There's Nothing New Here

[sonya_post]

I was just having a conversation with Hellene Hiner, creator of Soft Mozart. We covered the topics of Jump math, music education, bell curves and Latin. I found what she had to say very interesting as we talked about the method of educating children. Her contention is that every program that works is essentially the same. Every program that doesn't work - they are all different. She mentioned John Amos Comenius, who is her educational hero, and he just so happens to be my Latin language hero. His books are the first books we use to teach Latin.

Jump math works because it follows a certain model. Soft Mozart follows the same model, so does Doman, Brillkids, and a bunch of other programs we all love so well. It isn't revolutionary. But, I thought I'd post this bit from Wikipedia and tell you that while the rest of the world is trying hard to figure out what to do to fix the educational problem, over here, we are just following in the old paths of people who've come before us.

The third aspect of his educational influence was that on the subject matter and method of education, exerted through a series of textbooks of an entirely new nature. The first-published of these was the Janua Linguarum Reserata (The Gate of Tongues Unlocked), issued in 1631. This was followed later by a more elementary text, the Vestibulum, and a more advanced one, the Atrium, and other texts. In 1657 the Orbis Sensualium Pictus was published, probably the most renowned and most widely circulated of school textbooks. It was also the first successful application of illustrations to the work of teaching, though not, as often stated, the first illustrated book for children.[11]

These texts were all based on the same fundamental ideas: (1) learning foreign languages through the vernacular; (2) obtaining ideas through objects rather than words; (3) starting with objects most familiar to the child to introduce him to both the new language and the more remote world of objects: (4) giving the child a comprehensive knowledge of his environment, physical and social, as well as instruction in religious, moral, and classical subjects; (5) making this acquisition of a compendium of knowledge a pleasure rather than a task; and (6) making instruction universal. While the formulation of many of these ideas is open to criticism from more recent points of view, and while the naturalistic conception of education is one based on crude analogies, the importance of the Comenian influence in education has been recognized since the middle of the nineteenth century. The educational writings of Comenius comprise more than forty titles. In 1892 the three-hundredth anniversary of Comenius was very generally celebrated by educators, and at that time the Comenian Society for the study and publication of his works was formed.[11]

Now off to find his books on education.


EDIT: Here is a link to the Didactica Magna in English. Warning: The guy was a Moravian Bishop. http://core.roehampton.ac.uk/digital/froarc/comgre/

[nee1]

Thanks for sharing, Sonya. Charlotte Mason mentioned Comenius in her books too. And I read a blog on the net that said that CM was probably influenced by his works. Here is the link - http://www.afterthoughtsblog.net/2010/08/classical-education-is-sayers-only-way.html. That blog article (and the comments) got me curious about the works of Comenius, though I never had time to chase them up. So thanks for bringing him up, and kindly paste any links to his other translated works that you can find.

Also if you google the words ``Charlotte Mason a different perspective'', then click that first pdf article that comes up. It is written by Elaine Cooper. Elaine's article states clearly that CM was influenced by Comenius. And by the way, Elaine is one of the authors of ``When Children Love to Learn: A Practical Application of Charlotte Mason's Philosophy for Today '' - http://www.amazon.com/When-Children-Love-Learn-Application/dp/1581342594

And I found a pdf copy of Didactica Magna (The great didactic) by Comenius here on archive.org - http://archive.org/details/cu31924031053709.  One can download this version as one pdf file rather than as several files (as on the Roehampton website). 

And would you consider him as the father of education? That is what I think he was. I went to wikipedia to read more and they said the same too. You've studied some of his writings. What are your thoughts on them? Thank you.

[lzp11]

Hi Sonya

I find this really interesting.  Could you educate me in "idiot's terms" as to what the common aspects to all these programs are?  It would help me when planning all our teaching and how to tie things together.
I'd love to know know what are the bits that work - it can be difficult from the outside to compare Soft Mozart with Jump Math for example.  Is it the incremental progression?

