Sandra Dodd

On Mar 6, 2006, at 8:45 AM, Laura Endres wrote:

> http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_08/b3972108.htm


When I first say the link, I thought, "Not another plain link without
comment," because really... I don't like that.

But for this one I'll make the comments. Though this is from a
conservative source, and addressed to the affluent, it's a VERY
positive article on homeschooling! It's not about unschooling, but
it doesn't matter. The article says some things I've never seen
said before. And the comments they let through are all VERY
positive, from homeschoolers.

Here are a couple of paragraphs out of the middle, and I think it's
worth a read, and probably worth passing on to someone in your life
who doesn't consider Live Free Learn Free to be an objective source
of information, but might stop fidgeting long enough to read a short
BusinessWeek article.

-=-The spread of the post-geographic work style and flex-time
economy, in which managers can work at odd hours in any number of
locations, is also playing a role. So is the fact that more knowledge
workers want to live in more than one place. Homeschooling can
untether families from Zip codes and school districts, just as the
Internet can de-link kids from classrooms, piping economics tutorials
from the Federal Reserve, online tours of Florence's Uffizi Gallery,
ornithology seminars from Cornell University, and filmmaking classes
from UCLA straight onto laptops and handhelds. Also driving the trend
is a new cottage industry of private tutors, cyber communities,
online curriculum providers, and parental co-ops. Popular online
sites range from the humanities tutor edsitement.neh.gov to the
agenda-free lifeofflorida.org. "It would have been impossible to
homeschool like this 20 years ago," says Richard Florida, author of
The Flight of the Creative Class.

-=-The Internet is a chief resource that's powering homeschooling's
growth, from 850,000 children in 1999 to more than 1.1 million today,
according to the U.S. Education Dept. The popular perception is that
people homeschool for religious reasons. But the No. 1 motivation,
research shows, is concern about school environments, including
negative peer pressure, safety, and drugs. In some circles
homeschooling is even attaining a reputation as a secret weapon for
Ivy League admission.-=-

It's presented in such a way that there's really nothing to debate,
and in that way it's the tightest presentation of homeschooling I can
remember seeing, ever.


Sandra



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

cris

http://www.oriononline.org/pages/om/05-5om/Monke.html

My sister - who has no children, and doesn't necessarily agree that
home/unschooling is best for mine - sent me this link today. I read
the article, then read the below post from Sandra (haven't read the
newsweek article yet); thought it intriguing that the exerpts Sandra
made highlighted the benefits of the Internet/computer use, whereas
the education/computer "expert" in the Orion article bemoans the
computer's tendency to separate kids from real life. (Didn't someone
once say that about TV...?)
Guess it's a matter of user-failure -- or success!!

cris

(long-time lurker)


--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
wrote:
>
>
> On Mar 6, 2006, at 8:45 AM, Laura Endres wrote:
>
> > http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_08/b3972108.htm
>
>
> When I first say the link, I thought, "Not another plain link without
> comment," because really... I don't like that.
>
> But for this one I'll make the comments. Though this is from a
> conservative source, and addressed to the affluent, it's a VERY
> positive article on homeschooling! It's not about unschooling, but
> it doesn't matter. The article says some things I've never seen
> said before. And the comments they let through are all VERY
> positive, from homeschoolers.
>
> Here are a couple of paragraphs out of the middle, and I think it's
> worth a read, and probably worth passing on to someone in your life
> who doesn't consider Live Free Learn Free to be an objective source
> of information, but might stop fidgeting long enough to read a short
> BusinessWeek article.
>
> -=-The spread of the post-geographic work style and flex-time
> economy, in which managers can work at odd hours in any number of
> locations, is also playing a role. So is the fact that more
knowledge...<snip>
>
> ...It's presented in such a way that there's really nothing to debate,
> and in that way it's the tightest presentation of homeschooling I can
> remember seeing, ever.
>
>
> Sandra
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Sandra Dodd

On Mar 6, 2006, at 5:05 PM, cris wrote:

> http://www.oriononline.org/pages/om/05-5om/Monke.html

Wow. That address looks so much like The Onion! <g>

But Orion... in the "about Orion" it says this:
-=-ABOUT ORION MAGAZINE
Orion explores an emerging alternative world view. Informed by a
growing ecological awareness and the need for cultural change, it is
a forum for thoughtful and creative ideas and practical examples of
how we might live justly, wisely, and artfully on Earth.

Since 1982, Orion has worked to reconnect human culture with the
natural world, blending scientific thinking with the arts, engaging
the heart and mind, and striving to make clear what we all have in
common.-=-



Sounds like living artfully on earth is better if you commune with
something besides computers, and yet there they are, with a big
hypocritical website.



First, Cris, quote this back to your sister and say the article
doesn't apply to unschooling:'

-=-Rather than attempt to compensate for a growing disconnect from
nature, schools seem more and more committed to reinforcing it, a
problem that began long before the use of computers. Even relying on
books too much or too early inhibits the ability of children to
develop direct relationships with the subjects they are studying-=-

Tell her you're not relying on books OR computers "too much or too
early," and that unschooling is all about direct learning by MANY means.


