Fwd: July Freedom in Education Newsletter
[email protected]
Does anyone elsee get the Freedom-in-Education newsletter? And if so,
were you disturbed at the last issue enough to write?
~Kelly
-----Original Message-----
From: Fienewsletter@...
Freedom-in-Education Newsletter
May 2006
The full version can be seen on-line at:
www.freedom-in-education.co.uk/newsletter06/july06.htm
The July Newsletter is about television, an interesting topic as yet
uncovered by Freedom-in-Education. Television is a major issue in most
families: when to watch it, what to watch, how long to watch it for, or
if one should watch it at all.
I do believe that television is slightly addictive - and this is as
true for adults as is it is for children. Once one has sat oneself down
to watch it, even if there is nothing interesting on, it becomes hard
to turn it off again, and I know that I will usually end up watching
things which are not only a terrible waste of time, but also put images
in my head which I could really do without!
It is quite clear that when a child is young television has a huge
effect on them. If one stops to talk to a child nearly everything they
say is copying an advert they heard, or imitating something they saw on
television. The sights and sounds seem to fill their world, and the
reason they are running round with toy guns pretending to blow each
other up is usually due to something they saw on television. It is no
wonder, then, that parents often try to protect their children from
this as much as they can, and I think that in general this is a good
idea.
When I was young I don't remember there being a television around, and
when I was a little older, we had a television but I would never watch
it without my parent's permission, - it was usually pretty boring
anyway. When I was about ten or eleven I went through a phase of
watching cartoons on television every day, and soon discovered that it
never left me feeling very good. The adverts aimed at children for
toys, sweets, junky drinks, and disgusting cereals were really quite
shocking, and the gross noisy way in which the channel was supposed to
appeal to children I found highly offensive, and not at all suited to
my tastes.
Sometimes in other people's houses I would catch glimpses of the news
which would fill me with a dread and horror of television which can't
easily be described. I still remember how deeply appalled I was, when I
saw pictures of people who were dead and wounded being shown, whilst
adults were casually eating their dinner. These shots would instantly
reduce me to tears, and make me feel far too sick to eat, but to them
it was considered an appropriate meal-time accompaniment!
I am still shocked when I see murders being coolly discussed by the
news presenters without reducing them to tears, and after having
announced the deaths of so many people they put a cheery smile on their
faces and say 'now time for the sport'. I don't think anyone is aware
of the damage that television must do, putting ideas into people's
heads that they would not otherwise have, hardening people in an area
where they should not be hardened, and turning terrible tragedy into
idle entertainment.
So I really don't think that television is the main culprit, but
rather what is shown on it. If television showed things which were as
good as things they now show are bad, then television could become a
wonderful thing which inspired people and left them feeling better. One
does occasionally see a good programme which shows one that this is the
case. But even then to watch it in moderation is probably still a good
idea, especially as regards children. After all, as Dad says in the
article below, television only stimulates a child's brain, whereas
ideally children should be able to learn whilst feeling and touching
and moving and interacting at the same time.
Anyway, I hope you enjoy the article.
Best wishes
Wendy
Television: Junk Food for the Mind
This is an article that I wrote about fifteen years ago, but never had
published. I come across it from time to time when tidying up my
office, and thought perhaps that it deserved a wider audience. The
title, in particular, is popular with members of my family. I hope that
it does not come across as a rant against television, but rather as a
reminder that, like other aspects of modern technology, one has to be
careful about how one introduces children to television.
A few years ago parents who gave their children healthy food were
often considered to be kill-joys and cranks. Now, everyone, from the
medical profession to people working in the food industry recognises
that a diet of crisps and fizzy drinks is bad for children’s health and
increases the risk of contracting life-threatening ailments in later
life: everyone now agrees that the body is designed in such a way that
it requires a constant supply of nutritious food over the first
eighteen or so years of life if it is to grow and develop properly, and
that a junk food diet does not supply those needs.
What is true for the body is even more true for the mind. A human
being is one of the most complex things in Nature, taking longer to
reach maturity than just about any other animal. This long period of
development is required principally not by the body, but by the mind,
which starts off blank and proceeds to acquire vast amounts of
information and knowledge as a child grows up.
In order to acquire this knowledge the mind needs constant sensory
stimulation, and this stimulation needs to be constantly maintained
over a long period of time. The natural world provides a child with
ever-changing, dynamic stimulation, of almost infinite variety,
compared to which the experience of watching television is sadly
lacking. Instead of having a multi-dimensional experience of sight,
sound, taste, smell, touch and an interaction with another responsive
human being, a child sitting in front of a television screen is largely
inactive, is having only the senses of sight and sound stimulated, and
is being given no chance to respond.
To the developing mind this is equivalent to sensory deprivation, and
whilst the odd hour of watching television can be accommodated in the
midst of an otherwise full life, a child who spends a significant
proportion of their time watching television is inevitably missing out
on the stimulation and input that they require in order to develop
normally.
The problem is compounded by the fact that the input that children
receive from television is not equally deficient in all aspects:
children receive intense visual and audio input – which fills their
heads with sights and sounds – whilst other senses are not stimulated
at all. This seems to have a detrimental effect on children’s power of
imagination.
The nature of the programmes watched gives further cause for concern.
It is often said that even though there are some programmes that are
not very good, this is compensated for to a certain extent by the fact
that there are thoughtful documentaries, drama programmes, and
educational programmes available for children to watch, which represent
a more acceptable face of television. Interestingly, in the early days
of television there do appear to have been more of these sorts of
programmes, but television has become a victim of its own shortcomings:
children brought up on television do not have the attention span, the
language skills, or the level of understanding required to appreciate
thought-provoking or subtle broadcasting, and therefore producers of
children’s television have had to make their programmes ever more
inane, garish, and banal in order to maintain their audience figures.