[sonya_post]

I don't have a lot of good answers exactly as this sort of thing is new to me right now. But as Hellene and I were talking she mentioned somethings that got me thinking:

1. Soft Mozart and Jump Math both break things down to the smallest bites. Soft Mozart isn't quite as small as Jump Math, but it can be easily modified to make that happen.Also, both assume mastery of certain things before moving on. Jump is incremental and works to mastery before introducing a new concept. The heavy use of manipulatives in Jump and the screen in Soft Mozart help a child make concrete connections to real things.

2. Brillkids basically does the same thing with reading and music. Only because we are working with a babies, we place words in front of them associated with  all the things a child already knows. We grow by repetition and small increments to couplets and phrases then sentences then paragraphs. There is the ease of going back to pick up what the child isn't getting and then moving ahead. I also think that the problem with Doman Math and why it doesn't work as well as reading does is that there is no real way for a child to make sense of the abstract concepts of math. There is no way to integrate it into their lives. It works fine for a lot of people, but I think those kids are what the Jump math creator would say are gifted and at the right of the bell curve. Or as Hellene says, the ones who make it through bad music lessons are the ones who are naturally gifted in music.

I suspect that all bad methods will work for some children. But because a child can use it and learn does not mean a child is getting the most that he/she could if given a good program. I am going to give the Didactica Magna a quick read over the weekend and I can answer this fully.

Nee,

I foudn it interesting that Charlotte Mason is not a phonics only person. Her approach is more a combination of sight/phonics. Very short lessons and lots of memorizing of word families.

[Wolfwind]

This is all very interesting.  I'd never even heard of Comenius; now I"m going to have to read more!  I really like that blog post, nee.  It's interesting how the Mother School and Vernacular School are going to overlap for our EL kids: they'll be gaining a lot of information about everything around them in the 0-6 age when they're already reading, drawing, weighing, measuring, making music, and maybe writing.  I'm eager to read the original and see more about the Gymnasium and University.

Sonya, that's an interesting definition of a good program: "break it down into tiny chunks, use repetition to mastery, and increase information by small increaments."  I'll have to ponder that.  My first thought on reading it was, Don't most programs do that?  I'll have to think about it.  Maybe I just have good programs! 

I think the problem with Doman math is not so much a problem with the program; it's a problem with the adults.  (And I think this is what you meant by "There's no way to integrate it into their lives.")  Doman uses subitizing, and most of us parents can't.  So we assume that we can't do any math outside of the Little Math sessions.  I certainly didn't.  But then I thought, If I showed my kids LR and never read to them outside of that, no one would expect my kids to learn to read books by age 3 or 4, and hopefully younger.  But I, at least, and I'm guessing that other parents are the same, did a Doman math program and did no other math, and then expected my daughter to do math.

The problem is, how do we do math with our kids when we can't subitize?  We can all read, and reading is enjoyable to most of us, so we read with our kids all the time.  If we did math just as much, would LM work as well as LR?  I think so.  If I could subitize, we could take a walk and say: Look, fifty-seven berries on the sidewalk!  You picked up two.  Now there are fifty-five.  Fifty-seven minus two equals fifty-five.  But I can't.  And I forget to do it with the small numbers that I can subitize.  I wish there were some way to make everyday math come more easily.

[nee1]

Nee,

I foudn it interesting that Charlotte Mason is not a phonics only person. Her approach is more a combination of sight/phonics. Very short lessons and lots of memorizing of word families.

You're very right, Sonya. I found that out too when I read her Volume 1. On pages 199 - 222 of Volume 1, she describes her reading method. It's a combination of phonics and sight words. Link to Volume 1 - http://www.amblesideonline.org/CM/vol1complete.html.

And Comenius's ''The Great Didactic'' is now on my to-read list.  Thanks for reminding me of him.

