Part of my How Homeschool? Series. For part two, click here.
One evening in 1988, Laurelee Robinson, homeschooling mother of six children from 17 months to 12 years old, “felt a pain inside her abdomen before she went to bed. By sunrise her pancreas, diseased and inflamed, had secreted digestive enzymes onto a nearby artery, boring through its wall. Laurelee bled to death before anyone had any idea of what was happening.” Her husband, the CalTech-trained chemist Art Robinson, was determined to both continue his full-time research and homeschool their kids (because regular schools were “child abuse” with debased morals and slackening standards). Unable to consume the file cabinets full of materials that his wife had diligently compiled, Art came up with a rigorous back-to-the-basics program that could be self-taught. Today, 5/6 of his children have doctorates in nuclear engineering, veterinary medicine, or chemistry (the outlier merely has a masters in nuclear engineering).
Here’s a one paragraph outline: six days a week, with the occasional additional day off, for a total of about 275 days a year, first thing in the morning after waking and eating breakfast and milking cows, each child 7 years old and up worked through 30 math problems (selected to be pitched at the child’s level so he could consistently get at least 95% correct every day over about 2 hours). Each child 10 and up then wrote an essay of at least one page on any topic of his own choosing. Dad reviewed and circled grammatical and spelling errors - but did not correct them himself; the child figured out the errors and corrected them before writing the next day’s essay. Younger children might practice penmanship or copy passages from the Bible. And then each child spent two hours reading books. Every child had to work through, in order, a curated list of 150 books from age 6 to 18, with vocabulary flashcards that recalled the use of words in the books and, for some, an SAT-like exam to test comprehension. After about five hours of academics, the remainder of the day was consumed in (self-directed) chores on the Robinson family farm, free reading from any book in the (appropriately curated) Robinson family library, and free play (which often included HAM radio, piano) - concluding with a family Bible study before lights out at 9.30 PM. At the earliest end, children spent time memorizing math facts and learning phonics. At 15, they started regularly taking timed SATs and APs for practice. That’s it.
Figure 1. Why is PhD Dad pirates’ favorite homeschooling method? Because it focuses on the three ARRs. Before you groan that this is a “Dad joke,” I need to correct you: it’s a PhD Dad joke.
The most popular homeschooling approaches tend to primarily be critiques of the Traditional humanities curriculum and they either end up either deemphasizing math and science or just copying the Traditional approach; Robinson has his own Traditional humanities critique - but his approach is especially attentive to STEM, and puts kids on track to master calculus by 15 years old.
Appropriate for this curriculum, let’s start with some basic math: Robinson’s approach adds about 50% more school days to the typical public school year and basically eliminates learning loss by ensuring that time off is not concentrated. Even elite prep schools may have only about 50 minutes of math class a day, four to five days a week, often taught at a blackboard and amidst jittering with other students, plus some fraction of that time to do homework (to be eventually graded and returned). Robinson’s method involves a child reading a lesson himself and then working through problems, a lot more problems than what one could hope to do in a Traditional setting. While the target is to complete them with 95% accuracy (and correct any mistakes) in two hours, the focus is on solving the problems, not hitting the time, and it can take longer. That all adds up.
But Robinson also starts at an advanced level. He dismisses most early elementary school math as silly games and instead insists that young children should just memorize all addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division tables up to 12 - and then, when the answers are “instantaneous, non-thinking, immediate response[s]”, just start 4th grade math. Robinson thought what was typical for 10 year olds in the late 1980s was “easy for any 7 year old,” had in fact been the standard at that age years prior, and warned that the expectations would likely continue to drop for what was “typical” as time went on.
Despite the acceleration, Robinson also tried to build math confidence. In the Traditional approach, an adult would teach a new math concept and then a child would be assigned work on the new concept. Robinson employed the Saxon program (though not in the way that its designers intended), where 90% of each lesson’s problems are actually from previous lessons that a child should already know how to do (and, in the Robinson method, has already mastered). But even more significantly, Robinson would never explain the concepts himself and, if asked, would just tell his children to go figure it out themselves. When the children completed their problem sets, they would check their answers against a key. If they got any wrong, they would do three things: first, add the errors to a graph that sat atop their desk and tracked their error rate over time; second, self-correct the error without help (except, occasionally, from a sibling, who himself learns by teaching); third, show the results to Dad. All three elements disincentivized carelessness that, according to Robinson, accounted for most errors. For the Robinson family, “The younger children tend to make one or two errors each day. As they get older, the error rate drops. The older children make about one error each week” out of 180 problems.
