jeans5kids

Ok this is just a question not about a spacific family (that I can
think of right now): Now is unschooling what you (as members of this
group) think of as the ideal situation and the best way for most
people to homeschool or is it just for people who are life-long
learners themselves and are well read or well educated on the
unschooling subject.
Trying to better explain the question: Can anyone who just keeps
their children home from school and doesn't do text booky type
things actually unschooling their children
Or even better what about the people who are really religious (or
really something) and think that leaving their children out of
school is better for them socailly (or something) but don't leave
the kids opptions open (education-wise) and/or don't do anything
enriching with them????
I'm thinking about people with limited resources and such ??
I hope someone can understand my question and answer it to the best
of their ablity. I have ran this situation over in my head many
times and would really like to know what others think.
Like what about people in third world countries? Can they do a good
job of unschooling ? given their situation?
sorry this is so long but are we just the fortunate ones who *can*
unschool?
not meaning to stir the pot so to speak just a question I really
have been wondering about

thanks to anyone who tryes to answer
jean

Robyn Coburn

<<<< Trying to better explain the question: Can anyone who just keeps
their children home from school and doesn't do text booky type
things actually unschooling their children >>>

There's a lot more to it than just what is absent.

<<<<< Or even better what about the people who are really religious (or
really something) and think that leaving their children out of
school is better for them socailly (or something) but don't leave
the kids opptions open (education-wise) and/or don't do anything
enriching with them???? >>>>

This doesn't sound like Unschooling on any level.

Are you asking if I think their kids would be better off if they were
Unschooling instead? Yes *if* the parents devoted as much energy to it as
they did to school-at-home.

Are you asking if the reason why people become Unschoolers matters?
Hmm...that's a good one...

<<<<I'm thinking about people with limited resources and such ??
I hope someone can understand my question and answer it to the best
of their ablity. I have ran this situation over in my head many
times and would really like to know what others think.
Like what about people in third world countries? Can they do a good
job of unschooling ? given their situation? >>>>>

If poverty means that people are spending most of their time in the grueling
physical labor of carrying water by hand and farming with only hand
implements, and walking miles every day in search of firewood - well
probably not - there are only so many hours in a day. I think people see
schooling as a way to escape their poverty, as well as a way to have access
to resources we might take for granted. I don't know that it changes how the
brain works and how learning is accomplished inside the minds of the kids,
but it is a very different environment.

I think that people choosing to live a tribal traditional lifestyle are
outside the scope of "unschooling or not", since Unschooling educationally
is a response to the existence of schools. It has been posited in the past
that without schools there is no Unschooling.

Unschooling works in an enriched home environment with attentive, committed
to it parents. It also means being able to tap into the resources of the
community, including libraries and museums and cultural offerings.

I'm not sure what you are asking...I consider the freedom and opportunity to
Unschool to be a great gift. It's not that I am particularly adroit, but
that I am freed by circumstances and the commitment of my hardworking dh to
be able to do it.

Robyn L. Coburn

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.13/197 - Release Date: 12/9/2005

Sandra Dodd

On Dec 9, 2005, at 12:27 PM, jeans5kids wrote:

> -=-Can anyone who just keeps
> their children home from school and doesn't do text booky type
> things actually unschooling their children -=-

Those who DO "text book" things can't actually unschool their
children, in my opinion (quickly given based on no more than you asked).

They need to live so that text booky types stuff isn't necessary.

Did you mean "school subjects" though? That might get a different
answer.

-=-Or even better what about the people who are really religious (or
really something) and think that leaving their children out of
school is better for them socailly (or something) but don't leave
the kids opptions open (education-wise) and/or don't do anything
enriching with them????-=-

Are you asking about homeschooling?

Maybe your whole question is really about homeschooling (school at
home) and not about unschooling.

Sandra

Sandra Dodd

-=-
> sorry this is so long but are we just the fortunate ones who *can*
> unschool?-=-



Separate from the other questions, let's look at this one please.

Is your question about elitism?


And if it is, are you thinking we shouldn't do this if it's not
something that anyone can do?

And if that is what you're thinking, are you thinking it creates an
unfair advantage?

Because if you did take those steps from elitist to not fair, what
about expensive private schools where kids will meet other kids whose
parents chose and paid for expensive private school? (Brits
translate this to "public school" please for purposes of analogy.)

I've felt some guilt from time to time that some friends of mine
might have chosen other options for their kids if they didn't have
full-time jobs. I do know that it's Keith's willingness to support
the family while I stay home than enables us to do this. If we had
three teens at Albuquerque Academy, I'm sure that would cost more
than I could possibly make at any job for which I'm remotely
qualified, though.