Further problems are caused by television advertisements which
essentially seek to sell children products before they are old enough
to be able to realise that one should not believe everything that one
sees on a television screen.
One argument put forward in favour of television is the social
education that children can get from watching contemporary dramas such
as soap operas. However, these programmes may, in fact, do even more
harm than those which more obviously bear no relationship to everyday
life. A young teenager immersed in a world of television soap operas
may imagine that they know everything that there is to be known about
things such as bereavement, drug addiction, relationships, and
childbirth, but watching actors talking about these things in the
two-dimensional world of television is far removed from real-life
experience, and when young people find themselves caught up in these
situations, they find that they have nothing substantial to fall back
on if their view of life has been formed by television.
Of course, television is a factor of modern life and young people have
to be introduced to it at some time or other: but not necessarily when
they are very young. Children had enough to keep them fully occupied
before the advent of modern technology. Things such as acquiring
language skills, learning social skills, and developing an
understanding of the natural world are just as important now as they
ever were and still require as much time to pick up as in the past.
Television does not help in this process: it distracts children from
more fruitful activities, it stultifies their imaginations, it
over-stimulates one area of the mind to the detriment of others, and
above all it is a waste of precious time.
The comparison of television with junk food is appropriate because
just as junk food is designed to look like real food, but fails to
provide the body with the nourishment that it requires, so television
appears to be interesting and informative, but in reality fails to
provide children with the level of stimulation that they require.
Gareth Lewis
--------
Your letters and comments are welcome. You can send them to Gareth
Lewis at the following address, or to me at the address beneath:
gareth.lewis@...
wendy@...
www.freedom-in-education.co.uk
To unsubscribe reply to this message asking to be unsubscribed from
the freedom in education newsletter.
________________________________________________________________________
Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email
and IM. All on demand. Always Free.
were you disturbed at the last issue enough to write?
~Kelly
-----Original Message-----
From: Fienewsletter@...
Freedom-in-Education Newsletter
May 2006
The full version can be seen on-line at:
www.freedom-in-education.co.uk/newsletter06/july06.htm
The July Newsletter is about television, an interesting topic as yet
uncovered by Freedom-in-Education. Television is a major issue in most
families: when to watch it, what to watch, how long to watch it for, or
if one should watch it at all.
I do believe that television is slightly addictive - and this is as
true for adults as is it is for children. Once one has sat oneself down
to watch it, even if there is nothing interesting on, it becomes hard
to turn it off again, and I know that I will usually end up watching
things which are not only a terrible waste of time, but also put images
in my head which I could really do without!
It is quite clear that when a child is young television has a huge
effect on them. If one stops to talk to a child nearly everything they
say is copying an advert they heard, or imitating something they saw on
television. The sights and sounds seem to fill their world, and the
reason they are running round with toy guns pretending to blow each
other up is usually due to something they saw on television. It is no
wonder, then, that parents often try to protect their children from
this as much as they can, and I think that in general this is a good
idea.
When I was young I don't remember there being a television around, and
when I was a little older, we had a television but I would never watch
it without my parent's permission, - it was usually pretty boring
anyway. When I was about ten or eleven I went through a phase of
watching cartoons on television every day, and soon discovered that it
never left me feeling very good. The adverts aimed at children for
toys, sweets, junky drinks, and disgusting cereals were really quite
shocking, and the gross noisy way in which the channel was supposed to
appeal to children I found highly offensive, and not at all suited to
my tastes.
Sometimes in other people's houses I would catch glimpses of the news
which would fill me with a dread and horror of television which can't
easily be described. I still remember how deeply appalled I was, when I
saw pictures of people who were dead and wounded being shown, whilst
adults were casually eating their dinner. These shots would instantly
reduce me to tears, and make me feel far too sick to eat, but to them
it was considered an appropriate meal-time accompaniment!
I am still shocked when I see murders being coolly discussed by the
news presenters without reducing them to tears, and after having
announced the deaths of so many people they put a cheery smile on their
faces and say 'now time for the sport'. I don't think anyone is aware
of the damage that television must do, putting ideas into people's
heads that they would not otherwise have, hardening people in an area
where they should not be hardened, and turning terrible tragedy into
idle entertainment.
So I really don't think that television is the main culprit, but
rather what is shown on it. If television showed things which were as
good as things they now show are bad, then television could become a
wonderful thing which inspired people and left them feeling better. One
does occasionally see a good programme which shows one that this is the
case. But even then to watch it in moderation is probably still a good
idea, especially as regards children. After all, as Dad says in the
article below, television only stimulates a child's brain, whereas
ideally children should be able to learn whilst feeling and touching
and moving and interacting at the same time.
Anyway, I hope you enjoy the article.
Best wishes
Wendy
Television: Junk Food for the Mind
This is an article that I wrote about fifteen years ago, but never had
published. I come across it from time to time when tidying up my
office, and thought perhaps that it deserved a wider audience. The
title, in particular, is popular with members of my family. I hope that
it does not come across as a rant against television, but rather as a
reminder that, like other aspects of modern technology, one has to be
careful about how one introduces children to television.
A few years ago parents who gave their children healthy food were
often considered to be kill-joys and cranks. Now, everyone, from the
medical profession to people working in the food industry recognises
that a diet of crisps and fizzy drinks is bad for children’s health and
increases the risk of contracting life-threatening ailments in later
life: everyone now agrees that the body is designed in such a way that
it requires a constant supply of nutritious food over the first
eighteen or so years of life if it is to grow and develop properly, and
that a junk food diet does not supply those needs.
