Author Topic: Tradition In Action Disagrees with Williamson on women going to college (Read 14131 times)

Tiffany · « **Reply #45 on:** January 24, 2013, 09:10:32 AM »

The Saxon series is self teaching and goes all the way to Calculus. Like Tele said there are tutors, siblings, now there are also videos and virtual classrooms.
You also have the public school mentality that children need to be spoon fed to learn. Children can learn a great deal independently too.

Tiffany · « **Reply #46 on:** January 24, 2013, 09:31:04 AM »

Quote from: ancien regime

Quote from: Tiffany
Most young men can get life insurance and disability insurance in case of their death or disability to provide for their families.

This is true, but will they? do they? can they really afford it? I have seen too many cases where the money was not there when the father died.

Quote
I disagree that women need to be educated beyond 8th grade to successfully homeschool.

How, pray tell, can one teach high school subjects with only an eighth grade education?

We need a large dose of reality here. Unless every father wants to come home after a hard day's work and teach all his many children (we are talking Catholics here) all high school subjects, it behooves every traditional Catholic girl to get at least an excellent high school education and some college (e.g. two years at St. Marys).

It is a long a venerable tradition in Catholicism to educate women so they can teach the faith and other subjects, when necessary, to their children. Education in itself does not mean teaching women to take over the jobs of men. Back when we were awash in teaching sisters and good Catholic schools, it was not important for mothers to be educated so as to be educators. In case you have not noticed, those times are gone!

That is sad but there is usually social security and food stamps for some help too. I realize it's not always the case but extended family may be able to help too.

Once children can read they can learn on their own. Mothers can learn with their children too if necessary. My son picks up things much much faster than me. I love learning about saints and Church history in my son's books. It can be fun to learn together.

I organize chess and card games for the boys, I don't play and I have no interest in learning.The mother who runs art class does not teach, but she set up a room, sends out the emails, coordinates the supplies, and found an art teacher that we split the cost for.

brainglitch · « **Reply #47 on:** January 24, 2013, 09:38:10 AM »

Yes, children can certainly learn a great deal independently, but for most children that is not the case for advanced subjects.

And please don't get me started on the Saxon series. That series was a product of 60's thinking that children could learn merely by absorption, without learning in an incremental, concrete manner, moving from more basic topics to more complex. I used Saxon up until 11th grade and hated it. Once I got different textbooks my grades shot up. I have talked to numerous other students and every single one of them despised the Saxon math series. Why on earth anyone recommends them is beyond me.

I really don't understand why people are opposed to sending their children to CATHOLIC schools. We aren't talking Novus ordo or public schools for crying out loud! I don't care if you're SSPX or FSSP or sede or whatever, if there is a good traditional Catholic school, why not send your children there?

As far as women going to college, well yes that is bad, save for a few exceptions. I stated that earlier. Why on earth would someone thumb me down for saying that? Some damn feminist? Or someone who thumbs me down regardless of what I say because I'm a "Fellayite"? Get a grip people. We aren't discussing the SSPX situation right now. If someone doesn't like what I said about women not learning a profession, grow a pair and tell me why they should! If someone thinks a person with an 8th grade education can teach calculus and trigonometry, tell me why!

brainglitch · « **Reply #48 on:** January 24, 2013, 09:40:59 AM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

There are such things as tutors, older siblings, etc, that can teach high school mathematics.

Of course, that might require hiring a male tutor who is a bit demanding.

Can't have that!

I'm 100% certain that the reason college is being insisted on here has nothing to with trad women teaching trigonometry to their children.

True, but that kind of proves my point. Most women-heck, most men!-without a college degree or training in mathematics is not going to be able to teach high school math, at least not beyond Algebra I.

Certainly college in general is not a good idea for women, but I don't believe that a year or two at a Catholic liberal arts college is necessarily bad. It depends on individual circuмstances.

Tiffany · « **Reply #49 on:** January 24, 2013, 09:54:30 AM »

Quote from: brainglitch

Yes, children can certainly learn a great deal independently, but for most children that is not the case for advanced subjects.

And please don't get me started on the Saxon series. That series was a product of 60's thinking that children could learn merely by absorption, without learning in an incremental, concrete manner, moving from more basic topics to more complex. I used Saxon up until 11th grade and hated it. Once I got different textbooks my grades shot up. I have talked to numerous other students and every single one of them despised the Saxon math series. Why on earth anyone recommends them is beyond me.

I really don't understand why people are opposed to sending their children to CATHOLIC schools. We aren't talking Novus ordo or public schools for crying out loud! I don't care if you're SSPX or FSSP or sede or whatever, if there is a good traditional Catholic school, why not send your children there?

