Category: Homeschooling

On learning and remembering

Posted on by Suki

Neither of my kids learned their multiplication facts on schedule. The way the public school standards tell it, kids are just supposed to do it in third grade. You know, the way they’re supposed to walk on schedule, talk on schedule, and read on schedule. My kids have been equally as dismal at being “normal” in all those categories!

Schools assume that you learn things in order, and all their materials are based on that assumption. And even materials that are not created for public schools tend to follow the same assumptions.

The thing is, kids don’t learn things in a standard order. In fact, it’s often the kids who are eventually going to become masters in a subject who seem to lag behind. There are numerous tales of mathematicians who couldn’t add their way out of a paper bag. (“Let’s see, one paper bag plus one mathematician… Oh, geez, I really should have memorized that one before I got stuck in this bag!’) It’s heartening to know this, but when you’re in the thick of it, having a math-smart kid who can’t remember 7×8 — much less 5×6 — is hard to deal with.

A recent e-mail list discussion I was in on tackled this subject. Here is some of the wisdom I gained.

First of all, question why your child has to memorize math facts, and if it’s in his/her best interest to force it right now:

  • Does your child need to learn them because she’s in school and her teacher is pressuring her?
  • Does your child need to learn them because not knowing them is holding him back from doing math he enjoys?
  • Does your child need to learn them for reasons of self-esteem? (Kids who can’t seem to memorize random bits of information are often at a disadvantage in our schools.)

Secondly, be aware that there is absolutely no correlation with ability to memorize and overall intelligence. They are separate traits with nothing bit a tangential relationship.

  • A fairly large amount of successful people have trouble with rote memorization. That’s why they went into professions where rote memorization was not necessary for success.
  • Our schools operate on the assumption that certain types of learners should be rewarded, while all others should be punished into becoming the “right” kind of learner. But if your kid has trouble with rote memorization, there is no research that indicates that this will ever change, no matter what consequences she faces.
  • The “visual spatial” learning style is particularly noted for producing kids who have trouble with math facts. Visual spatial learners are very likely to have trouble in school, except in art class, shop, geometry, and other disciplines where their skills shine through. [Learn more about VS learners here.]

If there is a good reason that your child has to learn math facts, try a variety of methods in order to determine the one that “speaks” to your child’s way of thinking. Methods include:

  • Visual representation with blocks, pictures, or manipulatives. Make sure that your child really gets that when you say “2 times 4” you really mean take 2 of something and count it  4 times.
  • Different aural approaches like singing (lots of kids like Multiplication Rock or the silly rhyming method which I can’t seem to find a reference to but will at some point!)
  • The analytic approach: Show your child how you can fill in almost all of a multiplication table just by using the facts she already knows. Talk about how to quickly come up with math facts that he can’t remember off the top of his head.
  • The project-based approach: Take math facts as the starting point to do the sort of project your child likes. Incorporate math facts as part of the project. One of my daughter’s teachers, for example, had kids build “factories” out of recycled containers that spit out math facts on slips of paper.
  • The carrot-and-stick approach: You don’t necessarily have to pay, but find a way to reward each math fact earned. It could be as simple as the method we’re doing right now, where the math facts she doesn’t know are stuck on the walls of our breakfast room. Each day, if she can tell us the answer to one without hesitation, she gets to take it off the wall.
  • Association: This is the most tried and true method of memorization, but it’s hard for a lot of people to do with numbers. The basic principle is this: Find something to associate with each number, and practice the association so that it’s grouped with the number in your head. People who see numbers as colors or smells do this instinctively, but it is possible to create these associations on purpose.
  • Games: Any game that requires math will help. A good one I got recently is Muggins, which is quite fun.
  • If your kid loves computer games, find games like Timez Attack and let them play.

The main thing to remember about memorization is that the harder you force, the harder the brain fights back. Kids’ brains learn best through play — when it becomes work, it’s time to take a break. Sometimes that break can stretch out for a long time…much longer than the school standards might want to admit. But if the eventual goal is a happy, well-educated child, the standards just sometimes have to wait.