What is true for the body is even more true for the mind. A human
being is one of the most complex things in Nature, taking longer to
reach maturity than just about any other animal. This long period of
development is required principally not by the body, but by the mind,
which starts off blank and proceeds to acquire vast amounts of
information and knowledge as a child grows up.
In order to acquire this knowledge the mind needs constant sensory
stimulation, and this stimulation needs to be constantly maintained
over a long period of time. The natural world provides a child with
ever-changing, dynamic stimulation, of almost infinite variety,
compared to which the experience of watching television is sadly
lacking. Instead of having a multi-dimensional experience of sight,
sound, taste, smell, touch and an interaction with another responsive
human being, a child sitting in front of a television screen is largely
inactive, is having only the senses of sight and sound stimulated, and
is being given no chance to respond.
To the developing mind this is equivalent to sensory deprivation, and
whilst the odd hour of watching television can be accommodated in the
midst of an otherwise full life, a child who spends a significant
proportion of their time watching television is inevitably missing out
on the stimulation and input that they require in order to develop
normally.
The problem is compounded by the fact that the input that children
receive from television is not equally deficient in all aspects:
children receive intense visual and audio input – which fills their
heads with sights and sounds – whilst other senses are not stimulated
at all. This seems to have a detrimental effect on children’s power of
imagination.
The nature of the programmes watched gives further cause for concern.
It is often said that even though there are some programmes that are
not very good, this is compensated for to a certain extent by the fact
that there are thoughtful documentaries, drama programmes, and
educational programmes available for children to watch, which represent
a more acceptable face of television. Interestingly, in the early days
of television there do appear to have been more of these sorts of
programmes, but television has become a victim of its own shortcomings:
children brought up on television do not have the attention span, the
language skills, or the level of understanding required to appreciate
thought-provoking or subtle broadcasting, and therefore producers of
children’s television have had to make their programmes ever more
inane, garish, and banal in order to maintain their audience figures.
Further problems are caused by television advertisements which
essentially seek to sell children products before they are old enough
to be able to realise that one should not believe everything that one
sees on a television screen.
One argument put forward in favour of television is the social
education that children can get from watching contemporary dramas such
as soap operas. However, these programmes may, in fact, do even more
harm than those which more obviously bear no relationship to everyday
life. A young teenager immersed in a world of television soap operas
may imagine that they know everything that there is to be known about
things such as bereavement, drug addiction, relationships, and
childbirth, but watching actors talking about these things in the
two-dimensional world of television is far removed from real-life
experience, and when young people find themselves caught up in these
situations, they find that they have nothing substantial to fall back
on if their view of life has been formed by television.
Of course, television is a factor of modern life and young people have
to be introduced to it at some time or other: but not necessarily when
they are very young. Children had enough to keep them fully occupied
before the advent of modern technology. Things such as acquiring
language skills, learning social skills, and developing an
understanding of the natural world are just as important now as they
ever were and still require as much time to pick up as in the past.
Television does not help in this process: it distracts children from
more fruitful activities, it stultifies their imaginations, it
over-stimulates one area of the mind to the detriment of others, and
above all it is a waste of precious time.
The comparison of television with junk food is appropriate because
just as junk food is designed to look like real food, but fails to
provide the body with the nourishment that it requires, so television
appears to be interesting and informative, but in reality fails to
provide children with the level of stimulation that they require.
Gareth Lewis
--------
Your letters and comments are welcome. You can send them to Gareth
Lewis at the following address, or to me at the address beneath:
gareth.lewis@...
wendy@...
www.freedom-in-education.co.uk
To unsubscribe reply to this message asking to be unsubscribed from
the freedom in education newsletter.
________________________________________________________________________
Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email
and IM. All on demand. Always Free.
Sandra Dodd
-=-. Once one has sat oneself down
to watch it, even if there is nothing interesting on, it becomes hard
to turn it off again-=-
Not for me.
I think that's a sign of a boring life.
If television is the best thing in that person's life, they should
watch it!
Maybe it's that people who are trained to do what others tell them to
do find it hard to make their own decisions and prefer for their
decisions to be more limited or made for them.
-=-The sights and sounds seem to fill their world, and the
reason they are running round with toy guns pretending to blow each
other up is usually due to something they saw on television-=-
Except they've been doing that since before there was TV or radio.
-=-If one stops to talk to a child nearly everything they
say is copying an advert they heard, or imitating something they saw on
television. -=-
EEEK! "If one stops to talk to a child"!??!??
If more children were talking to children without the idea that one
would have to stop to talk to them, maybe... Oh never mind. <g>
It's not an article about unschooling. It's justfication for
limitations and controls.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
to watch it, even if there is nothing interesting on, it becomes hard
to turn it off again-=-
Not for me.
I think that's a sign of a boring life.
If television is the best thing in that person's life, they should
watch it!
Maybe it's that people who are trained to do what others tell them to
do find it hard to make their own decisions and prefer for their
decisions to be more limited or made for them.
-=-The sights and sounds seem to fill their world, and the
reason they are running round with toy guns pretending to blow each
other up is usually due to something they saw on television-=-
Except they've been doing that since before there was TV or radio.
-=-If one stops to talk to a child nearly everything they
say is copying an advert they heard, or imitating something they saw on
television. -=-
EEEK! "If one stops to talk to a child"!??!??
If more children were talking to children without the idea that one
would have to stop to talk to them, maybe... Oh never mind. <g>
It's not an article about unschooling. It's justfication for
limitations and controls.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Sandra@...
-=-The sights and sounds seem to fill their world, and the
reason they are running round with toy guns pretending to blow each
other up is usually due to something they saw on television-=-
Except they've been doing that since before there was TV or radio.
