Bug with a 3 poud package of bees

And I drive an SUV. There isn’t even a trunk to separate driver and children from the buzzing in the back.

But somewhere inside that small office, fear turned to curiosity. The cookies and the soda didn’t hurt any, either.

The queen in her cage with attendants

By the time we got home, the bee suit was a formality worn not so much for protection as for entertainment. At what other time in your life do you get to dress up in a beekeeper’s suit?

LE pretending to be a honeybee

And I found out my children are fearless.

LE holding a honeybee

The first sting was inevitable, but it was the third bee my little Bug picked up by the wing that stung her.

After that sting, Bug came in crying and through her tears pleaded, “Why do they have to die, Mommy? Why do they have to die when they sting?”

Through her pain, she was worried about the one who caused her pain.

Love your enemies, I thought. And she knows too well what death is.

After that sting, I saw just how forgiving my children can be.

If you are interested in following our journey a little more closely, I have been updating my Facebook fan page regularly with photos and tidbits about our bees. I have a video of my daughter installing the bees in the hive and one about their orientation flights I still need to upload. I may share them here, but they will certainly be on my fan page and on my YouTube channel.

I have to open the hives today. Hopefully there won’t be too much runnnig and screaming on that video!

That’s a skill I could use, but have no interest in. Which is probably why my hair styling equipment consists of a brush and a brush alone. The hair dryer lurking in my drawer was purchased for a homeschool project and the box of curlers is something my husband found in the attic while going through the wrapping paper, also left by the previous owners.

And still the post sits. Why? A few years ago, I would have been all over a challenge like this. I remember the year I taught myself to crochet, knit, quilt and can. It was an exciting time of learning born of an internal battle against the simplest of all foes: boredom.

I used to go to the Y twice a week and as I worked out on the treadmill or the bike, I’d look out the window and think there had to be a better way. But with small children, the walks were too short and too slow. And as tired as I was at the end of the day, the running around after them never seemed to result in any sort of improved fitness.

Now, I’m in a very different place. It has been over a year since I’ve done any sort of formal exercise plan. No trips to the Y. No daily walks. No exercise videos. Just life as needed and I’m in better shape than I have been in years.

That Year I Taught Myself Everything was a lot like the time I spent at the Y. I was occupying myself with a substitute for what I really needed. Lifting weights is good, but it doesn’t really compare to regularly hauling and stacking firewood in order to heat your home. There is purpose added to the physical exercise.

Don’t get me wrong. There are still a ton of things I would like to learn. I’ve been devouring books about raising poultry, beekeeping and gardening. I’m still wavering on the best cultivars for our orchard and my mind wanders to sheep and our dreamed-of family milk cow often enough to disrupt lesson planning.

This year has been an education and I know that it is just the tip of what we will need to learn to be successful in our little venture out here. I no longer need anything to fill the void or to challenge me to keep expanding my skills. Life as needed is presenting me with all the challenge I need just now.

But there is one little thing I’d like to try to do this month: make candy canes. I have no idea why that fascinates me so, but this year may be the year I finally try.

How about you? Anything you’ve always wanted to learn to do but never got around to? I’d love to hear about your progress if you decide to tackle something new!

According to Learning Styles, Concepts and Evicence, a study [pdf] published in the journal Psychological Science in the Public Interest, that whole learning styles thing may not be all we think it is.  Sure, it seems to form the basis for many a text both for public school teachers and homeschoolers, but what is the basis for it?

Although the literature on learning styles is enormous, very few studies have even used an experimental methodology capable of testing the validity of learning styles applied to education.  Moreover, of those that did use an appropriate method, several found results that flatly contradict the popular meshing hypothesis.  Learning Styles, Concepts and Evidence

Rather than hard science, the movement has its origins in the more touchy-feely self-esteem movement of the 70s. And while their study in no way disproves that learning styles exist nor even that teaching in a child’s preferred modality may be beneficial, they argue rather strongly that we are spending a lot of time and money on something with very little scientific evidence behind it.

If education is to be transformed into an evidence-based field, it is important not only to identify teaching techniques that have experimental support but also to identify widely held beliefs that affect the choices made by educational practitioners but that lack empirical support.  Ibid.

