Time spent on subjects dc is a natural at vs those they struggle with?

[one l michele]

I'm interested in other view points on this. My feelings are mixed and I'm not sure how to balance the two.

Let's take spelling for example. Say your dc is NOT a natural speller. Do you use mulitple spelling programs or a different one each year hoping something will click? Or do you hand them a spelling only dictionary and teach them to use spell check - LOL?

I guess it's similar with the dc's who are natural spellers. You could either "skip" formal spelling or pick a "light" program they can do independently and plug it on your scope & sequence. However, wouldn't that be similar to "busy work" since that dc doesn't "need" a formal program?

Let's face it, there are areas our dc are better at than others and areas they are likely to always find a struggle.

So how do you balance how much time/energy to put into their "weaker" areas? And not run wild with their "strengths"?

Using mulitple programs to try to "improve" their challenging areas can make school become a drag, yet you don't want them to think they are a natural at everything?

I guess I'm asking, do you teach to their stregnths or weaker areas?

Thoughts?

[MerryAtHope]

I'm interested in other view points on this. My feelings are mixed and I'm not sure how to balance the two.

Let's take spelling for example. Say your dc is NOT a natural speller. Do you use mulitple spelling programs or a different one each year hoping something will click? Or do you hand them a spelling only dictionary and teach them to use spell check - LOL?

They'll learn about spell check, but there are lots of situations where it would be embarrassing to not know some spelling, I think it's important to teach.

I guess it's similar with the dc's who are natural spellers. You could either "skip" formal spelling or pick a "light" program they can do independently and plug it on your scope & sequence. However, wouldn't that be similar to "busy work" since that dc doesn't "need" a formal program?

If I had a natural speller, I might check to see that their spelling was improving each year on grade level or above & if it was, I'd skip it. I use copywork and dictation anyway and I think for some kids it doubles very nicely for spelling.

Let's face it, there are areas our dc are better at than others and areas they are likely to always find a struggle.

So how do you balance how much time/energy to put into their "weaker" areas? And not run wild with their "strengths"?

I guess I prefer to balance the time as best I can. I think short, daily lessons will achieve more over the long term than hours per day in one subject. And I think different subjects support each other as well. I spoke about copywork and dictation above--this supports all areas of LA (and sometimes is the base of our LA except for spelling because my kids need focused work there). Math shows up in literature and science, likewise history and science show up in other areas we study. And reading and being read to improves vocabulary and general knowledge in many areas.

I might not get to both science and history each day--sometimes I'd rather double up on one & then double up on the other so it's not so many different books to read--but I do think a variety of subjects is important for us.

Using mulitple programs to try to "improve" their challenging areas can make school become a drag, yet you don't want them to think they are a natural at everything?

I tried doing 2 math programs one year, it didn't work very well for us! One math program is plenty! I'd rather spend time finding a program that will really help. That's not always easy.

I guess I'm asking, do you teach to their stregnths or weaker areas?

We do both, but I do try to keep their strengths in mind as I choose things, because those are usually the subjects they really enjoy. For my son it's history, so I buy extra history books and books on tape for him to enjoy & get the history channel. For my dd it's art, so I try to keep supplies stocked up & provide lessons etc... But none of that gets them out of daily math or spelling lessons, if that makes sense!

Thoughts?

(I answered in blue within the quote above). HTH some!

Merry :-)

[Rebecca in VA]

I find that the factor that *really* determines whether I teach material is my own mastery of the subject. If I'm strong in a subject and really enjoy it, I make very sure that it gets taught, even if I have to work extra-hard to make it interesting for my 11-year-old. (She and I have contrasting strengths and weaknesses.) She might cry and complain about the amount of literature I push on her, but I keep pushing it, even if I have to read it all to her myself. It's the same with history: I'll do anything to get her interested in history, even if it means packing her up for a field trip halfway across the world. Last year I ran a little TOG Year 1 class to give her some "history friends." I'm always ready to go the extra mile for subjects I'm strong in and want her to be strong in, too.

My weaknesses (math, science, logic) are her strengths, and I find it very easy to outsource those subjects. BJU Science DVDs are excellent, and I'm having her use them at an accelerated pace. She understands math almost instinctively, and even though I try to slow her down, she continues to go rapidly through math text after math text with little instruction from me. Outsourcing works well in foreign languages also.