In Robinson’s view, this continuous resort to self-help gave his children the confidence to tackle any problem, knowing that they had solved countless ones before. Relatedly, no child was allowed to use a calculator (or computer) until after they had mastered calculus. Robinson argues, “It is important to realize that one cannot insert a calculator or computer into one’s brain. Quantitative thought requires mental mathematics. Introduction of machines before the brain has learned to do this work by itself weakens the development of the ability to think.” Robinson felt that self-teaching also ensured that children could learn beyond the limits of their teachers. Robinson added that during a great deal of the rest of the day, especially without distraction by other subjects, kids would be subconsciously thinking about mathematics and that “If an unnecessary subject is added, it wastes not only the curricular school time, but also a fraction of the extracurricular time.” And, more speculatively, Robinson felt that starting first thing with math every morning helped shape his children’s worldview, especially that there was such a thing as right and wrong. The fact that his children were good at math caused them to like math:
“The better a student does with a subject of study, the more he likes it. The more he likes it, the better he does with it, and so on. An upward spiral of hard work and enjoyment of the work ensues until, at the top, the word 'work" no longer applies. The student loves the subject. He does not even consider it work… The secret is that the greatest men who have built our technological civilization have rarely ‘worked.’ They have loved their endeavors so much that they were not work to them. They have ‘played,’ and the games they have played have enriched us all.”
Figure 2. One depiction of the PhD Dad method, where the action is in the mind, not in the bare room. Note also the presence of a laptop indicates the child has already mastered calculus. The fictional vibe of PhD Dad is best illustrated by the self-teaching genius of Batman - though that’s not to say that PhD Dads are inviting being gunned down in a dark alley to inspire their children to become superheroes.
But you may have noticed that, despite my mentioning that Robinson was attentive to STEM, that I’ve barely mentioned what those first three letters stand for and, in particular, science. Robinson insists that you cannot really understand science until you’re entirely mathematically literate - and that basically everything that Traditional schools do before calculus is “pretend science” filled with “oversimplified half-truths which later need to be unlearned” if you want to do proper science. So Robinson, a CalTech chemist, didn’t teach any formal science until after his children were done with math. “If Isaac Newton could not do physics without calculus, how can ordinary students do so?” Indeed, Newton had to invent calculus to solve the physics problems he was interested in. Richard Feynman echoed that sentiment, saying, when it comes to physics, if you don't know the math, you don't know the science.
If you’re on the Robinson program, your kid is done with calculus by 15 and then can spend the next three years during their previous math time working their way through (contra normal high school order) physics, which Robinson says is required to learn chemistry, which Robinson says is required to learn biology. Your students do this by reading the textbooks and answering the problems assigned by CalTech for freshmen. Robinson warns “against using texts from most other universities. The teaching of science has deteriorated so much that even many well-known universities are using texts of such poor quality that they are not suitable for a first-rate home school.” Indeed, Robinson even includes in his curriculum 167 legendary problems from his own time at CalTech that were the “toughest mechanics problems that a generation of very bright Caltech physics professors could devise” (Robinson offered financial awards to at least two of his children for each one they could answer correctly, in order, but also penalized them if they got any wrong; they tended to get 90% right).
Figure 3. At the Robinson science fair, there are no retreads of baking soda volcanoes. If you can’t disprove faulty climate models, miniaturize a nuclear power plant, or extend human life by several years, keep studying.