-=-=-=-
My dad remembers that, when he was a boy, they played "GIs &
Nazis"---but his brother played "Cowboys & Indians." There was no TV
for either of them.
Duncan plays "Some Japanese Characters & Other Japanese Characters."
Or "Us & Aliens." <BWG>
~Kelly
________________________________________________________________________
Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email
and IM. All on demand. Always Free.
From: Sandra@...
-=-The sights and sounds seem to fill their world, and the
reason they are running round with toy guns pretending to blow each
other up is usually due to something they saw on television-=-
Except they've been doing that since before there was TV or radio.
-=-=-=-
My dad remembers that, when he was a boy, they played "GIs &
Nazis"---but his brother played "Cowboys & Indians." There was no TV
for either of them.
Duncan plays "Some Japanese Characters & Other Japanese Characters."
Or "Us & Aliens." <BWG>
~Kelly
________________________________________________________________________
Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email
and IM. All on demand. Always Free.
Kim H
<<-=-. Once one has sat oneself down
to watch it, even if there is nothing interesting on, it becomes hard
to turn it off again-=->>
Not for me either. I only ever watch TV when I plan to watch something in particular. Very occassionally I might turn it on without a plan but usually nothing of interest is found so off it goes. I find background noise really hard to handle so our TV is only on when someone is watching it for the purpose of watching it.
I agree, Sandra, that people who are sucked into the TV even though they're not interested in the shows must be totally bored out of their brains!
Kim
to watch it, even if there is nothing interesting on, it becomes hard
to turn it off again-=->>
Not for me either. I only ever watch TV when I plan to watch something in particular. Very occassionally I might turn it on without a plan but usually nothing of interest is found so off it goes. I find background noise really hard to handle so our TV is only on when someone is watching it for the purpose of watching it.
I agree, Sandra, that people who are sucked into the TV even though they're not interested in the shows must be totally bored out of their brains!
Kim
----- Original Message -----
From: Sandra Dodd
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2006 4:16 PM
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] Fwd: July Freedom in Education Newsletter
-=-. Once one has sat oneself down
to watch it, even if there is nothing interesting on, it becomes hard
to turn it off again-=-
Not for me.
I think that's a sign of a boring life.
If television is the best thing in that person's life, they should
watch it!
Maybe it's that people who are trained to do what others tell them to
do find it hard to make their own decisions and prefer for their
decisions to be more limited or made for them.
-=-The sights and sounds seem to fill their world, and the
reason they are running round with toy guns pretending to blow each
other up is usually due to something they saw on television-=-
Except they've been doing that since before there was TV or radio.
-=-If one stops to talk to a child nearly everything they
say is copying an advert they heard, or imitating something they saw on
television. -=-
EEEK! "If one stops to talk to a child"!??!??
If more children were talking to children without the idea that one
would have to stop to talk to them, maybe... Oh never mind. <g>
It's not an article about unschooling. It's justfication for
limitations and controls.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.1/389 - Release Date: 14/07/2006
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
plaidpanties666
--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
were caused by too much TV or something....
---Meredith
>> -=-The sights and sounds seem to fill their world, and theYeah, I always get a kick out of that arguement -like the Crusades
>> reason they are running round with toy guns pretending to blow each
>> other up is usually due to something they saw on television-=-
>
> Except they've been doing that since before there was TV or radio.
were caused by too much TV or something....
---Meredith
plaidpanties666
> I do believe that television is slightly addictive - and this isas
> true for adults as is it is for children. Once one has sat oneselfdown
> to watch it, even if there is nothing interesting on, it becomeshard
> to turn it off again,Not here. I get really "antsy" in front of the tv - I need a project
to be able to watch for any length of time, even if I'm facinated.
Morgan often has a project or game going while she has the tv on,
too. The one time I will see her sit and watch sort-of obsessively
is if there is a person around that she doesn't want to interact
with. That's a whole different scenario, though. Actually, that's a
thought: maybe its easier for some people to believe they
are "slightly addicted" to tv rather than admit that they are
disatisfied with their lives or partners and are using the tv as an
avoidance mechanism.....hmmmmm, armchair psycology is so much fun ;)
---Meredith (Morgan almost 5)
Sandra Dodd
-=-I get really "antsy" in front of the tv - I need a project
to be able to watch for any length of time, even if I'm facinated. -=-
Me too. I used to split firewood to watch movies, or if others were
in the room I would peel cedar with my fingernails. I discovered I
was really allergic to cedar splinters. Had to quit.
It's off season now, so the laundry hardly gets folded, but I had a
routine for months of doing laundry all weekend and piling it on the
couch, and then sorting and folding during Desperate Housewives and
Boston Legal, but they moved Boston Legal to Tuesdays which really
messed up my laundry routine. <g>
I can't JUST sit and watch a movie. Even at a theatre, I end up
leaning on the seat in front of me several times, and then shifting
positions this way and that.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
to be able to watch for any length of time, even if I'm facinated. -=-
Me too. I used to split firewood to watch movies, or if others were
in the room I would peel cedar with my fingernails. I discovered I
was really allergic to cedar splinters. Had to quit.
It's off season now, so the laundry hardly gets folded, but I had a
routine for months of doing laundry all weekend and piling it on the
couch, and then sorting and folding during Desperate Housewives and
Boston Legal, but they moved Boston Legal to Tuesdays which really
messed up my laundry routine. <g>
I can't JUST sit and watch a movie. Even at a theatre, I end up
leaning on the seat in front of me several times, and then shifting
positions this way and that.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-Yeah, I always get a kick out of that arguement -like the Crusades
were caused by too much TV or something....
--=
NO DOUBT little kids in those days had toy swords and ran around
yelling "INFIDELS!" or "You have to be York this time."