As far as women going to college, well yes that is bad, save for a few exceptions. I stated that earlier. Why on earth would someone thumb me down for saying that? Some damn feminist? Or someone who thumbs me down regardless of what I say because I'm a "Fellayite"? Get a grip people. We aren't discussing the SSPX situation right now. If someone doesn't like what I said about women not learning a profession, grow a pair and tell me why they should! If someone thinks a person with an 8th grade education can teach calculus and trigonometry, tell me why!

Saxon is incremental, and children learning by absorption is not what it's about. He compared to learning math to learning how to drive that children need less theory and more practice . Here is an interview with the author:
edited: link does not work, you have to download the alternate format:
http://www.robinsoncurriculum.com/view/rc/s31p655.htm#Message3339

I'm not saying everyone should use Saxon. Many don't like how geometry isn't a separate book. Saxons is sef-teaching and widely available but there are many others. Someone gave me a copy of Teaching Textbooks in Sept. I haven't had time to do more than glance at it but it looks great so far.

My point was there are plenty of alternatives to mothers teaching higher math. Using Saxon is one of them.

subpallaeMariae · « **Reply #50 on:** January 24, 2013, 10:02:29 AM »

It has always seemed contradictory for DR Horvat to preach about tradition and be such a blatant feminist herself; the DR in front of her name reveals the truth, whether she admits it or not.
Also, I find it odd that people in traditional circles are so obsessed with their kids getting a college education, as if they have to follow the same track that the worldlings lay out. College will often lead them straight to corporate America, which is a treacherous place to try to earn a living. We traditional Catholics need to pursue alternatives for our children. My husband has a 2 Masters degrees and he wishes that he had spent the years that he spent in college instead perfecting his woodworking skills, or his plumbing skills, or his anything other than sitting on his duff all day with a woman boss telling him what to do, skills!
I remember maybe 10 years ago when Bishop Williamson, in a letter or an interview, made a negative statement about women earning college degrees how ridiculously the "degreed" women in our chapel reacted- so insulted. Feminists! whether they admit it or not.
Women who go to college will most likely want to marry a man with a college degree, which takes most traditional Catholic young men, who want to avoid the perils of college life, out of the running for courtship.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #51 on:** January 24, 2013, 10:25:54 AM »

Quote from: brainglitch

True, but that kind of proves my point. Most women-heck, most men!-without a college degree or training in mathematics is not going to be able to teach high school math, at least not beyond Algebra I.

Proves your point about what? Most people never use high school math period. Those who want their children to be mathematically literate could hire tutors. If that's what they really wanted.

In fact most people with college degree are not going to be able to teach their children high school mathematics. Because they've forgotten and never used it. It's ridiculous to me the excuse for college and college tuition is being given that it's needed to homeschool in mathematics.

Quote

Certainly college in general is not a good idea for women, but I don't believe that a year or two at a Catholic liberal arts college is necessarily bad.

"Catholic liberal arts college" - this is your eupehmism for St. Mary's?

St. Mary's isn't so bad, they probably won't learn learn math to home school their children any other way, and all women need to learn trig to home school their children?

Quote

It depends on individual circuмstances.

In the future schools will be increasingly regulated.

As the collapse of social order continues coordinated homeschooling is the solution for Catholics.

It can be done quite well, so long as genuinely intelligent and generous people are assisting parents. As opposed to meddlesome busy body types.

brainglitch · « **Reply #52 on:** January 24, 2013, 12:22:26 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

Quote from: brainglitch
True, but that kind of proves my point. Most women-heck, most men!-without a college degree or training in mathematics is not going to be able to teach high school math, at least not beyond Algebra I.

Proves your point about what? Most people never use high school math period. Those who want their children to be mathematically literate could hire tutors. If that's what they really wanted.

In fact most people with college degree are not going to be able to teach their children high school mathematics. Because they've forgotten and never used it. It's ridiculous to me the excuse for college and college tuition is being given that it's needed to homeschool in mathematics.

Quote
Certainly college in general is not a good idea for women, but I don't believe that a year or two at a Catholic liberal arts college is necessarily bad.

"Catholic liberal arts college" - this is your eupehmism for St. Mary's?

St. Mary's isn't so bad, they probably won't learn learn math to home school their children any other way, and all women need to learn trig to home school their children?

Quote
It depends on individual circuмstances.

In the future schools will be increasingly regulated.

As the collapse of social order continues coordinated homeschooling is the solution for Catholics.

It can be done quite well, so long as genuinely intelligent and generous people are assisting parents. As opposed to meddlesome busy body types.

