Overall education- Acceleration vs Depth

Sonya, I’m with you on the extension of childhood. I read some interesting stuff from one of John Gatto’s books ‘Weapons of Mass Instruction’. John was a one-time New York Teacher of the Year, who later left the school system because of disillusionment with how it worked. He devotes an entire subsection to ‘The Artificial Extension of Childhood’ in his book. On page 39, he says:

[i]
``The same young people we confine to classrooms these days once cleared this continent when it was a wilderness, built roads, canals, cities; whipped the greatest military power of earth not once but twice, sold ice to faraway India before refrigeration, and produced so many miracles - from the six-shooter to the steamboat to manned flight - that America spread glimmerings of what open-source creativity could do all around the planet.

In those days Americans weren’t burdened by a concept of the phony stage of life called `adolescence;’ or any other artificial extension of childhood. About the age of seven you added value to the world around you, or you were a parasite. Like all sane people, so-called kids wanted to grow up as soon as possible - that’s why old photos show boys and girls looking like men and women. All that takes is carrying your share of the load, and a few open-source adventures and presto! You are grown up. In Ben Franklin’s day when you were ready to take your turn, no pseudo-sciences out of Germany stood in your way.

The pre-Civil War American economy was dominated by independent livelihoods, and even after the war, for another fifty years or so, young men (who would be called “boys” today) like Andrew Canegie could start life as an elementary school dropout at the age of seven, and be partners in business with the president of the Pennsylvania Railroad at age 20. Are similar lives being fashioned today? Of course they are, but it isn’t considered wise to talk about it openly anymore. Think of Shawn Fanning with his millions from starting Napster at age 18, and Fanning is far from alone - it’s just that those lucky ones allowed to do it are far more discreet in our time.

An earlier America celebrated accomplishment and shrewdness from any source. Kids weren’t locked away to provide employment for millions. America had room for anyone with energy, brass, and ideas. Foreign visitors like Tocqueville and DuPont de Nemours were constantly being dazzled by the high energy released in a society reaching for revolutionary egalitarianism, one which mixed all ages together, took risks, and discarded the rigid categories of European tradition.’ [/i] QUOTE ENDS.

He goes on and on, and on page 136, he says:
[i]
``When, as happens with some frequency, I’m asked by parents for a single suggestion for changing the relationship between them and their kids for the better, I don’t hesitate to recommend this:
Don’t think of them as kids. Childhood exists, but it’s over long before we allow it to be. I’d start to worry if my kid were noticeably childish past the age of seven and if by twelve you aren’t dealing with young men and women anxious to take their turn, disgusted with training wheels on anything, able to walkabout London, do hundred mile bike trips, and add enough value to the neighborhood that they have an independent income; if you don’t see this, you’re doing something seriously wrong.

Even at seven don’t edit the truth out of things. If the family has an income kids need to know to the penny what it is and how it’s spent. Assume they are human beings with the same basic nature and aptitudes that you have; what you have superior in terms of experience and mature understanding should be exchanged for their natural resilience, quick intelligence, imagination, fresh insight, and eagerness to become self-directing.

Don’t buy into the calculated illusion of extended childhood. It’s a great secret key to power - power for your kids if you turn the tables on their handlers. And adolescence is a total fraud, a pure concoction of social engineers barely a century old. It’s a paradox, constantly threatening to solve itself as the young beat against the school jail in which we’ve confined them. Sometimes as I read obituaries - far and away the most valuable department in a good newspaper-I stumble across a new piece of evidence that what I’ve told you is true.’’ [/i] QUOTE ENDS.

I’ve often pondered about the above suggestion to parents for changing the relationship with their kids, and it makes absolute sense. I asked my husband ‘do you think the artificial extension of childhood is what causes poor parent-child relationship and teenage rebellion?’ Both of us thought it contributed to the problem immensely, because while the child wants to grow up, the parents want the child’s childhood extended, and this leads to a lot of friction.

So when scientists say that brain changes is what makes teenagers crazy, maybe they should go to cultures that do not have concepts like ` adolescence’ and do their research there. That will give them better comparative data, rather than simply making claims based on a particular culture. It is just like the whole myth of ``potty training readiness’’, they claim kids do not have bladder control at early ages, but how about going to China, India, and Africa, to find out how their kids manage to have bladder control at very early ages. As with anything research, I read, but use my critical mind to think about what I’ve read. Not all research is true, simply that is published does not make it true.