Robinson, a contrarian scientist himself, worried that most “science education” just taught children (and adults) to “trust and parrot” - that is, trust that what the teacher was saying was true and then repeat it without full understanding - and that endangered real thinking, innovation, and possibly life if you trusted the wrong people (think about covid!). Of course, if a child shows an interest in science, he can pursue it in his free time, perhaps with a chemistry set, or consume some old 1950s-era encyclopedias which don’t dumb things down or indulge in political correctness. If a child has a particular interest, such as in ants, don’t get him a “Joe Ant” book for children, no,
“If the child is interested in ants, provide him with books about ants and the means to experiment with them, but do not feel you must now incorporate ants into your regular curriculum. If his interest persists, get him the most complicated and complete text on ants you can find. Only part of this text will be understandable to him, but it will show him the limits of his present knowledge. This does not say, ‘This subject is too difficult.’ It says instead, ‘This is your subject presented in the way that it is discussed by those who love it best and have made it their life’s work. Study hard, so that one day you will be able to fully communicate with them.’”
But let’s talk about Robinson’s formal reading list of 150+ books: it is eclectic, serious, and politically incorrect. It starts with the McGuffey readers, which taught tens of millions of Americans how to read in the 19th century with help from Scripture, and includes Julius Caesar, John Calvin, Frederic Bastiat, Rudyard Kipling, memoirs from both sides of the Civil War, adventures throughout history written by the Victorian author GA Henty, and, of course, Shakespeare. Almost everything is written before 1950, which Robinson insists means richer language and better value alignment - though it also often means things are out of copyright protection, which makes things cheap but that may not be what you’re optimizing for.
Figure 4. But what do you really need since 1950 that isn’t a CalTech textbook? Not much, says Robinson, except Nuclear War Survival Skills, a technical book about blockchain programming, another book about how to invest in precious metals in the modern era, Narnia, and the archives of Robinson’s own scientific newsletter.
Robinson’s list reflects his own bias toward Christianity and free market economics (which I, at least, share) - but also has little quirks like favoring learning about history from the autobiographies of those who made it (his daughters claimed that this was much more enjoyable than historians’ accounts). Like Charlotte Mason, Robinson favors books for the young with few pictures and more text. A Classical adherent will object to the relative lack of texts before say, 1776, but Robinson insists that Classical folks get things wrong: that people of yesteryear studied certain old texts because they were then “the highest level of human knowledge” but now “science and math are the highest levels of available rational knowledge. A student’s brain and ability to think are developed much more effectively by study of math and science than they are by study of the classics.”
The order in which Robinson has kids read his book recommendations is an attempt to replicate Saxon math, with each book being approximately a bit more difficult to read than the last. Notably, Robinson never formally taught grammar or spelling to 5/6 of his kids, insisting that it was pedantic, had too high an opportunity cost, and perfection early was just performative for other adults. Besides, “If the student lives in an environment of adults that speak with proper grammar, reads well-selected books that have good grammar, does not associate with poorly educated children (including most in the public schools), and does not watch TV or the Internet (an interactive equivalent of TV), he will certainly have good grammar, since his grammatical examples will be good ones.” Robinson kept a copy of Webster’s 1913 dictionary (5x as many words as the original but retaining a literary flavor) for children to look up the proper spelling and meaning of words they misused in their daily essays. Robinson’s writing program also had an unexpected benefit:
“Children will write things to their parents in this way that they would otherwise be reticent to mention. The essays open up an additional means of communication between parents and children. I still recall an excellent essay written by my then 12-year-old older daughter Arynne entitled ‘Daddy's Eyes.’ Daddy's eyes, it seemed, too often noticed what you did that was not quite right and too seldom noticed what you did that was well done”
Originally, there was no curated list - children just read freely in the afternoon from the Robinson family library (which Laurelee purged of unfit books, as Samuel Johnson advised). Later, such free reading was extra reading.
Robinson provided his children the Wall Street Journal (more accurately, he subscribed to it and had a difficult time keeping a hold of it once it arrived, so he had to read it fast). Robinson broadly encouraged his children to dig deeper into more books by the authors on his formal list and, in particular, to read through the 40,000 entry 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica (allegedly great for the “98% of recorded history” that happened before it, the reading of which apparently substantially helped his kids on history APs). And, generally, Robinson recommends that you the parents need to read in “high volume, good quality” if you want your kids to do the same.
