Kim H

Hi there,

I'm sorry I haven't been contributing much at all here but I am SO enjoying reading what you all have to say and think it's all fantastic.

I have one lingering thought that keeps trickling into my brain often, about TV and self-regulation. I was wondering if I could share it hear and gain some feedback on what you all think about it.

I hear what radical unschoolers say and feel about TV and computers (no limits - total self-regulation). I'm just wondering though, how do you all feel about the physical side of what TV/computers can do eg: the damage from rays, the damage to eyes and brain development in young children. There's a lot of info out there on that as well.

I'm just finding it so confusing. On the one hand I totally agree with self-regulation in all areas of life but then, at the back of my mind is this concern for my child's health.

I'd really value what you guys think about this health stuff.

Thanks so much and so sorry to be wanting something without giving very much (I guess I'm still really learning so much).

Kim

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

Sandra Dodd

On Mar 23, 2006, at 1:15 PM, Kim H wrote:

> I hear what radical unschoolers say and feel about TV and computers
> (no limits - total self-regulation).


"Self regulating" is still about rules and measures.

If you think of your children as making thoughtful choices all along
the way, that's better than waiting for them to "self regulate."
There's a green box down on this page http://sandradodd.com/rules
about the idea of self regulation.

-=-I hear what radical unschoolers say and feel about TV and
computers (no limits - total self-regulation). I'm just wondering
though, how do you all feel about the physical side of what TV/
computers can do eg: the damage from rays, the damage to eyes and
brain development in young children. There's a lot of info out there
on that as well. -=-

How close are you sitting to your computer?
Have you been outside without sunscreen and a hat lately?

The damage to eyes and brain development is, as far as I can tell,
total bullshit. Honestly. Reading flat books (and flat computer
screens) seems to be harmful to eyes too, or at least unnatural, in
that eyes are designed for depth perception. When I go outside to
gather wood or collect seeds sometimes, if I've been reading a lot
just before, I have to consciously stretch my eyes, and think and
concentrate to come back to looking with depth instead of just at the
surface of the vines or the woodpile.

-=-I'm just finding it so confusing. On the one hand I totally agree
with self-regulation in all areas of life but then, at the back of my
mind is this concern for my child's health-=-

In general, our culture likes to make children small. And in
general, our culture likes to encourage adults to keep children
down. So I question anything that says "children shouldn't do this"
or that. When I was little we were told drinking coffee would stunt
our growth. I think it was really that coffee was expensive and
adults didn't want to share it, and didn't want to stimulate their
kids. That still goes on, with people wanting to limit foods so kids
don't "get hyper." That's a way of controlling them biochemically,
isn't it?

Oh! Keith said he read that the U.S. Army (I think he said) won't
take someone who has taken psychoactive drugs within the past year
(when they go to enlist) and that includes Ritalin.

I let my kids know what effect different foods might have, as far as
I know. I try to be very careful not to make absolute statements or
to say anything that will turn out not to be true. Holly drinks Red
Bull sometimes. Sometimes if one is sick I'll remind them that juice
and broth/soup are thought to be better than milk products for people
who are having sinus and mucus situation. If they're "irregular" one
way or the other I'll point out foods we have that might help or
hurt. I don't tell them what to eat. I help them make better
decisions.

Last night Marty was playing a video game he's only owned since
Tuesday afternoon. He's working full time, and when he came back
yesterday Kirby was already playing the game and he waited a while.
It's called Oblivion.

At about 8:00 he came where I was and said he wanted to keep playing
his game, but he needed to go to sleep. I asked whether he couldn't
play for another hour and then get by on 8 and a half hours of
sleep. He said he *could* but he woudn't feel as good the next day.

This kid who was allowed to stay up late or go to bed either one, now
that he goes to work at 6:30, tries to sleep ten hours a night.
Nobody "makes" him. He decides each night based on how he feels, how
hard that day was and how alert he needs to be the next day. That's
not "self regulation," though. It's thoughtful decisionmaking, and
it's the way people can be in the absence of being controlled,
shamed, manipulated or scared. WEIRD. I would never have expected
it as a byproduct of unschooling. I, who was told when to go to
sleep and when to wake up, feel that I've really won something if I
stay up really late, and I'm WAY grown up. I sleep or wake with
little voices leftover in my head about "should" and "can" and "can't."

I think many "studies" are really justifications for controlling kids.

Sandra

Nittany Lion

Kim,

We don't watch much tv and do limit it for our kids. My oldest who is now 7
has lazy eye which was diagnosed at 4 months old. She's worn glasses,
patched and done vision therapy since she was about 18 months. According
to the eye doctors we've been to and our own research, tv is passive and her
eye needs (extra) stimulation. So alot of tv at the age of her eyes
developing (up until around age 9-12) could be harmful in the sense that she
would use her strong eye to watch tv and not use her lazy eye which would
shut down and could lead to lost vision/blindness in her lazy eye. Even if
she didn't have a vision problem I would likely continue to limit tv. We
don't have video games either but the same would be true RE: my dd's vision.
I know its not considered unschooling - but its a choice we've made and
live fine with. I've also read The Plug in Drug and Four Reasons for the
Elimination of Television which have had an impact on our tv limits.

Dawn

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kim H" <kimlewismark@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:15 PM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] a question about TV


> Hi there,
>
> I'm sorry I haven't been contributing much at all here but I am SO
> enjoying reading what you all have to say and think it's all fantastic.
>
> I have one lingering thought that keeps trickling into my brain often,
> about TV and self-regulation. I was wondering if I could share it hear and
> gain some feedback on what you all think about it.
>
> I hear what radical unschoolers say and feel about TV and computers (no
> limits - total self-regulation). I'm just wondering though, how do you all
> feel about the physical side of what TV/computers can do eg: the damage
> from rays, the damage to eyes and brain development in young children.
> There's a lot of info out there on that as well.
>
> I'm just finding it so confusing. On the one hand I totally agree with
> self-regulation in all areas of life but then, at the back of my mind is
> this concern for my child's health.
>
> I'd really value what you guys think about this health stuff.
>
> Thanks so much and so sorry to be wanting something without giving very
> much (I guess I'm still really learning so much).
>
> Kim
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Sandra Dodd

On Mar 23, 2006, at 3:52 PM, Nittany Lion wrote:

> According
> to the eye doctors we've been to and our own research, tv is passive


-=-According
to the eye doctors we've been to and our own research, tv is passive -=-

TV watching is much less passive than book reading.
When a kid is thinking, and interested, and taking in information,
that's not passive. When a kid is up and dancing and singing and
discussing what's on with the others (sometimes we can't WAIT for a
commercial, which gives us a minute or two to discuss why and what
if, when we're watching 24 or Desperate Housewives, and when it's a
tape or DVD, we pause it LOTS, or wind back the good parts or places
that confuse us).

