I was reading an interesting article on the ideas behind the new SAT - I don't have a link to it though, sorry. What got me a little upset was that the SAT has changed a lot more than any of us realized. The SAT used to be a test of thinking skills and concepts. Analogies (my favorite part of the test) do not test vocabulary as much as your ability to think in comparisons. And the math portion was the same way.
But the the people behind the new SAT have decided that they will, single-handedly, improve and revolutionize America's high-school curriculum by demanding that schools teach what is on the SAT. And what is on the new SAT? Well, the biggest thing is a writing section, something I have a problem with because grading writing is not as easy as a multiple choice question. What it means for high-schools is that they now have to actually teach writing in the classrooms. Unfortunately, it means they will teach to the test in many cases - teaching students to write to formula rather than to subject or content. The new SAT has also, sadly, done away with analogies and added questions which test the student's ability to spot grammatical errors and correct them.
The Math section has changed drastically too. I took the diagnostic for this new job, and while I did as well as I should have on the writing and verbal portion, I was floored by the math. For one thing, they have changed the wording so that if you haven't been in a math class in the last 20 years, you won't even recognize the jargon they are using in the question. And for another thing, they have added more higher algebra.
The president of the College Board (the people who write the SAT) has said he wants to turn our high-schools around by forcing them to teach writing and higher math. He seems to feel that this will be beneficial to America's students. But to me it just sounds like another way of forcing our schools to "teach to the test," if they will care enough to even bother. The big city schools where few of the students even consider college won't see the need to change, and really, aren't they the ones that need to change the most?
But, hope is out there. I will be part of a new program run by The Princeton Review to put college test prep teachers into our public schools. I think this is a splendid idea. I will be teaching to the test, so that the regular teachers don't have to. I have to say, I wonder how TPR is making money from this, and maybe they aren't, but I'll find out later. Training starts next Monday, and I'm psyched.
Last night I was watching a news show about Taboos in America. The only part I saw in its entirety was about this American woman living in England - Helen Kirwin-Taylor - who wrote an article for the Daily Mail entitled, Sorry, But My Children Bore Me to Death!. Apparently, she was surprised at the response. On one hand, there were many women who agreed with her, and were glad to feel they weren't the only ones. On the other hand, there were the people who considered her an unfit mother.
I lean more towards the other hand, though I know plenty of women on the one hand. I have always been appalled at the way some women talk about their kids as if they are just a burden. They all claim to "love their kids as much as any mother," but they don't want to spend time with them. When you find you don't want to spend time with your husband, don't you start thinking maybe this marriage is over? Why don't we think of the love of our children in the same way?
At one point Ms.Kirwin-Taylor says:
It's as though motherhood is an exclusive private club and everybody is a member except for us few. But then, kids have become careers, often the Last Career, for millions of women who have previously trained for years to enter professional fields of business. Consequently, few of those women will admit that they made a bad, or — worse — a boring career move to motherhood.
Yes, I guess I'm one of those mothers who made motherhood a career. But I have never once thought it was a "bad" or "boring" career move. I enjoyed the time spent with my son, once he started to be more than an eating/sleeping/crying/pooping machine (about 6 months old). I really was fascinated with this tiny person. I remember putting a purse or diaper bag on the floor next to him and watching him explore each and every item he pulled out. Fortunately, he was never one of those babies that put everything into his mouth. I loved reading to him at night, and did it from the time he was several months old until he was able to read Harry Potter on his own (then I had to read Harry Potter on my own). And when it came time to do the whole kindergarten thing, I felt lonely when he was gone. I was happy to homeschool him when the time came, and though he can be a real pain in the ass, I was glad to do it.
Now, he only has one more week of his freshman year of high school. I am extremely proud of how well he has made out after all the trauma of this past year.