Transforming education into an evidence-based field

And that’s where the researchers begin to lose me.  I am all for effective classrooms, but I’m not so sure we want education to become an evidence-based field.  I’m not sure we want to view teaching as data delivery, learning as data acquisition and testing as the measurable difference between the two.

I’m not sure we want education reduced to what can be tested in a multiple-choice format.

There is so much more to education.  It is about the whole child and how he is to be brought up.  It is about “enlightening the understanding, correcting the temper, forming the manners and habits of youth and fitting him for usefulness in his future station.”  Direct instruction and other behavior based programs may be empirically proven to improve math scores, but do they improve children?

How a child is taught is important, and not just for its ability to transfer the largest amount of data for the least amount of resources.  I may be going out on a limb here, but I’m guessing JJRoss’ decision to unschool, the Headmistress’ decision to use Charlotte Mason, Renae’s decision to use the Principle Approach, and The Mama’s decision to use a classical approach had little to do with which methodology would most efficiently lead to proficiency in any given subject.  Their decisions were based in what they believe about the nature of teaching and learning, and the role of the teacher and student.  As such, how we teach our children invariably communicates our beliefs about teaching and learning and the roles of teachers and students to our children.

How we learn affects how we think.  It affects our attitudes and beliefs about the very nature of human learning and the role we play in the construction of our own knowledge.

And this is why we must be careful of the so-called research-based classroom.  It carries with it its own definition of education that has been somewhat narrowly interpreted as high test scores.  I am all for assessing what we are doing in our classrooms and in our homes, but before we do this, we need to carefully define what we are looking for.  As The Core Knowledge Blog points out,

If we begin instead with a definition of education, then a curious thing may happen. The results will likely be better, yet they will not rule what we do. We will recognize that learning is for the long term as well as for the next day. We will recognize that some of the most difficult concepts and works last the longest in the mind. They may not translate immediately into results, yet they are unlikely to vanish. We will expect short-term results but teach beyond them.  There’s No Such Thing As Teaching

Discussing education as an evidence-based field restricts it to what is observable, measurable and testable.  It tells us what teaching methodologies produce good results on standardized tests such as the CAT or I-STEP.  It does not, however, tell us which methodologies produce thinkers, problem-solvers, artists, book-lovers, and teachers.  It does not tell us which methodologies support the child in setting and achieving their own goals, nor which help them to take responsibility for their own learning.

Are we really willing to let go of all that in the name of higher test scores?  Or do we want to hold on to the belief that education means just a little bit more than that?

Still, children need to learn to read, but I will continue with that thought in a future posting.

homeschool homeschooling education learning styles research based classroom

Why is it important that we listen to the president and other elected officials, like the mayor, senators, members of congress, or the governor? Why is what they say important?  Classroom Activities, Pre-K-6 (pdf)

I’ll let you know my children’s answers to that later, after I ask them, but here are mine:

I.  I’m Christian, and the bible is pretty clear:

Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake:  whether it be to the king, as supreme; or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.  For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:  As free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.  –1Peter 2:13-16 (KJV)

I consider myself blessed to live in a nation whose ordinances allow me considerable liberty to express my disagreement with established authority, but I try very hard to apply this verse especially to my discussions:  “For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men…” By well doing hearts and minds are changed, not by inflammatory rhetoric.

II.  These are our elected leaders, and our responsibility as citizens is pretty clear.

The Salvation of the state is watchfulness in the citizen.  –Hartley Burr Alexander, inscribed on the Nebraska State Capitol Building

If we do not listen, we cannot know, and if we do not know, we cannot act.  Listening precedes all useful action, something I fear some may be forgetting.

Please share your thoughts on the prepared speech, the speech as it is delivered and the accompanying lesson plans.  If you had the stage, what would you tell America’s youth?  And what have you told your own children?

Obama school walkout education homeschooling

Tomorrow, President Obama will speak to the nation’s school children, presumably about setting education goals and staying in school.  At least that is what the White House is saying.