Sandra

Anastasia Hall

As far as third-world kids go - a theory I thought about while reading your post is Maslow's hierarchy of needs - you can only get an "education" (as we in "civilized" nations see it) - after your basic needs are met. Many of these children don't have food, water, shelter, or safety, so learning takes a back seat to staying alive. I'm sure they still pick up what they need to get by in their society, but I wouldn't call it unschooling as we use the term in the US. See below-


I think the ultimate goal of unschooling is self-actualization (the top of the hierarchy - after all other needs are met)- described by Maslow as the following:

Maslow writes the following of self-actualizing people:

They embrace the facts and realities of the world (including themselves) rather than denying or avoiding them.
They are spontaneous in their ideas and actions.
They are creative.
They are interested in solving problems; this often includes the problems of others. Solving these problems is often a key focus in their lives.
They feel a closeness to other people, and generally appreciate life.
They have a system of morality that is fully internalized and independent of external authority.
They judge others without prejudice, in a way that can be termed objective.
HTH - all of the Maslow info I included here came from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs#Self-actualization
so you can read more about it if you so choose.

Anastasia


jeans5kids <jeans5kids@...> wrote:
Ok this is just a question not about a spacific family (that I can
think of right now): Now is unschooling what you (as members of this
group) think of as the ideal situation and the best way for most
people to homeschool or is it just for people who are life-long
learners themselves and are well read or well educated on the
unschooling subject.
Trying to better explain the question: Can anyone who just keeps
their children home from school and doesn't do text booky type
things actually unschooling their children
Or even better what about the people who are really religious (or
really something) and think that leaving their children out of
school is better for them socailly (or something) but don't leave
the kids opptions open (education-wise) and/or don't do anything
enriching with them????
I'm thinking about people with limited resources and such ??
I hope someone can understand my question and answer it to the best
of their ablity. I have ran this situation over in my head many
times and would really like to know what others think.
Like what about people in third world countries? Can they do a good
job of unschooling ? given their situation?
sorry this is so long but are we just the fortunate ones who *can*
unschool?
not meaning to stir the pot so to speak just a question I really
have been wondering about

thanks to anyone who tryes to answer
jean










---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "AlwaysLearning" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---------------------------------






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

On Dec 9, 2005, at 1:58 PM, Anastasia Hall wrote (that Maslow wrote):

-=-They have a system of morality that is fully internalized and
independent of external authority. -=-

Thanks for bringing that Maslow list.

One of the most suprising and illuminating questions I've been asked
regarding unschooling was only vaguely about unschooling. Way back
when there was a user group and I got there through *Prodigy, all the
homeschoolers in the world who were online were there (all 200 maybe
<g>) and most were fundamentalist school-at-home folks.

The conversation that repeated in those days was about why someone
who wasn't Christian would homeschool. In one of those, someone
asked accusingly how then, if we weren't homeschooling for religious
reasons, and if I wasn't religious, would my children ever learn to
be moral. WHY would they be moral?


I had never wondered that question from that angle. I did know from
growing up Baptist that it's usual for some who leave the church to
go absolutely wildly crazy and live in bars and such. It seems that
without the fear of hell, they think there's no reason whatsoever to
be decent or honest or helpful.

Decency, honesty, helpfulness and all the other virtues in the world
have their own intrinsic rewards, and they make the person a better
person. That all works just fine without religion.

Sandra

Susan McGlohn

At 14:27 12/9/2005, you wrote:

> Now is unschooling what you (as members of this
>group) think of as the ideal situation and the best way for most
>people to homeschool

Yes, I do (as only one member of this group).

>or is it just for people who are life-long
>learners themselves and are well read or well educated on the
>unschooling subject.

No, John Holt's books were full of examples of people who unschooled their
children successfully who lived in public housing, who only owned one set
of encyclopedias, who worked to support their families, who only had a
minimum of formal education themselves, etc.

Many parents learn right alongside their children. I knew nothing about
video games until we started unschooling. Now I can carry on intelligent
conversations with most of the gamers my kids hang out with.


>Trying to better explain the question: Can anyone who just keeps
>their children home from school and doesn't do text booky type
>things actually unschooling their children

Yes. Unschooling usually doesn't involve "textbooky" things. It does
involve a tremendous amount of interaction and facilitation and
availability on the part of the parent, though. Filling in the gaps of my
education is an on-going process.


