Sometimes I do go on (remember this five-or-so-homeschooling-posts-within-a-post?).
Today I will give you one little thing to ponder when it comes to teaching history.
[I've had to go through and add edits, because apparently writing a quick post is not going to fly with you, my dear readers!! Whom I love!]
Disclaimer: I learned this very late, after a long struggle with my own failed education in history.
[edited to say: By this I mean that *I* did not learn history in all my elite education, partially because at a crucial time it was replaced by the progressive idea of social studies.]
So I can't say that my older children, at least, benefitted a ton from these musings [because, not knowing much about the subject, it took me a good long time to think out my approach]… at least, not from the more focused aspects of them. Still, there is room for “what I would do knowing what I know now” in the advice business.
The style now in classical curricula is to adhere to a “cyclical” method of teaching history.
This is how it goes: Start a young child — in Kindergarten, say — with something like “cradle of civilization” (another name for what we used to call “pre-history” to “ancient history”). Divide the eras up roughly into four, and continue with each era. In fourth grade, start again, sort of spiraling up in complexity for your older child, but efficiently bringing your new Kindergartener along for the ride. Continue in this way until you are done, incorporating each child somewhere in the cycle.
It has its appeal for the overwhelmed homeschooling mother, no doubt about it.
However.
[Another edit, as I find that this post seems discouraging to the relaxed, history-oriented homeschooling parent, when it's meant to feel liberating to the anxious, frustrated, compliant homeschooling parent.
I love the cyclical method of teaching history and endorse it.
I am convinced that history is the hardest subject to teach all the way through to high school, because a curriculum is always going to feel too constraining to the person who sees the varied pageant of man's story. In particular, I feel that imposing the start of the cycle on the very young (K or first grader) is counterproductive.
Note the verb “imposing.” If your preschoolers are building Lego ziggurats or writing their names in hieroglyphics, then your work is done — go get an ice cream cone and put your feet up! But if you are stressing out because they want to run and jump and can't really remember the names of the months, then I would like to say, “Don't worry.”]
However!
The cyclical approach doesn't take into consideration the young child's innocence of experience. By using this method, you are attempting to jump-start his understanding of events using those literally furthest from his time and place (unless you happen to live in Mesopotamia, in which case, go for it once you have fulfilled the other conditions).
It's my strong belief, and I am happily backed up by Aristotle (yes, he is happy to back me up, that helpful old Greek fellow), that we should begin with what the child knows. What he knows is his family and his town. The latter only a little bit.
It's much better to help the child begin an inquiry into events that have taken place as near to him as you possibly can, than to wrestle with his undeveloped consciousness of vast expanses of years and of ways of living, so substantially different from anything he's ever encountered as to resemble fiction. Boring fiction. [Talking here about how a dry study can make a child feel! Not about how it can be in your homeschool.]
He can be made to assimilate facts about ancient cultures, flooding rivers, early forms of communication, and primitive tools, but they won't be differentiated in his mind from things that are actually unreal.
That is, you might want to tell me about a preschooler of yours who truly loved hieroglyphics or spouted off about hanging gardens, but I maintain that to him, such things are no different from Legos or army guys. His imagination is working in a certain way, appropriate to his age, that doesn't include a strong distinction between real and unreal. (Listen, if you have a child who spontaneously needs to know about these things, fine. I'm talking about a method.)
[Again, I'm not saying that it's bad! It's fun! Except the “making him” part… but if he's doing it because he likes it, then awesome.
I'm just saying you aren't getting the product you signed up for, which is a child of the age of 7, let's say, who is getting the first step of history down pat. So if it seems a bit of a pointless drag to you to have to do these lessons– and believe me, I've been there — then there are other things to do!]
Most importantly, he won't grasp the significance of these things — that man has everywhere and always made laws — laws that we find recognizable, that ancient cultures formed in a certain particular place, that the origins of civilization uniquely prepared the world for its turning point of the birth of Christ — until about the third go-round.