So the article is titled "Charlotte's Webpage: Why children shouldn't
have the world at their fingertips."

They're discussing classrooms, and book reports. A quote about
"the problem":

-=-The teacher explained that her students were so enthusiastic about
the project that they chose to go to the computer lab rather than
outside for recess. While she seemed impressed by this dedication, it
underscores the first troubling influence of computers. The medium is
so compelling that it lures children away from the kind of activities
through which they have always most effectively discovered themselves
and their place in the world.-=-



First, I doubt that this author has been "outside for recess" in a
public school lately. That is NOT where people discover themselves
and their place in the world.



This is artsy and poetic, but it doesn't mean much: "If children do
not dip their toes in the waters of unsupervised social activity,
they likely will never be able to swim in the sea of civic
responsibility." For one thing, "Myspace" is quite an unsupervised
social activity. <g> And to glorify school recess for being less
supervised seems crazy to me.

-=-If they have no opportunities to dig in the soil, discover the
spiders, bugs, birds, and plants that populate even the smallest
unpaved playgrounds,-=-



REALLY!? We had a big playground, but there were no spiders, bugs,
birds or plants. There was sandy dirt, with some gravel and some
broken glass. One year there were three piles of dry cowdung,
because they had planned to plant something. They never did. We
played king of the mountain on piles of poo until it was evenly
scattered over the two acres of unpaved playground we had. We did
have six trees or so, honey locust or something with thorns and seed
pods. We weren't in danger of learning the fragility of flower
petals on that playground.
>>

>> thought it intriguing that the exerpts Sandra
>> made highlighted the benefits of the Internet/computer use, whereas
>> the education/computer "expert" in the Orion article bemoans the
>> computer's tendency to separate kids from real life. (Didn't someone
>> once say that about TV...?)
>> Guess it's a matter of user-failure -- or success!!

I think it's a matter of the definition of success of the reporter.
Orion wants kids to be artists and poets in tune with the biological
world. Business Week wants to know how people are spending their
money, and whether those kids can get into Harvard.

Back to the orion article:

-=-Yet these projects�the steady diet of virtual trips to the
Antarctic, virtual climbs to the summit of Mount Everest, and trips
into cyber-orbit that represent one technological high after another�
generate only vicarious thrills. The student doesn't actually soar
above the Earth, doesn't trek across icy terrain, doesn't climb a
mountain. Increasingly, she isn't even allowed to climb to the top of
the jungle gym.
-=-

What about books? Same for books, only books don't have moving color
photos taken yesterday (or a second before). And kids can't ask a
question of a book.

-=-For children, belonging is the most important function a community
serves. Indeed, that is the message that lies at the heart of
Charlotte's Web. None of us�whether of barnyard or human society�
thrives without a sense of belonging. In my case, belonging hinged
most decisively on place-=-

My kids find belonging online AND in real life, where they have more
social life than I had when I was in high school and clubs, and I was
pretty busy. The argument that belonging has only to do with place
is small. Those Orion readers and writers are probably scattered all
over the world, but they consider themselves a community, I'm sure.
They have something in common with those who believe as they do, and
they are clearly communicating by mail and by websites.

Of computer students he had worked with in gifted and talented
programs: -=-They preferred discussing cultural diversity with
students on the other side of the world through the Internet rather
than conversing with the school's own ESL students, many of whom came
from the very same parts of the world as the online correspondents.-=-

HOW hypocritical. Why is he communicating with people on the
internet instead of going into his own community and talking about
these things to people who just happen to live in his town, whether
they can speak English well or not, whether they WANT to talk to him
(or hear him) or not?

Sandra






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

averyschmidt

I read the Orion article, and few lines jumped out at me more than
others.

***The medium is so compelling that it lures children away from the
kind of activeties through which they have always most effectively
discovered themselves and their place in the world.***

First of all, I'm thankful that my school playground at recess
*wasn't* where I discovered myself and my "place in the world."
Frankly I'd have been better off (and would have preferred) staying
inside to do something more interesting. I'm amazed that the author
can think so poetically about school recess. And nature??? Aren't
most school playgrounds either pavement, wood chips, or sparse grass
without a trace of other life forms?

Secondly, I find it telling that when there's finally something in
school that kids can actually be INTERESTED in and dig in with gusto
that's perceived as a sign that there must be something wrong. Wow.

***Yet these projects- the steady diet of virtual trips to the
Antarctic, virtual clumbs to the summit of Mount Everest, and trips
into cyber-orbit that represent one technological high after another-
generate only vicarious thrills.***

And how exactly is a child to know that the Antarctic and Mount
Everest even exist without first experiencing them vicariously?
Is a book or a National Geographic spread a more worthy vicarious
experience? Why? And if a person either can't or doesn't *want* to
experience those things directly, then what's WRONG with experiencing
them vicariously???