Back to Ms.Kirwin-Taylor, who talks about making her children fit into her life and not letting them be the center of her world. My mother was that kind of mother. I loved her, and I know she loved me, but she was always more of a buddy than my mother. My older sister didn't even get that much from her, and resents it to this day. I prefer to be a mother first, and a friend second. Notice how I said "mother first." Ms. Kirwin-Taylor would probably think I was in denial about my incredibly boring life. She would be wrong.
Ms Kirwin-Taylor feels vindicated in her feelings by this:
All us bored mothers can take comfort from the fact that our children may yet turn out to be more balanced than those who are love-bombed from the day they are born.Research increasingly shows that child-centred parenting is creating a generation of narcissistic children who cannot function independently.
'Their demand for external support is enormous,' says Kati St Clair. 'They enter the real world totally ill-prepared. You damage a child just as much by giving them extreme attention as you do by ignoring them altogether. Both are forms of abuse.'
Perhaps there is some truth to this. But ultimately, it comes down to what kind of mother you WANT to be. Your kids are going to complain about you when they grow up no matter what you do: there will always be something you "did wrong." So, just be the best mom you can and hope it works out for the best. I'm sure Ms. Kirwin-Taylor's kids are perfectly well-adjusted, but I bet they wish she had taken more of an active roll in their childhood.
Funny, my son thought for a while that I was TOO active in his childhood. I guess I'll be hearing that when I'm old and gray. Meanwhile, I have learned to back off. I let him go off to school every morning, knowing he has learned how to get along and that things will be fine. But I admit, I still wait eagerly for him to come home and tell me about his day. He doesn't, of course. He's a teenager. He comes home and disappears into his room. Does the fact that I crave his attention say something about my own deficiencies? No doubt, but I am the mother I chose to be, and IMHO, it's a better choice than the one the bored woman chose.
So my son is still in school. I suppose this sounds like non-news, but if you had been here in January, you would be cheering as much as we were. Two calls from the principle in one week, a two day suspension, and massive teenage angst and rebellion. My son started to believe that nonsense about homeschool kids not being able to cut it in public school. We came very close to giving up on this whole public school thing - yes, again - but we decided he needed to stick it out.
Then the clouds parted, a ray of sun appeared, and a choir of angels sang. He realized that he not only could do this school thing, but that he could do it well. So now he's working at bringing several failing grades up to at least a B, and I think he can do it. He's decided to prove that homeschool kids can do anything other kids can do. Ironically, he wrote a tongue-in-cheek essay about how hard high school is and what you need to do to make it. He thought he was being cynical and acerbic, but the school thought it was good enough to print in next year's booklet for new freshman. Yes, he will do well, indeed.
Redneck Mother has a great post about a Newbery Medal winner that's causing a ruckus. Apparently, there are some people out there who think the word "scrotum" will leave our children scarred for life. What disturbs me even more is that librarians have been quoted as some of the ones who would ban this book. I guess they've never heard the words kids actually use for that part of the body.
So boy made it through his first semester of public high school, an achievement I cannot claim myself (private school, not public.) And despite a very steep learning curve in the area of behavior with students and administrators, despite having his backpack stolen, despite having two very challenging classes, despite a lack of self-control and self-discipline, despite illnesses which kept him out of school at least three days every month, despite being thrown into the dungeons with the "bad" kids for his lack of respect to authority figures, despite losing three weeks of actual class time while in this dungeon, he has managed to pass his classes. At the beginning of the year, I had hopes he would make the honor roll, but after this, the hardest semester I have ever been involved with, I am ecstatically happy that he has managed to pass everything. At one point, it was questionable as to whether he would even get credit for all his classes, but he persisted. I am very proud of him. Yes, he got himself into a lot of trouble, but he hadn't been in public school in many years, and he had to learn how to behave. Where many kids would never have learned - or learned too late - I believe my boy learned quickly and learned well.
So now what am I hearing? "Mom, since I proved I could finish a semester, can I quit school?" My goodness, I told him, you have completed the hardest semester you will ever have. The rest of the year should be a breeze (relatively). Why quit now?