-=-Even if
she didn't have a vision problem I would likely continue to limit tv.
-=-

MILLIONS of families limit TV. Here are some arguments against limits:
http://sandradodd.com/tv

If the goal is learning and real choices, parentally imposed limits
are limiting. They limit learning.

-=-I know its not considered unschooling - but its a choice we've
made and
live fine with. I've also read The Plug in Drug and Four Reasons for
the
Elimination of Television which have had an impact on our tv limits.-=-

I've read the former and it seemed to be pap and nonsense.

Sandra

Kathleen Gehrke

--- In [email protected], "Nittany Lion" <dsweeney@...>
wrote:
>
> >
> We don't watch much tv and do limit it for our kids. My oldest
who is now 7
> has lazy eye which was diagnosed at 4 months old. She's worn
glasses,
> patched and done vision therapy since she was about 18 months.
According
> to the eye doctors we've been to and our own research, tv is
passive and her
> eye needs (extra) stimulation. So alot of tv at the age of her
eyes
> developing (up until around age 9-12) could be harmful in the
sense that she
> would use her strong eye to watch tv and not use her lazy eye
which would
> shut down and could lead to lost vision/blindness in her lazy
eye. Even if
> she didn't have a vision problem I would likely continue to limit
tv. We
> don't have video games either but the same would be true RE: my
dd's vision.
> I know its not considered unschooling - but its a choice we've
made and
> live fine with. I've also read The Plug in Drug and Four Reasons
for the
> Elimination of Television which have had an impact on our tv
limits.
>
That is interesting. My son who is 12 had a very lazy eye. We
patched when he was little. He did eye exercises and then started
playing video games. He also is probably my biggest tv watcher. His
lazy eye is 98% better. He swears it is the video games that helped
him pull that eye in on a regular basis. I have no idea, but trust
his perception on it.

Like I said he is a huge tv fan. Probably most of his information on
the world is gathered from the tv. He gives me interesting facts
from all of his shows constantly.

He does not enjoy reading, other than some magazines, but that kid
is very knowledgable about many, many subjects from his love of TV.

Just sharing another viewpoint.
Kathleen

nellebelle

=-=-=-=-=-=I've also read The Plug in Drug-=-=-=-=-=-=

This book is so full of holes and contradicts itself throughout.

Mary Ellen

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

Melissa

I just wrote in my blog about the benefits of TV. My son also has a
lazy eye, it's been about a year since we stopped limiting TV, and
his vision has improved from 40/200 to 40/80.

Melissa
Mom to Josh (11), Breanna (8), Emily (7), Rachel (6), Sam (4), Dan
(2), and Avari Rose


On Mar 23, 2006, at 5:07 PM, Kathleen Gehrke wrote:

> --- In [email protected], "Nittany Lion" <dsweeney@...>
> wrote:
> That is interesting. My son who is 12 had a very lazy eye. We
> patched when he was little. He did eye exercises and then started
> playing video games. He also is probably my biggest tv watcher. His
> lazy eye is 98% better. He swears it is the video games that helped
> him pull that eye in on a regular basis. I have no idea, but trust
> his perception on it.

Kim H

Thank you SO much Sandra! I think, deep down, I needed to hear this to allow me to 'free' up my own head stuff about the TV thing.

I am pretty 'organic' when it comes to food and skin products bla bla and as much as I can be with as much of my life as possible BUT I know this world is full of stuff that we do that can cause us problems etc. and to try to aviod every little thing will cause cancer!! I don't know why I was still stuck on this TV/computer rays thing but it's one that kept lingering in my mind. It's so hard siffering through info trying to find what's right etc ( and then, right for WHO??). The whole vaccination controversy, sun screen, organic food versers GM foods, chemically based skin products and more organic ones. Arrrgghhh! I run myself silly somtimes with it all.

I love the learning that takes place for me here, at this group - it's like, I can exhale and let go. Breathe better or something.

Aaaahhhh...

thanks so much.

Kim

----- Original Message -----
From: Sandra Dodd
To: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 8:39 AM
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] a question about TV



On Mar 23, 2006, at 1:15 PM, Kim H wrote:

> I hear what radical unschoolers say and feel about TV and computers
> (no limits - total self-regulation).


"Self regulating" is still about rules and measures.

If you think of your children as making thoughtful choices all along
the way, that's better than waiting for them to "self regulate."
There's a green box down on this page http://sandradodd.com/rules
about the idea of self regulation.

-=-I hear what radical unschoolers say and feel about TV and
computers (no limits - total self-regulation). I'm just wondering
though, how do you all feel about the physical side of what TV/
computers can do eg: the damage from rays, the damage to eyes and
brain development in young children. There's a lot of info out there
on that as well. -=-

How close are you sitting to your computer?
Have you been outside without sunscreen and a hat lately?

The damage to eyes and brain development is, as far as I can tell,
total bullshit. Honestly. Reading flat books (and flat computer
screens) seems to be harmful to eyes too, or at least unnatural, in
that eyes are designed for depth perception. When I go outside to
gather wood or collect seeds sometimes, if I've been reading a lot
just before, I have to consciously stretch my eyes, and think and
concentrate to come back to looking with depth instead of just at the
surface of the vines or the woodpile.

-=-I'm just finding it so confusing. On the one hand I totally agree
with self-regulation in all areas of life but then, at the back of my
mind is this concern for my child's health-=-

In general, our culture likes to make children small. And in
general, our culture likes to encourage adults to keep children
down. So I question anything that says "children shouldn't do this"
or that. When I was little we were told drinking coffee would stunt
our growth. I think it was really that coffee was expensive and
adults didn't want to share it, and didn't want to stimulate their
kids. That still goes on, with people wanting to limit foods so kids
don't "get hyper." That's a way of controlling them biochemically,
isn't it?