[sonya_post]

Nee,

I just finished reading your link to the blog post. And she does a very good job of describing what I would call the difference between neo-classicists and what was considered a classical education long ago. The idea of the gymnasium and the university come from Greek ideas about education. A full explanation in the original context can be found by reading "A History of Education in Antiquity" http://www.amazon.com/History-Education-Antiquity-Wisconsin-Classics/dp/0299088146/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1362096390&sr=8-1&keywords=education+in+antiquity. Worthy of reading but painful.
This proves even more my feeling that Charlotte Mason is more classical than most of the current classical movement.

Wolfwind - it seems like most programs do what I described - assuming they are making connections to the world they live in - however, they do not. There are subtle distinctions that programs tinker with and some major ones as well. Current whole language for 6 year olds without a phonics base. New Math which introduces abstract thinking and all kinds of other "junk" into the curriculum which is a dismal failure. I will even mention Saxon Math here - but not to start a fight but to define the distinctions as I clearly see them now - after using Jump and having used Saxon. Jump does exactly what I described above. The jump fellow had to rely on all sorts of research to determine how to teach what 400 years ago we just knew. They teach new skills in the smallest possible increment and add new steps only when the child has mastered the previous. Saxon uses a spiral approach. This means that concepts are given and we hope the child gets them; if not we are going to spiral back around to it again and perhaps then the child will get it.  Saxon works for some kids, but I don't think you can even say that it works for most kids. And if you go to the What Works Clearinghouse, kids who use the Saxon Algebra 1 text actually are hurt by it rather than helped. I also liked MEP for many reasons, but after using Jump and liking it so much, I can see MANY flaws in that program also. Nee mentioned long ago that she didn't know how any child would gain math mastery using it. I was supplementing a lot using it. It doesn't fit the criteria of a good program either. But some kids will do fine with it. Many are doing fine, but as Hellene says - the gifted get it and the rest of the children are left with a large standard deviation........that shouldn't be acceptable.

 

[sonya_post]

Doman math may indeed be a parental issue. But I can't make the program work if I can't use it. Not even LR works for all kids. But then you can certainly take Daddudes plan - which is really just a different application of the same principles and techniques of Doman - and go that route. I think we are probably a ways from making an effectual Doman Style EL math program that will work with most children.

[Tanikit]

I am not convinced about this argument - I think it is a commercial argument made to aid advertising and to help sell products. Doman himself said that when he studied parents who had taught their children to read early he found that every child had learnt to read NO MATTER what method had been used. I think it has to do more with parents tenacity and their desire to accomplish the goal, their ability to read their children and to step in when needed. Following programmes that have been written by others and thinking they will fit every child will never work - gifted or not. You should be able to teach ANY child to read and to do math if you just listen to the child and keep adjusting your teaching - and if you make a mistake and try to teach something they do not have the background for then you should automatically realise that something is not right and go back and teach the part you left out.

There is a lot of discussion about mastery and spiral approaches - I actually think this is nonsense too. Everything needs to be repeated to be retained - that is why I am now studying courses to revise a lot of what I learnt at varsity for my degree - what I have not seen again since I qualified comes back, but I wouldn't have recalled it without the review. My whole job is a spiral approach to what I learnt to mastery at university. I think you need both and it is not true that you are not mastering anything using a spiral programme - its just mastery in a different way - similarly you are also approaching things spirally when using a mastery programme as the next step is automatically built into what you have apparently mastered.

I think we concentrate too much on teaching methods when it is real life that teaches - if we surround our child with words and maths they will learn it. I actually fail to realise why so many children where I live do NOT learn how to do basic maths - they get pocket money, they go to the shops, but their biggest problem is that there is no adult caring enough to explain and show and help them. It is adults and other humans who teach - not books or textbooks or computers or auditory tracks - those things can ONLY teach when a caring adult is involved and speaks to a child. Which is why the Einstein videos failed and why even Little Reader would fail if the child was just left to play it by itself with no human interaction whatsoever. Language (and Math is also a for of language) is only learnt within a context of human socialisation which makes it meaningful. And this applies especially to children.

