Well, it started out about math

I mentioned last week that H. has decided to work on math again. We got stuck last spring when her book started to introduce multiplication. She was having none of it and I wasn't going to push it. So when she wanted to go back to math, I did need to take a deep breath. But a break can do wonders and so far she is managing the difference between the number of times we add something together versus the amount of each thing added together. (For instance 3+3+3+3=12 is the same as 4, threes or 4x3=12.) The ability to deal with a number that doesn't actually appear in the addition version is new. It's kind of a big deal. 

I was reminded earlier today how far we've come when I was discussing the the idea of numeracy with a homeschooling mother. It made me remember those years where H. could identify and understand only the numbers one to four. Five was beyond her. I actually had come to resign myself to the idea we might never get beyond four. (Note that numeracy, the idea of what a numeral represents is very different than being able to count. She could count to one hundred in English before we even got home, but the understanding of what those strings of sound meant wasn't there at all )

I'm nothing if not stubborn, so we worked (and worked and worked and worked) on one to one correspondence. Looking back I realize that I've never written out some of the many things we did. Since it might be useful to someone this seemed to be as good a time as any to do so. These are all variations on a theme. But I think the key was we never discussed a number in isolation without figuring how many objects went with that number. We also needed to work on numeral recognition for numbers five and up as well. 

Here is what I can remember:

- I made several sets of cards with numerals written on each card. Some had dots drawn on them to match the number, others didn't. We used these to count objects. We had counting bears, farm animals, buttons, toothpicks, pretty much any small thing that could be counted. Sometimes we matched items to the dots, other times we would make a group of objects and find the card that matched, or some variation of those two activities. We did this a lot. 

- I also made large number cards in 8-1/2x11 paper and laminated them. Sometimes we used turn as a number line, stepping from number to number. Or we would play hopscotch and jump, or throw the right number of beanbags on each number, or having to jump on the right number when I called it. 

- Everything became a counting game. If it was nice outside and we were playing with chalk, we'd do some number work. Getting drinking glasses out for dinner involved counting. Pretty much anything that could be counted throughout the day was. It was a bit like living inside Sesame Street. 

- I tried to find a variety of manipulatives to keep it fresh. Working on find motor skills was also a need so we strung beads (and counted), picked up small objects with tweezers (and counted), poured water (and counted.)

- We played games. Games with spinners and games with dice, all of which needed movement to match the number rolled or spun. Practically any game also became an avenue for more opportunities to learn about how numbers worked.

Notice that there is one way we did not spend any time: on a computer or similar device. This would have served no purpose. She might have been able to figure out the game and do well, but from experience, I knew that that sort of learning would absolutely not transfer to the physical world. In order to really learn and understand something, objects need to be felt, moved, manipulated, dropped, and picked-up. The more types of objects the better because some children need to physically understand that three pennies is the same as three buttons and three toothpicks and three beanbags and three bears. The number needed to be three dimensions and not some flat picture on the screen. 

I'll say it again. There is absolutely no benefit to a young child (under middle school, though I actually think it's even later) to learning anything on a screen. Instead they lose all the connections that are created by manipulating physical objects which help to cement the concept in their brain. Children learning only online are stunted and missing key connections. I am so disturbed about the extremely high rate of computer learning particularly for the elementary ages. Parents have been sold a bill of goods and their children are paying the price. This feels extreme to write, but it shouldn't be. I am also  afraid that this is one windmill which will never topple regardless of how many times I joust at it.