Oh! Keith said he read that the U.S. Army (I think he said) won't
take someone who has taken psychoactive drugs within the past year
(when they go to enlist) and that includes Ritalin.

I let my kids know what effect different foods might have, as far as
I know. I try to be very careful not to make absolute statements or
to say anything that will turn out not to be true. Holly drinks Red
Bull sometimes. Sometimes if one is sick I'll remind them that juice
and broth/soup are thought to be better than milk products for people
who are having sinus and mucus situation. If they're "irregular" one
way or the other I'll point out foods we have that might help or
hurt. I don't tell them what to eat. I help them make better
decisions.

Last night Marty was playing a video game he's only owned since
Tuesday afternoon. He's working full time, and when he came back
yesterday Kirby was already playing the game and he waited a while.
It's called Oblivion.

At about 8:00 he came where I was and said he wanted to keep playing
his game, but he needed to go to sleep. I asked whether he couldn't
play for another hour and then get by on 8 and a half hours of
sleep. He said he *could* but he woudn't feel as good the next day.

This kid who was allowed to stay up late or go to bed either one, now
that he goes to work at 6:30, tries to sleep ten hours a night.
Nobody "makes" him. He decides each night based on how he feels, how
hard that day was and how alert he needs to be the next day. That's
not "self regulation," though. It's thoughtful decisionmaking, and
it's the way people can be in the absence of being controlled,
shamed, manipulated or scared. WEIRD. I would never have expected
it as a byproduct of unschooling. I, who was told when to go to
sleep and when to wake up, feel that I've really won something if I
stay up really late, and I'm WAY grown up. I sleep or wake with
little voices leftover in my head about "should" and "can" and "can't."

I think many "studies" are really justifications for controlling kids.

Sandra




SPONSORED LINKS Unschooling Attachment parenting John holt
Parenting magazine Single parenting


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

a.. Visit your group "AlwaysLearning" on the web.

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

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


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




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


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.5/284 - Release Date: 17/03/2006


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

Kim H

Thanks Dawn. This sort of literature is what affects me and my ideas about TV. But, I keep coming back to the fact that if we are limiting our children then are we really allowing them to regulate for themselves? I don't want to stifle my son's inate ability to determine for himself what he needs and when but then I constantly battle with info that looks at danger/damage etc and I think, Aaagghhh!!

Kim
----- Original Message -----
From: Nittany Lion
To: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 9:52 AM
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] a question about TV


Kim,

We don't watch much tv and do limit it for our kids. My oldest who is now 7
has lazy eye which was diagnosed at 4 months old. She's worn glasses,
patched and done vision therapy since she was about 18 months. According
to the eye doctors we've been to and our own research, tv is passive and her
eye needs (extra) stimulation. So alot of tv at the age of her eyes
developing (up until around age 9-12) could be harmful in the sense that she
would use her strong eye to watch tv and not use her lazy eye which would
shut down and could lead to lost vision/blindness in her lazy eye. Even if
she didn't have a vision problem I would likely continue to limit tv. We
don't have video games either but the same would be true RE: my dd's vision.
I know its not considered unschooling - but its a choice we've made and
live fine with. I've also read The Plug in Drug and Four Reasons for the
Elimination of Television which have had an impact on our tv limits.

Dawn

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kim H" <kimlewismark@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 3:15 PM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] a question about TV


> Hi there,
>
> I'm sorry I haven't been contributing much at all here but I am SO
> enjoying reading what you all have to say and think it's all fantastic.
>
> I have one lingering thought that keeps trickling into my brain often,
> about TV and self-regulation. I was wondering if I could share it hear and
> gain some feedback on what you all think about it.
>
> I hear what radical unschoolers say and feel about TV and computers (no
> limits - total self-regulation). I'm just wondering though, how do you all
> feel about the physical side of what TV/computers can do eg: the damage
> from rays, the damage to eyes and brain development in young children.
> There's a lot of info out there on that as well.
>
> I'm just finding it so confusing. On the one hand I totally agree with
> self-regulation in all areas of life but then, at the back of my mind is
> this concern for my child's health.
>
> I'd really value what you guys think about this health stuff.
>
> Thanks so much and so sorry to be wanting something without giving very
> much (I guess I'm still really learning so much).
>
> Kim
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>




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

a.. Visit your group "AlwaysLearning" on the web.

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

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


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




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


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.5/284 - Release Date: 17/03/2006


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

Barbara Mullins

I used to worry about my son watching too much TV when we first
started unschooling after him being in kindergarten for half a year. I
think one of the best things we did concerning TV viewing was to give
him his own VCR with pleanty of blank tapes (and help him use them of
course.) He's now just turned 8 and has free use of TV, computer with
internet (we use favorites to help him get back to the places he
likes, help him make a list of his passwords), PS2 (use memory cards),
all the books in the house (we real bookmarks for these) , etc. and
has had for a few years now and I feel he uses them all to his advantage.
Why I mention the bookmarks and VHS tapes is becuase it gives him
even MORE control over these things in that he can start and stop them
when he needs to, or get back to a website, or the same spot in a
game, etc. So if something else comes up that he feels is of interest
to him then he doesn't feel like he will miss out on something else.
So even if there is a really interesting episode of Teen Titans on TV
he can still go to the park and not worry about missing anything
because he can watch the tape when he gets back home, if that's his
choice. It EMPOWERS him. Yes there are times when you have to make a
choice about things, but life is already so full of choices it helps
to have some control.
Before he had this empowerment perhaps he would watch 6 hours of
TV just so he wouldn't miss his favorite hour show, now if he records
it he can skip through the stuff he's not interested in, or he could
not watch it for weeks while he explores a new book or video game. He
spends time doing what he is interested in, not what's dictated by the
TV lineup, not watching TV just becuase he feels it may soon be yanked
away and he should watch as much of it as he can while he has it.
This type of thinking also can crossover into othre areas of life.
I also help empower my son to not overeat. I know this may sould a
little weird but when he was age 4/5 and we went to Fazoli's he would
literally eat breadsticks until he would vomit because he liked them
SO much and it was so rare he got them! So now we figure out together
an amount that we can both agree on (say 2 1/2 breadsticks) with the
meal and then save another amount that we agree on (Say 2 more) away
for a later time like the next day. Perhaps we could make plans to eat
there more often or learn how to make breadsticks at home. Really I
never thought my son so deprived that he would feel he needed to hoard
food of any kind (never has he gone hungry) but obviously he felt
differently, so I tried to see how he felt and gave him more control
over the situation. He is now becoming more flexable in many areas! I
feel lots of communication and empowerment are great things in a happy
family. I'm going back to quietly lurking and learning now ~ Barbara
in Missouri