 

A passionate plea for more mud pies

Posted on by Suki

You’d think that hanging out with homeschoolers, as I do, would insulate me from people who feel the need to do academics with kindergarteners. However, amongst new homeschoolers you hear this common refrain: I really don’t know how to homeschool, so I just want to find a curriculum in a box I can do with my five-year-old. The people saying this mean well—they really think that a curriculum-in-a-box will be better for their children than just hanging out with mom and doing whatever lame stuff she comes up with. But those parents have fallen into the same trap as the administrators of our public education system. They think this is some kind of race, and they’ll be hurting their children if they don’t get them on the track and running as soon as possible.

I should have read it long ago, but I recently read what should be required reading for new homeschoolers, Tammy Takahashi’s Deschooling Gently. Takahashi’s book is considered a classic amongst homeschoolers, who see the process of “deschooling” a child who has attended school before homeschooling as key to homeschooling success. However, I found that the book had a lot more to say to me as an adult: How many of my ideas are residual bits of misinformation planted by my many years in school? All of us have this stuff stuck in there, even if we’ve consciously denied its validity.

Our feelings about “academic” education, in particular, are strong. Many of us inherently believe that “earlier is better” and that there’s something wrong with letting a child play if he can’t read yet. We haven’t turned out in mass protests as our public schools are pushing academics earlier into the curriculum, forcing out such kindergarten staples as finger painting, story telling, and free play on the playground.

The thing is, every single educator worth listening to has read the data and knows this simple fact: The most educated people in the world are not necessarily the people who had academics shoved at them at an early age. Forcing academics earlier into the American public schools is not going to slow the decline of our kids’ education. In fact, it might hurry it up.

Finland is an oft-cited example. There, they don’t even start teaching reading till around the age of 7, and academics, such as they are, are hands-on and cooperative until the higher grades. No tests, no grades, just fun. How can that be?

Well, I can give you plenty of examples closer to home: Millions of successful adults in America. If you went to public school in the 70’s, it is very unlikely you did any sort of academics in kindergarten. Sure, you probably sang the alphabet song and learned to write your name, but you spent as much time learning how to tie shoes and, yes, doing finger painting as anything academic. Those Americans who were educated in the 60’s and 70’s are no sorry bunch. You’ll find them at every successful technology company, in every important medical lab, in government buildings making decisions about our national safety, and making fabulous art, music, and literature.

Keep in mind, these people did not do academics in kindergarten. They didn’t get recess canceled because they couldn’t read. Their schools didn’t get denied funds or have every teacher replaced by a stranger because of their parents’ socio-economic status. And yet, here they are, leading the fastest technological and scientific change ever before seen by humankind.

There are better ways to educate than to force five-year-olds to study. I say, Let them make mud pies! Let them develop their minds at the same time as their hands, their bodies, their hearts, and their souls. There will be plenty of time for them to sit in front of a computer. But as we adults know, there’s limited time later in life to contemplate the wonderful feeling of mud between your fingers.

I am not a homeschool anarchist

Posted on by Suki

I read with interest this piece in the New York Times: My Parents Were Homeschooling Anarchists. It’s an interesting piece that is so resonant of the era in which it took place. I enjoyed reading it and learning what the kids are doing now as adults.

However, articles like this reenforce the idea that all homeschoolers are eccentric weirdos who don’t care if their kids learn to do math.

So, I’m wondering, can we just call off this idiotic conversation, already? You know the one: Homeschoolers are right-wing separatist Christian child-abusers whose kids don’t know how to talk to other people and are learning only the parts of the Bible that their parents agree with. Alternately, homeschoolers are left-wing anarchist child-worshipers who don’t discipline their kids and let them run wild with flowers in their hair.

Now, don’t get me wrong: I’m not telling you that there are no homeschoolers who fit these descriptions. And I’m not telling you that homeschoolers are normal. In fact, fierce pride in bucking societal expectations is pretty much a necessary ingredient in homeschooling parents.