This is the first time an American president has spoken directly to the nation’s school children about persisting and succeeding in school. We encourage you to use this historic moment to help your students get focused and begin the school year strong.  Letter from Secretary Arne Duncan to Principals

This historic moment.  We are inviting students to become a part of history, much like when I was in school and the television cart was rolled in to watch the Challenger lift off.  I don’t know why I exactly stumbled over that part of Duncan’s letter to principals.  His job is PR for the program, but it still seems a bit over the top.  Even if George Bush, Sr. hadn’t done it almost 20 years ago.  The technology may be a bit different, but it appears that speech was about succeeding in school and was intended to address all students.

Both Bush’s went much further than Obama toward making our schools a national stage for federal education politics.  Granted, Obama wishes to go further still, but the course has already been charted.

For twenty years, we steadily shift the power in education from the local community toward the federal government, and do nothing but occasionally grumble.  The president makes a speech, however, and we call for a National Keep Your Child at Home Day.  Suddenly, we’re worried about brainwashing in a “totalitarian-type telecast” befitting “banana dictators.”

Compared to the power we have willingly handed over (even demanded to be taken from us), I must agree with Joanne Jacobs on this one.  What is so sinister?

It certainly isn’t because he’s black, so why the uproar?  Honestly, I think a lot of it has to do with something My Domestic Church quipped.

This president has used more prime time press conferences and informercials than any previous president.

Even liberal bloggers can see a bit of public relations overkill in the speech and its pre-game show.  Which brings us back to that word “historic” that made me choke on my coffee.  But there’s more to it than just that.

Read the post over at American Elephant.  How much of it really has to do with the speech?  Not much.  Instead, it is expressing general frustration over the direction the country is heading.  It is a direction we have very little control over individually, but we certainly can pull our kids out of school for one day.

One day.

Education has been moving toward national standards and centralized control for my entire life.  Finally, some people are standing up and saying “Enough.”  Unfortunately, it is an insignificant gesture aimed at an irrelevant event.

Incidentally, I do believe it is important to listen to the President so I’d like to invite you to discuss the speech here tomorrow.  We’ll be doing some warm up activities I’ll share here for discussion before viewing the video.  I have an appointment so will be watching it after the copy is made available, but feel free to share your thoughts!

education Obama speech My education, My future

I have much respect for parents who take matters into their own hands in an effort to protect their child. But when it comes to home-schooling, I’m worried about the big picture.

The “big picture” appears to consist of three main points:

1. I could never homeschool because he’d have to put up with me all day.
2. I don’t think I’m qualified.  Teachers are paid professionals.
3. He would never forgive me.

Number three is a decent argument and although I am a passionate homeschool advocate, I’d never tell anyone they had to homeschool.  Still, the basic premise of these first arguments is “because I don’t think homeschooling is for us, it isn’t for anyone.”

Then there are the “fear-based reasons.”

1. School-budget cuts.
2. Bad influences.
3. Insufficient education.

These don’t seem like fear-based reasons to me.  When a child is struggling in school, be it academically or socially, and programs they need to be successful are being cut, it is a parent’s right and duty to look out for the interests of their children.  That certainly does not always mean homeschooling.  There are a number of ways parents can become more involved in their local schools, many of which Amy lists.  But they do not always work.

Perhaps I should defer to someone who has chosen to homeschool for these very reasons.  Our decision was not based on the public schools and frankly I’d continue to homeschool even if the public schools had no problems…or if we could afford private school.  I homeschool because of what I believe about education:  namely that it involves the entire upbringing of a child, not some artificially segmented part of a child’s day.  Life and learning should be integrated and children should have the opportunity to become active members of their communities, not passive observers stuck in a classroom.

This is where some of Amy’s concerns seem based in ignorance. And I do not mean that in a negative way.  I had similar thoughts about homeschooling before I started.  I didn’t have enough contact with homeschoolers to form a valid framework for my thoughts about homeschooling.  Thus comes the question:

How can a home-schooled child have compassion for his community when he isn’t part of it?