[By this I really meant that I am not sure the purveyors of these curricula themselves understand that these are the reasons we are so vitally interested in ancient times. One issue I had as a child was that I simply wasn't interested in ancient Egypt (ironically!) or Sumer and couldn't be made to be… until I found this out. Warren Carroll made this point about history in his comprehensive History of Christendom, and his wife, Anne Carroll, developed a version for high school called Christ The King Lord Of History: A Catholic World History from Ancient to Modern Times. I wouldn't recommend it as a text, because it's better to have original sources and what Charlotte Mason called living books, but I do as background and a sort of outline for you, the teacher!
I question whether, if the maker of the curriculum doesn't understand this larger point, and I find that most of them do not, you or your child will get it either when you use their products. So, although pointing this out may stray from my point that the very young child's imagination may not be ready for a study of such distant times, I think that knowing the overall importance of the time period will help us when we are deciding when to introduce it.]
So, mostly a waste of time, and certainly a bit frustrating, in most cases, for you.
[The excited poring over books about the Nile — or whatever your lively child is doing to drink in ancient culture — isn't a waste of time, but the program is. And doing the formal part of it at the age of 8 or 9 will be much simpler.
Also, there is a certain opportunity cost. If what your child needs is large motor skill development and better awareness of his immediate surroundings, then I maintain that introducing the Nile Delta is going to impede his progress. There is a limited time that a child before the age of about 8 or 9 will sit still. Don't sabotage your efforts by adhering to an unrealistic curriculum.
Again, that said, if your young one is captivated by a tale of ancient Rome, then go for it.]
Instead, I encourage you to tell the young child stories about the place you live and the people who lived there. Help him to see the timeline of his own life and that of your family. [This can be as simple as getting to know the calendar!] Have him delve into the tales of “olden days” that his grandparents can tell him. Have him make maps of your block.
Start from what he knows and go outwards from there. Start with some simple aspect of state history in first grade and the American colonial period to the Founding in second. If you live near Civil War sites, then start there. If you live near pioneer trails, start there. A timeline that is flexible (binder-style) will help you impose the order you so crave. [A Kindergartener can make a timeline of his own life, but it's not necessary. Here again I strayed a bit from talking about very young children.]
By third grade you can introduce the larger themes of eras and great movements — always tied as much as possible to stories about people who made them.
[Now we are back on the cyclical approach! You are doing great and your children will let you know when they are ready to study big sweeping subjects, so don't get discouraged if your very young child isn't ready for Mesopotamia.]
Michelle says
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you!
Mary Keane says
Haha! I took my four year old son out of preschool this year. I keep discovering that we’re really doing quite a lot of “school,” as unstructured as it is. Our neighborhood was once a horseracing track, so we’ve gone on walks looking for where everything was. (The jockey house is now a private home, for example.) My sister-in-law is a big traveler, so he always wants to find where Aunt Jennifer is on the map, and relate it to where we live, and find pictures of the different places she goes, and ask what the weather is like there, etc. It’s been very natural, just expanding upon his curiosity. I do think that what is lacking so often in the study of history is a sense of being part of the whole procession. History as a dry succession of disconnected names and dates and events to be regurgitated kills it!
Melanie Bettinelli says
Have you looked at The Story of the World history books? They are as far from “History as a dry succession of disconnected names and dates and events to be regurgitated” as can be. It’s really about interesting stories, yes stories, about people and places that engage a child’s imagination. They are stories written for early elementary and take into account the child’s age and experience. In fact the first book, the one about Mesopotamia and Egypt and Greece and Rome, begins with an inquiry into the child’s personal history and leads the child through a process of wondering how we know about the past and the people who lived long ago.
The idea is precisely to make history fun and entertaining to a child at the level he can appreciate it. Which is, yes, the level of fairy tales and Lego guys. And I think that’s fine and fun and in my experience has been frustrating to neither me nor my child. Instead it’s been a grand adventure that has fired the imaginations of my kids who love dressing as Egyptians, and Roman slaves and medieval knights and princess and characters from the Arabian nights.