When she was younger, her strengths and weaknesses, learning style, etc. weren't readily apparent to me. She flew through a lot of material at too rapid a pace, and I wasn't sure if I should slow down and cover the basics or let her keep flying through. I wish now that I'd covered phonics and spelling more thoroughly with her. She's OK in those, but she doesn't understand the rules well. I wish I'd been stricter about handwriting. I wish I'd made her count out the counts SLOWLY in piano. All the things that I wasn't strict about come back to bite her from time to time.

To sum up this rambling post, I think it's important to cover all subjects. I spend lots of time teaching subjects that are important to me, and I make sure she gets high-quality outside instruction in subjects that are important to her.

[Stacy in NJ]

I have two weak spellers. We use one quality program consistently. We'll probably continue with spelling long after others have given it up in 7th or 8th grade.

My goal is for my kiddos to be working to their capacity in all subject material, wherever that may be. I focus more on work ethic, stick-to-itness and managing frustration.

I have one child who has a very uneven learning curve. He's quite strong in math and any logic or mechanical related subject, but a pretty poor speller, writer and struggles to aquire new vocab via reading. We just work consistently on all subjects regardless. Even if a child isn't a natural in a particular subject, that doesn't mean they won't/can't enjoy the progress they do make and a sense of satisfaction at moving toward mastering something that's difficult for them. Sooo, it's more about effort and process and less about natural ability.

Natural ability is just the quality that makes us think we're great teachers when it's really just the kiddo.

[Mandy in TN]

I'm interested in other view points on this. My feelings are mixed and I'm not sure how to balance the two.

Balance is a funny thing. Ds likes math. He doesn't like reading. We do a ton of math, because he wants to do math. We do reading daily, because it needs to be done. However, I do not feel any need to spend equal time on reading and math. He likes math. Does this mean that he his skill level in math will always be ahead of his skill level in reading? Maybe. Maybe not. However, by spending enough time on reading to continue moving forward and letting him spend as much time as he wants on math, he is enthusiastic about learning. I doubt that would be the case if I forced him to spend equal amounts of time on math and reading.

My oldest is a 17yo 11th grader. He likes to read. He likes history. He does math, because it is required. He will stop studying math as soon as it is not longer required. He will not stop reading.

I guess I'm asking, do you teach to their stregnths or weaker areas?

Although I require my dc to be moving forward in areas that may not be their favorites, I teach to their strengths.

Just how we do it-
Mandy

[Karen in CO]

One of the reasons that my dh and I decided to follow a classical approach to homeschooling is so that we can avoid teaching just to our children's strengths and give them a well-balanced education.

My dh generally stays out of our homeschooling choices except for this area. He doesn't even want me to get the kids' learning styles evaluated because he is afraid that it would influence me to change how or what we teach. My dd loves history and art. We have tons of books on ancient Rome and lots of art supplies, but those are areas that she follows in her own time. I let her spend her time following her strengths if that makes sense. I focus on the goals that I we have set for school during school time which I try to keep short so that she can have time to spend with things she enjoys.

We spend the most time on the basics (reading, writing, and math), and we study art, history, and science after the basics are covered. I switched math around quite a bit trying to figure out how to teach math to this child, but even when she was struggling, we only spent the amount of time each day doing math that we had planned. She is a strong reader so I have to choose higher-level books than I had originally planned, but we spend the same amount of school time reading or studying literature that I felt was right - I didn't change it because she excelled in it.


I think if we focused mostly on the subjects she struggled with, it would suck the joy out of our day. If we focused mostly on the subjects she loved, she would get lost in the areas she struggled with..

Balance.

[OhElizabeth]

Not sure what other people will say, but I will observe that lots of people end up REGRETTING when they skipped or made light of or assumed their dc would grow out of some struggle point, and that regret hits later, say in junior high. My goal is to school with no regrets. We work hard on her weak points now, not to the point of inducing trauma, but certainly to turn them around if possible. I figure you take the "hand them an electric spell check" LATER, when it is inevitable. But when they're young, you work on it.

[Tabrett]

If my dc is strong in a subject, I skip up levels until I find where they are challenged. I had to do this with my phonics program. K was too easy, so I switched to 1st grade material.

On the other hand I would do the same thing with struggling subjects. I had to change math programs from RightStart A (which I think is pretty difficult) to Singapore Primary 1 & 2 B.

It would be better is you dc work "on skill level" and learn at a steady pace than try to keep you child on "grade level" and have your child struggle or bored.

My oldest dd struggled with spelling. We worked and worked and worked on spelling. She was in PS at the time. It would have been better if her teachers had let her study words on her level instead of just making the spelling lists shorter. Long list or short list the words were too hard and she didn't learn like she would have had the words been on skill level rather than grade level. I am so glad she is able to use spell check now that she is in high school and her papers are required to be typed.
She also excels in voice (music) I require she sing alto even though she is a soprano. I bump up her level because she can handle the material.