All in all, I’ve decided not to artificially extend my kids’ childhoods. I believe a good relationship with them (as John Gatto recommends) will result from my allowing them to grow up, under my loving guidance, of course.

I reflected on the Harding family, and I doubt very much their kids had teenage rebellion. They were too busy planning the next big thing they wanted to do with their lives, where would they get the time to rebel? The parents were busy reinforcing their dreams, encouraging them to grow up, and become whatever they wanted to be. One of the daughters, Rossanah, wrote:
[i]
``It’s amazing how God plants a seed in our hearts, and it grows into a dream and you just know without a doubt it is what you are meant to do. That’s how it was for me in choosing to be an architect. I was blessed at an early age to know what I wanted to do with my life. And I was blessed with parents who encouraged me to pursue it and showed me that it was not that far from my reach. For most parents out there, when their 8 year old says to them, “I want to be an astronaut [insert profession here] when I grow up” they smile at their kid and say “Oh that’s nice” and go about their day. My dad on the other hand, would take it to heart. He would sign them up for the next space camp and introduce them to a friend of a friend who cleans rockets. Something that still resonates with me is the way my dad always encouraged us to set our goals and aim as high as we could. Don’t just settle for the middle. He would say “Shoot for the stars, and maybe you’ll land on the moon” meaning, If you aim as high as you can and don’t make it there, you still end up somewhere pretty amazing. But, if you set your sights too low, you may never reach your full potential. Even to this day, this mindset still drives me. Someday I want to open my own architectural firm with my husband and maybe friends from college. Why be a draftsperson when you can be your own boss and make your own designs a reality!

Mom and dad did not regarded age as an excuse for immaturity. They gave us responsibilities to help us grow and taught us to reason like adults. By treating us like adults – and by this I mean with expectation that were capable of a higher level of accountability – we often rose to the occasion and surpassed what would be considered the “norm” for our age. I think in many ways, this prepared us for real world decision making and gave us the confidence to participate with students several years our senior. People always say to my sisters and I that we are so mature for our age. I think this all goes back to building those invaluable skills of communication and measuring consequences. Parents are ultimately raising adults, independent human beings that are capable of living and being a light in this world. Favorite dad quote: “If you can’t think of anything nice to say, then don’t say anything at all.”

I remember the moment I realized that I wanted to be an architect. Since early childhood, I paid attention to my surroundings and was much more interested in the way the light fell through the window than staring at a chalkboard. But even so, I had an appreciation for math in terms of its physical nature. The point where art and science collide seemed a perfect fit for me. There was something about the notion of creating something from nothing – or rather creating something from a single an idea. It was so exciting to me the possibility that something in my minds’ eye could become a reality.

In the early 2000’s when the housing market was booming, my dad found it a hobby to check out model homes of new housing developments in central California. I would tag along and be amazed at the size and scale of the spaces. As we were leaving the homes, I remember asking my mom, “Who is the person who decides where the rooms go?” She answered “Well, that would be an architect”. That was it. When I discovered that that was an actual job – getting to make beautiful drawings for a living and envision spaces that get built into realities – I know
that was my calling. I must have been 10 years old at the time….’’ [/i]QUOTE ENDS.

I herby promise to take my children’s “when I grow up I want to be a…” far more seriously.
What a slap in the face! :yes: Two of my three kids know in detail what they want to be when they grow up. One even has two separate careers mapped out! Their choices are based on their skills, strengths and enjoyment. What more could I want for my kids than a solid goal to aim towards during those" lost" teenage years. Plus a head start in their chosen career studies!
Now I need to guide and support my oldest into narrowing down her options…there was a time she wanted to be a marine micro biologist…maybe I should have run with that one at the time! :biggrin:

I agree, Mandab. Remember Zohaib and Wajib Ahmed, those mathy Asian-Brit boys? They wanted to be actuaries (and Zoihaib was just 8 years of age). The father felt that would be a good choice of profession for them as it requires lots of math (which the boys are very good at). In the Channel 4 documentary, he took them to an actuary firm so they could see the sort of work actuaries do, and get them excited about their future profession. It was so cute seeing 2 small boys in business suits, on their way to actuary firm, shaking hands with staff at the firm, working with spreadsheets, etc. I learnt a lot from what their dad did. When the actuary staff who was taking them on the tour of the firm asked which of you will be a better actuary'', both boys replied ME’'. So funny.

