Are progressive schools a bad fit for parents who want to see academic progress?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About 30% of students will learn to read without regard to what method is used. The other 70% do not learn well if 3-cueing or other bogus methods that ARE part of whole language / balanced literacy are used. Lots of large studies with quality controls show this.

Virginia public schools (and also public schools in many other states) are NOT allowed to use either of those methods any longer BECAUSE the science is so clear. Those rules passed the (politically divided) VA legislature in a nearly unanimous vote. This is not a partisan issue.

Go listen to the "Sold a Story" podcast.

Some of you are working overtime to prove a pointless point. Wouldn't it be simple (but boring and uninspiring) if the world were as "either- or-" and "black and white" as you seem to reduce it? Wouldn't it be simple (but again albeit boring and uninspiring) if nuance wasn't a thing?

For those who want to learn more about the history of 3-cueing and how popular it is beyond whole-language enthusiasts, start with this easy to read article, https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/is-this-the-end-of-three-cueing/2020/12

For the OP that started this thread and others - this thread is stupid. Progressive schools and academic progress are not mutually exclusive. It seems many posts have now stated the obvious - that there is no shortage of choices in the DMV of public, charter, private, and independent schools that rest on a variety of foundational philosophies and accompanying teaching methods. Find one that works for your kid. Best of luck in doing that. No need to bash the philosophies and methods that you don't agree with and/or don't work for your kid. Obviously the fact that all these different schools exist mean they work for some.

I see. You basically don’t want people to discuss the methods openly.

Oh, my bad - you wanted to "discuss" - that's why you referred to the methods as "bogus" and made a point of stating that the vote was unanimous and not partisan - because you wanted to open this up to "discussion". Okie dokie. Let's discuss then. Surely you read the article I posted and my repeated suggestion that there's no one size fits all approach in education. So let's "discuss" this.....go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - PP again, the one who you’ve engaged with a few times on this thread. I don’t want to get into the fight above (think the net net is - all schools work for SOME kids or SOME families. You have to find what works for you/your kids).

Our progressive school does teach phonics, but it wasn’t structured or woven into other parts of the day. So for example, when the kids were doing writers workshop (which of course they don’t call it that anymore because Lucy Calkins = bad PR) they just let them use brave spelling, even into 2nd grade. What they should be doing is having the kids reference the phonics patterns they know when trying to write. This reinforces the learning and builds encoding skills. Or if a kid was having a hard time listening or participating, they could go use the cozy corner (great!) with no expectation that they make up the learning they missed later (not great!). Again - one school, my experience, but these are all things to poke on should they be important to you.

I’ll add that us leaving our school was very tough on some of our friends who, much like posters in this thread, seem to think our choice says something about THEM. I don’t know what it is about progressive education but there’s a lot of emotion wrapped in it, and I haven’t seen the same thing at our local Catholic school. Good luck!

I don't think very many people on these threads feel that the choices others are making says something about them. What posters get wrong is the language they are using and that's what gets targeted. It's not the choice you are making. These are your kids - you can and should make whatever choice is best. But posters often wrap their "explanation" of their choices in divisive language. In the case of your post above you use the word, "should" and then go on to explain with an air of authority why you think they "should". In this specific example, some teachers feel that "brave spelling" during initial (first drafts) of writing is best so as to not interfere with their flow of thoughts while writing and that they can go back in an edit phase and reference their phonics patterns. If you don't think that works well for your child just say that. The point is - the problem with many posts is the disguise of criticism of whole schools and whole philosophies within posts they later defend as a telling of one's personal experience or they deflect rudeness of their posts onto those who respond as being defensive. I mean just look at some of that the sweeping and negative statements made in this thread.