What they’re doing is putting in hooks that will be there later to hang those facts and names and dates off of, you aren’t doing drill or tests or regurgitation, just enjoying ripping good stories and learning a bit about the world that the child has already encountered in Bible stories and, in our case, museum visits and picture books. The stories help the child to form a relationship with these distant times and places and people so that when you come back when he’s older he’s already got a friendship with them, an interest, even a love. Then, when he’s got to memorize the dates and names they aren’t dry and dull and killing because they are already old friends he’s happy to visit again, this time with the wonder of understanding it more on a new level. Then the timeline becomes a welcome tool that he embraces to help him keep track of it all and he wants to learn the proper order of the kings of England or the presidents of the United States because they matter to him because he encountered them first in the realm of story and playtime.
And it doesn’t have to be an either-or. You can map the neighborhood one day and then look at a map of Egypt the next (And then peruse at a Google Earth satellite pictures of Egypt the next.) You can tell him stories about the grandparents at breakfast and then read about Rome at lunch and then take a walk around the block and learn about the history of the town in the afternoon.
Maybe some kids and parents will find this method dull and frustrating. In that case, I most certainly encourage them to ditch the ancient history book and do the local history instead. In our case, my kids have really embraced it. We’ve visited local archaeology sites and learned about what was happening right here, gone to the art museum to look at the ancient art collections, read piles and piles of picture books, looked at images of art online, read children’s versions of great literature like the Children’s Homer and Beowulf for Children, which were loved by all my kids, and never taken a test or memorized anything more challenging than a poem.
Leila says
Melanie, as I said in my post, if something is working for you, then great!
Also, I’m really speaking here of very young children and possibly frustrated parents. If these kinds of things are what float your boat, then I am all for them.
One caveat about “History of the World” -type books: They tend to be Whig in their approach: They are usually written by Protestants who believe that the world is progressing out of the “Dark Ages” via the Reformation to a more perfect state.
For a good Catholic overview of history (but not, alas, a good textbook — just a resource), see Christ the King, Lord of History by Anne Carroll.
http://www.amazon.com/Christ-King-Lord-History-Catholic/dp/0895555034/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1411402691&sr=1-1&keywords=christ+the+king+lord+of+history
Also, there was an ambiguity in my wording in the post, which I have edited…
Melanie Bettinelli says
Thank you for your gracious understanding. And yes the edits make it much clearer what you were getting at. I’ve not really encountered the frustrated moms, so I guess I missed understanding the intended audience. I’m glad to see we basically see eye to eye with the major differences being ones of emphasis.
Laura Jeanne says
I think there is great wisdom in this. I use the Ambleside Online curriculum, and while I love it in general, I do feel that a lot of the history in the early years is over kids’ heads. I just started Year 1 with my 6 year old son. We are reading stories from ancient Greece right now and I can clearly see that while he may find the stories themselves interesting, he has no grasp whatsoever of what “ancient” means, let alone where Greece is.
I like your idea of doing maps of our neighbourhood and a timeline of a child’s life, before doing a timeline of history. It makes sense, and if I’m not mistaken Charlotte Mason herself did advocate something like when children are young, only moving to a world history timeline when the child is old enough to create it without help.
I’m definitely going to do this with my son. I’m not sure if I want to change our curriculum entirely, but I can definitely see the benefit of focusing more on what the child knows from his own life, in the beginning. Thank you!
Virginia says
Great post! Something that makes complete and total sense, but that I hadn’t thought about out loud before! I feel learning local history is important for kids because it really develops a sense of community, which is something we as parents and other adults in kids’ lives need to make sure we’re teaching them just as much as we are arithmetic.
Anne-Marie says
It’s true, kids have very little sense of time. We started our timeline the day one of my kids said in astonishment, “You mean Grampy was alive during World War Two?!” Part of it is that they don’t have enough experience of numbers for “fifty years ago” to be meaningfully different from “a thousand years ago.” (Which leads to my favourite educational hobby horse, the need for kids to experience quantities, but that’s a rant for another day.)