First off, I don't know what your problem with St. Mary's College is, but it is a Catholic liberal arts college, whether you like it or not.

Secondly my point is that most parents are not qualified to teach their children advanced math and should get them taught by someone else in those fields. Whether that is by sending them to school or getting a tutor or online classes, whatever works. It depends a great deal on individual circuмstances. My point is that parents should not assume that children will be able to teach themselves this stuff. Most kids can't, no matter how smart they are.

As far as college goes, I don't believe that it is necessarily bad for some young women to broaden their intellectual horizons with Catholic learning at a Catholic (truly Catholic, not the Catholic in name only places like Notre Dame, Georgetown etc.) university. Training for a profession or career is a different matter. Doing such a thing puts women in a position to compete with men, be in charge of men, etc. This not only is bad for men, but also degrades the true femininity of women and separates them from their natural purpose. A woman who learns about St. Thomas and St. Augustine at a Catholic school is going to be quite different, and much better, then someone who learns about Hegel and Kant at Big State University.

We need to avoid the perils of anti-intellectualism. It's a scourge in the traditional community and makes a mockery of 20 centuries of Catholic intellectual life. And it is quite alive and well on this thread, with many posters even saying men should not go to college, for any reason!

brainglitch · « **Reply #53 on:** January 24, 2013, 12:31:25 PM »

Quote from: Tiffany

Quote from: brainglitch
Yes, children can certainly learn a great deal independently, but for most children that is not the case for advanced subjects.

And please don't get me started on the Saxon series. That series was a product of 60's thinking that children could learn merely by absorption, without learning in an incremental, concrete manner, moving from more basic topics to more complex. I used Saxon up until 11th grade and hated it. Once I got different textbooks my grades shot up. I have talked to numerous other students and every single one of them despised the Saxon math series. Why on earth anyone recommends them is beyond me.

I really don't understand why people are opposed to sending their children to CATHOLIC schools. We aren't talking Novus ordo or public schools for crying out loud! I don't care if you're SSPX or FSSP or sede or whatever, if there is a good traditional Catholic school, why not send your children there?

As far as women going to college, well yes that is bad, save for a few exceptions. I stated that earlier. Why on earth would someone thumb me down for saying that? Some damn feminist? Or someone who thumbs me down regardless of what I say because I'm a "Fellayite"? Get a grip people. We aren't discussing the SSPX situation right now. If someone doesn't like what I said about women not learning a profession, grow a pair and tell me why they should! If someone thinks a person with an 8th grade education can teach calculus and trigonometry, tell me why!

Saxon is incremental, and children learning by absorption is not what it's about. He compared to learning math to learning how to drive that children need less theory and more practice . Here is an interview with the author:
edited: link does not work, you have to download the alternate format:
http://www.robinsoncurriculum.com/view/rc/s31p655.htm#Message3339

I'm not saying everyone should use Saxon. Many don't like how geometry isn't a separate book. Saxons is sef-teaching and widely available but there are many others. Someone gave me a copy of Teaching Textbooks in Sept. I haven't had time to do more than glance at it but it looks great so far.

My point was there are plenty of alternatives to mothers teaching higher math. Using Saxon is one of them.

The biggest problem with Saxon IMO is that there is almost no explanation and no theory. He seems to think that people learn only by doing. That is insane, especially with math. One has to have a solid grasp of the theory and principles behind things before putting them into practice. Obviously practice is hugely important; in high school I used to do about 50+ problems a week, minimum. It's all disconnected and jumbled however because he doesn't provide any principles or theoretical framework for what you're learning. You can figure out how to do a problem, but you have no idea of the underlying mathematical principles of the solutions. Saxon seems to think people will just kind of pick up on things magically.

My younger siblings used Math-U-See, and they were far better at math than I was. I had to overcome the handicaps imposed by years of Saxon's garbage by studying a lot harder in high school than most of my peers. Now I am taking Calculus III at university for my engineering degree. Saxon did nothing to help me; the only reason I am good at math now is due to high school at an SSPX school and some fantastic teachers who helped me out a great deal.

What you're hearing is years of frustration with Saxon's non-existent explanations and poor examples! This has been the constant complaint of every person I have spoken to who has experience with Saxon. In almost every case when they switched textbooks, math started to make sense!

Telesphorus · « **Reply #54 on:** January 24, 2013, 12:35:56 PM »

Quote

We need to avoid the perils of anti-intellectualism.

Yes, and pretending that St. Mary's is the solution to that is a problem.

