Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums THINKING BIG About Gifted Education Classical Education for Visual Spatial Learners???

Anyone have any experience with this? Is it too rigid and is there too much rote memorization for Gifted Visual Spatial learners? My children have done better with non-verbals on their IQ tests, but I'm wondering if this would challenge them to work harder and to strengthen their verbals.

We are looking at a new school with a smaller classroom that uses Classical Education + Saxon Math. The math at this school is a year ahead of the grade level. Both boys are very strong in Mathematics and STEM.

I do not, but I'm going to throw in my opinion anyway.

Part of me is very attracted by the classical philosophy, with it's overall emphasis on reasoning, argument, and the tools of learning, but then when I look at how actual schools in our area implement it, and at my actual children, I think they would be either deadened or frustrated by the early emphasis on rote learning and the rigid conceptualization of cognitive development. I do know families with MG+ children who have been very pleased with their classical experience so far (the schools I know of use either Saxon or Singapore for math), though none of them have children older than preteens.

I had these notes on a post-it from when I did a brief search of what might be considered classics, so I'll share them.

Trivium (grammar, logic, rhetoric),
Quadrivium (music, math, geometry, astronomy),
Aristotle's metaphysics,
Astrology,
Philosophy,
Literature,
Languages and the other
Liberal Arts.

Classical education plus advanced math sounds wonderful! Good Luck.

I wouldn't recommend Saxon for mathy kids. The slow spiral with lots of busy work tends to suck the life out of math for gifted kids. Classical also tends to be weak in science.

However, it is more reading focussed and can be great for gifted kids who like to read a lot...

I think it entirely depends on the teachers.

I switched my kids from a STEM charter school to a private school that uses a classical curriclum with Singapore math. Both my kids are visual learners. This is what I experienced:
1.The STEM school was more experiential and more fun. I felt it was a better school for science and history (Core Knowledge) in the early grades. The classical history is much more rigorous in middle school.
2.The classical school is a better school over all in terms of rigor, reading and writing and math. I felt like my children needed the foundations of a liberal arts education to prepare for high school and college. The programming from STEM can wait until summer camp. I also feel like the rote memorization piece is necessary to prepare for high school. Our STEM school did not have much homework. The movement to make learning fun has its place; but should not replace the fundamentals.
3. I plan to move my 3rd grader to a different school for middle school because I don't like Singapore math for middle school and would prefer he take traditional Algebra, Geometry, and Algebra II for TAG kids in a public school setting.
4. Be careful with "STEM" schools, especially charters. Many use a blended learning model, so the math is really dumbed down. Some math programs have been overhauled to comply with common core and PARCC testing. Online math programs are good for testing practice, but don't go deep enough and don't teach problem solving. That requires direct instruction and a good math curriculum.