Sandra Dodd

On Mar 23, 2006, at 6:04 PM, Kim H wrote:

> -=-The whole vaccination controversy, sun screen, organic food
> versers GM foods, chemically based skin products and more organic
> ones. Arrrgghhh! I run myself silly somtimes with it all.-=-


I cut to paste this and say "And more important than knowing or
acting on any of that would be remembering to breathe.

And while I was changing to the other window, I saw your next
paragraph, which is this:

-=-I love the learning that takes place for me here, at this group -
it's like, I can exhale and let go. Breathe better or something.-=-

You were ahead of me.
Breathe and look up instead of holding your breath and looking down
into a hole filled with controversy and guilt and confusion.

We make choices ALL the time. Learning to make better ones in small
little ways, immediate ways, makes life bigger and better. Choosing
to be gentle with a child, and patient with ourselves, and generous
in ways we think might not even show makes our children more gentle,
patient and generous.

Sandra

Sylvie Martin

I pass lot of time behind my computer, several hours a day, and when I was a child, I wasn't restricted for the tv.

My mother is a tv lover, she prefers losing everything, but not her tv ! I was watching tv with her till midnight every night, my vision is perfect.

For years, I didn't have the electricity where I was living. I read a lot, with a canddle, and people were saying I could ruin my eyes, but no.

I have no problems with my eyes.

One time in my life, I had problems, I didn't see very well, it was when my baby Eliott died. Maybe because of my tears, or because I didn't want to "see" what was happened, I don't know..

But for now, I have a very good vision, and my children too, they watch tv when they want.

There are so many people with glasses, they didn't have tv when they were children. Even today, I know people without tv, they wear glasses and their children too..


Sylvie (eliott le Magicien 97 - Tom le Héros 99 - Lilou la fée 02)
http://www.webzinemaker.com/louves-online/
www.yourtes-tipis.com
www.sculpture-rod.com


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

Nittany Lion

Its silly to think that watching tv will result in poor vision or that not
watching tv will result in good vision. There is too much research,
scientific and unscientific that shows tv can and does have detrimental
effects though - vision included. Lazy eyes will get worse if they are not
stimulated, that includes tv AND everything else. Of course there are
benefits to tv too - we watch tv and reap those benefits. I'm not at a
place where I can see more benefit in unrestricted tv than restricted tv -
especially at the age my kids are. And IMO its such a small issue, yet
there is so much defensiveness and borderline anger about it that makes it
difficult to discuss in a respectful manner.

Dawn

----- Original Message -----
From: "Sylvie Martin" <eliott2@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 4:15 AM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] a question about TV


I pass lot of time behind my computer, several hours a day, and when I was a
child, I wasn't restricted for the tv.

My mother is a tv lover, she prefers losing everything, but not her tv ! I
was watching tv with her till midnight every night, my vision is perfect.

For years, I didn't have the electricity where I was living. I read a lot,
with a canddle, and people were saying I could ruin my eyes, but no.

I have no problems with my eyes.

One time in my life, I had problems, I didn't see very well, it was when my
baby Eliott died. Maybe because of my tears, or because I didn't want to
"see" what was happened, I don't know..

But for now, I have a very good vision, and my children too, they watch tv
when they want.

There are so many people with glasses, they didn't have tv when they were
children. Even today, I know people without tv, they wear glasses and their
children too..


Sylvie (eliott le Magicien 97 - Tom le Héros 99 - Lilou la fée 02)
http://www.webzinemaker.com/louves-online/
www.yourtes-tipis.com
www.sculpture-rod.com


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




Yahoo! Groups Links

[email protected]

In a message dated 3/24/2006 4:30:57 AM Eastern Standard Time,
eliott2@... writes:

>>There are so many people with glasses, they didn't have tv when they were
children. Even today, I know people without tv, they wear glasses and their
children too.. <<

I have 3 children who used to wear glasses full time, but now only 1 still
wears contacts, and the other 2 need them just for reading. I never *made*
them wear their glasses when they were supposed to be wearing them full time,
and they chose not to most of the time. So I would probably be considered a
bad parent for not insisting they wear them.

But possibly, because they didn't wear them all the time, their eyes
strengthened, or changed, or "grew" maybe? I don't know...But all 3 needed glasses
from the age of about 7 (bad eyes run in my husband's family, lots of lazy
eye) and my daughter that still wears them had really bad lazy eye when young
(we corrected it surgically.)

Nancy B.




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

Sandra Dodd

On Mar 24, 2006, at 4:34 AM, Nittany Lion wrote:

> I'm not at a
> place where I can see more benefit in unrestricted tv than
> restricted tv -
> especially at the age my kids are.


Anything you restrict in a rules-way makes your child small, and you
artificially big and wise.
Every "no" you say erodes the relationship between you and your child.

How much "no" could you take from your husband before you either
wanted to quit asking, or leave?

It's not about the level of restriction, it's about discovering that
saying yes is more positive than saying no.

If you withhold some of your willingness to trust your child, your
child is less trusted.

Flat out, right there. Not trusted. Negativity.

http://sandradodd.com/joyce/yes

Here's part of what's on that page:

**There's a lot of factors at play here.**

If someone sees the situation between parent and child about
maintaining control then there's a lot of factors.

When the situation is seen as respect then most of the factors
disappear.

**When I do, I stick to it.**

Even when you're wrong?

**I think I'm a dependable person to my kids that way.**

I think it sounds rigid.