Well, I don’t see those kids wasting their teenage years in rebellion and what-not. They may change their minds later on about becoming actuaries, but a plan on what to be in future and then working towards it is better than none at all. Further, it helps to keep young minds occupied.

Here is a link to watch the Channel 4 documentary. The boys are the 2 Asian kids with big textbooks. http://www.channel4.com/programmes/child-genius. And on that page (on the left hand side), there is also a link to a video interview with their parents.

This is what I love about this forum. We start a thread on Accelration vs depth and we all come to the conclusion that our children must find their purpose early. Miss S looooooooooooooves science so I feed that with science dvds,toys and such and such. She still does not like actual math but will watch a math dvd. My other child loves music and languages so I feed that. I have no idea where it will lead them but when I became a parent I promised myself that whatever they wanted to do with their life no matter how I felt about it I would support them 100%.

I totally agree with you guys on not artificially extending the kids childhood…I come from a traditional Asian background and was born and brought up back in my homeland. We get potty trained by the time we turn 6 months and by 8 months we are totally out of nappies. There is not even a word in our language for the term “Teenager”. However, atleast from where I come from wacking and spanking a child is also a part of the culture and out of the fear a lot of the times kids tend to listen to their parents and try to stay away from trouble. Does that make spanking or wacking a child an ok behaviour? I am sorry for putting it so bluntly out there but this is the truth. Again I am talking from what I have seen and the culture that we come from.

The so called teenagers wouldn’t dare say a word back to their parents as they fear the repercussions. However, we still see irrational behaviour from teenagers and I have seen it first hand in school and college. Westernisation has introduced a lot of good and bad into every culture and I think it will be very hard to take the society back to the good old days. We have to accept the fact that kids are going to be exposed to this culture one time or the other and our job as a parent is to guide them and help them choose the good elements.

I am not saying that we should escuse rash behaviour from our teenage kids saying that its their brains but instead we must see which is the best way to reach to them during the teenage years. Adult reasoning and not rewarding might not work due to the brain wiring at that time but some other strategies might.

I appreciate your perspective. I do spank when kids are little - I don’t see that as a problem, but there are some who might. We stop spanking on the 5th birthday as the child is no longer a toddler and spankings are for toddlers who don’t know any better. Our goal is to be spanking free by 5 and burn the spanking paddle (my oldest kept his). Other than a few minor bumps in the road we do not have the teen problem in our home that many of my friends experience. I would say that is true for most of the home schooled families I know. Of my three sisters, two of them have very few teen problems. Neither of them started home schooling their kids until they were older. One of them has a lot of problems but everyone around her can tell you why she is having problems also.

I will agree that my son has what we call “mental blips”. There are times when you have to give him information 3 or four times before it registers. But that is not rebellion - that may be a brain thing and I should probably extend more grace than I do in those situations. When I say, “Go to the store and get some milk, cheese, and stuff for a salad.” Then he goes to the store and gets nothing and comes back because he forgot EVERYTHING - I will buy that we have to develop strategies for dealing with that and we have. But that is not the same as “Yeah right, go get it yourself.” Which my friends have experienced and much, much worse. And while my son hasn’t been spanked since he was 4, I assure you that if he did speak to me that way he would scraping his lips off the wall. :yes:

The first career that I would have loved to have done was in arcaheology or history. If I were able to run with that at a young age, I would have. I would have loved to have gotten a phd and done field work. However as I got older I wanted to focus on having a family. Not something I feel I could have done as an archaeologist. But hopefully at that point I would be able to find a research job close to home or a teaching job.
I probably would have even changed my focus and gone back to school to get a science degree to accompany archaeology. Maybe forensic anthropology. :slight_smile:

I totally understand where you are coming from Korrale4kq. I am an Engineer and have given up my profession to concentrate on my family. I also did my research in Environmental Engineering and that was lot of fun. I think I have a flair in teaching little kids and so who knows…I might end up being an early education instructor later on. I have also done lecturing in Uni but nothing more satisfying than teaching little ones.