That’s the thing–he is part of it.  My children experience community by playing catch in the backyard.  By participating in programs at the Y.  By going along with me to doctor’s appointments and on errands where they get to know our “community helpers” through frequent and informal contact rather than through a lesson delivered in kindergarten.  By stopping on the way home to watch the firemen wash their truck.  By volunteering.  By participating in community programs and events.

In short, the homeschooled child has a unique opportunity to truly be a part of their community rather than passively learn about their community.  Schools have often been viewed as “learning communities.”  But we, too, are part of a learning community.

One that extends beyond age ranges and grade levels.  To me, that is the bigger picture.

homeschooling homeschool home education

Homeschooling is essentially a protest movement. Regardless of motivation, homeschoolers believe public schools are unable to prepare their children to live in the world.  mlive.com

Perhaps for some.  Or perhaps it was at one time.  Or perhaps we are falsely perceived by a public who only hears from us when we are protesting a proposed law.

I am full of criticisms of public education, as are many of my fellow homeschoolers.  But then that is hardly unique to homeschoolers.  We didn’t write “Nation at Risk,” or “Why Johnny Can’t Read.”  Our measly 2% of the population hardly influenced President George Bush, Sr. to bill himself as “the education president.”  And I know his son wasn’t listening to us when he drafted No Child Left Behind.  Education has been a bit of a battle ground for some time, and homeschooling is only one (very small) part of that public conversation.

Being critical is not a protest movement.

Supporting reform is not a protest movement.

Choosing an alternative is not a protest movement.

It is only a protest movement if our decision to homeschool is directed at what is going on in public schools.  Like an organized boycott, a sit-in or march of some sort.  I can only speak for myself, but I did not choose to home educate because of what is going on in the public schools.  I chose to home educate because of the virtues inherent in this form of education.

Some people garden as an act of protest.  Most of us, however, just prefer the taste of homegrown produce or enjoy the hobby for its own rewards.  It is the same with home education.

Unfortunately, what homeschooling can do is isolate children from the market of ideas, especially when it comes to biological science. There is a large amount of fringe literature published by religious groups that support the claims of creationists while providing no real information about the vast field of evolutionary biology.  Ibid.

There is a large amount of fringe literature available on any topic imaginable and you don’t need to be a homeschooler to find it.  I do find it interesting that we’re talking about the “market of ideas” in public school, although by and large there is only one idea presented, taught and tested.  And that isn’t exclusive to the whole evolution debate.  There isn’t enough time to present anything like a marketplace of ideas with testing looming overhead, and all the baggage students bring with them to school.

And again, this isn’t about homeschooling.  We only account for approximately 2% of the population.  Yet according to a recent Gallup poll, only 39% of Americans say they believe in the theory of evolution, 25% do not and 36% don’t have an opinion.  Education was a factor in the beliefs, as was church attendance. Surprisingly, a poll in Britain revealed that only 25% of Briton’s thought the theory of evolution was “definitely true.”  This isn’t even an American issue.

If I were concerned about Americans’ lack of knowledge regarding Darwin and his theory, I would look first at why people are graduating high school…public high school…without this knowledge long before I’d jump on the homeschoolers.

Homeschooling allows families to isolate their children from good information by providing them only with information that is comfortable with their own biases.  Ibid.

The potential is there.  The potential is there anywhere someone has control over the curriculum.  Should that control come from the state or the parent?  What about when parents disagree?  What about when students disagree with the content that is being taught them?  One of the more interesting questions in one of my ethics courses dealt with this very debate.

The question was whether it was ethical to pass a student who demonstrated a knowledge of evolutionary theory that surpassed the course requirements, but who didn’t believe it.

There is a fundamental question about control here, but it isn’t about homeschooling.  We are just a bit of a catalyst for the discussion.

Like homeschooling is a protest against public schools, creationism is a protest against anything that opposes a literal interpretation of the Bible. When it comes to the origins of life, creationism is not a scientifically educated movement.  Ibid.

Kapture never supported his assertion that homeschooling is a protest movement against the schools, and now he’s claiming that creationsim is a protest as well.  It isn’t.  It is simply a belief.  One that existed prior to Darwin and prior to his predecessors who had already begun to look at the world outside a religious worldview.