Trust comes from following through on promises not from following
through on whatever happens to come out of our mouths. My daughter --
or any human for that matter -- doesn't trust me less if I say no and
change it to yes. But she does trust me less if I say yes and change
it to no.

**How do I know when to say no**

Don�t say no. Always say yes. Or some form of yes. See your role as
helping her get what she needs rather than negotiating for what�s
most convenient for you.

Yes can come in all sorts of forms:

�Yes, we can do that in 15 minutes when I�m done with this. If you�d
like to help, I can be done even sooner.�
�Yes, you can buy that. Let�s think up ways you could save up or earn
the money.�
�Yes, we can do that tomorrow morning because right now I�m about to
drop from exhaustion.�

**How do I know when to say no and when to let them decide.**

The question is what's more important? Is your need to put the
clothes away more important than a fun time spent playing with them?
Think about the memories you're creating for your daughter: a
knowledge that the summer clothes were put away in a timely manner or
an hour spent pretending with them.
I�d go get the clothes and apologize for being mean and rude to her.
Even if she�s a grudge holder and doesn�t want to play any more, the
fact that you apologize will make a difference even if she doesn�t
show it. It will let her know you recognize that her needs are
important and that you didn�t treat them that way.
We can view children's needs as inconvenient for us or we can view
them as people who need our help doing what they want to do.

As an adult if I want to paint, I get out the paints. If want a Coke
from the store, I get in the car and go. If I want to not cook
dinner, I can order pizza.

If I had to ask permission to use the paints, or ask my husband to
drive me, or ask for money and convince him why it was a good idea to
spend it how I wanted to then it would change our relationship
knowing that he had the power to grant or deny my request based on
*his* perception of what's important.

It's not that he trusts me to make the decisions he would. It's that
he trusts that I understand my own needs.
We can be our kids partner in helping them get what they want in life
or we can be the barrier that opens or closes according to our whim.

Our kids won't make the same choices we will. They don't have the
same needs we do. If we want them to respect our needs then we need
to offer them respect. We need to respect what *they* say is
important, *not* what we judge to be important.

Our kids are different people and they're not the age we are so their
needs are different. It's not our job to train them to need what we
need � they will have adult needs when they are of adult age � but to
model how to respect others needs by respecting theirs.

What's helpful is to recognize that what we think is important
doesn't look important at all to kids. We can't make them understand
how important it is. We can make them act as though they understand
by making them comply with what we want. But that isn't respect.
That's control.

If we want them to respect needs they don't understand then we need
to respect needs we don't understand. It won't be an equal give and
take for years and years but eventually as the cognitive ability to
understand someone's needs as separate from their own grows, as they
build up a feeling of being respected, kids will offer in return what
they're given.

Joyce
==============================

-=-And IMO its such a small issue, yet
there is so much defensiveness and borderline anger about it that
makes it
difficult to discuss in a respectful manner.-=-

It's not a small issue, as it's the central issue involved in
unschooling. Do you believe that there are learning opportunities
everywhere, and that children can continue to make connections their
whole lives?

If you believe they can learn history naturally, and grammar, but
you're sure they couldn't learn math or reading, you don't believe
and you don't trust. If you think they can learn history/science/
language/math naturally, but they can't learn whether they're sleepy
or hungry or whether they like a food or don't, you're still
reserving some things for which you will be the teacher because you
don't trust their ability to learn and communicate.


Sandra






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

Nittany Lion

Saying "no" doesn't have to be negative, it can be pleasant and positive.
My husband and I can respectfully say "no" to each other without negative
connotation and with trust - is shows our boundaries without confusion.

John Holt wrote:

Except in rare times of great stress or danger, there is no reason why we
cannot say 'No' to children in just as kind a way as we say 'Yes'. Both are
words. Both convey ideas which even tiny children are smart enough to grasp.
One says, 'We don't do it that way', the other says 'That's the way we do
it'. Most of the time, that is what children want to find out. Except when
overcome by fatigue, curiosity, or excitement, they want to do it right, do
as we do, fit in, take part.


Dawn
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sandra Dodd" <Sandra@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] a question about TV



On Mar 24, 2006, at 4:34 AM, Nittany Lion wrote:

> I'm not at a
> place where I can see more benefit in unrestricted tv than
> restricted tv -
> especially at the age my kids are.


Anything you restrict in a rules-way makes your child small, and you
artificially big and wise.
Every "no" you say erodes the relationship between you and your child.

How much "no" could you take from your husband before you either
wanted to quit asking, or leave?

It's not about the level of restriction, it's about discovering that
saying yes is more positive than saying no.

If you withhold some of your willingness to trust your child, your
child is less trusted.

Flat out, right there. Not trusted. Negativity.

http://sandradodd.com/joyce/yes

Here's part of what's on that page:

**There's a lot of factors at play here.**

If someone sees the situation between parent and child about
maintaining control then there's a lot of factors.

When the situation is seen as respect then most of the factors
disappear.

**When I do, I stick to it.**

Even when you're wrong?

**I think I'm a dependable person to my kids that way.**

I think it sounds rigid.

Trust comes from following through on promises not from following
through on whatever happens to come out of our mouths. My daughter --
or any human for that matter -- doesn't trust me less if I say no and
change it to yes. But she does trust me less if I say yes and change
it to no.

**How do I know when to say no**

Don't say no. Always say yes. Or some form of yes. See your role as
helping her get what she needs rather than negotiating for what's
most convenient for you.

Yes can come in all sorts of forms:

"Yes, we can do that in 15 minutes when I'm done with this. If you'd
like to help, I can be done even sooner."
"Yes, you can buy that. Let's think up ways you could save up or earn
the money."
"Yes, we can do that tomorrow morning because right now I'm about to
drop from exhaustion."

**How do I know when to say no and when to let them decide.**

The question is what's more important? Is your need to put the
clothes away more important than a fun time spent playing with them?
Think about the memories you're creating for your daughter: a
knowledge that the summer clothes were put away in a timely manner or
an hour spent pretending with them.
I'd go get the clothes and apologize for being mean and rude to her.
Even if she's a grudge holder and doesn't want to play any more, the
fact that you apologize will make a difference even if she doesn't
show it. It will let her know you recognize that her needs are
important and that you didn't treat them that way.
We can view children's needs as inconvenient for us or we can view
them as people who need our help doing what they want to do.