I understand that he's tired and feeling crushed, but he has to realize what an accomplishment he has achieved. This is the hardest thing he has ever followed through on in his life, and he did well. He needs to understand that life is full of challenges, and that he can do almost anything if he tries. I told him to ask me again when the Christmas break is over. Perhaps he'll feel differently when he starts missing his friends. He was also excited about taking photography and orchestra next year, so he has to keep that in mind.
Anyway, I'll let you know if I become a homeschooling mom again, although at this point, it would be better if I didn't. After all, I got all "A"s in my classes this semester, and I am just waiting for them to send my diploma in the mail. Now the employment game starts. I won't tell you where I've applied, becuase I don't want to jinx it, but if I get it, I think we would all be impressed, me especially. So, later!
Everything I have ever thought about public schools (government or "G-Schools") has been confirmed, validated and justified. This supposedly "good school" my son is going to is nothing more than a warehouse to keep kids until they're old enough to be charged considered as adults. Public high school is not about education, at least not in the academic sense - it's about learning to conform and behave and cower before authority.
My son begged me to go to school. I thought it would be a good experience for him. Silly me. Since August he has been bullied by students, harassed by security guards and administrators, been out sick two to three days every month, had his backpack stolen, and nearly failed all of his classes. Even so, he has risen above all this, gotten his grades up from failing to nearly all B's, and determined to see this through. However, I believe the last encounter with "the man" has broken the camel's back. He was unjustly charged with a misdemeanor (how many schools do you know of who give suspensions for the official reason of "horsepley"?), then treated poorly by the security guard when he demanded to know why he was getting this referral. He was mocked and teased for even asking. Unfortunately, if there is one trigger my son has that will truly set him off, it's being teased. And he was being teased by those in power. So it was no wonder that by the time the Assistant Principal came along to hand out punishment, my son said, "I'm tired of this" and wadded up his pink slip and threw it in a corner. The AP is not the most understanding of men (as you can imagine) and proceeded to make it worse by escalating the punishment until my son finally said "F**k you." Well, this was something I never would have said to any adult, let alone any adult in power, but my son lost his judgment for a moment. That afternoon, he told me he was now in "AEP" which means "Alternative Education Program" but which is actually jail on campus.
My first response was that there was no way I was going to let my son associate with the type of kids that get thrown into Coronado's own private oubliette. But after Brian's behavior at the hearing (think Mr.Defiant), we decided he needed to be taught a lesson. Even so, I do not believe this is the way to run an educational institution. The Army, maybe; the Marines, perhaps; a prison, definitely, but not a school.
And they think they can put him there for the rest of the year! Everyone I have spoken to in the school system thinks this is excessive. But, they remind me, it's only a "recommendation." They can let him out for good behavior before that time. Unfortunately, this planned punishment has backfired. He actually likes it down there. It's like homeschool only easier and they let him sleep when I won't. He gets a little one-on-one instruction in each of his core classes, then he's assigned some work. When he's done, he can take a nap. And as long as he does the work, he gets a good grade, regardless of the quality. The only real punishment aspect is that he can't hang out with his friends because he has to be off campus before they get out of school.
Now he dreads going back to regular classes where he will actually have to work for his grades. And he'll have to work extra hard to catch up. But, as far as the admin here is concerned, that doesn't matter. At this school, I am the only one who cares about his grades. They are unimportant as long as he plays nice with the administration and doesn't cause trouble. Most of the teachers couldn't care less, either.
So, we have decided that December will end this experiment in juvenile detention one way or another. Brian has been beaten pretty hard by the system. He feels there is no recourse, that nothing we do will matter. We have tried to explain that we have some recourse, that we can cause a stink, and make them wish they hadn't messed with our son. Brian is fond of a phrase he heard from a friend at school, that "we signed a paper saying everything he does is wrong." But what we have told him is that they can only do to him what we allow them to do. If it comes down to pulling him out of school and never going back, so be it, but we would like that to be our last resort. Either he goes back to the general population in January or he comes back to homeschool. And if he comes home, the admin will come to view us as a real pain in their asses.