Back in February, academics and scientists across Europe got together in Germany to discuss difficulties regarding the acceptance of evolution.  Some fear these lingering beliefs in creation are a danger to scientific thought in this country and the Western world in general.  I don’t exactly buy that, but our schools’ ability to graduate students who can scarcely read just might.

homeschool homeschooling creation evolution Darwin

But The Wheel on the School starts off with an intriguing premise made through the insight of a village teacher.

For sometimes when we wonder, we can make things begin to happen.

And the teacher dismisses his small class of six a whole hour early with the promise that they will spend the evening wondering why.  All because little Lina wrote an unassigned essay about storks which nest all around her small village but not in it.

And I’m not sure which I found more delightful: an afternoon off school in order to wonder or indignant little Lina the following morning.

“Why, Teacher, they never did [wonder]!  They went ditch jumping.”

As if wonder only happened while sitting quietly on the dike and trying to wonder.  But an unanswered question is a curious thing and once it captivates your imagination, it does not let go so easily.

Imagine if we had more teachers like this one, ready to set aside arithmetic for an unassigned essay and let out school to simply wonder why.  I had an instructor in college who said it was her job as a public educator to stamp out creativity wherever it reared its ugly head.  She was part of a system whose greatest achievement was that it educated children until their favorite question was no longer “Why” but “Will this be on the test?”

Whether or not something will be on a test is the last question on my children’s minds.  But they certainly ask why.  Again and again.  Sometimes I answer and sometimes I don’t, but at the end of the day I find I have to remind myself that asking why is the beginning of learning.  So while making dinner when I’m again asked to explain the color of the sky or why my daughter is not a bird, I try not to send the little explorers away.  Instead I answer,

Hmmm. . . I wonder.  Why do you think?

And sometimes the answers can be quite intriguing.

education homeschool homeschooling

The New York Observer, for example, summarizes the program’s lofty goals thus:

QED “has little to do with earth mamas teaching hippie spawn. Instead, try field trips to Egyptian pyramids. Visits to the Louvre. Harp lessons from a member of the New York Philharmonic.”  The New York Observer

Because the rest of us, of course, are earth mamas.  And our poor hippie spawn will never have the chance to see anything beyond the patch of organically grown veggies near our earthship home.  Nothing like an estimated $30,000 fee to bring “homeschooling” out of the recesses of the press’s imagination to acquire a few additional stereotypes.  Now we’re urban elites, longing for the glory days of the British aristocracy to be revived here on our own shores.

For cityfile, the real reasons for homeschooling are obvious.

Obsessive parents no longer have to worry about sending their kids to an expensive private school where, despite the hefty tuition, they still don’t get to handpick every teacher and student their child comes into contact with, personally select the school uniform, or dictate the lunch menu in the cafeteria.  cityfile

Instead, they can homeschool.  And thanks to QED, “they don’t even have to join a religious cult in Montana to do it!”  But, well, cityfile appears to be too posh to capitalize its own name, so perhaps it is a bit much to expect them to distinguish between religious cults up there in Montana and here in Nebraska.  I think we both belong to that great swath of the American landscape better known as “flyover country.”

Other than the seemingly irrelevant title, Page Six’s “Hot for Teachers” does a little better job getting at the core philosophy of QED and the inspiration behind it.  Something a lot of us can probably identify with if you throw out the stereotype-laden subtitle.  And the impromptu move to France…although I can certainly identify with the sentiment behind it.

Melissa quickly realized there was no need for concern. In their Left Bank apartment, “we had our lesson plan for that first day. Within three or four days, we were speeding through. There were no distractions! We realized how much time gets wasted in a classroom. We’d anticipated that we’d be in school for four or five ours—because kids are usually in classrooms for five-and-a-half to six hours a day. It ended up taking two hours and we were done.”