***It is not necessary or sensible to teach children to reject
computers (although I found that students need just one year of high
school to learn enough computer skills to enter the workplace or
college).***

I wonder if it occured to the author that one year might be all that's
needed to learn *any* skills necessary for entering the workplace or
college?

***As the computer has amplified our youth's ability to virtually "go
anywhere, at anytime," it has eroded their sense of belonging
anywhere.***

Depends on how you look at it. I tend to think that kids today feel
they belong everywhere. :-)

Patti

Sandra Dodd

On Mar 6, 2006, at 7:57 PM, averyschmidt wrote:

> ***It is not necessary or sensible to teach children to reject
> computers (although I found that students need just one year of high
> school to learn enough computer skills to enter the workplace or
> college).***
>
> I wonder if it occured to the author that one year might be all that's
> needed to learn *any* skills necessary for entering the workplace or
> college?

===========

There was a quote common when I was first on the homeschooling
newsgroup in the ancient days. I always thought I'd find the written
source, but it was (and this is past third-hand, so if anyone nows
the original that would be great) that John Holt had said that
everything taught in the American public schools could be learned in
18 months, if someone waited until the age of 15 to start.

Part of the way something like that could be shown would be the way
in which students from VERY different cultures can get up to speed
when they come to the U.S. for college, if they only learn English in
the last year or two before they arrive here. It's a different kind
of comparison, but still a clue.

-=-
Depends on how you look at it. I tend to think that kids today feel
they belong everywhere. :-)-=-

Unschoolers do, at least.

After I wrote my original rants, I realized that it wasn't just
simple hypocrisy. It's profound disrespect for children, or at least
an extreme double standard. They wouldn't extend this to everyone:
"Why children shouldn't have the world at their fingertips."

Sandra

cris

yes yes yes to all of you!! I knew my queasy "this isn't right"
feeling would be validated here :)
thanks so much for your input on this; sis will get a rant from me
and orion just might hear from me too.
I really like Orion magazine, mostly, the writing is nearly always
great quality, and the photography as well. And I do agree with the
basic agenda of living respectfully, however, some of the authors can
get a bit shrill about their particular issues. As I read, I often
find myself telling them to take their blinders off.

Thanks for your input.

namaste,
cris


--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
wrote:
<snip->
> -=-
> Depends on how you look at it. I tend to think that kids today feel
> they belong everywhere. :-)-=-
>
> Unschoolers do, at least.
>
> After I wrote my original rants, I realized that it wasn't just
> simple hypocrisy. It's profound disrespect for children, or at least
> an extreme double standard. They wouldn't extend this to everyone:
> "Why children shouldn't have the world at their fingertips."
>
> Sandra
>

Betsy

**And how exactly is a child to know that the Antarctic and Mount
Everest even exist without first experiencing them vicariously?
**

Yes!

Last week we saw the Mars Rover movie at the Imax Theater at the Tech Museum. Since I can't really go to Mars, a virtual field trip is all there is. It was fun and inspiring.

I don't think any mission to Mars would have succeeded without people so passionate about computers that they (sometimes) gave up food and sex and recess to work with the computer uninterruptedly.

Betsy

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

Sandra Dodd

On Mar 7, 2006, at 6:59 AM, cris wrote:

> And I do agree with the
> basic agenda of living respectfully

==================

Maybe that article isn't representative of their philosophy.
If it is, though, they seem to be more concerned with living
respectfully with other species than with their own children.
They don't seem respectful of the idea that some people DO find
technology-related benefits.

And *HONESTLY*, their beautiful photography and well-constructed
articles and website are wholly dependent on electronics and
engineering and silicon, electricity and plastic.

Beautiful writing is a travesty when it wraps lame thinking up in a
pretty package.

Sandra

Have a Nice Day!

I actually think the whole thing was just a veiled attempt at touting the "socialization" argument by creating an "either/or" situation. EITHER the kids are on the computer all the time having vicarious experiences OR their out with friends or learning from the world around them.

Obviously, as we all know, it doesn't have to be "one or the other".

Kristen


----- Original Message -----
From: Betsy
To: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, March 07, 2006 11:24 AM
Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] one about education; was: Re: another article about homeschooling


**And how exactly is a child to know that the Antarctic and Mount
Everest even exist without first experiencing them vicariously?
**

Yes!

Last week we saw the Mars Rover movie at the Imax Theater at the Tech Museum. Since I can't really go to Mars, a virtual field trip is all there is. It was fun and inspiring.

I don't think any mission to Mars would have succeeded without people so passionate about computers that they (sometimes) gave up food and sex and recess to work with the computer uninterruptedly.

Betsy

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



"List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this group.

Visit the Unschooling website and message boards: <http://www.unschooling.info>



SPONSORED LINKS Graduate school education High school education Home school education
Middle school education New york school education School education in california


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

a.. Visit your group "UnschoolingDiscussion" 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: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.0/275 - Release Date: 3/6/2006


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