So, the boy will be starting public high school in August. No, I'm not thrilled by the prospect, but he is old enough to make his own decisions in that area, and he has the right to have the "high school experience" as he calls it (sigh). I'm not worried about his academic success - he should coast along quite well just as his father and mother did, and still get As and Bs. I worry about the atmosphere of high school. I worry about him being bullied, or getting mixed up with the wrong crowd. He has this silly notion of being duct-taped to a bench (!) which he thinks is "cool." My son has some very strange ideas. However, that is one of the reasons I don't worry about that whole "peer pressure" thing. He is very much an individual, and I believe I have given him the knowledge and the tools he will need to make the right choices at school. I just hope he is not terribly disillusioned too early on. High school is not like it is on TV, and that's really all he has to go on.
I had originally wanted him to go to my alma mater, but since that is in CT and we are in TX, and just applying would have cost us a mortgage, we just couldn't do it. I was rather depressed by that for a while. My high school experience was damn good. I never had to deal with drugs, drug dealers, gangs, bullies, or creepy principles (there were a couple of questionable teachers, but they will always be lurking on the fringes.) And I should qualify the drugs issue - I didn't smoke pot, but I had a friend who did to her detriment for about a year there. But pot was the only thing I ever heard about. Our school was full of future lawyers, doctors, company CEOs, university professors, computer software engineers, and the like. Then there's me.
The DH is not thrilled about this decision to go to school. His objections stem from his problem with government schools in general, which I generally agree with. But the boy is old enough now and has enough real education under his belt that I don't think it will be detrimental to him. At least, not academically. DH thinks he will not get the proper classical education that he always wanted him to have, but he has hopes. The DH and DS actually had a bet that the school would offer Latin courses. Both the boy and I figured they have enough trouble teaching English let alone Latin. Seriously, this is a school where the Mexican kids take Spanish as their "foreign language" and get a C. Anyway, boy is sporting a nifty iPod until his dad asks for it back. Yeah, he lost the bet.
I am happy to announce that Monroe's Second Reader is finally available at the store. Worksheets for this one were easier to create because it's a lower level than than the 3rd and 4th readers. This one is for 2nd and 3rd graders. If anyone is interested in a sample, just email me.
In the past few months, I have scanned Monroe's 2nd, 3rd and 4th Readers. I have also scanned Appleton's 3rd and 4th. I had originally thought of these two series as different but equally useful. However, now that I have read every selection in each one, I begin to think that my original choice of Monroe's as the best reader to focus on has been vindicated.
Monroe's Readers are charming. They emphasize common virtues like hard work, kindness, generosity and devotion to God and family. The stories are about children doing everyday things - well, everyday things back in the 1870's. The poems are sweet and uplifting, and there are a lot of them. The stories teach by positive examples as opposed to emphasizing what happens to bad children. And the writing in the 4th reader is wonderful. The biggest drawback of Monroe's Readers is that they have little in the way of exercises to give the child a chance to become more familiar with vocabulary and concepts. So, I remedied that and decided to put them up for sale. The other drawback, which seems most problematic in the 4t Reader, is the emphasis on religion. While this is obviously not a problem for families homeschooling in the Christian traditions, it might put off those who are secular homechoolers. That's why I have a separate package of secular selections pulled from the 4th Reader. I think every homeschooler should be able to use Monroe's Readers without having to do much self-censorship.