North Americans are somewhat hamstrung in this area, because local recorded history is all quite recent. Our family has been lucky enough to live where we’d walk past the remains of Roman walls to attend mass in a Romanesque church, so ancient and medieval history did relate to what was already familiar to the kids.
One way in which ancient history can be brought to young children is through the connection with Bible stories. They aren’t local to most of us, but they are familiar. I agree that young children won’t get the sweep of ideas and events between, say, the Babylonian exile and the Annunciation. But they can learn about King Cyrus defeating the Babylonians or about the Romans being in charge when Jesus was born, and then later they can put those (now also familiar) pieces into a larger pattern.
Rosie says
This is exactly what I was thinking – when we connect history to Scripture, I know it engages my kids a LOT more, but I’m wondering if part of that is because it’s similar to their “local” history? Saint stories, too – they love learning about history in relation to their favorite saints, because they practically consider them family! But we’re faaaaar from any formal history study – my oldest is only 5 🙂
Rozy says
My goodness! I wish I’d known this (or thought of it) twenty years ago. No worries, I can pass this wisdom along to my adult children when they are married and having children and homeschooling. Thank you so much for sharing this concept, it makes complete sense and is so much easier (walking around the neighborhood, telling parent and grandparent stories) than trying to evoke an ancient civilization. Many, many thanks for sharing.
Alicia says
We were reluctant to start Story of the World with our 1st grader this year, partly for this reason and partly because I have littles (almost 4 yrs and 2.5 yrs) who we’d like to include in the same history lessons. Incidentally, Veritas Press has a K-level “Bede’s History of ME” that is fun for establishing the concept of history from different angles. They follow it up with “Bede’s History of US.” We did the first “ME” last year, part of “US” this summer, and are using Sonlight’s World Cultures core this year to get a general, light-hearted introduction to the world before we start the common 4-year cycle next year. . .because I do want to school everyone together in history, and the classical method appeals to us. I don’t expect them to remember facts or dates or important events the first time (especially my little guy, obviously), so much as to get a sense of the big picture story of the world–and that is something I think is accessible to their imaginations, particularly as my kids (even the little guy!) have lengthy book attention spans. My eldest has a precocious grasp of themes and intangible connections, though of course she doesn’t use the word “theme.”
And, living near DC as we do, we anticipate finishing Bede’s “US” next summer and continuing to explore local US history options for summers to come. It’s a both/and approach, I suppose. So far, it’s working well–though I admit I had to get a tight grasp on myself to move on past the “Ancient Egypt” exposure after a mere 4 days. 🙂
Donna L. says
Thank you so much for this down-to-earth, but with an eye toward Heaven plan!
My History education consisted basically of remembering people to whom I felt no connection; their actions and when they occurred–with not even the slightest bit of interesting or warmth. Sad. I really couldn’t care less about History, as a student, and I’m having a time jumping in as an instructor..I love your ideas!
polly says
I agree! I dabble in teaching history (my oldest is second grade) but really it’s just dabbling. For anyone who wants to use the Story of the World but doesn’t want to get too wedded to it–I recommend Jim Weiss’ CDs. He is such an engaging storyteller. We listen to them in the car when we run errands, which means less work for me (I never crack the book open). If the children want music instead…we do music! All things in time.
My great-great-aunt wrote a book in the 1980s about our family. She self-published it; it contained detailed stories of her parents, her live-in aunt, and the 8 children. When I was growing up I devoured that book! I love history and my father grew up (and still lives in) Charleston, SC so as a child we explored many historical sites. I love family history and learning my ‘roots’ (my children are the 5th generation to live on our farm–my maternal family’s farm). There is something very grounding about it. All that is to say that if anyone is reading this who has ever gotten the itch to ‘storytell’ by writing a book of family stories–you should do it! I have a strong sense of what life was like in the early part of this century in the Southern South because of these stories, and the values my great-great-ancestors had and the way they conducted their lives. It is priceless. There are stories that touch on racial issues, religion, politics, etc but never in any explicit or didactic way; my great-great aunt’s mission was simply to ‘tell the stories’ with no underlying agenda. She even tells some of the sad or embarrassing stories. What a gift.