What I'm trying to say is that I don't try to give more work, just find the correct level for optimal learning.

[Carol in Cal.]

I want to always give my DD a well-rounded, but customized education.

I feel that she needs to master all of the skills, and a great deal of content.

For skills, I do all of them at once, but I focus on one at a time. So when she was struggling with learning to read, I really pushed her on it, but I also taught math and writing. However, I didn't push math as hard, and I didn't require a lot of perfect writing (except for copywork). I just kept them going, but at a less intense level than the reading. I felt that if I emphasized the reading until she really mastered it, a lot of other things would fall into place for her. One year I really, really pushed writing, on the same premiss; and another year I pushed math. Again, though, we continued with all of them.

For content, I do try to give her more content that she enjoys or is quite interested in. But I expect her to become proficient in being able to apply what she learns and relate things to each other in science, history, and literature. I try to give her chances to learn in a group when that is helpful, and to keep her progressing in all areas. But I am very flexible. For instance, she's been working on a great project with her robotics team, and so I picked out her science books this last semester so that they would complement her project work. This has really paid off--her science books became source material for the whole team, and also she learned the material in much more depth because they had to present it to judges. (And they won the project presentation award! WTM writing pays off!!!)

For literature, I use sources of instruction as they come up. So, for instance, although I had picked some literature to study this last semester, when "Romeo and Juliet" and "Antigone" popped up as available for field trips within two weeks of each other, I ditched my plans and jumped on those. DD attended both, and we discussed and applied literary elements, vocabulary, historical analysis, 'what else was going on nearby when this was written?' discussions, and ethical discussions of the characters. I also tied her writing assignments in literature to aspects of those plays for a while. This was a very rich way to go about teaching language arts, and depended on my being willing to untie from a curriculum. But, if DD had not understood the plays, I would have gone back and just worked on comprehension for them, and not done all the other stuff, but applied those skills to my planned curricula.

So I do play to her strengths when I can, but I maintain a background level of progress in all areas, in both skills and content.

[Nan in Mass]

I guess I decide this way: How much academic time and energy does the child have? First I cover the basic skills (reading, writing and drawing, and math) and then skills and basic content that my family consider important. Then if they still have time and energy to spare, I add in basic content and skills in areas like science and social studies. Then I concentrate on whatever the child is good at. If I can't tell, I aim for well-rounded and no-closed-doors. This is where my first two stopped. The youngest can go farther. He has the time and energy to go farther than very basic in science and social studies AND do lots of whatever his is good at.

Practically, this looks a lot like TWTM grin. At a young age, we work on natural history, languages and music (since they have a developmental window), reading, writing and drawing, making things, math, and stories - lots of stories, many of the natural history and history, the rest the whole bulk of the family children's books. In other words, skills, skills, and more skills, with as much content as we have time for in whatever the child is interested in. Later, as the child gets older and we can see who they might be, we let them specialize more. Now that they can draw and move and read and write and play music, we let them choose one or two to get good enough at to use for pleasure and escape the rest of their lives. Now that they have one modern language down well enough to travel with, they can choose whether or not they want to add another. They can choose what emphasis they want to put on their great books - stories or history or philosophy or politics. They can choose how they want to do science - lots of different subjects or a few in depth or at the for-poets level with a textbook just to get the basics. Math goes on forever because it closes too many doors to stop doing that. Some of my children have had to keep working at the basics in something during this stage (like writing), but at this point, if a good crutch is available (like spelling getting someone else to proof your papers), we let them use it and don't spend time trying to get better at that thing. We just continue to put in time doing the subject at whatever level the child is. And hopefully, this leaves lots of time for the child to do the things that will make them develop into an interesting adult, projects like robotics or travelling or composing music. And they'll figure out how to make a living doing one of those things.

My biggest regrets homeschooling revolve around either not continuing until they had the basics down or continuing past the basics in something they were either uninterested in or untalented in.

Some examples:
My oldest is the engineering type and mostly did public school. We made sure he had an appreciation and knew the basics, both skill and content, for the things that were important to our family. He has the basics of natural history down, can build things, is competent in boats, has read all the family children's books, can draw (at a basic level), can make music, and reads for pleasure. He wasn't particularly good at school and hated it. His high school made sure he could write adequately and could speak basic Spanish (more family requirements). They made sure he took college prep classes. We tried to make sure that he didn't burn any bridges (like deciding not to take 4 years of math or skip physics) in case he ever decided to go to engineering school, but we didn't worry about how well-read he was or how much history he knew. Because it was clear who he was and where his skills lay from the beginning, he was pretty easy. We didn't worry about making "well rounded".

