Lynnw wrote:I loved Carrie's comparison when I read it awhile back. I didn't re-read it today, so I hope I'm not contradicting anything in it. I was thinking that another way to approach the Classical vs. CM discussion (and I agree with others that there is much over lap between the two!) might be to consider how you approach skills vs. how you approach content subjects. I dislike a memory approach for content subjects (history and science) because I think it's not very useful out of context and I don't want to kill the joy of learning. But on skill subjects (math, grammar, spelling), I am more likely to make use of a more classical approach, including some degree of memory work. Even on those, I wouldn't do memory work out of context. For example, I wouldn't teach math facts totally void of conceptual understanding, but I would do some speed drill/flash card work to help get the facts more automatic.
Sorry if I repeated or contradicted anyone else. Great discussion!
Btw, I see other kids that are academically ahead of mine.... and I haven't taken the time to sit down and ponder why.... but I'm not sure I would credit the classical approach for it. I'll have to think about that for awhile. The two families I'm thinking of probably spend more time doing school every day and also started reading earlier (as early as 3!) and have two children (instead of five). Reading early may be more child specific than, environment... not sure. Something to think about it
Users browsing this forum: mommyofmany and 1 guest