The Appleton Readers, although published in roughly the same time period, are very different. I had decided to make them available as scanned editions because they are the only readers that make extensive use of exercises. There are several different exercises at the end of each selection, and they focus on vocabulary, comprehension, and other things like geography and history. After looking at several of the selections, I thought they were just the kind of thing that should be made available to the public in a scanned form. However, now that I have read every story in the 3rd and 4th readers, I begin to have my doubts. Where Monroe offers more charming stories of average children, Appleton offers more stories about animals. That would not be so bad, except that, like Disney and his Bambi syndrome (I hated Bambi as a child and have not seen it since the first time I saw it in a theater in the mid-60s), these animals tend to die or get killed off at an alarming rate. In one story from the 3rd reader, a man travelling by horse with his dog stopped for a nap by the side of the road. He told the dog to guard his saddle bags, which were full of gold. When he got up, he rode off, and the dog ran after him, barking like crazy. Thinking the dog had gone mad, he shot (!) his own dog, who ran off in the direction he had come. The man followed and discovered his dead dog still guarding his saddle bags. Now I ask you, is this any kind of story for a child? The grade level would probably be 4th or 5th grade, but it's still a bit brutal. And what does it teach? Nothing useful, as far as I can tell.
Then there's the story in the 4th Reader (5th and 6th grades) of the race between the hedgehog and the hare, in which the hedgehog cheated by sending his wife to the finish line to make the hare think the hedgehog was ahead of him.
"So the Hare went on, running backward and forward three-and-seventy times. The seventy-fourth time, however, he did not reach the end of the field; in the middle of the furrow he dropped down dead. But the Hedgehog took the three artichokes and the three onions he had won, called his wife out of the furrow, and away they jogged merrily home together; and if they are not dead, they are living still."
There's a bedtime fable the kiddies will ask for again and again! And the moral is ... anyone? .... anyone? "This story teaches how the cunning of mind is superior to brute force." Cool! Cheat your way to success and kill off the competition.
I realize I'm not doing a very good job of selling these particular readers to anyone reading this blog. However, I would add that these two stories are the extremes. There are several interesting stories involving children, too. Most of the stories, whether about animals and children, are more tame, although the animals do often die, as they are wont to do in real life as well. Since I don't believe in censorship, I offer these Readers in their entirety with perhaps a warning printed before a particularly nasty bit. And I still think they are as useful as Monroe's Readers because they present the child with the rich language of a bygone era that allows them to become comfortable enough to read the classics.
In fairness, I would add that there is one story in Monroe's 3rd Reader that has a warning due to the fact that dogs are treated none too kindly. So even Monroe is not all sunshine and daisies.
So my son wants to go to high school and quite frankly, that has me biting my nails. It's not that I want to shelter him from that environment - quite the opposite. It's that I really don't think he knows what he's getting into. He wants the high school "experience," but he only has a vague idea of what that is from TV shows. We know of two people who were homeschooled up through 8th grade and then tried going to high school. One went to the very same highschool he may be attending and did well. The other tried a private school, a public school, and wound up back at home. Looking at that, I guess the DS has a 50 percent chance of survival.
He and I both know that if he goes, it won't be for the education he won't be receiving. I expect he'll pick up some learning, but his main objective is to socialize, go to dances, meet girls, join geeky cliques, and get beat up and shoved into lockers. I have already stated that he will be doing extra school work to prepare him for college entrance exams. I have also told him that he will be walking - up hill, about a mile, in the heat. He is less excited about that, but still seems determined. He actually came to me at one point and said he had doubts about this whole thing because as it stands now, he enjoys a good deal of free time. If he goes to school, he will be there all day, have to do homework, any extracurricular activities at school, plus his violin lessons (he just started those this week.) But I don't think he has changed his mind. However, the final decision rests on his behavior at our yearly summer retreat in the Gila National Forest over the July 4th weekend. If he can go the entire 5 days without having a meltdown (he has anger issues) over something someone says or does, then he has a go. Otherwise, he gets to wait another year.
It took a week, but I am mostly myself again. I picked up the bug at a sleepover for the 13-year-olds at church (yeah, I know they call it a "lock-in," but that just sounds very ugly to me.)
OK, so 12 13-year-olds and two adults. We realized after the fact that we should have replaced that third adult when he backed out on us at the last minute, but we thought we would be alright. I thought it was stressful, but apparently the kids didn't think so, and it seemed to do what I wanted it to do - bond them together as a more cohesive group. I don't hear half as much name-calling and insults as I did before.
