![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Hunh, homesschooling
Nov. 17th, 2011 08:10 pmSo the NYT ran an article by a homeschooled lady. -- click here.
Homeschooling always interests me. This is because I was homeschooled from k-11. Then I went to college. I could have gone a few years earlier, but we didn't know that at the time. Early college courses are very easy compared to some of the courses I went through under the tutulege of my mother, a "lady of the old school".
The author of the NYT article experienced a classic failure mode in homeschooling, the idea that "structure is bad". The classic result is also mentioned- academic weakness. Unstructured homeschooling for younger children is typically realized in academic weakness and inability to perform the various tasks.
Many areas today have homeschool groups, where the homeschoolers band together and do field trips, socials, and other activities. I saw this firsthand in my cohort in the particular homeschool group I grew up around. By this experience, I was exposed to several different homeschool philosophies and curricula.
Loosely, things delineated into a few typical groups.
Group 1: Unstructured schooling. Bad results. You usually got the really fuzzy-minded countercultural types here. A lot of woo woo, and they didn't do too well; they broke down after a while. (Montessori schools remind me of this)
Group 2: Video Schooling. At the time and place , the Abeka curriculum was used for this. A teacher was filmed teaching class, and kids watched it. Mom would grade. This was by far the most popular mode, as it involved the least work for Mom, had correct ideology, and anyway, it was popular. As you might guess, watching a TV for teaching does not prove to be best. These children did acceptably, but did not prove to be academically of high quality.
Group 3: Mom teaches. Mom teaching was very rare. My mother did, but she had actually worked as a teacher (trivia: she had taught at an all-girls school in Jamacia in the 1970s). She had a great rigor to her methods, which did not slack appreciably until I was a mid-teen and she had to work. We were in school from 8 until 2 or 3 every day, and all our seat work was done in that particular hour. Lunch was 45 minutes, starting at 12. Recess was at 10 and was 15 minutes.
I am an introvert, who (almost certainly not coincidentally) is a child of introverts. This reality did not help me (or my sister, also an introvert) socially. My sister and I are bookish and prefer the company of educated people having long discourse about complex subjects. It is certain that homeschooling enhanced whatever natural introversion tendencies here.
I'm not sorry we were homeschooled. There was a vast amount of problems in our local public schools. We would have been less educated, worked harder, and been more conformist. I probably would have wound up being a punk rocker/anarchist. My sister... who knows.
My mother was and is a disciplinarian. We were expected to do well academically, then go play. Because we were expected to have our school work done by 2 or 3, we had a lot of time to explore our own interests, which were supported by our parents. I played musical instruments, built legos, taught myself how to program, ran around outside, etc. My sister played the piano, learned how to carve wood, built models, went hunting on her own, knitted, and investigated chemistry sets.
My lady and I plan to not send out children to public schools. Likely, we will select charter schools if available. Homeschooling is definely an option. If that comes to pass, we will follow my mother's route of routine and scheduling, expecting high academic performance and to follow one's interests after school.
We have no flipping clue how to raise a jock. :D
Homeschooling always interests me. This is because I was homeschooled from k-11. Then I went to college. I could have gone a few years earlier, but we didn't know that at the time. Early college courses are very easy compared to some of the courses I went through under the tutulege of my mother, a "lady of the old school".
The author of the NYT article experienced a classic failure mode in homeschooling, the idea that "structure is bad". The classic result is also mentioned- academic weakness. Unstructured homeschooling for younger children is typically realized in academic weakness and inability to perform the various tasks.
Many areas today have homeschool groups, where the homeschoolers band together and do field trips, socials, and other activities. I saw this firsthand in my cohort in the particular homeschool group I grew up around. By this experience, I was exposed to several different homeschool philosophies and curricula.
Loosely, things delineated into a few typical groups.
Group 1: Unstructured schooling. Bad results. You usually got the really fuzzy-minded countercultural types here. A lot of woo woo, and they didn't do too well; they broke down after a while. (Montessori schools remind me of this)
Group 2: Video Schooling. At the time and place , the Abeka curriculum was used for this. A teacher was filmed teaching class, and kids watched it. Mom would grade. This was by far the most popular mode, as it involved the least work for Mom, had correct ideology, and anyway, it was popular. As you might guess, watching a TV for teaching does not prove to be best. These children did acceptably, but did not prove to be academically of high quality.
Group 3: Mom teaches. Mom teaching was very rare. My mother did, but she had actually worked as a teacher (trivia: she had taught at an all-girls school in Jamacia in the 1970s). She had a great rigor to her methods, which did not slack appreciably until I was a mid-teen and she had to work. We were in school from 8 until 2 or 3 every day, and all our seat work was done in that particular hour. Lunch was 45 minutes, starting at 12. Recess was at 10 and was 15 minutes.
I am an introvert, who (almost certainly not coincidentally) is a child of introverts. This reality did not help me (or my sister, also an introvert) socially. My sister and I are bookish and prefer the company of educated people having long discourse about complex subjects. It is certain that homeschooling enhanced whatever natural introversion tendencies here.
I'm not sorry we were homeschooled. There was a vast amount of problems in our local public schools. We would have been less educated, worked harder, and been more conformist. I probably would have wound up being a punk rocker/anarchist. My sister... who knows.
My mother was and is a disciplinarian. We were expected to do well academically, then go play. Because we were expected to have our school work done by 2 or 3, we had a lot of time to explore our own interests, which were supported by our parents. I played musical instruments, built legos, taught myself how to program, ran around outside, etc. My sister played the piano, learned how to carve wood, built models, went hunting on her own, knitted, and investigated chemistry sets.
My lady and I plan to not send out children to public schools. Likely, we will select charter schools if available. Homeschooling is definely an option. If that comes to pass, we will follow my mother's route of routine and scheduling, expecting high academic performance and to follow one's interests after school.
We have no flipping clue how to raise a jock. :D