"Progressive schools also tend to attract a lot of chaos in the classroom". A sweeping negative generalization.
"Many so called progressive schools..." Passive aggressive.
"I don't want to find out that my kid is behind because the teachers/school couldn't be bothered to focus on the fundamental building blocks that need to be put in place in elementary school." A rude characterization.
"Isn't it code for "excuses bad behavior because children are thriving at their passion?" And a lot of other therapy-speak? " Baseless and rude.
"Also, "child-led" is not an excuse for giant gaping holes in the curriculum. The teacher is supposed to awaken the child's interests, not just blow off whatever doesn't happen to appeal. " Baseless and sweeping assertion.
"So they spent like 3-4 years teaching them to do it wrong then tried to fix it? Stupid." Here we are calling an entire teaching method (writer's workshop) stupid.
"Ugh. This is the opposite of what most kids need and takes the wrongheaded view that learning to spell is somehow deleterious to learning to express yourself. " What is your qualification to suggest what "most kids need" and then to suggest that an entire teaching method (writer's workshop) is wrongheaded?
"A lot of supposedly progressive models seem to be about keeping the kids from experiencing any discomfort or stress - and exempting the teachers from the work of organized learning and feedback." Really?
"Deferring corrections until later means the unfortunate child already has memorized bad spelling and grammar, which now will need to be unlearned. So senseless." Implying that an their pedagogy lacks sense.
"I cannot imagine someone paying $50k tuition for the privilege of a teaching approach that treats 10 year olds like incapable preschoolers. " Wow.

And these were just in the first 4 pages. So no, there's not a lot of emotion wrapped in progressive schools and those who attend - no more than the emotion wrapped in public schools or catholic schools and those who attend. Love progressive school philosophy or hate it or question it or be curious about it - most of us don't care. Your kids - your choices. But don't come to these threads with such ignorance, sweeping generalizations, and rudeness and then look use the push back received as further confirmation of the bias you already brought with you about entire philosophies and the people who subscribe to them. Otherwise, what is the point of these forums?

Dang all that because you are offended that parents are being advised to ask about teaching phonics and math facts and spelling?

how about you tell US what “progressive” means and what a prospective parent could ask?

In all of that, pinpoint where the poster stated they were offended by [i]advice[b]?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - PP again, the one who you’ve engaged with a few times on this thread. I don’t want to get into the fight above (think the net net is - all schools work for SOME kids or SOME families. You have to find what works for you/your kids).

Our progressive school does teach phonics, but it wasn’t structured or woven into other parts of the day. So for example, when the kids were doing writers workshop (which of course they don’t call it that anymore because Lucy Calkins = bad PR) they just let them use brave spelling, even into 2nd grade. What they should be doing is having the kids reference the phonics patterns they know when trying to write. This reinforces the learning and builds encoding skills. Or if a kid was having a hard time listening or participating, they could go use the cozy corner (great!) with no expectation that they make up the learning they missed later (not great!). Again - one school, my experience, but these are all things to poke on should they be important to you.

I’ll add that us leaving our school was very tough on some of our friends who, much like posters in this thread, seem to think our choice says something about THEM. I don’t know what it is about progressive education but there’s a lot of emotion wrapped in it, and I haven’t seen the same thing at our local Catholic school. Good luck!

I don't think very many people on these threads feel that the choices others are making says something about them. What posters get wrong is the language they are using and that's what gets targeted. It's not the choice you are making. These are your kids - you can and should make whatever choice is best. But posters often wrap their "explanation" of their choices in divisive language. In the case of your post above you use the word, "should" and then go on to explain with an air of authority why you think they "should". In this specific example, some teachers feel that "brave spelling" during initial (first drafts) of writing is best so as to not interfere with their flow of thoughts while writing and that they can go back in an edit phase and reference their phonics patterns. If you don't think that works well for your child just say that. The point is - the problem with many posts is the disguise of criticism of whole schools and whole philosophies within posts they later defend as a telling of one's personal experience or they deflect rudeness of their posts onto those who respond as being defensive. I mean just look at some of that the sweeping and negative statements made in this thread.