>Or even better what about the people who are really religious (or
>really something) and think that leaving their children out of
>school is better for them socailly (or something) but don't leave
>the kids opptions open (education-wise) and/or don't do anything
>enriching with them????

That wouldn't be unschooling. That would be neglectful parenting. And
that isn't just confined to the "really religious".


>I'm thinking about people with limited resources and such ??
>I hope someone can understand my question and answer it to the best
>of their ablity. I have ran this situation over in my head many
>times and would really like to know what others think.
>Like what about people in third world countries? Can they do a good
>job of unschooling ? given their situation?

Yes. They can supply their children with as much experience and learning
as is necessary to live in their community and part of the world. A child
in a third world country may have different needs and goals than a child in
the US, but certainly they can get what they need right there where they
are. They can give their children that much, and then give them the
freedom to find whatever else they want or need themselves.

Don't compare them to what our children have, or to our county's definition
of "educated". Compare them to other people in their country. Can they
live as successfully as anyone else in their country by unschooling? Most
likely. Could you go to their country or village and live as
successfully? Probably not.


>sorry this is so long but are we just the fortunate ones who *can*
>unschool?


No, but we are just the fortunate ones who have had the opportunity to
learn about and choose unschooling.


Susan M (VA)
http://radicalchristianunschool.homestead.com/index.html

"I am taking this opportunity to tell you that I am untraditional. I teach
my kids about the things that really matter. I will teach them about
Abraham Lincoln and Ronnie Van Sandt, because they are equally important in
my house." ~Jessie Baylor, Elizabethtown



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

NANCY OWENS

Susan McGlohn <wifeto.vegman@...> wrote: Jean wrote:
****>Or even better what about the people who are really religious (or
>really something) and think that leaving their children out of
>school is better for them socailly (or something) but don't leave
>the kids opptions open (education-wise) and/or don't do anything
>enriching with them????

Susan wrote:
That wouldn't be unschooling. That would be neglectful parenting. And
that isn't just confined to the "really religious".*****
Exactly. It matters not if you are religious Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Pagan, really, or not-at-all. School-at-home homeschooling and unschooling and every thing in between is homeschooling. But keeping kids at home, for the sake of at homeness to avoid various things for whatever reason, religious (no matter the religion or no religion), AND doing nothing with them once you have them there is IMO, abuse. And this applies to the really religious, really not religious, rich and poor.

This is where (I think) religious (and non-religious) school-at-homers and unschoolers (might) agree and disagree. Agree that doing nothing with a child is wrong, but the agreement stops there because most (most that I have met anyway) think that unschooling is doing nothing with a child. And they give all sorts of reasons for this belief. *If you aren't religious, you aren't moral, and if you don't homeschool for religious reasons then why homeschool?* Not taking into account that many unschoolers may be religious, and that many school-at-home types may not be religious. For some of the religious *elite* it is either this or that way and couldn't possibly be any combination of either way, or many ways.
~Nancy






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Susan McGlohn

At 00:21 12/10/2005, you wrote:
>
> Not taking into account that many unschoolers may be religious, and that
> many school-at-home types may not be religious. For some of the religious
> *elite* it is either this or that way and couldn't possibly be any
> combination of either way, or many ways.


Yep, and that religious elite are the ones that try to say that unschooling
is a sin and take scripture out of context to support it. That is one
reason I created my yahoo list RadChristianUnschoolers, to combat such
ignorance and bible-thumping. (yeah, that was a shameless plug for the
list...LOL) Admittedly the list is small, only 168 members. It has been
tense sometimes to keep it true to real, honest unschooling, but so far so
good.

But seriously, any type of lifestyle will have some parents that are
neglectful, and parents that are respectful and connected to their kids,
and parents that fall somewhere inbetween the two.

Unschooling is, I truly believe, the best environment to promote
connectedness and respect between parents and their children. Everything
else, but especially those religio-elitists, promote separation and
authoritarian rule and will squash learning in freedom and joy.

So to fully answer the OP's first question, yes, I truly believe that in
a home that lives radical unschooling every single day is the best way for
most children to live and learn.


Susan M (VA)
http://radicalchristianunschool.homestead.com/index.html

"I am taking this opportunity to tell you that I am untraditional. I teach
my kids about the things that really matter. I will teach them about
Abraham Lincoln and Ronnie Van Sandt, because they are equally important in
my house." ~Jessie Baylor, Elizabethtown



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

On Dec 9, 2005, at 10:21 PM, NANCY OWENS wrote:

-=- This is where (I think) religious (and non-religious) school-at-
homers and unschoolers (might) agree and disagree.-=-

As much as I love qualified statements, the one above ends up
saying... what?