However, I am here to say that homeschoolers, just like everyone else, are not stereotypes. Stereotypes are amplified from the most shocking, unusual, and outrageous examples within a community. When white actors put on blackface, they didn’t make themselves up to look like Denzel Washington. When anti-Semites talk about money-hungry Jews, they don’t hold up Elie Wiesel as their example.

I urge you to read the New York Times article, and then flip back here for a few rebuttals:

OK, I admit that this much is true: Some homeschoolers prefer the company of goats to humans. But really, can you blame them?

1) We are not anarchists.

OK, we’re also not card-carrying members of the middle-of-the-road club. My husband and I are both people who are willing to go against societal norms when it’s important to us. We’re both big believers in an open society in which people should be allowed to be themselves, as long as it’s not harming other people. So yes, we support gay marriage though we are heterosexual. Yes, we support religious freedom, though our household is largely secular. And yes, we support every person’s right to wear whatever outrageous clothing that makes their heart flutter with joy!

But we also believe in a society with laws, behavioral norms that allow us to live closely and comfortably, and reasonable ways to dissent.

This description would fit hundreds of homeschoolers I have personally met.

2) We parent our children.

Our children are not running wild. Although one of them has behavioral difficulties that might make it seem like we don’t teach discipline, we do in fact believe in discipline. Hopefully, if we’re doing the job we think we’re doing, we’re teaching our kids self-discipline. Because discipline imposed for no obvious reason teaches kids nothing. Teaching them to understand themselves and other people, to think about how their actions affect the world, and to work to change themselves when they see room for improvement is an integral part of our parenting.

On the other hand, we are not stifling our children. We do allow them lots of free play time. We do allow them to make their own choices even when we know that it’s probably not the right choice. We allow them to make decisions about their own bodies, which is how we ended up with a boy with long hair for four years and now a girl with short hair who wears boys’ clothing.

This description would fit hundreds of homeschoolers I have personally met.

3) We believe in education.

We are homeschooling because we believe in education, and when we looked at our child’s needs, we decided that homeschooling was the best choice for now. We are not anti-school, and we fully hope and expect that our kids will seek advanced degrees at university. We want our kids to be exposed to all the knowledge that they would in school and more. We want them to master all the math they’ll need to pursue a technical degree at college, all the understanding of geography, history, and society that will help them understand world events that happen in their lifetimes, and all of the science that will allow them to pursue college level science and at the very least, understand what a scientific study really means and question people’s assumptions about scientific truth.

On the other hand, we don’t believe that kids need to be bored in order to learn. We don’t think that doing well on standardized tests is a full measure of a student’s achievement. We don’t think that our kids should be force-fed anything, should ever have to deal with a teacher who doesn’t respect them and their intelligence, or spend their time doing nothing while waiting for other people to catch up.

This description would fit hundreds of homeschoolers I have personally met.

4) We want our kids to be socially adept.

On any given day, our children deal with a wider range of people than any school child ever could. They have five very different and very wonderful teachers in their homeschool program, each of whom inspires and challenges them in a different way. They work with other homeschooling kids and parents on projects almost every week. They count as their friends people from a few months old to eighty years old. My son volunteers in the community. My daughter works with therapists and other teachers to learn correct social interactions, which are difficult for her. Our children see how the world works while other kids are in school.

On the other hand, we don’t think our kids should stay in situations where they are being abused. We have taught them to speak up when there’s a problem and to respect themselves. When they go off on their own, my hope is that they will never suffer through a badly taught college course, because they will vote with their feet as soon as their professor proves herself inadequate. They will not be sexually abused because they will seek out loving relationships. They will not put up with abusive social groups because they know that there are great people out there who will someday be their friends. They will know how to be alone with themselves and enjoy the company.

This description would fit hundreds of homeschoolers I have personally met.

5) We are not homeschooling in order to insult you.

Lastly, homeschoolers do not choose this path in order to insult parents who have chosen school, in order to insult teachers, or in order to insult schools. We chose it each for our own reasons, but our choice is ours. Just as my choosing to wear black leather boots doesn’t offend your sneakers, our choosing one method of schooling does not make any commentary, negative or positive, about yours.