"Progressive schools also tend to attract a lot of chaos in the classroom". A sweeping negative generalization.
"Many so called progressive schools..." Passive aggressive.
"I don't want to find out that my kid is behind because the teachers/school couldn't be bothered to focus on the fundamental building blocks that need to be put in place in elementary school." A rude characterization.
"Isn't it code for "excuses bad behavior because children are thriving at their passion?" And a lot of other therapy-speak? " Baseless and rude.
"Also, "child-led" is not an excuse for giant gaping holes in the curriculum. The teacher is supposed to awaken the child's interests, not just blow off whatever doesn't happen to appeal. " Baseless and sweeping assertion.
"So they spent like 3-4 years teaching them to do it wrong then tried to fix it? Stupid." Here we are calling an entire teaching method (writer's workshop) stupid.
"Ugh. This is the opposite of what most kids need and takes the wrongheaded view[i] that learning to spell is somehow deleterious to learning to express yourself. " What is your qualification to suggest what "most kids need" and then to suggest that an entire teaching method (writer's workshop) is wrongheaded?
"A lot of supposedly progressive models seem to be about keeping the kids from experiencing any discomfort or stress - and exempting the teachers from the work of organized learning and feedback." Really?
"Deferring corrections until later means the unfortunate child already has memorized bad spelling and grammar, which now will need to be unlearned. So senseless." Implying that an their pedagogy lacks sense.
"I cannot imagine someone paying $50k tuition for the privilege of a teaching approach that treats 10 year olds like incapable preschoolers. " Wow.

And these were just in the first 4 pages. So no, there's not a lot of emotion wrapped in progressive schools and those who attend - no more than the emotion wrapped in public schools or catholic schools and those who attend. Love progressive school philosophy or hate it or question it or be curious about it - most of us don't care. Your kids - your choices. But don't come to these threads with such ignorance, sweeping generalizations, and rudeness and then look use the push back received as further confirmation of the bias you already brought with you about entire philosophies and the people who subscribe to them. Otherwise, what is the point of these forums?

Dang all that because you are offended that parents are being advised to ask about teaching phonics and math facts and spelling?

how about you tell US what “progressive” means and what a prospective parent could ask?

DP - I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to have missed the point of the post entirely while your tone kind of proves their point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - PP again, the one who you’ve engaged with a few times on this thread. I don’t want to get into the fight above (think the net net is - all schools work for SOME kids or SOME families. You have to find what works for you/your kids).

Our progressive school does teach phonics, but it wasn’t structured or woven into other parts of the day. So for example, when the kids were doing writers workshop (which of course they don’t call it that anymore because Lucy Calkins = bad PR) they just let them use brave spelling, even into 2nd grade. What they should be doing is having the kids reference the phonics patterns they know when trying to write. This reinforces the learning and builds encoding skills. Or if a kid was having a hard time listening or participating, they could go use the cozy corner (great!) with no expectation that they make up the learning they missed later (not great!). Again - one school, my experience, but these are all things to poke on should they be important to you.

I’ll add that us leaving our school was very tough on some of our friends who, much like posters in this thread, seem to think our choice says something about THEM. I don’t know what it is about progressive education but there’s a lot of emotion wrapped in it, and I haven’t seen the same thing at our local Catholic school. Good luck!

I don't think very many people on these threads feel that the choices others are making says something about them. What posters get wrong is the language they are using and that's what gets targeted. It's not the choice you are making. These are your kids - you can and should make whatever choice is best. But posters often wrap their "explanation" of their choices in divisive language. In the case of your post above you use the word, "should" and then go on to explain with an air of authority why you think they "should". In this specific example, some teachers feel that "brave spelling" during initial (first drafts) of writing is best so as to not interfere with their flow of thoughts while writing and that they can go back in an edit phase and reference their phonics patterns. If you don't think that works well for your child just say that. The point is - the problem with many posts is the disguise of criticism of whole schools and whole philosophies within posts they later defend as a telling of one's personal experience or they deflect rudeness of their posts onto those who respond as being defensive. I mean just look at some of that the sweeping and negative statements made in this thread.