As an adult if I want to paint, I get out the paints. If want a Coke
from the store, I get in the car and go. If I want to not cook
dinner, I can order pizza.

If I had to ask permission to use the paints, or ask my husband to
drive me, or ask for money and convince him why it was a good idea to
spend it how I wanted to then it would change our relationship
knowing that he had the power to grant or deny my request based on
*his* perception of what's important.

It's not that he trusts me to make the decisions he would. It's that
he trusts that I understand my own needs.
We can be our kids partner in helping them get what they want in life
or we can be the barrier that opens or closes according to our whim.

Our kids won't make the same choices we will. They don't have the
same needs we do. If we want them to respect our needs then we need
to offer them respect. We need to respect what *they* say is
important, *not* what we judge to be important.

Our kids are different people and they're not the age we are so their
needs are different. It's not our job to train them to need what we
need - they will have adult needs when they are of adult age - but to
model how to respect others needs by respecting theirs.

What's helpful is to recognize that what we think is important
doesn't look important at all to kids. We can't make them understand
how important it is. We can make them act as though they understand
by making them comply with what we want. But that isn't respect.
That's control.

If we want them to respect needs they don't understand then we need
to respect needs we don't understand. It won't be an equal give and
take for years and years but eventually as the cognitive ability to
understand someone's needs as separate from their own grows, as they
build up a feeling of being respected, kids will offer in return what
they're given.

Joyce
==============================

-=-And IMO its such a small issue, yet
there is so much defensiveness and borderline anger about it that
makes it
difficult to discuss in a respectful manner.-=-

It's not a small issue, as it's the central issue involved in
unschooling. Do you believe that there are learning opportunities
everywhere, and that children can continue to make connections their
whole lives?

If you believe they can learn history naturally, and grammar, but
you're sure they couldn't learn math or reading, you don't believe
and you don't trust. If you think they can learn history/science/
language/math naturally, but they can't learn whether they're sleepy
or hungry or whether they like a food or don't, you're still
reserving some things for which you will be the teacher because you
don't trust their ability to learn and communicate.


Sandra






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




Yahoo! Groups Links

Joyce Fetteroll

On Mar 23, 2006, at 5:52 PM, Nittany Lion wrote:

> but its a choice we've made and
> live fine with

Not we. What you mean is it's a choice your husband and you have made
because it's convenient for the parents and eases your worries. It
doesn't feel the same to your daughter. Rules never feel the same to
those who are in control as they do to those who are controlled by them.

What if your husband read some studies that reading caused blindness
that you thought were bogus? What if he would only allow you to read
for 5 minutes a day and only those things he preapproved? *He* would
feel it was working and *he* would feel relieved that he didn't have
to worry about you going blind from reading. But how would it feel to
you?

> There is too much research,
> scientific and unscientific that shows tv can and does have
> detrimental
> effects though - vision included.

While I'm a big fan of science and have a sciency degree, in terms of
helping children I trust the real life experiences of unschoolers far
more than I trust scientific studies done on (schooled) children
(often with an eye towards getting kids to perform better in school!)

There have been several responses that are counter to your studies.
If you choose out of fear to listen to the studies over the voices of
unschooling experience that is your choice but limiting kids because
of what a parent fears might happen is not going to help anyone
unschool.

Do ask what people's experiences are on the list. Do collect your own
data and weigh it and assess it! :-) But offering a fear over
experience as the basis of decision making isn't going to be helpful
to unschooling.

Joyce

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

Sandra Dodd

On Mar 24, 2006, at 6:35 AM, Nittany Lion quoted John Holt:

> Except in rare times of great stress or danger, there is no reason
> why we
> cannot say 'No' to children in just as kind a way as we say 'Yes'.
> Both are
> words. Both convey ideas which even tiny children are smart enough
> to grasp.
> One says, 'We don't do it that way', the other says 'That's the way
> we do
> it'. Most of the time, that is what children want to find out.
> Except when
> overcome by fatigue, curiosity, or excitement, they want to do it
> right, do
> as we do, fit in, take part.

You CAN say no in a kind way. I think Holt was advising about not
yelling or being mean unless the child's life was in danger.

I say no to my kids lots. I'm not counting words. But the no is
usually in advisement, not in absolute limits, and there's a difference.

There's a guy who writes about how to be a parent who recommends
"vitamin N" and said children should hear five "no's" for every two
or three "yes's" (he WAS counting—anyone here remember the
recommended proportion?)

John Holt didn't like TV either, for himself, and figured no one else
would like it either. He probably quit watching it (if he ever did)
when it was still in black and white, and he's been dead a long time,
and he never had children.

My children certainly DO want to find out about what they need to do
to "do it right" and fit in. When the boys went to their first
funeral, when a friend's mother died, they were briefed and coached,
partly by Holly who had been to two funerals with me. They had seen
some funerals on movies and TV, and that didn't hurt.

I couldn't begin to count the things my kids have learned from media—
internet, music, radio, television, movies, video, DVD, magazines,
books.

I really don't want to count. I want their lives to be whole lives
of respect and freedom. One whole life.

Sandra

Susan McGlohn

At 06:34 AM 3/24/2006, you wrote:
> And IMO its such a small issue, yet
>there is so much defensiveness and borderline anger about it that makes it
>difficult to discuss in a respectful manner.


Probably due to where you are trying to discuss it. Maybe a group where tv
restrictions are the norm would be better. Bringing it to an unschooling
list is not going to get you very much support.



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



"Real, natural learning is in the living. It's in the observing, the
questioning, the examining, the pondering, the analyzing, the watching, the
reading, the DO-ing, the living, the breathing, the loving, the Joy. It's
in the Joy." ~Anne Ohman





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

Sandra Dodd

On Mar 24, 2006, at 6:39 AM, Joyce Fetteroll wrote:

> in terms of
> helping children I trust the real life experiences of unschoolers far
> more than I trust scientific studies done on (schooled) children

I want to point out that Joyce (and many others here) are not just
trusting mothers' reports of their real life experiences. She has
met dozens of the kids talked about here, hung out with them, seen
them in their homes, had some in hers (Marty, Holly and I were
fortunate to get to stay with Joyce for a few days and tourist in a
place very exotic, for us).