Thank you for this nugget of wisdom and good reminder!
Kate says
To a first or second grader the way people lived in the US colonial period or the Civil War is just as foreign to them as the Ancient Egyptians or knights of the Middle Ages. To a child growing up in CA, the tobacco fields and plantations of VA are as mysterious as Mesopotamia. Aristotle’s idea of moving from the more know to the less know is proper to the study of natural knowledge, because it’s always based in sense. However, in theology, for example, you move from the less know to the more know, since it’s based on divine revelation, not sense. History is based on records of the past; it’s not something you come to through reasoning or the senses. It builds upon men’s discovery of the past and the causes of events start way in the past and move forward, not backward. The American republic is built upon the ideas of the Enlightenment and you cannot really understand the founding, unless you study European history. The study of history is more than just an accumulation of dates and VIP’s, it’s also an understanding of our culture and the how’s and why’s. The grammar stage is not up to the deeper ideas, but it is important for them to become familiar with characters of history so they will become part of their cultural memory and help them with their studies later on. The cyclical approach makes a lot of sense.
Leila says
Kate, I don’t quite agree about the colonial period being foreign to an American child, for the reason that we have commemorations of many of the events of our own country’s history in the calendar. Thus, a young child begins to be exposed to “Columbus Day” and “Independence Day” and many local holidays (we have “Evacuation Day” here in Massachusetts, for instance) — and even reads poems about them. Where we live, colonial history is very much alive. Another family might find a different period more accessible, but I was giving examples. My suggestion was precisely that the child in CA begin with what the (near-ish) past looked like in CA.
These things become familiar to the child as lore…
Not quite, re: Aristotle. I wrote about what you are touching on in this post: http://www.likemotherlikedaughter.org/2014/01/teaching-children-about-god-a-book-for-the-life-syllabus-the-lmld-library-project/
And for teaching about God, we agree. But things that pertain to human knowledge should start with what the child knows. Since his very sense of the passage of time must be developed, we must… let it develop.
I am not opposed to these things (events even of the deep past) coming up in conversation, especially in the form of stories about people –but remember, my post here is about Kindergarteners and first graders! Surely you are not suggesting that one begins mentioning the Enlightenment at this stage! Not that I even agree that “you cannot really understand the founding” without that study — not if we are talking about children. Or that the founding is based on the Enlightenment full stop.
Children can certainly understand that particular events took place. So I would have to say that yes, for young children, names and dates are essential, especially “accumulated” on a timeline — whereas “causes” are not. That comes later, when they have mastered the general flow of time and have acquired a sense of what is real and what is imaginary. I think that introducing the Enlightenment (and the ambiguities of the label) before high school will be counterproductive. My post is about very young children.
So it’s a matter of distinctions, I think.
As I stated in my post, I do think that the cyclical approach makes a great deal of sense, but NOT starting with K and Grade 1.
Kristi says
I love this. We follow AO and love the history readings (my son’s in 2nd grade) and we supplement with whatever he wants to read in his free time (Story of the World, WW I & II books) — he is all about history! But of course he doesn’t have a grasp, really, on the scope of it all (I’m fine w/ that, but I see it’s an argument in your favor.) I hadn’t considered your approach, which does track, I think, Charlotte Mason’s approach w/ geography (local), and I’ll definitely incorporate this and start it w/ my daughter, in K and a different type of learner. Thank you!
briana says
I’ve done it both ways, and for us, the local and deeper stuff is what *really* stuck. But it was a lot of work for me.
Leila says
Briana, I think it can be easier if we rely on holidays, using a sort of “historical season” approach. And also books about people — for instance, the Laura books!