When I was preparing questions for a certain game we played, I realized that although my son is homeschooled, he has still experienced just as much - if not more than his peers. Questions like, "Have you ever stayed home from school by pretending to be sick?" Oh, yes, he has. Technically, it's "stayed in bed," but it counts. Then there's "Have you ever snuck out of the house?" Another check for him. "Have you ever lived overseas?" Not many of them could answer yes, but he can. At one point, I was looking over the questions to be sure I wasn't asking too many that he couldn't say yes to, and that's when I realized that he's a pretty well-rounded kid. He has experienced almost all the things - good and bad - that the average American kid experiences, thanks to his stints in the prison sytem the public school system.
Enough for now. I have a lot of schoolwork, but I do want to get back to the Magdalen as soon as time permits.
Most people have at least heard of McGuffey's Readers even if they have never seen one. That is because they are schoolbooks that were published from 1836 to the 1920's. Now that's staying power. In that time, the readers were revised three times; that in itself would be unheard of today, when school textbooks have to be revised every 2 or 3 years so the publishers can sell more books.
The first revision was in 1856 and the second in 1879, long after W. H. McGuffey's death. Nothing from the earlier versions was retained. That 1879 edition was published virtually unchanged into the 1920's. But it means that the most popular edition has absolutely nothing in common with the original edition aside from its name. I know that a lot of people who want or sell editions of McGuffey have no idea that there are different editions. I have asked on eBay more than once which edition a seller had, and they would say "the revised." Hmph.
I now own all three revisions of McGuffey's Fourth Reader. I have a number of fourth readers from different publishers in order to extablish baseline comparisons against publishers and time periods, and I wanted to compare the different editions as well. You can find reprints of the 1836 edition published by Mott Media, and reprints of the 1879-1920 version are available from Amazon. I was going through and comparing them for content, style, and tone when I noticed this little caveat in the Mott version:
Slight changes have taken place for the sake of clarification. Those changes are as follows: a. some punctuation has been changed to keep it consistent wth current usage; b. many words which used to be hyphenated are now shown as one word; c. the following lesson has been omitted because it was not appropriate today: XVII, and the last half of paragraph 11 in lesson VII.
The changes in punctauation and hyphenation I can see, no problem. But you know I had to know what they meant by "not appropriate today." I don't have an original copy of the 1836 edition, so I haven't been able to find out what lesson XVIII was, but lesson VII is in the 1856 edition that I have. So, in the interest of information and education, I will share with you the part deemed "not appropriate today" by Mott Media.
From "The Whale Ship" (Regular font indicates what was left in. Italics is what was omitted.)
On the 27th of December, the three boats, with the remainder of the men, started in company from the island, for Juan Fernandez, a distance of two thousand five hundred miles! On the 12th of January, the boats parted company in a gale. Then commenced a scene of suffering, which cannot be contemplated without horror. The men died, one after another, and the survivors lived upon their flesh. In the captain's boat, on the first of February, three only were living; they cast lots to see which of them should die. It fell upon the youngest, a nephew of the captain. He seated himself in the bow of the boat, with calmness and fortitude -- was shot and eaten!
Shot and eaten! How did the captain explain that to his sister or brother? "Oh, yeah, well, he was the youngest and tasti -- I mean we were starving, weren't we!"
Ok, so it's a bit gory and gruesome, but I think most kids today would just find it amusing. I know I did. Now if I can find out what lesson XVIII was...
I was thinking about one thing my troll said.
I've worked with and around home-schooled children for many years, and they all have the same faults. I do not say "most", I say "all". They all believe they are far more capable and talented than they actually are.
I wondered if this might have some truth to it. It's a valid complaint. I see signs of this in my son as well as some of his peers. But today I saw this and realized it's not just homeschoolers: it's an entire generation.