Sonya_post,

Its nice to see that you are doing so well with managing your teenager. I am just hoping that we will be able to do the same when our daughter gets to that stage. Its always easy to have a plan in place but who knows when she grows up we might have to change our strategies that we have thought for her. I am sure the ‘mental blips’ will get better soonie soon (though my mental blips …even at this age is worse than his … lol )

momtobeby,

Please don’t get me wrong, I was a rebellious child. My siblings were rebellious. My cousins were rebellious. And our parents all raised us the same. My sisters and some of my cousins decided to raise our children differently than our parents raised us. Amazingly, we all have pretty good kids. Now, if you take a family of 6 kids and 1 turns out rotten, it’s probably just the kid. But if you take a family of six and all six turn out poorly - well, it’s probably the parents. If either of my sons end up as rotten eggs, I will assume the problem is mine and not theirs, unless we can find some organic underlying cause. From age 12-14 it was pretty touch and go. I wasn’t sure how things were going to turn out - the problems we were having stemmed from decisions I made and things I’d done wrong. We had some fixing to do. Luckily, I’d put in a pretty good foundation and got him on my team early. He ended up being strong enough and our relationship was strong enough to weather the storms.

If you want to know how to raise good kids - just watch the families who’ve raised them and copy. It isn’t that hard. You know, if you are on this forum, and you are not a pushy obnoxious parent, you are taking an interest in your child - then she is probably going to be just fine.

As far as mental blips - forget about it. I’m hoping on the other side of menopause there is a bright light. :slight_smile:

Remember the comment I made about my daughter with two careers already mapped out? Well she wants 10 kids! Her first career choice doesn’t suit 10 kids so she thought through what she would enjoy doing with 10 kids and organized a phase 2 of her life! She is 6!!! knave just decided to reshuffle her after school activities more in line with her career choices. We need children’s drawing class. :wub:
Thankfully my son picked a nice easy one. He wants to be a builder. Let’s face it becoming a builder as a teenager is pretty easy to do. No point in wasting years at university after school if you need a trade certificate. His plan is to build mummy a big house with a rainbow door. Then build some more houses and rent them to other people who need somewhere to live. He said I can have the money from the rent because he is never leaving me ever and won’t need it all :smiley: He is 4! Sounds like a great plan to me! :wink:
So what do I do with a nerdy, science kid who loves to read and has no idea what they want to be when they grow up? she is the one headed for university early. It scares me already and she is only just 9.

lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol

Your comment made me want to cry, and I really don’t cry easily. I saw this and I couldn’t not comment. If you can spare 15 minutes please see if any of these are of interest to you http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=philosophical+parenting

I just have this to say about spanking. From a Christian perspective, the reference is often “Spare the rod and spoil the child”. The comeback to that is often that it wasn’t meant to mean that you beat your child, but that you guide them as a shepherd guides his sheep with his staff. I agree, that’s what it means. We aren’t supposed to beat our kids up, and the scriptures don’t justify it. However, we do need to look at how the shepherd uses his staff. Mostly he uses it to herd the animals. He uses it to fend off enemies. When a sheep gets stuck, the crook can be used to help lift the animal out of danger. The shepherd loves his sheep and guides them with love. But what happens when the sheep goes astray? The shepherd might tap their feet or side with the staff to get them back in line. He might even grapple their feet to keep them from running away or to catch them for medical needs. This isn’t abuse, this is loving guidance, and this kind of action is necessary to properly take care of sheep.

Sonya,

I’ve been re-reading Charlotte Mason lately. I’ve completed volume 1 and I’m now midway through volume 6. In volume 6, she makes a case against unit studies, dumbed down children books, and a lot of other things. I’ve thought about most of her points and I’m convinced about their validity.

She also made a case against early specialisation of knowledge for children, and advocated a liberal education for all children. A liberal education in the sense of laying before the child a generous curriculum, where the child is exposed to poetry, the best literature, history, science, scriptures, as well as the three R’s (reading, writing, and arithmetic). I’m convinced by her points but wondered about the early specialisation thing. She said that providing a child with a broad (generous and liberal) education would make the child a better specialised person in future. See her comments on pages 53 – 54 and pages 123 – 127, Volume 6 here - http://www.amblesideonline.org/CMM/M6complete.html (modern English paraphrase). Then check her original words (still those pages) here - http://www.amblesideonline.org/CM/vol6complete.html.