-=- Susan wrote:
That wouldn't be unschooling. That would be neglectful parenting. And
that isn't just confined to the "really religious".*****
-=- Exactly. It matters not if you are religious Christian,
Jewish, Buddhist, Pagan, really, or not-at-all.-=-

Same thing.

If you say too much it ends up not saying anything anymore.

If someone is using homeschooling as a tool of isolation and
seclusion, they're not going to be able to help their child live in
and learn from the world.
If the purpose of their being at home is to hide that child from the
world, the world isn't let into the home, nor the child out.

Except for fundamentalists, I know of no one who really does that. I
know of no fundamentalist Buddhists--maybe monks. I know of no
fundamentalist Pagans. I know of no Hassidic or Conservative Jews
who are unschoolers, nor can I consider any of them wanting to be. A
simple google search will turn up more reading than one could do this
weekend of conservative and fundamentalist Christians who are
unschooling primarily to keep their children pure, to keep them
innocent, to keep them separate from the world. They're not evenly
spread throughout the world, those fundamentalist Christians. And it
makes no difference that there are 90badillion liberal Christians or
freeform/whatever Christians to "balance" them because it doesn't
balance them. They don't want balance. They want separatist extremity.

Let's not pretend they don't exist.

Can someone unschool who is homeschooling to keep children in
isolation? I think their world is too small for it to work in any
honest, sensible way. But they wouldn't want it anyway. The
principles which cause them to control their children's exposure and
freedom will cause them to try to control their schedules and learning.

Sandra

NANCY OWENS

Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
On Dec 9, 2005, at 10:21 PM, NANCY OWENS wrote:

****-=- This is where (I think) religious (and non-religious) school-at-
homers and unschoolers (might) agree and disagree.-=-

As much as I love qualified statements, the one above ends up
saying... what?****

Did I leave a sentence hanging? How about... I think religious and non religious homeschoolers can agree that bringing a child home and doing nothing at all isn't homeschooling at all, by any stretch of the imagination. School-at-home or unschooling.


***-=- Susan wrote:
That wouldn't be unschooling. That would be neglectful parenting. And
that isn't just confined to the "really religious".*****
-=- Exactly. It matters not if you are religious Christian,
Jewish, Buddhist, Pagan, really, or not-at-all.-=-

Same thing.

If you say too much it ends up not saying anything anymore.

If someone is using homeschooling as a tool of isolation and
seclusion, they're not going to be able to help their child live in
and learn from the world.
If the purpose of their being at home is to hide that child from the
world, the world isn't let into the home, nor the child out.

Except for fundamentalists, I know of no one who really does that.***(snip)

I think what I was trying to say was that neglectful parenting isn't limited to any religion or economic status. And/but that while a fundamentalist (Christian) would agree with me on that point, he probably would go further and say that what I do with my children falls under that umbrella. For him. I wasn't trying to say that there are the same type (fundamentalist) of folks in other religions, just that no matter the religion, or social class, neglect is neglect and not unschooling.

And I have met two different families who homeschool and one family who claims to unschool, but none really do either. And all three families purpose to homeschool is to isolate their children from all sorts of real or imagined dangers out in the *real world*. And none are particularly religious. One family attended the church I grew up in, sporadically. The other two claimed not to believe in God (of any sort) at all. And while I realize these examples are few, they do exist. And although I don't know of any personally, I have heard that there are fundamentalist christians who do unschool, despite the widespread belief in that group that unschooling is the same as neglect.
~Nancy
*clear as mud yet? <g>*




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

On Dec 9, 2005, at 11:41 PM, NANCY OWENS wrote:

> -=-while a fundamentalist (Christian) would agree with me on that
> point, he probably would go further and say that what I do with my
> children falls under that umbrella. For him.-=-


Well that's true. They'd think we were abusive for "spoiling" our
children by not spanking them and by letting them stay up late, etc.
It's midnight and Marty's at Walmart with his friend, and Kirby's at
another house playing video games, and Holly's watching late-night
talk shows. Altogether wrong and "permissive" (a bad word among the
spanking/grounding/hell-threat crowd).

-=-And all three families purpose to homeschool is to isolate their
children from all sorts of real or imagined dangers out in the *real
world*.-=-

Like TV and movies? <g>
Saving their kids from plastic toys and (the wrong type of)
revisionist history.