Mystie says
Or, sounds like, don’t worry about history until 3rd grade? 🙂 Our K-2nd years are mostly phonics, arithmetic, and read alouds which include Bible stories. Once they’re reading on their own, I have a huge stack of Childhood of Famous Americans for them to read. 🙂
Kate says
The funny thing is that Bible study is done on a cyclical approach. Indeed, most of religion is done this way. One of the first images a child sees in a Catholic home is the crucifix. Why did Jesus die? We start back at the beginning with creation and the fall of man, move forward to God’s preparation of the Chosen People, the Annunciation, the Christmas Story, the public life and ministry of Christ. All in order, all studied more deeply each year. We want children to become familiar with the stories of their salvation, even if they don’t understand it all yet, even if it’s as unreal to them as Cleopatra at this point. if If it works for “God’s history” why not the rest of history? I read them the lives of saints at an early age. Why not the stories of men and women who were important to the development of civilization? Those stories are very important for the grammar stage. They are necessary building blocks for deeper study later.
Karen Edmisten says
Mystie, our read alouds included so much history from the start that I never separated it out as a separate subject until they were much older even than third grade. We were all over the map (so to speak) in our history studies and I found, over the years, that a combination of historical fiction, a timeline (started for my very-visual then-7 yr. old) to put things in perspective, repeated discussion, and a wide variety of other books/cycling through time worked well for us.
Leila says
Mystie and Karen,
If you check out the primers I recommend here in this post: http://www.likemotherlikedaughter.org/2011/06/what-you-need-to-teach-child-to-read_15/
You will see that it can work for the very young child to wait to learn history as a separate subject, and that the reading and read alouds in the primers do incorporate stories from the past — but actually in a systematic way (Bible and also history as it relates to our country’s celebrations).
Karen Edmisten says
Interesting! We never used primers of any kind — my girls all learned to read so very differently. My oldest was reading on her own at age 4, my middle one was a “late” reader, and my third one was another “self taught” case. They are all voracious readers and writers now, thankfully.
At any rate, I’m certain it can work very well to hold off on history as a separate subject — I’m all for whatever works with each child! I just find that it varies by child so much. I’ve never pin able to nail down a single method for our homeschool, but my college-aged girls grew up loving history and are doing well with it at the college level, so I’m grateful that whatever we did seems to have worked well for them! That was my goal, so…happy, happy. 🙂
A fun note about our original timeline: it included the births of all of our family members and grandparents, etc., along with Laura Ingalls Wilder, her ancestors, and the American Girls. And thus a timeline (that lived a long and happy life) was born. 🙂
Leila says
These primers aren’t for learning to read so much as just a collection of reading material to study. Being quite old, they are amazingly good!I wish all homeschooling parents would enjoy the process and not worry about method too much, as you say!
Karen Edmisten says
My oversight, Leila! I see now that the link to Part I of that series included the mention of mechanics, and the primer post is talking about ongoing reading, etc. I love the look of those primers. I would want them in my house if only because they look so good. 🙂 (My so-called decorating style is “Early Book.”)
Also, re. your edits above, I loved this:
“One issue I had as a child was that I simply wasn’t interested in ancient Egypt (ironically!) or Sumer and couldn’t be made to be… until I found this out. “
The same was true for me! Ancient Egypt bored me silly when I was studying history way-back-when, but when I saw it as a vehicle for helping my children understand the beginnings of civilization and the ties to Scripture and our faith, it came alive for me (and hopefully for them.)
Our timelines have always included “Genesis” — bold print, separate piece of paper, the thing that comes before all. 🙂
Adele says
This is a wonderful thought on how to teach about the past in a meaningful way. I am an oddity to most in that I love history in just about every form. My experience is that history sticks the best not only when it relates to what kids already live but also when it is something they do. Experimental history and archaeology are wonderful with younger kids. There is archaeology going on everywhere and while America may not have alot of written history the way Europe or Asia does, it does have amazing history to be found in archaeology involving native american sites and cultures. Kids can touch objects that were used by people who lived the history they are hearing about. Also they get to dig in the dirt which is usually a big bonus. When this is coupled with getting to try out what they just dug up kids can get really excited. For example digging through an old homestead trash heap and finding an old broken scythe blade and then finding someone who can show your kids how to use it to make hay and clear brush. Or chopping wood, or making candles, or spinning wool or knitting or any of the myriad of things alot of people do just for fun. Local is great but doing history is great too.
elizabethe says
I just read this exact same argument on the beautiful feet books website. literally today. huh.