When I was little we played WWII at school. I remember once in
second grade, I was a nurse and a boy I really liked was "killed by
the Japanese" and I revived him by sprinkling a handful of sand over
his body. In retrospect, it was a resurrection battle with team
tactics, and we were acting out what the adults in our lives had
experienced and talked about. We were learning who played fair,
and who was quick and clever in our group. Good young-primate
behavior. The building my second grade classroom was in was an old
army barracks too. I talked to Holly recently about how Quanset huts
and Army barracks were commonly used as cheap buildings after the
war, and barracks could be purchased and moved. That building was
made more permanent and plastered over, and few would've known it had
been a barracks, because gradually over the years the windows were
replaced, the inside walls were panelled, and the outside was
stuccoed all the way to the ground. By the time it was the art and
music building and people too young to have been in WWII were having
kids, the memory was gone.
We played cops and robbers too. At home we played Tarzan and Jane on
the swingset, and there would be alligators or tigers on the ground
so we had to stay up on the crossbars and only cross with swings.
THAT came from watching Tarzan movies on TV.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
were caused by too much TV or something....
--=
NO DOUBT little kids in those days had toy swords and ran around
yelling "INFIDELS!" or "You have to be York this time."
When I was little we played WWII at school. I remember once in
second grade, I was a nurse and a boy I really liked was "killed by
the Japanese" and I revived him by sprinkling a handful of sand over
his body. In retrospect, it was a resurrection battle with team
tactics, and we were acting out what the adults in our lives had
experienced and talked about. We were learning who played fair,
and who was quick and clever in our group. Good young-primate
behavior. The building my second grade classroom was in was an old
army barracks too. I talked to Holly recently about how Quanset huts
and Army barracks were commonly used as cheap buildings after the
war, and barracks could be purchased and moved. That building was
made more permanent and plastered over, and few would've known it had
been a barracks, because gradually over the years the windows were
replaced, the inside walls were panelled, and the outside was
stuccoed all the way to the ground. By the time it was the art and
music building and people too young to have been in WWII were having
kids, the memory was gone.
We played cops and robbers too. At home we played Tarzan and Jane on
the swingset, and there would be alligators or tigers on the ground
so we had to stay up on the crossbars and only cross with swings.
THAT came from watching Tarzan movies on TV.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Lidia Ingah
I am not the only one that can not focus 100 per cent on TV. Definetely, TV is not addictive to me, not interesting, fascinating, or entertening enough to captivate my full attention for longer than 5 minutes. I love living real live much better, doing better than receiving passive info. Not surprising, since I was raised to be a critical, unique and intrinsically motivated person.
Glad to be part of the group,
a mom that just discovered the concept of unschooling and hates the schooling one,
Lidia
PD: Any family in the group live in San Jose, California? I love to meet other unschooling families. Any interest?
Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
-=-I get really "antsy" in front of the tv - I need a project
to be able to watch for any length of time, even if I'm facinated. -=-
Me too. I used to split firewood to watch movies, or if others were
in the room I would peel cedar with my fingernails. I discovered I
was really allergic to cedar splinters. Had to quit.
It's off season now, so the laundry hardly gets folded, but I had a
routine for months of doing laundry all weekend and piling it on the
couch, and then sorting and folding during Desperate Housewives and
Boston Legal, but they moved Boston Legal to Tuesdays which really
messed up my laundry routine. <g>
I can't JUST sit and watch a movie. Even at a theatre, I end up
leaning on the seat in front of me several times, and then shifting
positions this way and that.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
---------------------------------
See the all-new, redesigned Yahoo.com. Check it out.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Glad to be part of the group,
a mom that just discovered the concept of unschooling and hates the schooling one,
Lidia
PD: Any family in the group live in San Jose, California? I love to meet other unschooling families. Any interest?
Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
-=-I get really "antsy" in front of the tv - I need a project
to be able to watch for any length of time, even if I'm facinated. -=-
Me too. I used to split firewood to watch movies, or if others were
in the room I would peel cedar with my fingernails. I discovered I
was really allergic to cedar splinters. Had to quit.
It's off season now, so the laundry hardly gets folded, but I had a
routine for months of doing laundry all weekend and piling it on the
couch, and then sorting and folding during Desperate Housewives and
Boston Legal, but they moved Boston Legal to Tuesdays which really
messed up my laundry routine. <g>
I can't JUST sit and watch a movie. Even at a theatre, I end up
leaning on the seat in front of me several times, and then shifting
positions this way and that.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
---------------------------------
See the all-new, redesigned Yahoo.com. Check it out.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-Any family in the group live in San Jose, California? I love to
meet other unschooling families. Any interest? -=-
To find local groups, go here:
http://sandradodd.com/local
You could check the HSC list, too, if you haven't already hooked up
with them.
-=-I love living real live much better, doing better than receiving
passive info. Not surprising, since I was raised to be a critical,
unique and intrinsically motivated person. -=-
http://sandradodd.com/tv
I don't want you to be disappointed if you find this list isn't
opposed to TV.
-=-Definetely, TV is not addictive to me, not interesting,
fascinating, or entertening enough to captivate my full attention for
longer than 5 minutes. I love living real live much better, doing
better than receiving passive info.-=-
If you really believe that TV is no more than "receiving passsive
info," it will give your unschooling future a boost if you can
motivate yourself to give it a critical look. <g>
How old are your children? Were they in school?
http://sandradodd.com/deschooling
http://sandradodd.com/checklists
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
meet other unschooling families. Any interest? -=-
To find local groups, go here:
http://sandradodd.com/local
You could check the HSC list, too, if you haven't already hooked up
with them.
