View Full Version : Textbooks and R Students

02-27-2013, 03:05 PM
I've been reading elsewhere a person's opinion that Tapestry is not enough or could be improved with the addition of a spine, in particular a text.

I have assumed that the two levels of history readings well cover anything that might be needed. Does my son need to read one of the texts you recommend on the alternative pages?

Here's what I've read, " It is important in history to have a sense of place; to be familiar with important dates, military actions, discoveries, leaders, artists, inventors, etc. It would be difficult to obtain that context from the various TOG readings alone."

Since I've been using Tapestry for a while I have doubts about this statement, but I wanted to make sure I hadn't missed something.

Renaissance Mom
02-28-2013, 07:43 AM

I am the last one to be giving you advice -- you've been teaching at the R level longer than I have. But as a fellow traveler on this road, I share your scepticism about what you have been told. I am wondering just what date, military actions, discoveries, leaders, artists, inventors, etc. have been left out of which year plans? So many times I've found these things are covered in depth at the grammar or dialectic levels, but aren't necessarily left out of R. The focus for R seems to be on analyzing rather than simple data input. I know at the D level, we covered various key wars, the strategies and battles, and leaders throughout history in quite a bit of depth. Last year, in yr 4 for us, I noted that the R level had an ongoing thread on leadership -- analyzing the leadership characteristics and qualities of key leaders throughout the century. I don't know if there is any textbook out there that could guide us through that the way the COMBINATION of the TOG-recommended readings, AQ and TQ, discussion, and writing does. In my less experienced and perhap not humble enough opinion, that is what a real R level and college prep class should do -- not regurgitate WHAT and WHEN something happened, but WHY it happened. If reading a textbook could actually help a student learn how to analyze and evaluate what they read, put it in context with whatever else they have learned, and then pull it all together in context of the bigger picture, teaching would be a lot easier. But it's not. We help our students pull together all the pieces they read, from whatever the source, in discussion. That, of course, is real learning...for all of us.

I'm sorry I don't have the experience needed to reassure you. But perhaps my pontificating offers at least a little bit of encouragement. :)


03-01-2013, 08:27 AM
Monica, I asked because, like you, I have a bit of a prejudice against textbooks, especially for history and I wanted to get an official word that I've not messed up somehow by only using the primary reading suggestions.

I'm hopeful that an additional text on top of them would be redundant.