So let’s get this straight: Homeschoolers, like all people, are not stereotypes. We are people who care deeply about our children and believe that we are giving them a good education. We do tend to veer a bit off the beaten path, be divergent thinkers, and choose a more interesting over an easy route. But in general, I think we’re a pretty tolerable bunch. So when you read articles like this, uninformed opinions like these, see nutty homeschoolers on reality TV, or read books in which we’re stereotyped over and over, remember that stereotypes, by their very nature, can never tell the full story.

Local books for Santa Cruz kids

Posted on by Suki

Ever since my husband and I read The Wonderful Flight to the Mushroom Planet*, which is set in Pacific Grove, to our son, I’ve had a passion for snooping out books with local flavor. It’s such a passion that I was sure I’d written about it before. But having searched my files, I have to admit that I have not, in fact, written about all these wonderful books! So here it is, my rundown of kids’ books I have read (and a few I haven’t) that are set in or near the Monterey Bay area.

1. Kildee House by Rutherford G. Montgomery

This has to be the first book on my list, because it holds such an important place in my reader’s heart. I was introduced to this book by my son’s first-grade teacher. After she read it aloud in class, he came home and asked if we could read it again! It’s the story of an old man, retired from a career as a headstone-maker, who builds a little cabin against a massive redwood tree. When we did this with my daughter’s book club, we met at Henry Cowell inside of the hotel tree! It was magical, to sit inside a tree with dim lanterns, sipping hot chocolate and talking about literature.

2. The Wonderful Flight to the Mushroom Planet (and sequels) by Eleanor CameronWonderful Flight to the Mushroom Planet

What can I say about this very weird, truly excellent book? It’s one of the ones I remember from my childhood, which is why, when we started to read chapter books to our son, I just had to read it again. And lo and behold, it takes place in Pacific Grove. I’m guessing there aren’t many works of fiction that take place there, but this one makes up for the lack of others. My husband has even searched to find out if the address in the book exists (it doesn’t). Great book to read to younger kids.

3. I Am Lavina Cumming by Susan Lowell

This rather obscure little book was recommended to me by Gay, the wonderful children’s book buyer at Bookshop Santa Cruz. It’s historical fiction about a real girl who lived in Santa Cruz during the earthquake of 1906. The writer posits (I’m not sure that this was the case) that Lavina counted amongst her friends the youthful Susan Pitts (later to be known as the famous actress Zazu Pitts). It’s a nice little book, and I suggest that upon reading it, find the detail that tells you without a doubt that the author has never lived in Santa Cruz (or anywhere on the California coast, for that matter).

Operation Redwood4. Operation Redwood by S. Terrell French

I haven’t read this one yet, though it’s been on my shelves for a while. My son read it and liked it — probably good for pre-teen kids.

5. Star Lost by Patsey Gray

One of my correspondents recommended this long out-of-print book, which our local library doesn’t even have a copy of. If you have a copy, donate it to the library and ask them to get it on the shelves so we can read it!

6. Tricks by Ellen Hopkins

This is a young adult book (definitely not for the kids, judging from the description) that is partly set in Santa Cruz. I haven’t read it yet!

7. The Changeling by Zylpha Keatly Snyder

Again, I haven’t read this, but a correspondent tells me that it’s set in an unnamed coastal California town. She also recommends The Egypt Game, which is set in Berkeley.

8. Eight Mules from Monterey by Patricia Beatty

From Nancy Winans: “I actually met her when I was a child when I was part of a junior library reading club and read several of her books, all historical fiction centered around her experiences living on the Pacific West Coast as a child.  Two were centered near where I lived in So Cal, one about the orange growing business and the other about boron miners.  Others focused on quilters in Oregon and a Quileute family in Washington state. I think they might still hold up to today’s readers, with parents explaining when they were written and about how people weren’t as aware of certain issues then.” [Visit Nancy’s Choices4Learning website]

9. The Terrible Churnadryne by Eleanor Cameron

Another from Nancy: “Another book I read as a child that was inspired by the Monterey Peninsula but which uses other place names.  I just re-read it last year for fun – only then realizing there were so many parallels to our area and finding out that the author lived here.”