Only through the scope of how I see unschooling work the best and
brightest do those protectionist tactics seem to hurt children.
It doesn't "hurt" them, it just harms the potential ability for them
to learn from all the world.

But obviously those kinds of families just plain don't WANT them
learning from the world at large because it's too sinful or
commercial or R-rated or conservative or (pick your set of evils...)

I have my own set of evils, and fear of Barbies and Ninja Turtles is
one of them. <g> People who tell their kids that an interest in such
a toy will destroy their self image or potential to be peaceful are
crossing my invisible "too controlling and dishonest" line.

They don't care. <g>

Sandra

Susan McGlohn

At 02:04 12/10/2005, you wrote:

>On Dec 9, 2005, at 11:41 PM, NANCY OWENS wrote:
>
>-=-And all three families purpose to homeschool is to isolate their
>children from all sorts of real or imagined dangers out in the *real
>world*.-=-
>
>Like TV and movies? <g>
>Saving their kids from plastic toys and (the wrong type of)
>revisionist history.
>
>Only through the scope of how I see unschooling work the best and
>brightest do those protectionist tactics seem to hurt children.
>It doesn't "hurt" them, it just harms the potential ability for them
>to learn from all the world.


One note: The parents who practice such authoritarian/coercive lifestyles
would *never* choose unschooling as the methodology to educate their
children. They are the ones driven to shape their children's world-views
and would never leave them to their own learning, but would want to be very
sure to control it all. They will quote all sorts of scripture out of
context to prove their point about a child being left to himself brings
shame to his mother, and a child must be trained up in the way he should go.

So the OP's question about religious people pulling their kids out of
school to isolate them and then leaving them on their own to learn would
not happen in those types of families.

Christian unschoolers have a different interpretation of those and other
verses. ;-)


Susan (in VA)
wife to VegMan (aka Ted) since 12/86
momma to Sarah (10/89), Andrew (6/91), and Aaron (3/98)

"It's a small world....but a BIG life!" ~ Aaron, age 6

http://radicalchristianunschool.homestead.com/index.html



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Susan McGlohn

At 01:41 12/10/2005, you wrote:
>
>And although I don't know of any personally, I have heard that there are
>fundamentalist christians who do unschool, despite the widespread belief
>in that group that unschooling is the same as neglect.


Hi, Nancy! You can meet a lot of them, from all different denominations,
at the yahoo group RadicalChristianUnschoolers, and you can read their
reasons why they feel unschooling and their faith are perfectly compatible
in the files section there and in the archives.

It is true, though, that we are an anomaly amongst the huge Christian world
population. But hey, even a group of 168 is good. After all, there were
only 144 disciples <BWG>.


Susan (VA)
http://radicalchristianunschool.homestead.com/index.html





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

NANCY OWENS

Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote: ***Like TV and movies? <g>
Saving their kids from plastic toys and (the wrong type of)
revisionist history.****
YES! All three families like that. And I forgot about one other family, I met a few years ago, who, if there were such a thing as fundamentalist pagan, they would fit that mold. And they unschool, but they keep their kids from all sorts of *evil-right-wing-republican-idealism, and the wrong sorts of history, and toy guns, and barbies and...* So in my mind, they aren't unschooling, but... I don't know what comes after but. I've never seen evidence of any sort of abuse. Their kids are all happy, clean (or a clean as any child is at any given point in a day), well fed...


***Only through the scope of how I see unschooling work the best and
brightest do those protectionist tactics seem to hurt children.
It doesn't "hurt" them, it just harms the potential ability for them
to learn from all the world.

But obviously those kinds of families just plain don't WANT them
learning from the world at large because it's too sinful or
commercial or R-rated or conservative or (pick your set of evils...)

I have my own set of evils, and fear of Barbies and Ninja Turtles is
one of them. <g> People who tell their kids that an interest in such
a toy will destroy their self image or potential to be peaceful are
crossing my invisible "too controlling and dishonest" line.

They don't care. <g>***

Really? Do you really think they don't care? While I would agree that there are areas of the religious right that are very political. That seem as if the whole purpose of having a child is because God has commanded it. That the only place for a woman is slightly beside but behind her husband, with her mouth shut. And yes, I agree, they really seem to just not care, at least about anything but their agenda. But what about others? People who have strong beliefs, one way or another, religious or political or environmental or... Who impose those beliefs on their children, who teach their children that all other beliefs are wrong. And I believe there are people like that regardless of religious or political affiliation. What about those people? Do they not care about their children?
~Nancy
Who has a little foot stuck up in her ribs, and is all sorts of uncomfortable. Who is feeling grumpy and tired. And am I just being a bit too confrontational?