If any of us were just making this stuff up, the discussion would
have died years and years ago. But this list is four and a half
years old, and has grown steadily. UnschoolingDiscussion is nearly
seven years old. Yesterday was the tenth anniversary of the first
time I spoke in public. Had I been full of shit, it wouldn't be
worth mentioning; I woud've never spoken again. But usually when I
go to a conference, at least one of my kids is there. And when
people really meet my kids and talk with them, their fears
dissolve. No one can meet my kids, or Pam's or Joyce's or those of
many of the longtime unschoolers we've met, learned from, helped
along, and not KNOW that there's something to all of this.

Here's something Holly, who is fourteen, posted on MySpace recently:

Things to do when I get my braces off:
1. Have corn on the cob like all the time
2. Go to Shoney's and get like a ton of gum from their really cool
25¢ gum machine
3. Eat carrots until my skin turns orange

I put it up, with commentary, here: http://sandradodd.com/eating/balance

Holly has had braces since she was twelve, and they come off soon.
She's not pining for Jolly Ranchers or Tootsie Roll. She misses
whole carrots and corn on the cob. And she's had freedom to reject or
choose foods her whole life.

It's not what mainstream "common knowledge" would predict. Common
knowledge encourages parents to make such absolute statements as these:

They would spend all day, every day, in front of the the TV, computer
or playstation if they were allowed to.

If I I left him to his own plans, he would be playing the gameboy or
watching TV all day long.

Left to himself he would play Gamecube and torment his sister.

My Mitchell (5) would watch it all day if I didn't say that's
enough...get outside and play, now.

I know if I let my son do ONLY what he wanted to do that is what he
would choose. [of video games]

If I let him do exactly what he wants he will just watch tv constantly.

(More here: http://sandradoddcom/ifilet )



Holly, who's fourteen and longs for carrots, can watch TV or play
games all day if she wants to. She can watch R rated movies all she
wants to. She can rent them at the video place that's just a few
hundred yards out our back gate. I set their rental privileges to
"unlimited" years ago. Yesterday she watched The Lion King while
she did cut-paper art, and then went and played Guitar Hero until her
hand hurt, then talked to her brother a while and got in the hot tub
with her dad. You might be inclined not to believe me, but those
who have met Holly or Kirby or Marty are glad to believe it.



Sandra





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

Sandra Dodd

On Mar 24, 2006, at 7:03 AM, Susan McGlohn wrote:

> > And IMO its such a small issue, yet
> >there is so much defensiveness and borderline anger about it that
> makes it
> >difficult to discuss in a respectful manner.
>
>
> Probably due to where you are trying to discuss it. Maybe a group
> where tv
> restrictions are the norm would be better. Bringing it to an
> unschooling
> list is not going to get you very much support.


Yes. When something theoretical is presented as fact to a group of
people who have moved way beyond that theory and have years of
experience showing how false it really is, the newcomer presenter
will be challenged.

There are groups where the other moms, who haven't thought that much
about it either but are really glad there are a couple of aging books
supporting their desire to control would say "Oooooh, you're *such* a
good MOM!" That might feel good for a minute.

We're trying to share something with you that could change your life
and your children's lives and your lives together (family
environment, relationships) phenomenally. Take it or leave it.

My kids are bright, happy, responsible, whole and respected. You
can get in on that for free but we're not going to blow sunshine up
behind you. If your preferences are more important to you than your
kids' feelings and freedoms, you will find a lot of support in the
world for controlling, belittling, and discounting children. If you
want something different, stick around. Maybe check out
UnschoolingBasics for more basic unschooling info:
http://sandradodd.com/lists/other (it's described and linked there)

Sandra

P.S. Kirby (19) is housesitting the dojo where he studies and
teaches karate. His teacher lives there, but is out of town for five
days. He also works today, mid-day. He helped organize a birthday
party for a friend for Saturday night, but yesterday he was telling
Marty and Holly that he probably won't go to the party but will stay
at the dojo. If he does go, he said, it will be for just an hour or
two. I thought this Saturday was the day Marty (17) agreed to work
someone else's shift, for overtime. No, he said; that's April 1.

What does any of that have to do with freedom to watch TV?
It's part of freedom to live, learn and grow in a safe, supportive
environment, and the results are good.

Kim H

<<We make choices ALL the time. Learning to make better ones in small
little ways, immediate ways, makes life bigger and better. Choosing
to be gentle with a child, and patient with ourselves, and generous
in ways we think might not even show makes our children more gentle,
patient and generous>>

Oh that's so beautiful Sandra! Thanks SOOOO much. You've got no idea how much relief I feel from hearing the wonderful words of wisdom come out of your mouth (fingers...typing!) and others too. That's the reason why I still feel it's really important for me to just sit and listen to the posts rather than contribute much as I'm still really trying to get it all and learn, learn, learn.

It's been an absolute blessing to be hear even though I'm not contributing and helping others.

Kim
----- Original Message -----
From: Sandra Dodd
To: [email protected]
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 2:21 PM
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] a question about TV



On Mar 23, 2006, at 6:04 PM, Kim H wrote:

> -=-The whole vaccination controversy, sun screen, organic food
> versers GM foods, chemically based skin products and more organic
> ones. Arrrgghhh! I run myself silly somtimes with it all.-=-


I cut to paste this and say "And more important than knowing or
acting on any of that would be remembering to breathe.

And while I was changing to the other window, I saw your next
paragraph, which is this:

-=-I love the learning that takes place for me here, at this group -
it's like, I can exhale and let go. Breathe better or something.-=-

You were ahead of me.
Breathe and look up instead of holding your breath and looking down
into a hole filled with controversy and guilt and confusion.

We make choices ALL the time. Learning to make better ones in small
little ways, immediate ways, makes life bigger and better. Choosing
to be gentle with a child, and patient with ourselves, and generous
in ways we think might not even show makes our children more gentle,
patient and generous.

Sandra


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

a.. Visit your group "AlwaysLearning" on the web.