Thanks to their overinvolved boomer parents, this cohort ["millenials"] has been coddled and pumped up to believe they can achieve anything. Immersion in PCs, video games, email, the Internet, and cell phones for most of their lives has changed their thought patterns and may also have actually changed how their brains developed physiologically. These folks want feedback daily, not annually. And in case it's not obvious, millennials are fearless and blunt. If they think they know a better way, they'll tell you, regardless of your title.
You can't tell me they're ALL homeschooled. (via Cranky Professor)
My father recently got on my case about not sending my DS to a public High School. His argument was, of course, socialization. He thinks it's time he was thrown into the system, to learn about how life really works. I have heard this argument from many people, and the gist of it is this: life is hard, school is hard, people can be cruel, and every child needs to learn to deal with them. There's a kind of "sink or swim" attitude here, a throwing our children to the sharks and hoping for the best. "Whatever doesn't kill us makes us stronger." Granted, there is some validity to this, along with the idea that "we got through it ok, so can our kids."
But I've been giving this a lot of thought. I think we can all agree that there are problems with our society today, and it seems like it just gets worse as the years go by. How many of you DON'T think society was safer when we were kids than it is now? I don't kow of anyone personally. I travelled by plane by myself when I was 6 years old, no problem. My son is 13, and I still won't let him travel by himself. My DH used to bicycle to other towns when he was DS's age. We won't even let him bicycle to the mall.
So what has caused this deterioration in society? There are many, many theories about it, from divorce to sexual permissiveness. But I think at least some of it stems from the attitude of our public schools. We throw our kids into it knowing it won't be pleasant, hoping it won't be too bad, but thinking we are doing what's right. But what happens when kids learn to "deal with" things like bullies, drugs, overbearing teachers, arbitrary rules, and shifting priorities? They deal with it the way the KIDS AROUND THEM deal. And kids are not being taught or guided by adults in this. They have to fend for themselves. If you've read Lord of the Flies you should know where this is going. Kids are savages. They need to be taught things like manners, compassion, respect for society's rules. It's no wonder our culture is angry, aggressive and violent. It's what our kids are learning in schools when they're learning to "deal with" people in general.
So the next time someone asks, "What about socialization?" my answer will be that MY son, at least, will not be one the people fueling our angry, aggressive and violent society. Perhaps he will be a leader, as will some of the other homeschooled kids, and they can perhaps, throw some water on those flames.
As some of you may already know, I have been working on a project for some months now that has to do with 19th century textbooks. To date, I now have 5 books scanned and on CDs and the worksheets for 2 of them complete or almost complete. I am going to go live with some of them on eBay in the next few days.
So, why 19th century textbooks, of all things? Well, I posted a few things from one book HERE and HERE, so you can get an idea of what prompted this. However, I think what is really motivating me is the fact that today's textbooks have had all of the vitality, morality and intellectual rigor sucked right out of them. They are pure pablum, not fit for any thinking person. When my son was in 5th grade, he had a version of The Wizard of Oz in which many of the vocabulary words had been changed to "easier" ones. Please! The Wizard of Oz is not a difficult book to read. I could see doing it with Ulysses or even Jane Eyre, but not The Wizard of Oz. But this is just one of the many atrocities that are committed on literature nowadays in the name of education. If you want to read more, read The Language Police by Diane Ravitch. That was a real eye-opener for me.
After reading The Language Police, I found myself looking at old textbooks. The ones I remember as a kid do, indeed, have more interesting content, but even then textbooks were being bled dry. They still had some soul, but not as much as they started with. Going back further, to the 1870's, I found the first real textbooks, readers produced for schools which were just beginning to spring up around our growing nation. These are the books that shaped our great-great grandparents view of America, and from them, our own views. These books are often very religious, mentioning God and admonishing children to thank Him for all His works. These books are also very moralistic, teaching lessons about right and wrong in a very straightforward manner. And, of course, they have stories about the founding of the United States, with moralistic lessons about its founding fathers. Many people will find the above subjects objectionable in one way or another. 19th century readers are not for them. However, I have weeded out a selection of secular stories and poems that some people may be interested in: teaching morals is important, and should not be limited to those teaching Christian values.
