Whole to Parts

I’ve really been thinking about this post, since Tori requested it. (Thanks for the nudge!) It’s one thing to know the definition of “whole-to-parts learning” and another thing to apply it. That’s why I didn’t consciously apply it for long after I was first exposed to the idea. And why I discovered I was actually teaching whole to parts in some cases, but didn’t know it. So, I will explain the idea as I understand it, and then try to give lots of examples of applications.

In whole-to-parts learning, instruction begins with the “big picture,” or in a natural setting. Then learners construct their own understanding of the components. (That doesn’t mean that students never spend time practicing facts—such as the times tables, for instance—but such practice comes later.) This is in direct contrast to a method where subject matter is taught and mastered as factual bits and then (hopefully) synthesized into a whole. Whole-to-parts learning is supposed to appeal to some specific learning styles, but I think it works best for anyone because it is the way that little children learn everything before they go to school. This type of teaching is student-centered (perfect for a homeschool!) and tries to create a context for learning instead of forcing students to be passive recipients of the teacher’s knowledge.

Confused? Here are some examples:

1. Waldorf students are taught the letters of the alphabet using fairy tales. We find a letter in each story, then draw a picture in which that letter IS the picture. I taught the letter “R” with Rapunzel. One side of the "R" is the tower wall. The top of the "R" is the window. The other leg is Rapunzel's hair. (If this isn't obvious, remember that the artist is a 6 year old!) Providing this picture-context has helped D to no longer reverse his letters.

2. Our history study is always based on biographies or historical fiction. (I didn’t want to teach history in the boring way I had been taught, and reading stories just felt right.) So, we might not get all the facts and dates, but we get a feel for the people and the time period.

3. In Waldorf 1^st grade, we learn all four basic math operations together. The math gnomes help each other with their work, so the children see that the operations are all related (eg. multiplication is fast adding).

4. Also in Waldorf math, we always work from the “answer” when learning math facts:
12 is two sixes
12 is three fours
12 is six twos
Also:
12 is two sixes
10 is two fives
8 is two fours
Etc.

5. One of my favorite grammar resources, called Editor in Chief, offers a short passage for the student to read and then tells him how many errors to find. It’s much more challenging than just identifying parts of speech or grammar rules out of context! And it seems less threatening to the kids to edit someone else’s work rather than their own.

6. When modeling with clay, Waldorf students are encouraged to start with one big lump and then pinch and pull to make legs, ears, windows, doors, etc.

7. Our science studies always begin with a “lab.” Even when using a textbook, I rearrange the order so we are doing something experiential at the start. The kids understand the concept much better when they’ve already seen it first-hand.

8. Both the Charlotte Mason and Waldorf models have kids spend a lot of time outside, in nature. They don’t get just a leaf to look at in the classroom; they have seen the whole tree (and probably drawn a picture of it and collected its seed pods and …).

As you have probably noticed, this teaching philosophy is not exclusively a Waldorf idea. But it is part of the foundation of Waldorf ed., and that has prompted me to pay better attention to how I am doing things.

I’d love to hear your ideas of other applications of this philosophy.