I found my kids to be pretty engaged with ancient history and with medieval history as well (knights!). And I really didn’t want to do any modern history with them until they were older — the issues in modern history are much more morally complex, IMO and harder to avoid.
My little one who was just tagging along when I started ready history to my kindergartener loved anything and everything on a map.
That having been said, I really don’t think it matters much at all which approach you use, esp in grades 1 – 4 (I have a history Phd, it really doesn’t matter what you do in the early years, do what you and your kid most enjoy).
Leila says
Elizabethe, I do like the Beautiful Feet materials for young children, and that site did influence my approach. I do think it matters — IF the parent is getting frustrated because studying ancient history seems a grind to him.
In addition, there is an opportunity cost — spending time trying to get him to answer questions about cuneiforms could be spent on subjects that will provide him with the tools he will need in subsequent years. Most homeschoolers really feel that time is at a premium!
Isabelle says
Very interesting take, as usual, but if I may add my two cents to the discussion, I used to teach history to secondary school kids (11 year old onwards), and your binder idea of chronology rings alarm bells to me. The approach you describe (I think!) is the one very much pushed in British schools (or at least in the one I worked at) and in my experience, doing a disjointed version of history, which relates to them, had some adverse effects later on, as the children were unable to understand causation in history, unable to imagine that other countries had also an impact on the history of the world, and a general feeling that history was a series of vignettes which happened at some point, the Tudors happily mixed up with WWII in their minds. I personally prefer them to have a less jumbled chronology in their minds, and if they think Mesopotamia unreal, that is easily corrected later on and doesn’t prevent enjoyment!
Leila says
Isabelle, my post is about very young children. No need for alarm.
I do approve of the cyclical, systematic approach for older children.
Michelle says
My oldest is six. We are reading about ancient history this year after carefully considering not doing any history. There are many curricula that don’t do history at this age, and the public schools here don’t either. But I wanted to begin the familiarity with people and places, and provide some fodder for the imagination. And this week she built a lego ziggurat, all on her own.
Hafsa says
Pinning this! Thank you, history has always seemed a daunting task to teach my children. This makes so much sense!
Marie says
Thank you for this post! This very much resonates with me, and reflects the way I feel makes sense to begin educating our children (who will be in pre-k and kindergarten). I did want to ask, though, whether you have any specific book recommendations.
There are so many wonderful booklists out there with recommendations for teaching history utilizing the traditional/cyclical approach, that I’m a bit intimidated at the thought of bucking the system and identifying quality, age-appropriate material on my own!
Thanks,
Marie
Therese says
I have been perusing old posts and found this one quite helpful! We moved to Athens, Greece a few months ago and I have been stressing my self out trying to come up with ways to teach my four year old son about the history of it all. Maybe just by visiting the sites, discussing in general terms, and looking at maps is enough? He seems to be interested and engaged and will shock me at times with remembering some of it. I’m hoping that the experiences themselves will turn up later in his mind when we do formally discuss. I did look at the Story of the World book, to possibly use it as a guide, but it was still too stuffy for his 4 year old mind. We recently visited Corynthos and discussed St. Paul as well. So much fun!
Leila says
Therese, the principle is the same: Start with where you are. Tell the story (perhaps in your own words, perhaps from a story book you find) of the actual events where you are. Or tell about the kinds of people who lived in those ruins. Children love “everyday” history. Use maps — first a local one, and then a larger one to give perspective. You can point out where you used to live and talk about how far away it is and how you got where you are.
I do not recommend the Story of the World. Here is what I said, above, in a previous comment: One caveat about “History of the World” -type books: They tend to be Whig in their approach: They are usually written by Protestants who believe that the world is progressing out of the “Dark Ages” via the Reformation to a more perfect state.
Do read all the comments and do look on amblesideonline.org for books about ancient history in Greece that your son might like. Also check out the offerings in the Beautiful Feet catalogue.