But I also wondered: most children have dreams of what they want to be when they grow up. And most of those dreams do come true if nurtured by the parents. My question is: should parents not nurture their children’s dreams for fear that they would end up too specialised and without a liberal education?

I remember reading Ben Carson’s autobiography (‘Gifted Hands’) and his other books. Here is wiki link to Ben Carson - (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Carson). Ben wanted to be a medical doctor from a very young age and his mom encouraged that dream. Today, he’s one of the world’s foremost neuro-surgeons, saving children’s lives with his gifted hands. I’ve also met lots of other people who were encouraged to pursue their childhood dreams and have ended up quite successful today.

Granted, while pursing the dream (a specialisation), the child should at the same time be exposed to the other liberal arts as propounded by Charlotte Mason, so that the child will not end up too specialised without a knowledge of other subjects. For example, I’ve mentioned the Ahmed brothers. Good as they are in maths, with Zoihaib acing A levels maths at age 8, they go to schools where they receive instruction in other subjects. Further, their father said the following in this interview –

``Currently Wajih is broadening his education to cover the three sciences, English and other softer subjects at GCSE and A' levels, thus setting further goals for Zohaib to match or beat.’’
Link to entire interview - http://www.channel4.com/programmes/child-genius/articles/testimonial-from-wajih-and-zohaibs-parents From that interview, I see that the boys’ education would not be narrowed within the specialism of math, but that the parents were working hard to broaden their boys’ curriculum within the sciences and other subjects. And in the full documentary (http://www.channel4.com/programmes/child-genius/4od), I found that the boys had done the exams in other subjects too, and they did well in those subjects. Hence their education could not be considered narrowed to only mathematics.

What are your thoughts on early specialization of knowledge? Do you think it is crippling? Brillkids parents, what do you think? Thanks for your responses.

MyPashmina, if you’re engaged with Stefan Molyneux of Freedomain Radio you may wanna read this http://www.rickross.com/groups/freedomain.html (Rick Ross Institute is a website that collects information on cults and cult-like groups). Also see http://liberatingminds.forumotion.com/t2259-is-freedomain-radio-a-destructive-cult (an entire website set up for people who walked away from FDR).

Nee1, I personally wouldn’t focus so much on one area that my child is excluded from exploring other options. I am a believer in the idea of multi-talented, multi-faceted, multi-purposed human beings. One person really can do it all - just not all at the same time. If my parents had groomed me into an artist/thespian I would (still could and dreaming of it!) most likely have been successful, but may have missed my calling in enterprise, in writing, in teaching, in parenting and building a home. OR I may NOT have missed anything at all IF they insisted I got a broad education, while developing my expertise. Yes that would mean more work, but that is the price of being a professional, and I am prepared to require it of my own kids. Some cultures (mine is one of them, I’m Nigerian) believe a child has completed education only when they have a masters degree, but will settle for an undergraduate degree and professional qualifications/development at minimum (which is what I have!) lol I am friends with someone from a family of legendary musicians (his father is Fela Anikulapo Kuti), he is a very successful musician today, and he and his siblings were required to get degrees because they needed other options just in case. I take this approach, partly because it is culturally wired into me but also because I wanted to do many things when I was a child (still do), therefore a broad education with “a current area of expertise/focus” would have worked best for me. So it is what I am giving my children - options.

I thought those videos communicated the idea of not hitting your kids very persuasively. Quicker than reading books or the studies that are available.

I could also recommend “Why Love Matters” by Sue Gehrhardt - http://www.amazon.com/Why-Love-Matters-Affection-Shapes/dp/1583918175 - worth reading the book reviews.

Glenn Doman’s book and the subsequent amazing results with my boy inspired a ton respect for babies, and after that it would be impossible to hit them, with or without a paddle.

I was just surprised to see such a comment on this forum, where other parents have been through similar experiences with their kids.