"Progressive schools also tend to attract a lot of chaos in the classroom". A sweeping negative generalization.
"Many so called progressive schools..." Passive aggressive.
"I don't want to find out that my kid is behind because the teachers/school couldn't be bothered to focus on the fundamental building blocks that need to be put in place in elementary school." A rude characterization.
"Isn't it code for "excuses bad behavior because children are thriving at their passion?" And a lot of other therapy-speak? " Baseless and rude.
"Also, "child-led" is not an excuse for giant gaping holes in the curriculum. The teacher is supposed to awaken the child's interests, not just blow off whatever doesn't happen to appeal. " Baseless and sweeping assertion.
"So they spent like 3-4 years teaching them to do it wrong then tried to fix it? Stupid." Here we are calling an entire teaching method (writer's workshop) stupid.
"Ugh. This is the opposite of what most kids need and takes the wrongheaded view[i] that learning to spell is somehow deleterious to learning to express yourself. " What is your qualification to suggest what "most kids need" and then to suggest that an entire teaching method (writer's workshop) is wrongheaded?
"A lot of supposedly progressive models seem to be about keeping the kids from experiencing any discomfort or stress - and exempting the teachers from the work of organized learning and feedback." Really?
"Deferring corrections until later means the unfortunate child already has memorized bad spelling and grammar, which now will need to be unlearned. So senseless." Implying that an their pedagogy lacks sense.
"I cannot imagine someone paying $50k tuition for the privilege of a teaching approach that treats 10 year olds like incapable preschoolers. " Wow.

And these were just in the first 4 pages. So no, there's not a lot of emotion wrapped in progressive schools and those who attend - no more than the emotion wrapped in public schools or catholic schools and those who attend. Love progressive school philosophy or hate it or question it or be curious about it - most of us don't care. Your kids - your choices. But don't come to these threads with such ignorance, sweeping generalizations, and rudeness and then look use the push back received as further confirmation of the bias you already brought with you about entire philosophies and the people who subscribe to them. Otherwise, what is the point of these forums?

Dang all that because you are offended that parents are being advised to ask about teaching phonics and math facts and spelling?

how about you tell US what “progressive” means and what a prospective parent could ask?

DP - I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong but you seem to have missed the point of the post entirely while your tone kind of proves their point.

No honestly tell me - because it seems like some people want to keep OP from hearing about possible issues on the ground that you don’t like our tone? basically your stance is that OP is “stupid” to ask or even try to learn about teaching methods - she just needs to pay the tuition and wait and see if her kid learns to read, spell and do math?

[Anonymous]

Wokeness is no longer cool in colleges. Don’t send your kid to a woke school. Your future self will appreciate it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:About 30% of students will learn to read without regard to what method is used. The other 70% do not learn well if 3-cueing or other bogus methods that ARE part of whole language / balanced literacy are used. Lots of large studies with quality controls show this.

Virginia public schools (and also public schools in many other states) are NOT allowed to use either of those methods any longer BECAUSE the science is so clear. Those rules passed the (politically divided) VA legislature in a nearly unanimous vote. This is not a partisan issue.

Go listen to the "Sold a Story" podcast.

Some of you are working overtime to prove a pointless point. Wouldn't it be simple (but boring and uninspiring) if the world were as "either- or-" and "black and white" as you seem to reduce it? Wouldn't it be simple (but again albeit boring and uninspiring) if nuance wasn't a thing?

For those who want to learn more about the history of 3-cueing and how popular it is beyond whole-language enthusiasts, start with this easy to read article, https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/is-this-the-end-of-three-cueing/2020/12

For the OP that started this thread and others - this thread is stupid. Progressive schools and academic progress are not mutually exclusive. It seems many posts have now stated the obvious - that there is no shortage of choices in the DMV of public, charter, private, and independent schools that rest on a variety of foundational philosophies and accompanying teaching methods. Find one that works for your kid. Best of luck in doing that. No need to bash the philosophies and methods that you don't agree with and/or don't work for your kid. Obviously the fact that all these different schools exist mean they work for some.

I see. You basically don’t want people to discuss the methods openly.

Oh, my bad - you wanted to "discuss" - that's why you referred to the methods as "bogus" and made a point of stating that the vote was unanimous and not partisan - because you wanted to open this up to "discussion". Okie dokie. Let's discuss then. Surely you read the article I posted and my repeated suggestion that there's no one size fits all approach in education. So let's "discuss" this.....go.

NP. I read the article. I’m confused why you seem to think it’s a defense of cueing as a learning strategy. It very much isn’t. It talks about how problematically entrenched the method is in the teaching world, but repeatedly emphasizes its ineffectiveness, and reiterates the effectiveness of phonics-based methods.

[Anonymous]

The EdWeek article cited actually contradicts the claims that balanced literacy / whole language works well to teach reading. The article says 3-cueing is both harmful and too widespread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - PP again, the one who you’ve engaged with a few times on this thread. I don’t want to get into the fight above (think the net net is - all schools work for SOME kids or SOME families. You have to find what works for you/your kids).