-=-I love living real live much better, doing better than receiving
passive info. Not surprising, since I was raised to be a critical,
unique and intrinsically motivated person. -=-
http://sandradodd.com/tv
I don't want you to be disappointed if you find this list isn't
opposed to TV.
-=-Definetely, TV is not addictive to me, not interesting,
fascinating, or entertening enough to captivate my full attention for
longer than 5 minutes. I love living real live much better, doing
better than receiving passive info.-=-
If you really believe that TV is no more than "receiving passsive
info," it will give your unschooling future a boost if you can
motivate yourself to give it a critical look. <g>
How old are your children? Were they in school?
http://sandradodd.com/deschooling
http://sandradodd.com/checklists
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Melissa
I love TV! I do sit there and not do anything else besides cuddle my
kids. When I watch tv, it's fullblown, because I want to see
everything. It's not addictive, that word is kind of loose, but I
really do enjoy sitting down to a good movie and losing myself in the
plot. My family can sit around and watch for hours...flipping from
cartoon network to national geographic to country music channel, over
to the national news...
Now if it's just togetherness we're after, we'll pop in a classic and
play board games or read books, play gameboys...we alternate between
watching TV and doing our things.
We live real life too, and I'd like to think I was unique and
intrinsically motivated. It's not really one or the other, you can do
both.
Melissa
Mom to Josh (11), Breanna (8), Emily (7), Rachel (6), Sam (4), Dan
(2), and Avari Rose
share our lives at
http://360.yahoo.com/multimomma
kids. When I watch tv, it's fullblown, because I want to see
everything. It's not addictive, that word is kind of loose, but I
really do enjoy sitting down to a good movie and losing myself in the
plot. My family can sit around and watch for hours...flipping from
cartoon network to national geographic to country music channel, over
to the national news...
Now if it's just togetherness we're after, we'll pop in a classic and
play board games or read books, play gameboys...we alternate between
watching TV and doing our things.
We live real life too, and I'd like to think I was unique and
intrinsically motivated. It's not really one or the other, you can do
both.
Melissa
Mom to Josh (11), Breanna (8), Emily (7), Rachel (6), Sam (4), Dan
(2), and Avari Rose
share our lives at
http://360.yahoo.com/multimomma
On Jul 17, 2006, at 2:10 AM, original poster wrote:
> TV is not addictive to me, not interesting, fascinating, or
> entertening enough to captivate my full attention for longer than 5
> minutes. I love living real live much better, doing better than
> receiving passive info. Not surprising, since I was raised to be a
> critical, unique and intrinsically motivated person.
>
>
>> .
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Lidia Ingah
Television is a wonderful educational tool if use as material to be used for analysis and criticism and I will definetely will use it for that purpose with my boys. In fact, TV has been the starter of many educational conversations between my husband and I, and I hope our children can join us soon since the constructive use of the"caja tonta", silly box like my mom likes to call it, can be very enriching. However, the passive use of it, , like many of people I know use it, it is detrimental.
Our boys are almost 5 and 2. They are August kids. My oldest was in Special Ed in the public school pre-school for an year since his speech is pretty immature if we compare him with other kids his age.We did not know better before, but we have learnt a lot from the experience. Terrible mistake to put him there, he lost his spontaneity, happiness, self steem...but wonderful thing it happened so it force me to consider homeschooling and us to learn to value and cherish the uniqueness of every single person. Differnt, of course. So, what?
By the way, I love TV it as a pacifier sometimes, ja, ja, ja.
All the best,
Lidia
Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
-=-Any family in the group live in San Jose, California? I love to
meet other unschooling families. Any interest? -=-
To find local groups, go here:
http://sandradodd.com/local
You could check the HSC list, too, if you haven't already hooked up
with them.
-=-I love living real live much better, doing better than receiving
passive info. Not surprising, since I was raised to be a critical,
unique and intrinsically motivated person. -=-
http://sandradodd.com/tv
I don't want you to be disappointed if you find this list isn't
opposed to TV.
-=-Definetely, TV is not addictive to me, not interesting,
fascinating, or entertening enough to captivate my full attention for
longer than 5 minutes. I love living real live much better, doing
better than receiving passive info.-=-
If you really believe that TV is no more than "receiving passsive
info," it will give your unschooling future a boost if you can
motivate yourself to give it a critical look. <g>
How old are your children? Were they in school?
http://sandradodd.com/deschooling
http://sandradodd.com/checklists
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Our boys are almost 5 and 2. They are August kids. My oldest was in Special Ed in the public school pre-school for an year since his speech is pretty immature if we compare him with other kids his age.We did not know better before, but we have learnt a lot from the experience. Terrible mistake to put him there, he lost his spontaneity, happiness, self steem...but wonderful thing it happened so it force me to consider homeschooling and us to learn to value and cherish the uniqueness of every single person. Differnt, of course. So, what?
By the way, I love TV it as a pacifier sometimes, ja, ja, ja.
All the best,
Lidia
Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
-=-Any family in the group live in San Jose, California? I love to
meet other unschooling families. Any interest? -=-
To find local groups, go here:
http://sandradodd.com/local
You could check the HSC list, too, if you haven't already hooked up
with them.
-=-I love living real live much better, doing better than receiving
passive info. Not surprising, since I was raised to be a critical,
unique and intrinsically motivated person. -=-
http://sandradodd.com/tv
I don't want you to be disappointed if you find this list isn't
opposed to TV.