Nee1 - I’ve been reading a lot about CM philosophy, too. I love that she advocates such depth in every subject. In regards to specialization, my understanding is that with CM the idea is to finish ‘school’ by lunchtime, giving the afternoon free. I understood that this is time that the child can use not only for play, but also to expand on their interests. So, if your child desperately wants to be a marine biologist, they can spend as much of the afternoon reading about sea creatures, or pretending to be a shark or watching documentaries as you allow them to (some time needs to be spent outdoors!) - so long as they focus and finish their general lessons in the morning. :laugh:

This is something that I really like about CM. I’ve always been of the opinion that I want my son to have a good grasp on all subjects and still have time to focus on things that he loves. Goodness knows if I’d only done school in the morning, I could have learnt so much more! ( I am the type of person that reads textbooks and learns languages for fun :wub: )

Not commenting on the spanking part as Tamsym did a fine job already.

Nee1,

I am going to paint with broad brush strokes here so please don’t take any of this as a concrete statement. Charlotte would not approve of Early Learning. However, I suspect with some of the new science she might change her mind as she agrees that learning in the early years should be in the form of games and play. What most of us are doing is in the form of play and games - no pressure and hopefully with lots of cuddle time and laughter. Most of us are not doing EL at the expense of sending our children out to play in the dirt.

Someone pointed out that the school day is short in a consistently CM environment. That does leave the afternoons for the development of other interests. From experience - if you are homeschooling and develop the habit of attention early (preventing the dwaddles) - school isn’t going to take all that long even with acceleration in certain subjects. Especially if you plan to go year round. You are going to have many unfilled hours in the day for specialization.

My 2 year old has developed an obsession with music and conducting. Right now he spends 3-5 hours a day practicing the violin, piano, listening to music, pretend conducting and studying and copying the movements of conductors we watch on YouTube. He sleeps about 13, so that leaves another 6-8 hours in his day. We spend another 1-2 hours, depending, on reading, math and Latin. Most days it is closer to 1 hour than it is to 2 hours. We also read a lot - maybe one to two hours. That leaves 4-6 hours a day in play and free time to explore. Most children can finish their schooling in 3-5 hours. This includes HS, provided you get rid of all the busywork. If your child is sleeping 9 hours, does chores for an hour, and school for 5 and is outside/nature study for 3, and 2 is spent eating that leaves you with five hours left in the day. K-6 you will be spending about 4 on school most days. We have never spent an hour a day on chores - more like 20 minutes during the week and and hour or two on Saturday.

Early specialization can be a problem if you don’t expose your children to other things. But if you round out their education with other subjects, I think that is fine. Part of the joy of starting so early is that your are getting so much of the difficult learning out of the way before your children even realize that there might be something to “fuss” about. There needn’t be any tears over learning to read as there was never a time when they weren’t reading. When your child is five they will think they were born reading. They won’t remember learning. That saves several years which your child can then take that time and do other things - like what they are passionate about. Or reading more books. or jumping ahead in math, you get the point. I mentioned somewhere else that EL throws the whole timeline off. Partly because you are saving time upfront to be spent later but for those who are homeschooling, your child will have always spent a large part of the day learning. There will be little to fuss over - if it was done with happiness and good cheer all along. This will save hours and hours of wasted time later. Plus they learn faster. My toddler starting spewing out math facts this week and showed me that he knows quite well how to add and subtract numbers. All this time I thought it was going nowhere, he is filing it all away in his little brain to be pulled out later. We spend no more than 15 minutes a day directly on math. All this to say that I don’t think this has to be an either/or but a both/and.

Charlotte used Da Vinci as a great illustration, however, there are very few Da Vincis in the world. The likelihood that I will have one by broadening my child’s horizons in quite small. But, I can make sure my music obsessed child gets a full education in addition to being music obsessed. I think he will be a better musician if he gets a full classical education.

MrsObedih, Ezihk, and Sonya, I don’t even know how to thank you all for your responses. Your responses have clarified a lot of things for me. Thank you, thank you, and thank you.