Our progressive school does teach phonics, but it wasn’t structured or woven into other parts of the day. So for example, when the kids were doing writers workshop (which of course they don’t call it that anymore because Lucy Calkins = bad PR) they just let them use brave spelling, even into 2nd grade. What they should be doing is having the kids reference the phonics patterns they know when trying to write. This reinforces the learning and builds encoding skills. Or if a kid was having a hard time listening or participating, they could go use the cozy corner (great!) with no expectation that they make up the learning they missed later (not great!). Again - one school, my experience, but these are all things to poke on should they be important to you.

I’ll add that us leaving our school was very tough on some of our friends who, much like posters in this thread, seem to think our choice says something about THEM. I don’t know what it is about progressive education but there’s a lot of emotion wrapped in it, and I haven’t seen the same thing at our local Catholic school. Good luck!

I don't think very many people on these threads feel that the choices others are making says something about them. What posters get wrong is the language they are using and that's what gets targeted. It's not the choice you are making. These are your kids - you can and should make whatever choice is best. But posters often wrap their "explanation" of their choices in divisive language. In the case of your post above you use the word, "should" and then go on to explain with an air of authority why you think they "should". In this specific example, some teachers feel that "brave spelling" during initial (first drafts) of writing is best so as to not interfere with their flow of thoughts while writing and that they can go back in an edit phase and reference their phonics patterns. If you don't think that works well for your child just say that. The point is - the problem with many posts is the disguise of criticism of whole schools and whole philosophies within posts they later defend as a telling of one's personal experience or they deflect rudeness of their posts onto those who respond as being defensive. I mean just look at some of that the sweeping and negative statements made in this thread.

"Progressive schools also tend to attract a lot of chaos in the classroom". A sweeping negative generalization.
"Many so called progressive schools..." Passive aggressive.
"I don't want to find out that my kid is behind because the teachers/school couldn't be bothered to focus on the fundamental building blocks that need to be put in place in elementary school." A rude characterization.
"Isn't it code for "excuses bad behavior because children are thriving at their passion?" And a lot of other therapy-speak? " Baseless and rude.
"Also, "child-led" is not an excuse for giant gaping holes in the curriculum. The teacher is supposed to awaken the child's interests, not just blow off whatever doesn't happen to appeal. " Baseless and sweeping assertion.
"So they spent like 3-4 years teaching them to do it wrong then tried to fix it? Stupid." Here we are calling an entire teaching method (writer's workshop) stupid.
"Ugh. This is the opposite of what most kids need and takes the wrongheaded view[i] that learning to spell is somehow deleterious to learning to express yourself. " What is your qualification to suggest what "most kids need" and then to suggest that an entire teaching method (writer's workshop) is wrongheaded?
"A lot of supposedly progressive models seem to be about keeping the kids from experiencing any discomfort or stress - and exempting the teachers from the work of organized learning and feedback." Really?
"Deferring corrections until later means the unfortunate child already has memorized bad spelling and grammar, which now will need to be unlearned. So senseless." Implying that an their pedagogy lacks sense.
"I cannot imagine someone paying $50k tuition for the privilege of a teaching approach that treats 10 year olds like incapable preschoolers. " Wow.

And these were just in the first 4 pages. So no, there's not a lot of emotion wrapped in progressive schools and those who attend - no more than the emotion wrapped in public schools or catholic schools and those who attend. Love progressive school philosophy or hate it or question it or be curious about it - most of us don't care. Your kids - your choices. But don't come to these threads with such ignorance, sweeping generalizations, and rudeness and then look use the push back received as further confirmation of the bias you already brought with you about entire philosophies and the people who subscribe to them. Otherwise, what is the point of these forums?

Pp you replied to. I’ll take your point on my use of “should.” I do think kids should be encouraged to remember their phonics - especially vowel sounds - when trying to write. Especially in 2nd grade. Maybe there isn’t evidence for that, so yes, I see how that could be an opinion of mine. It is one of the things I came to care about, and if someone else cares about it, they should ask questions when touring classrooms. I learned the hard way because I didn’t know I cared in kindergarten when we applied.

