A couple of things Norma has said, both in the comments and in private e-mails, have made me think more about my approach to curriculum planning.
First, some background: I am a sociologist and worked as an academic for 8 years (not including part-time and sessional teaching). For 7 of those, I worked in a ‘red-brick’ university in England (this means not Oxford or Cambridge but an old, well-respected place). I’m a good teacher, though the students who weren’t interested in doing much work often transferred out of my classes. One of the best compliments I ever had from a student was from one who said that she knew my 3rd year class would be hard work (becaue she had taken a 2nd year class with me) but that she also knew she would learn a lot.
But I am also basically lazy. I had colleagues who stayed up until the wee hours of the morning reading stuff they weren’t familiar with and writing lectures. Unfortunately, for all that work and suffering, they were often frustrated that their students didn’t understand. The students were frustrated, too. I did teach things I didn’t know a lot about but I am too lazy to stay up reading stuff until 3 a.m. Laziness motivated a different approach. In England there is a system of external examiners, a senior academic in the field who moderates the assessment to ensure that it meets national standards (peer review for teaching). Our external examiner often commented on how much my students seemed to have learned in that course I didn’t know a lot about. I had worked out how to get them to learn things I didn’t know.
Now I should be clear about this. This was a sociological theory course. I know the broad themes in sociological theory and a bit about what many theories are about, again broadly. But I am not interested in theory for the sake of theory and so haven’t read all of these folks in detail. And I wasn’t about to start in order to teach an undergraduate course. I started my curriculum planning by determining what the objectives were — what do students at this level need to know. Then I found a good textbook. The next bit is the tricky part — I came up with activities that got the students to read beyond the textbook for at least a few of the authors. And I set essay and exam questions that challenged them to think critically about the theories they had read. I spoke to the librarians who were more than happy to help students make use of things like the special collections. I read the textbook. And I learned a lot from their essays and class presentations.
How does this experience translate into homeschooling? Well, my approach is basically the same. I work out the broad learning objectives and try to find resources that will enable my daughter to reach those objectives. In addition to things like ‘know how to do multiplication’, I also want to help her become a confident independent learner. Another objective is to help her become more self-aware — What kinds of structures work for me? How long can I concentrate on something like that? What helps improve my concentration?
Often a good book is a great starting place. That library find of the series on Québec history (which includes the book on la nouvelle france) provided just such a starting place. It was at her level. And it had a lot of interesting questions, illustrations, maps, etc. She was already interested in the topic because of a museum visit in September and reading about Acadia. I then looked at the museum website because I knew they had a Canada Hall that covers all of Canadian history including this period and found that other resource (tip for those who don’t speak French, that link will have a button on the top somewhere to change the language to English; all official Canadian websites are bilingual).
And then yesterday, I browsed through the Canadian geography section of the children’s part of the library and found a couple of books to extend that element of the learning. One was a little book that lays out 5 themes in Geography in a pretty clear way. The other is a history of maps for children. We will then return to the books about Nouvelle France and use our Historical Atlas of Canada to talk about what Cartier and Champlain were doing. The little book of themes will also help us plan other things we could look at. I already have some ideas — waterways and transportation, and resource based economies seem like obvious topics.
I’ve been reading some homeschooling blogs and finding ideas there, too. You may have noticed a new list of blogs and a new set of links. I update these all the time. As some of you will remember, I started my own blog when I went on holiday partly as a way to have access to my “favourites” while away from home. So this is where I keep what I find.
I have been calling what we are doing ‘project based learning’. This makes sense to my daughter who seems to understand what a ‘project’ is. But when searching on-line, I keep coming across the term ‘unit-study’. I think this is the same thing. Correct me if I’m wrong.
All this is to say that while it might look as if I’m working really hard at this, it doesn’t feel that way. Mostly I am thinking about this and talking about this. I actually like thinking and discussing so it is kind of fun. I’m glad all of you are prepared to listen to my thoughts and interject some of your own from time to time.
And this way of working can also lead to some fun thinking. Cate and I were talking about dyeing yesterday and how that could be the basis of all sorts of learning. I had already come up with chemistry but she came up with anthropology, history, art, and all sorts of other things. And then I started to think about natural dyes and that led to plant studies, ecology, etc. And the great thing about a thing like that is that I would learn a lot, too. Just like I did when teaching sociology.