I don't have one.
I have nothing against different methods or types, it's just that I don't necessarily wholly subscribe to or carry the cross for any one in particular. All methods have pros, and they also all have cons. They can all be used very efficiently in many different situations. That's the glory of homeschooling: we can use whatever means, method, or curriculum necessary to give our individual children individual education tailored to their specific strengths, weaknesses, interests, and needs.
I am a supporter of a well-rounded education for all children. This means that I don't personally believe that adhering to only one specific schooling method or type will give a child the best education. I don't believe that any one method alone can challenge a child or inspire him to rise to his best effort, and then surpass it. At best, streamlining home education via the ropes of a single method does a child a great disservice. Personally, I believe that only utilizing one homeschool method in education is no better than what public schools have to offer, and that the best way to have a well-rounded child with a well-rounded intellect and well-rounded education is to use a myriad of methods, techniques, curricula, and resources that all work toward the common goal. Draw the good out of each method, technique, or resource, utilize it well, and discard the extras.
For example, I love Montessori's approach to early childhood education. I reference her materials and techniques a lot in my preschool and kindergarten routines. She respects the child at a level that not many other 'experts' do, and she regards children as capable and more intelligent than society realizes. However, I do not agree with her in regards to elevating the child to the status of a god in that he is primarily good and must be taught bad behavior through modeling or through neglect [I believe that children are human first, and by nature are inherently selfish and self-absorbed, good must be taught. I also believe, however, that the desire lies within each child to please the ones they love. This makes early education at home easier.], and I do not believe that a child imitating another child is a sign of an inferior intellect. Children learn by repetition, by imitation. A child imitating another child is part of the natural process of learning, not a sign of a lesser intellect.
I also love the Waldorf approach to early education. There isn't much I expressly disagree with, other than the fact that you don't need waldorf specific tools to utilize the method, much to the chagrin of those expensive private schools and their tight-knit recommendations.
I utilize many box-curriculums with the understanding that the box is only meant to be a foundation that the rest of the education is built on. Reading is not limited to the box reading curriculum. Measures of knowledge are not limited to workbook answers and test results. However, the box curriculum can be a great tool for children who thrive on more structure and/or for parents who are not natural teachers, such as myself.
The idea of unschooling or "natural learning" has many great concepts, most of which are common sense. A child learns better in a low-stress, high-interest environment. Tools for self guided learning should be readily available at all times. A child should be able to learn at their own pace. However, my criticism of this method in particular is the idea that a child will learn something when it interests them and until them, we should not push them to learn it. I do think that it is our job to guide them through their education, so that by the time they reach 18 they will be well-rounded and prepared for whatever path they may choose. In college they aren't going to get professors who say "Here's the syllabus, do whatever you feel like doing," or employers who say "Do whatever you feel like to contribute to the workforce." No, there will be specific jobs, and specific expectations, and deadlines. Who really ever wants to learn algebra, or clean toilets anyway? Yet both are essential for a well-rounded education. It can also quickly turn lazy. Many well-meaning parents have launched the unschooling ship only to find that, at 10 years old their child cannot read simple three letter words because even though they dutifully read to their children, they never pushed learning to read or decipher and their child never got interested. Again, in my opinion, the basis of unschooling should be the basis for all education: low-stress, high-interest environment. However, this is probably the most slippery slope when it comes to the downfalls of using only one method in home education.
I am also a supporter of family-integrated education. Meaning, it's not ONLY about what is best for the child. It's about what is also best for the family, the other children, the parents, and the primary educator of that child. No two families will look the same when it comes to this. And you know what? That's okay! I may have strong opinions here, but there will likely be many who do not agree with me, and that's okay too.
I have (so far) three dyslexic children, out of nine, so working with them has caused me to reevaluate my own methods and reasons quite often.
Homeschooling takes up a large chunk of my day right now, but only because I insist upon sitting down with each of my children and working through English, Language Arts, and Math with them personally. That way I can be sure that I am in tune with their strengths, knowledge, and weaknesses, so that I may constantly revamp my approach to suit their needs. Education is a living organism, ever changing and moving as it grows. Putting it in a box and expecting it to stay there is a great way to fail, or at best, barely get by.
We are on summer break right now, so my posts may not always happen on Thursdays, but consider this my intro. ::smile::
What methods do you utilize in your homeschool, and what strengths do you find in them?
No comments:
Post a Comment