-=-Definetely, TV is not addictive to me, not interesting,
fascinating, or entertening enough to captivate my full attention for
longer than 5 minutes. I love living real live much better, doing
better than receiving passive info.-=-
If you really believe that TV is no more than "receiving passsive
info," it will give your unschooling future a boost if you can
motivate yourself to give it a critical look. <g>
How old are your children? Were they in school?
http://sandradodd.com/deschooling
http://sandradodd.com/checklists
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Lidia Ingah
I just can share my personal opinion about TV and why it is so, but I am not making any general statement regarding people who enjoy it. I know some very passive people who love it, watch it a lot, and believe eveything they hear from it. The TV might affect people differently depending on the receptors' citical or uncrtical typeof mind.
Lidia
elp@...> wrote:
I love TV! I do sit there and not do anything else besides cuddle my
kids. When I watch tv, it's fullblown, because I want to see
everything. It's not addictive, that word is kind of loose, but I
really do enjoy sitting down to a good movie and losing myself in the
plot. My family can sit around and watch for hours...flipping from
cartoon network to national geographic to country music channel, over
to the national news...
Now if it's just togetherness we're after, we'll pop in a classic and
play board games or read books, play gameboys...we alternate between
watching TV and doing our things.
We live real life too, and I'd like to think I was unique and
intrinsically motivated. It's not really one or the other, you can do
both.
Melissa
Mom to Josh (11), Breanna (8), Emily (7), Rachel (6), Sam (4), Dan
(2), and Avari Rose
share our lives at
http://360.yahoo.com/multimomma
Lidia
elp@...> wrote:
I love TV! I do sit there and not do anything else besides cuddle my
kids. When I watch tv, it's fullblown, because I want to see
everything. It's not addictive, that word is kind of loose, but I
really do enjoy sitting down to a good movie and losing myself in the
plot. My family can sit around and watch for hours...flipping from
cartoon network to national geographic to country music channel, over
to the national news...
Now if it's just togetherness we're after, we'll pop in a classic and
play board games or read books, play gameboys...we alternate between
watching TV and doing our things.
We live real life too, and I'd like to think I was unique and
intrinsically motivated. It's not really one or the other, you can do
both.
Melissa
Mom to Josh (11), Breanna (8), Emily (7), Rachel (6), Sam (4), Dan
(2), and Avari Rose
share our lives at
http://360.yahoo.com/multimomma
On Jul 17, 2006, at 2:10 AM, original poster wrote:
> TV is not addictive to me, not interesting, fascinating, or
> entertening enough to captivate my full attention for longer than 5
> minutes. I love living real live much better, doing better than
> receiving passive info. Not surprising, since I was raised to be a
> critical, unique and intrinsically motivated person.
>
>
>> .
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Music Unlimited - Access over 1 million songs.Try it free.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Barbara Mullins
--- In [email protected], Melissa <autismhelp@...> wrote:
other drugs. When you find a show you like you want to watch more of
it, just like when you find a food you like you want to eat more of
it. Of course prettymuch anything done in excess is going to cause
problems but few reasonable people eat a food they like until they're
sick and if they do it once they will probably learn from their
mistake. Anyhow I wanted to share what appears to happen in our house.
My son usually watches something closely the first time, if he doesn't
watch it closely it's obviously not that interesting and he usually
does something else while watching or just watches something else. If
it was interesting he will usually watch it again but this time we
pick out stuff that we didn't see the first time or he would like to
find out more about, the second showing usually brings more
conversation about the show that just watching it once. Somtimes it
gets watched even a 3rd or more times but usually not as closely or
while doing something else, sometimes really interesting stuff gets
watched until it's almost memorized.
We rented Doogle last week (my son is 8) and it got 3 viewings. The
first one we all watched thourally and then not as closely for the
later views, sometimes fast forwarding to the good parts like the
train in mine scene. There are many comments in the movie where they
refer to other movies, even Thomas the Tank engine got a remark. That
brought about so much discussion about why the other shows were
referred to other than just the main themes of the movie.
We watch D&D on Disney late Saturday nights which was make several
years ago. Last episode they make a Star Wars reference and being that
my son is a big Star Wars fan he was elated and of course I had to
point out that it would have been a reference from what is now
episodes 4 or 5 but was 1 or 2 when the show was originally played.
My son sat through the whole King King movie (DVD rental)becuase he
wanted to which I thought was pretty amazing, but it didn't get a
second viewing from him and he didn't talk much about it afterwards.
Hoodwinked however was probably watched 4 times before it got returned
(I think I watched it 3X myself!) and he has made references back to
it.
So for us TV or movies give us lots of connections and discussion
starters and it is usually on in our house although a lot of the time
it's just background noise like a radio on playing music while we do
other things. I know I personally really enjoy how to and shows that
tour factories that show how things are made but I know there are more
importatnt things in live so I think my son will able to easily see
the same thing. Barbara
>I don't think TV is addictive in the same sense as cigarettes or
> I love TV! I do sit there and not do anything else besides cuddle my
> kids. When I watch tv, it's fullblown, because I want to see
> everything. It's not addictive, that word is kind of loose, but I
> really do enjoy sitting down to a good movie and losing myself in the
> plot.
other drugs. When you find a show you like you want to watch more of
it, just like when you find a food you like you want to eat more of
it. Of course prettymuch anything done in excess is going to cause
problems but few reasonable people eat a food they like until they're
sick and if they do it once they will probably learn from their
mistake. Anyhow I wanted to share what appears to happen in our house.
My son usually watches something closely the first time, if he doesn't
watch it closely it's obviously not that interesting and he usually
does something else while watching or just watches something else. If
it was interesting he will usually watch it again but this time we
pick out stuff that we didn't see the first time or he would like to
find out more about, the second showing usually brings more
conversation about the show that just watching it once. Somtimes it
gets watched even a 3rd or more times but usually not as closely or
while doing something else, sometimes really interesting stuff gets
watched until it's almost memorized.