Are there better and worse programmes to use to teach children? Yes, of course there are, but I think if an observant adult used ANY programme they could find something to teach out of it - they may have to adapt severely, but the child could still learn something. In the 1700s and 1800s people taught successfully without all the programmes we had now and we still can which is why I say this debate is for commercial reasons - we have become so materialistic and so focused on what to buy that we forget that we can do this all by ourselves without any product we get off a shelf or off the WWW.

[Korrale4kq]

I agree with Tanikit.

I don't think there are best and worst ways to teach. I think some things are better, for some, and some are worse, for some. I do not beleive that there is a one size fits all.

I have seen the mastery approach in math fail dismally, no matter how small the incremental steps.  I myself excelled at math with a spiral approach.
I have been trying mastery with my son and have been finding that if I spend time focusing on mastery he forgets other concepts. Right now he does much better with a spiral approach. And like Tanikit said each time we revisit the concept he is getting closer and closer to mastery.
We start fractions with a 0% proficiency, we move on when he is 60% proficient. We revisit fractions with 50% proficient and leave it again with a proficiency of 85%.
I think there is always going to be some learning regression if things aren't revisited.
I have also found that mastery can be detrimental as it can create a mental burn out. The student I tutor is in a class that does little incremental steps. Well thus child is being tutored because she needs to keep learning more, to push her, to keep her mimd awake. We got stuck for months trying to master stuff the nitty gritty. It hurt her more than it did good. This is a bright, but academically struggling girl that is being left behind.

Now on the flipside there is a lot to be said about mastery. It is nice to be about to be completely competent in a part of any program before building upon it. Mastering number facts and many formulas just makes math much easier as you approach higher levels.

As for there being nothing new that works, or rather the best things are old?... I just can't believe that. There will always be new ideas, and I think that there have been educational advances. There have been some realtively new things that work with great success with remedial students created in the last few decades. Touch Math and Dot Matrix comes to mind.

[sonya_post]

The spiral approach works for many kids. You will get no argument there from me. And we all agree what there needs to be lots of review. No one is suggesting that you shouldn't do lots of review. Nor am I using my obvious bias against Saxon as that program caused so many problems for us. There are objective studies we can look at. It's true there is not a one size fits all either.....but I do think that the programs that work have a lot in common.

[FomerlyMrsObedih_Now_BatmansMama]

This is a very important conversation to be had on this forum in particular because a new member can easily be overwhelmed thinking there is so much curriculum that needs to be bought in order to effectively teach a child. In the homeschooling community "curriculum" is a BIG word that leaves ones head swooning, especially in the early stages. I think it is crucial to remember that a gifted chef will cook good food with the most rudimental tools. There was a forum post recently about the results parents were having from their early learning activities - this is a big questions with sceptics - what difference does all of this make? Where are the hundreds of genius children of BK parents? Well, there aren't going to be. I don't believe that every child of a EL parent is going to be a genius because even if all the suggested best curriculum are bought, as others have mentioned above, the learning happens in the context of socialization between a loving/committed parent and loving/committed child. I loved reading The Education of Karl Witte because of the broader relational aspects that were shared in how Karl was educated. The book actually states that he became what he did because and exceptionally gifted teacher was matched with an exceptionally gifted pupil. Mr Witte put a lot of effort into creating and protecting a learning environment/life/discipline for his son, and making it intrinsic in a big way because Karl was deeply religious. Reminds me of the Kramaricks. It is so not just about curriculum! More important is learning how to work with and support your child's desire to blossom into the fullness of his/her being. Which is why I am not afraid of unschooling. I have not decided I am an "unschooler" or a "Saxon-ian" or "Charlotte Masoner", I am still learning about my child - the person that is in there and what I need to put before him so that he becomes that person more fully. That has to be the goal of education - not completing programmes or textbooks or ticking boxes. I know that this statement can be taken out of context, and appropriated to set and settle for low ambitions based on low/negative parental assumptions (my child is not the academic type, my child is not this or that). My caveat would be to assume one's child is capable of EVERYTHING and let THEM ultimately decide which to pursue with commitment. You HAVE to trust the child. We cannot all be cookie cutter products of a type of education. We do not all have the same destiny/purpose on earth. So the person has to be taught and trusted to be reponsible for shaping their own life, which is what is at the heart of unschooling in my opinion.