That left time for outings to explore Darwin’s theories in the Galapagos, as well as field trips to Egypt and other parts of Africa—not to mention visiting virtually every museum in Paris. By trip’s end, the family realized none of them—even the kids—wanted to go back to Little Red. “All five of us knew we’d experienced something incredible,” recalls Melissa. “And we wanted to hold on to it.” They decided to continue the children’s homeschooling in Manhattan “for another year. It was really a lark, initially.”  Page Six

But eventually, Melissa wanted to go back to being “just a mom,” so they hired a tutor to take over where she had left off.  With their children’s successful re-entrance to the private school scene in their high school years, she realized she was on to something and the idea for QED was born.

What all of these articles completely miss is that you don’t need a $30,000 tuition, an apartment in Paris or a personal and very highly paid tutor to achieve the same kind of individualized and rich educational experience this company is offering.  And it is available to you whether you live in Manhattan or Montana, and whether you are an earth mama, religious zealot or just an average American who cares deeply about your child’s education.

Like QED founder Melissa Meyer discovered, the school part of homeschooling can go amazingly fast without the distractions of the school environment, leaving you a lot more time for life.

Hat Tip: families.com

homeschool QED Quality Education by Design

He makes it clear that problems being faced by some schools in some areas should not direct policy and law making for all schools.  I haven’t seen much vilification of public school teachers in the media, but then my radar is a little more sensitive toward the vilification of homeschoolers.  As a teacher, I received nothing but respect but maybe that is a curiosity of working in a 100% Hispanic school district.  At any rate, he does a fine job of outlining the main problems with No Child Left Behind and the testing craze it has spawned.

I.  Watered down curriculum:

First, by forcing all students to pass certain tests, we’ve essentially had to “water down” important courses. In New York, for example, the biology curriculum has been gutted of content so that everybody can pass a “Regents level” science exam. The new algebra curriculum is great, but the cutoff score is so low that students have figured out that practically anybody who can fog a mirror can pass it. Under the guise of raising standards for all, we end up selling short our most capable students. There is little reward to excel, only to “pass the test.” Both ends of the spectrum get ignored at test time just to get enough students “over the cut score.” By their very design, “magically” determined cutoff scores can be manipulated to produce a predetermined number of students who will pass a given test. Beating the testing game has become an end instead of a means to an end. (Emphasis mine).

There was a time when teachers in my district were shown a graph with a little bubble, the target students.  Children above that bubble would do fine with or without you, children below that bubble were too far from the target to waste resources on.  Almost all instruction was focused on that small bubble near the middle where the teacher was most likely to to be able to have a measurable effect come testing time.

II.  Waste of instructional time

Now, all year long, precious days are lost and enormous amounts of money are spent on annual testing. Out here in the country we have a saying: “Nobody ever fattened a calf by weighing it.” Unfortunately, we’ve figured out that only tested subjects “count” anymore. Many of our limited resources get pumped into the few areas that get tested; other areas are given short shrift when it comes to funding, staffing and, more importantly time. (Emphasis mine).

Yeah.  Once I counted up the required hours for all the “core” (meaning tested subjects), I had exactly five minutes left in the day to teach science, art and history.  I can’t help but laugh when people talk about homeschoolers potentially weak in science.  Who in the public school system cares about science anymore?

III.  Boxing Children Rather than Developing Individual Talents and Interests

In order to play the NCLB game and to avoid having the stigma of being labeled a “failing school,” there is a lot of pressure not to classify needy students in order to avoid having to disaggregate data and make AYP for special education students as a separate subgroup. In addition, students with very limited abilities are dumped into classes that are way beyond their developmental abilities instead of being given appropriate instruction at a level at which they can be successful. Some have been forced to sit through lengthy exams that they have no hope of passing. In the same vein, we need to recognize that not all students will want to pursue a four-year college degree.  (Emphasis mine)

So, uh, now that we’ve established what the current fixation on testing is really accomplishing in many schools, let’s make the homeschoolers play the game, too.

Make homeschooled students take the same tests as public school students are required to take in order to continue homeschooling.

How much sense does that make?  But I’ve written on this subject at length before and shan’t go into it again:

• Why would homeschoolers object to state testing.
• A more concrete objection to testing homeschools.

But it does seem a bit ironic to spend most of a letter attacking testing and then throw a few more kids into the crazy mess it has created.

homeschool homeschooling No Child Left Behind standardized testing