Anti-intellectualism often comes from obscurantism, and the neo-SSPX approach to Rome and the promotion of blind obedience to clerics without authority is obscurantist.

The belief that so-called "higher education" should be a "default" is in fact a kind of anti-intellectualism. It depends on many false ideas about what the very term "intellectual" means.

1) Most people who go to college are woefully ignorant about the world by design.
2) Most people who go to college do not understand that their education as far as truly intellectual matters are concerned is not serious. No one will take their thinking seriously
3) Most people who have gone to college look down on people more intelligent than them who have not gone
4) Most people who have gone to college lose all respect for authorities "outside the mainstream" and mistake that for critical thinking.
5) Most people who go to college think other people should go to college too.

Now don't get me wrong, practically speaking most people who don't go to college won't ever be quite as "sophisticated" as those who do go. However, that "sophistication" is wasted on the vast majority of people.

People with high IQs don't need college to develop their intellects, they just need skilled tutors.

The function of modern college is not education but socialization.

Socialization to conform to an anti-intellectual, anti-Catholic society.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #55 on:** January 24, 2013, 12:40:24 PM »

I've seen Saxon and it was something of a nuisance. A test was expected to be given every week - that really cut into instruction time.

I don't think it would do harm though.

Children should be taught skill in arithmetic (number sense) and Euclid's geometry.

Then learning analytical geometry, algebra, and calculus should be no problem.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #56 on:** January 24, 2013, 12:41:35 PM »

number sense is actually the most practical mathematics, and it's never taught, instead students are subjected to relentless, interminable repetition.

brainglitch · « **Reply #57 on:** January 24, 2013, 12:52:35 PM »

Quote

1) Most people who go to college are woefully ignorant about the world by design.
2) Most people who go to college do not understand that their education as far as truly intellectual matters are concerned is not serious. No one will take their thinking seriously
3) Most people who have gone to college look down on people more intelligent than them who have not gone
4) Most people who have gone to college lose all respect for authorities "outside the mainstream" and mistake that for critical thinking.
5) Most people who go to college think other people should go to college too.

This is all true, but I am not speaking of people in general. I am speaking about traditional Catholics-mainly Catholic men. An intelligent Catholic man should at a minimum consider college, instead of writing it off because he's too afraid to face the world or battle the heretics and fools that reside there (I've gotten into some pretty big arguments with people at university, mainly Prots. So much fun since they get confused very easily :ready-to-eat:).

One must avoid both intellectual snobbery and anti-intellectualism. However the predominant trend in traditional circles is anti-intellectualism, and that is a problem.

Quote

Yes, and pretending that St. Mary's is the solution to that is a problem.

I'm not saying it the the solution, but is a possible solution, and despite the small size it is a very decent school. Surely you would not prefer a mainstream Catholic university? And tutors are not an option for a lot of people. There aren't a great deal of Catholic private tutors just sitting around.

Jaynek · « **Reply #58 on:** January 25, 2013, 08:55:04 PM »

Quote from: brainglitch

The biggest problem with Saxon IMO is that there is almost no explanation and no theory. He seems to think that people learn only by doing. That is insane, especially with math. One has to have a solid grasp of the theory and principles behind things before putting them into practice. Obviously practice is hugely important; in high school I used to do about 50+ problems a week, minimum. It's all disconnected and jumbled however because he doesn't provide any principles or theoretical framework for what you're learning. You can figure out how to do a problem, but you have no idea of the underlying mathematical principles of the solutions. Saxon seems to think people will just kind of pick up on things magically.

My younger siblings used Math-U-See, and they were far better at math than I was. I had to overcome the handicaps imposed by years of Saxon's garbage by studying a lot harder in high school than most of my peers. Now I am taking Calculus III at university for my engineering degree. Saxon did nothing to help me; the only reason I am good at math now is due to high school at an SSPX school and some fantastic teachers who helped me out a great deal.

What you're hearing is years of frustration with Saxon's non-existent explanations and poor examples! This has been the constant complaint of every person I have spoken to who has experience with Saxon. In almost every case when they switched textbooks, math started to make sense!

I started out with my older children using Saxon and switched to Math-U-See for the younger ones. But one of my kids liked Saxon and did well with it. And one of them did not like Math-U-see. Part of it is simply matching the kids up with the program that works best for them.

Jaynek · « **Reply #59 on:** January 25, 2013, 08:59:54 PM »

Quote from: Telesphorus

The function of modern college is not education but socialization.

Socialization to conform to an anti-intellectual, anti-Catholic society.

I agree the this describes secular college. I'm thinking that sending my children to a small (real) Catholic college could be an opportunity for them to experience living in a Catholic culture.