Figure 5. I actually thoroughly enjoy the 1828 Webster’s dictionary but it may occasionally lead you astray. Before a test, interview, or date, shouldn’t you encourage someone to be nervous (“possessing or manifesting vigor of mind”)? Wouldn’t you be disappointed if your date was merely fantastic (“imaginary; not real”)? Who wouldn’t want a gay (“jovial”) marriage?
The standard objection to the Robinson approach is that parents can’t get their kids to sit down and concentrate for multiple hours. Robinson insists that’s not a homeschool problem, that’s a parenting problem. For Robinson, the prerequisite to a successful homeschooling regime is an orderly household in which “parental orders must always be followed – without exception (and without argument or complaint).” He expanded that “Complaining is not a part of life in our home. Since it is never acknowledged or rewarded, complaining just does not occur.” And, above all, your children must be honest (in order for self-grading to work), such that “the most extreme disciplinary measures should be applied to dishonesty. If you do not teach each of your students to always be absolutely honest and truthful, then, in my opinion, your neglect is very likely to ruin their lives.”
Related to concentration, Robinson had no television and his family may have seen a carefully selected film together every several months (“An entire home-school curriculum can be completed in about the same number of hours per day as are spent by the average American child watching television”). Robinson is also fanatical about sugar, making the claim, backed by citations, that “Sugar for children is like alcohol for adults… Child ‘restlessness,’ ‘hyperactivity,’ ‘difficulty in concentrating,’ ‘attention deficit,’ and other popular descriptions of diminished mental performance are often caused by sugar in the diet.”
Further, Robinson warns against coddling children, making everything fun for them, or giving them the crutch of adult help which will never enable them to walk on their own. “If a child receives too much individual attention, he can develop a dependency upon his teacher that is difficult to break.” Robinson claimed that he spent less than 15 minutes a day “teaching” all of his children (basically circling the errors) - but, importantly, he did his work at a desk in the same bare room, free of any distractions, including decoration, and enforced quiet concentration. Robinson insists that he did not have perfectly naturally obedient children - that he had to lay down the law.
When his wife died, Robinson was overwhelmed and one local woman took one of his children (Joshua) under her wing while he tried to set things up for the rest. When Robinson finally got back to Joshua, the child “had learned that school consisted of a very nice woman helping him with everything” and he was shocked at the slow pace of learning. So Robinson thanked and dismissed her and put Joshua in with his other kids. Joshua resisted the program and just sat at the desk daydreaming… for 12 hours a day. Robinson told him his assignments could be done in 5 hours but he couldn’t leave unless he finished his work or the sun was down. This went on for 2 months until Joshua finally got bored, did the work, and, as predicted, was free in 5 hours. Apparently Joshua was young enough that he has no memory of this incident and there was never another problem. Robinson insists: “most of life is actually spent in a self-teaching situation. Adult life is not a series of spoon-fed lessons administered by all-knowing teachers and programmed workbooks.” And Robinson summed up his own experience: “Months of agony where the child sits stubbornly at the desk unable to learn by himself can result from early coddling. (There are lots of names for "learning difficulties" that imply the child has inherent problems. Many of these are cover-ups for inept early teaching.)”
In our next email, we will discuss the other big objection - the Robinson program “worked” because his kids inherited the genetics of a CalTech trained chemist and his biochemist/computer system programmer wife, the criticisms of this method by other homeschooling approaches, and a the independent development of similar programs by other PhD Dads.
Thanks for reading! If you enjoyed this, forward it to a friend: Know anyone who is thinking about homeschooling their kids? How about anyone with kids? Or do you know anybody who was once a kid?
If you liked this, be sure to check out my other newsletters, especially the others in this series, which started with this introduction that will be updated with links as they are released: How Homeschool?
If you’ve received this email from a friend and would like more, sign up at www.grantreadsbooks.com. I read over 100 non-fiction books a year (history, business, self-management) and share a review (and terrible cartoons) every couple weeks with my friends. Really, it’s all about how to be a better American and how America can be better. Look forward to having you on board!