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

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


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




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


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.5/284 - Release Date: 17/03/2006


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

Barbara Chase

>Saying "no" doesn't have to be negative, it can be pleasant and positive.
>My husband and I can respectfully say "no" to each other without negative
>connotation and with trust - is shows our boundaries without confusion.

IMHO, using the word 'no', even when said nicely, doesn't help to clarify
and I think it can add confusion to a relationship. When I started to say
'yes' more I started to notice that 'no' felt like closing the door. I
also find that when I say 'no' I'm not very connected w/ myself, and if I'm
honest saying 'no' is just a short cut for doing what I want or holding on
to a fear rather than stretching myself and offering more to my
relationships. (Just to clarify, I'm not talking about simple stuff like
"would you like more potatoes?" ;-)

I prefer to convey additional information about what is really needed, to
offer an opportunity to connect and to share w/ the other person, or to
partner to find a way to say yes. This isn't my experience when I say
'no', that's more of a dead end. And I've also noticed that people often
hear the first thing that is said, so if I were to say "No, that will be
too cold for me. How about..." we never really get to the 'how about' part
because they are feeling the 'no'.

Saying 'no' is one way to honor a boundary, and it may be the only idea I
have at times, but these days I prefer to choose more and if 'no' comes up
for me I use it as an opportunity to learn more about myself so I can move
beyond it.


Barbara (Nicole, 7)

Mahalo - May you be in Divine Breath

Kim H

Thanks for that lovely insight into your children, Sandra. It puts everything all right into perspective when we start talking about REAL people and putting the self-regulation and radical unschooling into the real world. I think people get bees in their bonnets (me included - very unfortunately) without knowing anyone that's lived a life like this. Society has such a hold on us all and we listen so hard to what 'other' people say, believe and teach us that's it's really hard to go against the grain sometimes.

But...thankfully, some of us are enlightened and find a better, more peaceful way to live and bring up our children. Thankfully some of us fall across an email list like this one and meet others, more experienced, who can guide us in a different way. Thankfully some of us stumble across beautiful parenting books and get a glimpse of the things we could do better for our precious children. Thankfully we can step aside from scoiety and do a little bit better.

Kim
----- Original Message -----
From: Sandra Dodd
To: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 12:28 AM
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] a question about TV



On Mar 24, 2006, at 6:39 AM, Joyce Fetteroll wrote:

> in terms of
> helping children I trust the real life experiences of unschoolers far
> more than I trust scientific studies done on (schooled) children

I want to point out that Joyce (and many others here) are not just
trusting mothers' reports of their real life experiences. She has
met dozens of the kids talked about here, hung out with them, seen
them in their homes, had some in hers (Marty, Holly and I were
fortunate to get to stay with Joyce for a few days and tourist in a
place very exotic, for us).

If any of us were just making this stuff up, the discussion would
have died years and years ago. But this list is four and a half
years old, and has grown steadily. UnschoolingDiscussion is nearly
seven years old. Yesterday was the tenth anniversary of the first
time I spoke in public. Had I been full of shit, it wouldn't be
worth mentioning; I woud've never spoken again. But usually when I
go to a conference, at least one of my kids is there. And when
people really meet my kids and talk with them, their fears
dissolve. No one can meet my kids, or Pam's or Joyce's or those of
many of the longtime unschoolers we've met, learned from, helped
along, and not KNOW that there's something to all of this.

Here's something Holly, who is fourteen, posted on MySpace recently:

Things to do when I get my braces off:
1. Have corn on the cob like all the time
2. Go to Shoney's and get like a ton of gum from their really cool
25¢ gum machine
3. Eat carrots until my skin turns orange

I put it up, with commentary, here: http://sandradodd.com/eating/balance

Holly has had braces since she was twelve, and they come off soon.
She's not pining for Jolly Ranchers or Tootsie Roll. She misses
whole carrots and corn on the cob. And she's had freedom to reject or
choose foods her whole life.

It's not what mainstream "common knowledge" would predict. Common
knowledge encourages parents to make such absolute statements as these:

They would spend all day, every day, in front of the the TV, computer
or playstation if they were allowed to.

If I I left him to his own plans, he would be playing the gameboy or
watching TV all day long.

Left to himself he would play Gamecube and torment his sister.

My Mitchell (5) would watch it all day if I didn't say that's
enough...get outside and play, now.

I know if I let my son do ONLY what he wanted to do that is what he
would choose. [of video games]

If I let him do exactly what he wants he will just watch tv constantly.

(More here: http://sandradoddcom/ifilet )



Holly, who's fourteen and longs for carrots, can watch TV or play
games all day if she wants to. She can watch R rated movies all she
wants to. She can rent them at the video place that's just a few
hundred yards out our back gate. I set their rental privileges to
"unlimited" years ago. Yesterday she watched The Lion King while
she did cut-paper art, and then went and played Guitar Hero until her
hand hurt, then talked to her brother a while and got in the hot tub
with her dad. You might be inclined not to believe me, but those
who have met Holly or Kirby or Marty are glad to believe it.



Sandra





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



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

a.. Visit your group "AlwaysLearning" on the web.

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

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


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




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


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.3.1/292 - Release Date: 24/03/2006


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

Sandra Dodd

On Mar 25, 2006, at 5:51 PM, Kim H wrote:

> Thanks for that lovely insight into your children, Sandra. It puts
> everything all right into perspective when we start talking about
> REAL people and putting the self-regulation and radical unschooling
> into the real world.


Thanks.

I should point out that there's no way to prove by my kids that
"unschooling works." Maybe they're just genetically like me and
Keith, who met in a madrigal group we didn't have to be in, as part
of a medieval studies club we didn't have to be in, where he had made
clothes for ourselves just for fun, and so forth.

Though it doesn't prove that they are energetic and curious and
trustworthy *because* they were unschooled, what I think it does
prove is that those who say that childhood bedtimes can't ever get
jobs when they're grown, and that kids who aren't taught to read will
grow up illiterate, and if kids are allowed to watch as much TV as
they want their brains will turn to mush and they'll never turn the
TV off (oh... I haven't ever even thought of it, but none of our kids
need glasses. Neither did I until I was 40, nor Keith until he was
45 or so, so again—probably entirely genetic).

Sandra