I've gone on a bit of a tangent and ranted enough 

[Mandabplus3]

Oh another interesting thought provoking thread. You guys add so much to my reading list I may never run out of things to read ( oh boy I hope I never do!  )
Reading through I had a few thoughts.
Using a spiral approach IS potentially a form of breaking it down into the smallest parts. Not in every program but certainly in Saxon and others. In a spiral program the first run on the spiral explains and then gives sample questions of the most basic type. The second run presents questions that are slightly harder and the third run harder again. If the child is getting all the questions correct then they have achieved mastery in that spiral. Now there are a few exceptions of course and things to look out for. Are there enough questions to gain mastery in the whole program? Are the questions difficult enough? Is the first spiral easy enough? Does the program actually teach HOW to do the questions? Are the spiral steps small enough not to loose a child in the steps up the spiral? I know Sonya doesn't like Saxon ( I have no problem with that, I can see its not for every child) but it does cover all the bases above. It teaches, it has small steps, it starts of very basic, it is incremental without fault, the questions get gradually harder and hard enough to gain mastery... I do believe Saxon will work on MOST children because it covers all the basis.
I was thinking through some of the other program's we use. Little musician- increases in difficulty from a very easy base. Soft Mozart- how much easier could piano playing get!    Then I thought about a few other program's I really like and they all fit the bill. They all break things down to the very basics and build from there. In very gradual steps. Take some writing program's. start with tracing letters, then copying letters, then copying words, then copying sentences, then writing sentences, copying paragraphs, writing paragraphs, copying poetry, writing poetry, reading style, writing in same style from a template, writing in same style without a template..... Yep that works! Now you know what to look for 
Art is the same....basic lines, basic shapes, copying, more complex copying then free drawing. Then advanced techniques ( perspective, shading...) excersizes in copying then attempt it free hand.
I like the idea, it forces us to make sure we are starting at the very beginning with our early learners. It forces is to provide the support structure to ensure success.
Some curriculum are provided to cover only one step in the chain. For example a handwriting book might be step 2 ( after mark making but before word writing) that doesn't mean it isn't worth purchasing it just means you need to understand where it fits in the chain and use it accordingly.
Your ideas on little math and doman dots not being able to be integrated into their lives hold merit. I have been thinking about what can be done to make little math more useful to a broader age group. I was thinking along the lines of adding more advanced concepts. But after reading this may e the solution is to include videos like in little reader demonstrating the counting, one to one correspondence, addition, subtraction etc. as one way to integrate it into their lives. I did a lot of outside of little math counting and one to one correspondence stuff with my son along with the first 65 days of Lmath. He got it. He understands math better than most kids his age. I believe the program helped immensely but I agree on its own it wouldn't be complete curriculum for a four year old.

[sonya_post]

Mrs. Obedih, you are not on a tangent at all. And there is much about unschooling that is appealing - within limits. You are right that this is a good conversation to be having. And knowing your kid and what is appealing to that child is very important. Most children, with decent and loving parents, survive all kinds of mistakes their parents make. And not only do they survive they thrive. But it is always better not to be making the mistakes.