Sonya,
I hope you know I’ll ever be grateful to you for introducing me to Charlotte Mason on this thread: http://forum.brillkids.com/homeschooling/homeschoolers-is-‘the-well-trained-mind’-the-best-homeschool-curriculum/. I’ve been reading Charlotte Mason’s volumes in depth these past weeks, and I keep thinking ``What! This woman was pure genius.‘’ From my readings so far, her model of education in the grammar stages surpasses the Well Trained Mind by far, and the more I study Charlotte Mason’s original writings, the more I become dissatisfied with WTM.

a) For example, CM recommends using best literature (e.g., unabridged versions) of the best books; WTM is okay with using abridged children’s versions in the grammar stage.

b) CM sees children as complete persons, capable of dealing with all forms of knowledge (as Glenn Doman does); WTM sees young children as memory machines for which parents have to ensure that they know, especially in the grammar stages.

c) CM believes children should be placed in touch with real knowledge from the start and be taught to narrate back after a single reading; WTM believes in gradation of knowledge, where you start small, and keep repetiting the same thing over and over.

d) CM uses narration, where the child expresses the knowledge in oral form using his OWN words; WTM uses comprehension questions, where you ask ‘What did the lion do?’; `what happened to the bear?', etc.

e) CM is happy with memorisation, but says the memory work has to have the corresponding ideas attached; WTM is happy with parrot memorisation without understanding, especially in the grammar stages. According to the authors of WTM, if the child does not understand in the grammar stages, he will understand in the logic or rhetoric stages; just make him memorise during the grammar stage.

That said, WTM is a good book, and I’ve learnt some things from it. The book does get better in the logic and rhetoric stages. But how they perceive children in the grammar stage is very different from how Charlotte Mason perceived children.

It’s unfortunate that CM has been thought to be a milder form of classical education, leaning more to unschooling. I think this is because of the way the interpreters of CM have presented the method. I’ve heard parents complain that Karen Andreaola’s writings make people think CM is unschooling. As I have found, CM is not unschooling but a rigorous form of classical education. I found this interesting thread on the WTM forums: http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/267301-cm-did-not-require-just-copywork/.

As a result of my recent readings of CM’s works, I’ve raised the bar of education for my kid. Best of all, I’m enjoying the teaching and learning too. For example, for our read-aloud, I got Aesop’s fables in unabridged form. It was very important for me that the book be unabridged, cos I had seen several dumbed down versions of Aesop’s fables on Amazon. I also got the unabridged Grimm’s Fairy Tales, and we’ve been reading from those. It’s more interesting to read aloud from the unabridged versions, and for the first time, I felt I was recapturing my childhood. It makes teaching more fun when the teacher feels he/she is learning as well, but when you are constantly reading aloud from dumbed down children’s books, teaching your kid tends to get boring.

I’ve also started history, and for that Charlotte Mason and Amblesideonline recommended Van Loon’s Story of Mankind. I found a free copy on www.archive.org, and I’ve been reading aloud from that. It’s an interesting history book, I enjoyed reading aloud from it to our son, and I even caught my husband listening in too to the read-aloud. Hubby and I then had a lively conversation on the book after the read-aloud. I’m not sure we would have had much to discuss if I had been reading aloud from one of the dumbed down children’s books.

Sonya, you’ve done this before and have read widely about it, so you should know. Pray, is the gradation of knowledge as proposed by WTM actually what was done in classical education? I’ve read some articles online where people say it is something that was introduced by Dorothy Sayers, and that was not actually how classical education was implemented in the past. Your thoughts?

Further, for the depth question Tamsyn asked about, I strongly feel CM could provide such depth, especially in the grammar stages. Your thoughts on this?

And while you are at it, could you give me a recommendation for a living science text? Charlotte Mason mentioned ‘The Sciences’ by Edward Holden. I found a free copy online at www.archive.org, but the book appears not to include biology, though it includes physics and chemistry. Are there any other living science books you could recommend, something that incorporates all the sciences? I don’t want to spend money buying different books that discuss different things, say chipmunks, then birds, then ants. I need an all-in-one living science book. I already have Handbook of Nature Study (thank you Keri), which can be downloaded free from www.archive.org. And I’m planning to get one of the Kingfisher science encyclopaedias as reference texts. But right now, I’ve been searching high and low for a suitable living science book that is in narrative form, something a child can easily grasp, understand, and narrate from. Any recommendations? Thank you.

Looking forward to your responses, everyone. Thank you all.