We rented Doogle last week (my son is 8) and it got 3 viewings. The
first one we all watched thourally and then not as closely for the
later views, sometimes fast forwarding to the good parts like the
train in mine scene. There are many comments in the movie where they
refer to other movies, even Thomas the Tank engine got a remark. That
brought about so much discussion about why the other shows were
referred to other than just the main themes of the movie.
We watch D&D on Disney late Saturday nights which was make several
years ago. Last episode they make a Star Wars reference and being that
my son is a big Star Wars fan he was elated and of course I had to
point out that it would have been a reference from what is now
episodes 4 or 5 but was 1 or 2 when the show was originally played.
My son sat through the whole King King movie (DVD rental)becuase he
wanted to which I thought was pretty amazing, but it didn't get a
second viewing from him and he didn't talk much about it afterwards.
Hoodwinked however was probably watched 4 times before it got returned
(I think I watched it 3X myself!) and he has made references back to
it.
So for us TV or movies give us lots of connections and discussion
starters and it is usually on in our house although a lot of the time
it's just background noise like a radio on playing music while we do
other things. I know I personally really enjoy how to and shows that
tour factories that show how things are made but I know there are more
importatnt things in live so I think my son will able to easily see
the same thing. Barbara
Sandra Dodd
-=-I know I personally really enjoy how to and shows that
tour factories that show how things are made but I know there are more
importatnt things in live so I think my son will able to easily see
the same thing.-=-
More important things than learning?
More important things than doing something you like to do?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
tour factories that show how things are made but I know there are more
importatnt things in live so I think my son will able to easily see
the same thing.-=-
More important things than learning?
More important things than doing something you like to do?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-The TV might affect people differently depending on the receptors'
citical or uncrtical typeof mind.-=-
In light of the purpose of this list, it's a good idea for parents to
help their children to live discerningly, and to develop critical
thinking skills. Avoiding situations in which they might have to do
some real analytical thinking doesn't help them become better thinkers.
The advantages parents have reported of sharing experiences with
children (all kinds, but including TV and movies) are deeper and
broader than any unschooler I know had ever imagined might happen.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
citical or uncrtical typeof mind.-=-
In light of the purpose of this list, it's a good idea for parents to
help their children to live discerningly, and to develop critical
thinking skills. Avoiding situations in which they might have to do
some real analytical thinking doesn't help them become better thinkers.
The advantages parents have reported of sharing experiences with
children (all kinds, but including TV and movies) are deeper and
broader than any unschooler I know had ever imagined might happen.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-Television is a wonderful educational tool if use as material to
be used for analysis and criticism and I will definetely will use it
for that purpose with my boys.-=-
Starting when? If it's a tool you plan to use in the future, what's
happening with it now?
To call it an idiot box in any language is too judgmental. The worst
thing about declaring something "stupid" (a book, or a style of
music, or a hobby, or television) is that by extension, anyone who
doesn't think it's stupid must then feel stupid. It can cause a
child to choose between mom and a skateboard, or mom and rock'n'roll,
or whatever. It's better to be their partners than their
adversaries. Relationships are primary for unschooling to work, and
if it's all on the mom's terms, the child becomes powerless.
Your children cannot make a neutral, personal decision about
something you've declared "tonta."
Words have power. Words show thought and belief.
-=-In fact, TV has been the starter of many educational conversations
between my husband and I-=-
"Educational" is another of those words that will keep you from
sliding straight to happy unschooling.
Learning is everywhere, even in conversations that aren't "educational."
-=-but wonderful thing it happened so it force me to consider
homeschooling and us to learn to value and cherish the uniqueness of
every single person.-=-
Uniqueness I understand. "August kid" is a term I don't know. I'm
not asking for a definition or explanation, just pointing out that
you've labelled him something (something which his brother also is,
you say) in the same paragraph you assure us you care about uniqueness.
It might seem like I'm picking on you, but it might've been better if
you'd read the list a few days before writing things that aren't
ideal for helping others (or yourself) understand unschooling. It's
not too late to read a while.
http://sandradodd.com/nest
http://sandradodd.com/lazy
http://sandradodd.com/phrases
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
be used for analysis and criticism and I will definetely will use it
for that purpose with my boys.-=-
Starting when? If it's a tool you plan to use in the future, what's
happening with it now?
To call it an idiot box in any language is too judgmental. The worst
thing about declaring something "stupid" (a book, or a style of
music, or a hobby, or television) is that by extension, anyone who
doesn't think it's stupid must then feel stupid. It can cause a
child to choose between mom and a skateboard, or mom and rock'n'roll,
or whatever. It's better to be their partners than their
adversaries. Relationships are primary for unschooling to work, and
if it's all on the mom's terms, the child becomes powerless.
Your children cannot make a neutral, personal decision about
something you've declared "tonta."
Words have power. Words show thought and belief.
-=-In fact, TV has been the starter of many educational conversations
between my husband and I-=-
"Educational" is another of those words that will keep you from
sliding straight to happy unschooling.
Learning is everywhere, even in conversations that aren't "educational."
-=-but wonderful thing it happened so it force me to consider
homeschooling and us to learn to value and cherish the uniqueness of
every single person.-=-
Uniqueness I understand. "August kid" is a term I don't know. I'm
not asking for a definition or explanation, just pointing out that
you've labelled him something (something which his brother also is,
you say) in the same paragraph you assure us you care about uniqueness.
It might seem like I'm picking on you, but it might've been better if
you'd read the list a few days before writing things that aren't
ideal for helping others (or yourself) understand unschooling. It's
not too late to read a while.
http://sandradodd.com/nest
http://sandradodd.com/lazy
http://sandradodd.com/phrases
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]