Since I, by nature, like to give large chunks to a child and demand that they chew on them - mostly because I didn't realize they were chunks, I need programs that guide me. Details are not my thing, so naturally I get stuck there. My 17 year old survived his homeschool education more or less intact. My daycare kids are doing well because I can go to the computer and turn it on, left click and right click and use the arrow keys. Well, maybe a little more, but only because I had lots of instruction along the way. It is helpful for me to know what to look for in a good program because I cannot break it down myself. I can manipulate, change and modify once I get the concept, but to come up with it on my own - not happening.

As far as the genius children of BK parents, we won't know for another 15 years or so. And what difference it will all make, we won't know that either for quite some time. These are still very young kids. You will have to follow them to adulthood to see if it makes a difference. And then you will have to find a way to measure what that "difference" might be. Almost every thread on this forum must be taken in the context of what your desired goal are...

The Cat only grinned when it saw Alice. It looked good- natured, she thought: still it had VERY long claws and a great many teeth, so she felt that it ought to be treated with respect.

`Cheshire Puss,' she began, rather timidly, as she did not at all know whether it would like the name: however, it only grinned a little wider. `Come, it's pleased so far,' thought Alice, and she went on. `Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?'

`That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,' said the Cat.

`I don't much care where--' said Alice.

`Then it doesn't matter which way you go,' said the Cat.

`--so long as I get SOMEWHERE,' Alice added as an explanation.

`Oh, you're sure to do that,' said the Cat, `if you only walk long enough.'

If you have no idea where you are heading and what you want to accomplish then none of this really matters and you are really just punching at the wind. Charlotte Mason only makes sense in a certain context. Same with accelerated learning, or even early learning. If you have no idea of your destination then you will certainly feel like your head is spinning. When I read about what parents are doing - as far as science and other subjects go - protons and neutrons - etc. I find it interesting but I'm not about to change what I am doing to teach my kids about those things. My goals are different. My son has no idea what protons or neutrons are or much more than the very very basics of anatomy. He likes maps but has no idea about Africa or China or about salty seas. He can spot squirrel tracks in the snow, and tell you what kinds of clouds are in the sky. He can tell you about the temperature outside and identify squash beetles and whiteflies on eggplants. This is not saying that anyone who teaches about protons is wrong.

There is a thread on here with Robert Levy and accelerated math. I follow the thread, but I'm not sucked in and don't comment. Robert Levy's goals for his son are not the goals I have for mine. His path will not get me to my desired destination. But he has certainly done a fine job of raising his son and he did get to his destination. If his goals happen to be the same as yours - well I'd go talk to him because he knows how to get it done.

So yes, these kinds of conversations need to exist - mostly so we can all figure out what the heck we are trying to do.

[Mandabplus3]

Well said Sonya.
You certainly will feel lost if you don't decide what is important to you to teach. I dabbled in protons and then decided it just wasn't for me. Like you I favoured other things like identifying the vegetable seedlings that sprout in the garden so we can pull weeds not plants!
I did and do teach geography ( hey I want to see the whole world!!!  ) but gave up on landscape details over cultural eccentricities.
It is important to discuss all angles. Curriculum can easily become overwhelming. I think it's most important to match the curriculum to the child AND the parents ability and enthusiasm. Considering how your child learns and what they need is important to success and harmony.
Personally I can't wait until all the EL kids grow up. I think we will find a group of people much like everyone else but with a higher overall intelligence. Giving them more choices in life and endless dinner party invitations. They will probably hold high end jobs but many may choose very different prioroties to hi incomes. many parents here are spending a lot of time and effort on manners and virtues. They will raise amazing children as a 2nd generation of El kids will be truly amazing!

document.getElementById('recent_loading').style.display = 'none';document.getElementById('recent_page_box').style.display = '';

Page: 1/4  

Loading...

Members

• Total Members: 214772
• Latest: addisonjones

Stats

• Total Posts: 110526
• Total Topics: 19136
• Online Today: 514
• Online Ever: 826
• (January 22, 2020, 12:09:49 AM)

Users Online

• Users: 0
• Guests: 479
• Total: 479