I also have a selection of short stories by Saki that I had my son reading, along with the worksheets I created for him. Saki (aka H.H.Munro) is hilarious, and really likes to zing the Edwardian values of his time. Well worth reading, even if you don't want any worksheets (Saki is free at Project Gutenberg.)
So, if this sounds at all interesting to you, take a look at what I have on eBay by using the button on my sidebar. And I welcome comments and suggestions.
From Monroe's Fourth Reader (see previous post):
Benjamin Franklin, when a young man, visited Dr.Cotton Mather. When the interview was ended, the doctor showed him out of the house by a back way. As they proceeded along a narrow passage, the doctor said to the lad, "Stoop! Stoop!"Not at once understanding the meaning of the advice, Franklin took another step, and brought his head pretty sharply against a beam that projected over the passage.
"My lad," said the divine, "you are young, and the world is before you; learn to stoop as you go through it, and you will save yourself many a hard thump."
Yet it is not an easy lesson to learn, --the art of stooping gracefully, and at the right time.
When a young man stands before you in a passion, fuming and foaming, although you know he is both unreasonable and wrong, it is folly to stand as straight, and stamp as hard, and talk as loud, as he does. This places two temporary madmen face to face. Stoop, as you would if a tornado were passing.
It is no disgrace to stoop before a heavy wind. It is just as sensible to echo back the bellowings of a mad bull, as to answer in the same tone the ravings of a madman. Stoop gracefully, and, amid the pauses of the wind, throw in the "soft words that turn away wrath."
When reproved for an error you have committed, for a wrong you have done, for a neglect chargeable against you, stoop! Do not try to justify or excuse a palpable fault. This only increases the wrong. This only excites greater wrath. Stoop!
If you say mildly, "I know I was wrong; forgive me," you have stolen away all your complainant's thunder. I have seen this tried with the happiest effect.
A friend came to me once with a face black with frowns, and with fury bottled up ready for an explosion because I had failed to fulfill a promise. I foresaw the storm, and took both his hands in mine as he approached, simply saying, "I am very sorry; I forgot. Pardon me this time." What could the man say? He kept the cork in the bottle and I escaped a terrible blast.
How much more easily and pleasantly we should get through life, if we knew how and when to stoop!
But when tempted to do a mean thing or a wrong thing, --when solicited to evil by companions or circumstances, --then don't stoop! You may give up your own personal rights if you will, you may give "coat and cloak" to an unjust demand, --sometimes even this is necessary, --to stoop in silence to an injustice. It may be done without disgrace or guilt. But never stoop to a meanness, to a base deed. Never stoop to pick up a forbidden object, the possession of which righteously exposes you to scorn or censure.
I have recently become enamoured of old school textbooks. When I say old, I mean old - anything from the 20's or earlier. I am continually amazed at how much children were taught back then as opposed to what they are taught now. My most recent acquisition is from 1872 - Monroe's Fourth Reader published by Cowperthwait & Co., Philadelphia. This Fourth Reader is a 4th year textbook, though how old the students would be could vary. But consider what our 4th graders learn and then read this (from the preface "To Teachers.")
The natural mode of acquiring languag is through the ear. If a child should hear nothing but correct pronunciation, he would pronounce correctly, even though he did not attend school or have special instruction in language for a day. But unfortunately he imitates the defects quite as much as the merits of those to whom he listens. In the course of a few years the habits of the organs of speech become fixed, the ear is less impressible, and the individual retains faults early acquired.
I just can't imagine seeing anything like this in a book printed today, although one written for speech therapists - specialists, mind you - might repeat some of these ideas. Later, I think I'll post a story or two from the reader. See if you know any 4th graders who could comprehend them.
This makes me glad mine is 12 now.