wise -- I feel un-handicapped. :-) In other aspects -- I have felt handicapped.

[Hisey]

I also think these folks have very limited dreams for their kids. The girls will of course be homemakers. The boys will hold blue collar jobs or be "entrepeneurs". So they are not preparing their kids for jobs like physicist, college professor, art historian, neuropsychologist.

I mean, I'm not actively preparing my kids for such jobs either. But I do try to keep all options open for them, by exposing them to lots of different things and making sure they are prepared for any career they choose.

Meredith Alexander was homeschooled. The final two years of "high school" consisted of her reading books chosen by her mother. That's all she did, read books in between childcare and chores. I'm sure that made homeschooling Meredith quite easy for her mom.

She is not prepared for the life of the wife of a Rhode Scholar and fancy-pants lawyer. I'm sure she often feels shy and self-conscious among Stephen's well-educated friends, even if she is just as bright. So that is an example, to me, of the system failing.

[Evilbad]

If my kid had his way, he would do tons of math and science and PE and do absolutely no reading or writing or anything.

It's kind of my job as his parent to push him to work on all areas and make sure he receives a well-rounded education. It's not his, he's a kid and doesn't understand yet how his choices could affect him 6 or 7 years from now, you know? I want him to have the best possible start so that he lives successfully as an adult, not under my roof at 23 waiting for his perfect courtship and doing manual labor jobs because he has no education or experience to do anything else.

[Freed]

This is the kind of thing my mom did in her homeschooling. She picked out sections she wanted me to do, handed me the books, and told me that all of it had to be done by a certain time. She never taught me literature or much history, because she didn't think it was important, never taught me how to write an essay, I ended up in tears every day because I struggle with math beyond simple algebra, and my "science" consisted of "God's beautiful earth is less than 8000 years old" type bullshit.

How I've made it through college with decent grades, I will never know. I'm still convinced my Statistics professor only passed me so he didn't have to deal with another semester of me sobbing in his office.