Either way I was trying to have an honest discussion with the OP who had a question. the rest of your quotes weren’t things I said; I have many friends who love our progressive school dearly. The approach works for them and their kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A theme of the threads in the "Private & Independent Schools", forum is parents who blame schools rather than turning the spotlight onto themselves and their kids. It's a parents job to know their kid and find the right fit. This is not easy and as a parent I have compassion for the difficulty of this task. However, making the wrong choice of school for your kid does not mean that the school itself or its philosophy and pedagogy are wrong - it was simply wrong for YOUR kid. I know we are firmly in an unfortunate era where science and research are routinely dismissed but the fact is progressivism is a philosophy and pedagogy such as workshop model and whole language are supported by research. But just as not all researched medicines work for all patients, neither do all pedagogies work for kids.

Decide what you believe in as a parent, embark on the journey to find the right fit for your kid, and if you make the wrong choice - own it, fix it for your kid, and move on without bashing what you are moving on from. You may be moving on but other kids and families are staying because that school and those methods work for them.

Right. This is why most of the posts are saying “OP, I don’t think it’s right for YOU.”

Plenty of posts are also bashing various teaching methods. I think that was the point of the post you are responding to. No need to bash a whole philosophy or various teaching methods as it just means it doesn't work for "your" child so unfortunately you'll need to choose a different school.

I think we have plenty of evidence to bash the “progressive” methods of literacy. The whole point is that there is research on this so parents who are paying $$$$ have the right to understand this instead of all the hand-waving and smoke-blowing.

No, what you have is plenty of anecdotal evidence that progressive methods do not work for all children. This is the point. There is no blanket evidence that progressive methods don't work - they don't work for some. In the same way that Montessori doesn't work for all kids (didn't work well for mine) but that doesn't mean that Montessori doesn't work. I'm bewildered why this is such a difficult thing for you to grasp.

Also, just to be clear and to provide a bit of background for those actually interested - whole language and phonics were never meant to be mutually exclusive. The word "whole" in whole language was a directive for a holistic approach to reaching to include ALL of the following: phonemic awareness (phonics), semantic awareness (meaning), and syntactic awareness.

Do “progressive” schools use phonics though? or do they just use whole language and assure parents “it will all come together” when their children are not reading well in 1st grade? How about math? Do they claim that learning basic math facts is somehow harmful?

Our progressive K-8 focuses heavily on phonics. They use an O-G system. I think other progressive schools do that now as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The EdWeek article cited actually contradicts the claims that balanced literacy / whole language works well to teach reading. The article says 3-cueing is both harmful and too widespread.

The charter school I know that uses “3-cueing” has 5th graders that can’t read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The EdWeek article cited actually contradicts the claims that balanced literacy / whole language works well to teach reading. The article says 3-cueing is both harmful and too widespread.

The charter school I know that uses “3-cueing” has 5th graders that can’t read.

(“Progressive” charter school)

[Anonymous]

We just left our progressive K-8 for a much more structured middle school. What we loved in K and 1st started to make us very frustrated as our child got older.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We just left our progressive K-8 for a much more structured middle school. What we loved in K and 1st started to make us very frustrated as our child got older.

Sounds about right. I think there are reasonable arguments for making K and 1st more play-based than they tend to be, but eventually you have to stop treating kids like 5 year olds. And you do need to make sure they all learn to read!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We just left our progressive K-8 for a much more structured middle school. What we loved in K and 1st started to make us very frustrated as our child got older.

Sounds about right. I think there are reasonable arguments for making K and 1st more play-based than they tend to be, but eventually you have to stop treating kids like 5 year olds. And you do need to make sure they all learn to read!

Makes sense. In My kids progressive school they seem to be play based until high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We just left our progressive K-8 for a much more structured middle school. What we loved in K and 1st started to make us very frustrated as our child got older.

True of many progressive schools. Nature based, laid back, no screens, emphasis on curiosity and asking questions, lots of play, etc. It all works super well when kids are in preschool and K, but once kids aren’t able to read or do math in 1st some of the great aspects feel like a liability. I think it’s fine to jump to a different educational philosophy as a child grows.