10. Frosty: A Raccoon to Remember by Harriet E. Weaver

From another correspondent: “Apropos of Kildee House there’s also the 1973 “Frosty: A Raccoon to Remember” by park ranger Harriet E. Weaver, about half of which takes place in Big Basin and half in Southern California. Frosty even causes some commotion in the Mission St. Safeway parking lot.”

 

Back to homeschool

Posted on by Suki

Both homeschoolers and schoolers alike are often interested to find out how homeschoolers work within our cultural focus on a “school year” and “summer break.” For as many ways as homeschoolers do everything else, we all have different approaches, but here is ours.

Until last year, I always had one kid in school. So summer was by its very nature different because our school kid would be home. Another difference was that while taking part in two school programs, we were very, very busy with school-related events during the school year, so summer seems more relaxed in any case. This year both my kids were in the same homeschool program, but somehow we didn’t have a more relaxed spring! What with spring school events, doing year-end wrap-ups with our teacher-consultant in our public school program, and other things like recitals that always seem to take place all at once, we were ready for a real break.

Another really important reason that we change our routine during the summer is the wonderful opportunity of summer camps. I’ve written before how if school were more like summer camp, we’d be doing school year-round as well! So when the camps are announced, we start scanning the possibilities and thinking about how to sandwich them in between travel, beach, swim lessons, and relaxation.

So as a result, in our family we do “take the summer off” from homeschooling in a formal way. This does not mean, however, that we take the summer off from learning:

  • Travel is a great way for kids to learn. You don’t have to do worksheets and tests to learn history, social studies, geography, and even math and literary analysis during your travels. This year we went to my kids’ father’s homeland — New York/New Jersey — for two weeks. We went to some great museums where they were presented with learning opportunities in a formal environment, and we did things like catching fireflies on warm Jersey evenings that promoted learning of a more experiential sort.
  • We didn’t go out for camps in a big way this summer, but my daughter did repeat her yearly visit to soccer camp. Of course she learned soccer skills, but she also learned important social and emotional lessons in an environment that is much more accepting of her big personality than a closed-up classroom.
  • We took time to work on long-delayed projects. My son and I started learning more about Arduino, a really cool piece of hardware that your kids can graduate to once they’ve learned the basics of computer programming and electronics. While we were doing that, my daughter got out our Snap Circuits, one of the best “toys” you can possibly invest in, and retooled her knowledge of how circuits work.
  • We spent a lot of time gardening and hanging out at my parents’ farm or down in the redwoods. Today’s kids are getting less and less time just to hang out in nature, despite the overwhelming research showing that they’ll do better in life if you just leave them alone sometimes.

The most successful thing we did to make sure that we didn’t just veg out during the summer was what has become an annual tradition: the Our Fun Summer poster. The kids and I sit down at the beginning of the summer with a pad of enormous paper and start to write down everything we hope to accomplish over the summer. We only took the poster down last week, and I’m satisfied to say that we did pretty much everything we wanted to do.

So now it’s back to homeschool. What that means for us is, first of all, reconnecting with the folks at our public homeschool program. This year reconnection took place at Blue Ball Park with a fair-like atmosphere — the older kids leading activities and crafts for the younger ones. The parents brought homeschooling supplies they were done with and exchanged them with other people’s cast-offs. (I scored a copy of Brian Jacques’ Redwall and a cursive practice book.) The teachers met with each group of kids and did a “get to know you” since there are always new kids coming in. Everyone perused sign-up sheets for school-led activities that they wanted to take part in. I signed up to help lead the film festival and the technology group.

So yes, Back to Homeschool does have meaning for us. But it’s not back to the grind, as it was in the old days. It’s more like a renewal of our commitment to living and learning together.

Now available