My youngest is also the engineering type and homeschooled (except kindergarten). Academics of all sorts come more easily to him, so our expectations are higher. He is expected to do all the normal family stuff AND go farther in the stuff he doesn't particularly like, because he has academic time and energy to spare. BUT I am very careful to make sure I'm not keeping him from learning to program computers and making him better than adequate at history when I know that computer programming is going to be more useful to him. If he chooses to study more history instead of programming, then he can do so, but I'm not going to make that choice for him. He will be adequate at history and literature, which he is doing as great books a la TWEM/TWTM and rather enjoys. Unless he chooses otherwise, I will work to strengthen his strengths, so he will be good at something.

HTH
-Nan

[OhElizabeth]

That was really interesting, Nan. Thanks! :)

[cathmom]

I have heard at least one homeschool mom regret that she didn't spend more time on the dc's strengths rather than always trying to overcome their weaknesses. For my oldest, we did just enough science and math for college admissions. He won't be needing them for a major or career. But he did study 3 foreign languages and had several extra credits in literature beyond the normal 4 years of English.

[Renee in FL]

Not sure what other people will say, but I will observe that lots of people end up REGRETTING when they skipped or made light of or assumed their dc would grow out of some struggle point, and that regret hits later, say in junior high. My goal is to school with no regrets. We work hard on her weak points now, not to the point of inducing trauma, but certainly to turn them around if possible. I figure you take the "hand them an electric spell check" LATER, when it is inevitable. But when they're young, you work on it.

:iagree::iagree::iagree::iagree:

I wish I had pushed my 10yo harder in language arts - he is now in the 5th grade and facing having to "catch up" before high school. This means he will have to spend even more time than he would have had I achieved a balance.

[Laura Corin]

I do try to balance the hard and the easy subjects: Calvin is not a natural mathematician, but I try to make sure he spends as much time developing his English skills (this is where his talents lie) as struggling with his maths.

Laura

[LisaK in VA]

I try to find a balance -- we work at challenge levels (for most things), but when it comes to history and science, we go deeper vs. more difficult.

My son "get" most things pretty easilly, but even within his "good" subjects there are weak areas.

Take math, for instance, conceptually, he is right up there. Computation speed, not so much, but we work on it regularly. Multi-step problems, he has a tendency to rush through things and make mistakes, so I purchased SM Challenging Math Problems to supplement and give him extra practice -- but we only do one or two a day, and I'm teaching him how to break the problems down, identify the steps and take one step at a time. We're seeing great improvement.

In Language Arts, he's great with reading, comprehension, grammar and spelling (He spells the way I do, so in addition to the "rules" I've taught him some of the coping mechanisms I used as a child... he thinks it's funny, but it's working). But, he's a bit "below level" in the penmanship area. So, I expect he'll be doing some form of copy work through 6th grade. Slow and steady wins THAT race...

Writing has been another struggle -- and this is the area we've really decided to work on this year. So we're doing more simple writing assignments. I mix up the hand-written and the type-written assignments, so he's not doing too much of one or another.

So, I guess we do a few different things -- supplement to improve a specific deficit within an area, increase the duration of practice (over time, not of time) for things that are skill building, and focus on a particular area to reach a specific goal for the year.

I don't have to teach to my son's strengths, he follows them naturally. I do have to shore up his weaknesses, though -- because he would naturally avoid them.

[GretaLynne]

This is a very timely discussion for me, and I appreciate everyone's comments. I am in the process of having my dd evaluated at the local public school for possible learning problems -- she excels in math, art, and science but really struggles in spelling and writing. One of the things I have learned so far is that on her IQ test, she did average to superior in most areas but had one glaring low score in the area of "visual to motor processing". Basically, this means that handwriting is extremely difficult for her, it exhausts her. So the teacher who did the evaluation recommended that I get her typing asap so that she has a way to express her thoughts in writing without it being so difficult for her that it distracts from what she's trying to say; and require less of her in terms of writing quantity, but work to keep the quality really high.

So I'm thinking that rather than change the amount of time we spend on given subjects, maybe I just need to change how we approach them. For example, with narrations, I can either allow her to do them orally (and I type them out) or, once she's able, to type them instead of writing them out by hand. I'm putting this out there not as advice for others, but just wondering if anyone else has used this approach . . . ?