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Sandra Dodd

On Dec 10, 2005, at 10:29 AM, NANCY OWENS wrote:

> -=- Really? Do you really think they don't care? While I would
> agree that there are areas of the religious right that are very
> political.-=-


I mean they don't care what I think about what they think.

My opinion of them is of no concern to them.

-=-But what about others? People who have strong beliefs, one way or
another, religious or political or environmental or... Who impose
those beliefs on their children, who teach their children that all
other beliefs are wrong. And I believe there are people like that
regardless of religious or political affiliation. What about those
people? Do they not care about their children? -=-

They do, and within their worldview they aren't hurting their
children, they're helping them.

Because they're not trying or wanting to unschool, it doesn't matter
how their decisions affect the success of unschooling, because they
don't WANT any unschooling.

Sorry I wasn't clearer.

Sandra

NANCY OWENS

NANCY OWENS <nancy-owens@...> wrote: Really? Do you really think they don't care? While I would agree that there are areas of the religious right that are very political. That seem as if the whole purpose of having a child is because God has commanded it. That the only place for a woman is slightly beside but behind her husband, with her mouth shut. And yes, I agree, they really seem to just not care, at least about anything but their agenda. But what about others? People who have strong beliefs, one way or another, religious or political or environmental or... Who impose those beliefs on their children, who teach their children that all other beliefs are wrong. And I believe there are people like that regardless of religious or political affiliation. What about those people? Do they not care about their children?
~Nancy
Who has a little foot stuck up in her ribs, and is all sorts of uncomfortable. Who is feeling grumpy and tired. And am I just being a bit too confrontational?

*******

Okay, I've taken a nice, hot, expensively long shower. I've got a tape of Darin reading stories, playing against my belly. (He has this *gift* with talking to the unborn. <g>) And baby has moved her foot out of my ribs. So to answer my own question...
Yes, I am being too confrontational. And, there are way too many variables in my statements and questions above. It doesn't answer the OP's question, only confounds it, and really has no scope in our unschooling world. Do *they* (the imaginary people above, regardless of their religious or political beliefs) love their children? Yes, they probably do, but few if any are unschoolers, and most don't even homeschool.

To try and answer the OP's questions; I agree with another's answer in that you can't count what people do in third world, deepest darkest jungles of Africa or South America as unschoolers because there is no school. And really extremist-religious-political folks probably don't unschool. (although I believe that really religious people do) But people with limited resources? Yes they can and do unschool. We lived for years with limited everything. But that didn't mean that I didn't seek out everything that I could for the kids. And if I had been the school-at-home type I couldn't have afforded Sonlight, Abeka, BJU or other curriculum so I would have had to write my own. I did have access to a library, and we did have Internet at home, but IF we didn't have it at home, the library had it. So limited resources doesn't have to mean whole-wide-world limiting, just different means and ways of getting what you want.
~Nancy



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Nancy Wooton

On Dec 9, 2005, at 10:04 PM, Susan McGlohn wrote:

> So to fully answer the OP's first question, yes, I truly believe
> that in
> a home that lives radical unschooling every single day is the best way
> for
> most children to live and learn.
>
>
> Susan M (VA)
> http://radicalchristianunschool.homestead.com/index.html
>

Two non-sequitur questions:

1. Who or what is "the OP"?

2. Does "radical" modify "christian" or "unschool"?


Nancy

Susan McGlohn

At 18:23 12/10/2005, you wrote:

>On Dec 9, 2005, at 10:04 PM, Susan McGlohn wrote:
>
> > So to fully answer the OP's first question, yes, I truly believe
> > that in
> > a home that lives radical unschooling every single day is the best way
> > for
> > most children to live and learn.
> >
> >
> > Susan M (VA)
> >
> <http://radicalchristianunschool.homestead.com/index.html>http://radicalchristianunschool.homestead.com/index.html
> >
>
>Two non-sequitur questions:
>
>1. Who or what is "the OP"?

OP is "original post" or "original poster".



>2. Does "radical" modify "christian" or "unschool"?


In this case, the answer is both. :-)


Susan M (VA)
http://radicalchristianunschool.homestead.com/index.html

"I am taking this opportunity to tell you that I am untraditional. I teach
my kids about the things that really matter. I will teach them about
Abraham Lincoln and Ronnie Van Sandt, because they are equally important in
my house." ~Jessie Baylor, Elizabethtown



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]