FW: Computers for Kids Article
Robyn Coburn
Sandra suggested that I post here the *full* text of the letter I sent to
Life Learning Magazine, my copy of which was lost. I only received it
yesterday, so I am a bit behind the original discussion about the Report
that was held online.
I was disappointed in the editing of my letter, even though I understand
that space constraints mean that sometimes letters must be cut. Aside from a
few words here and there, the paragraph that was cut (sentences between the
stars) happened be my primary reason for writing the letter in the first
place, and my main disagreements with the original article.
The editor chose to leave in the one paragraph where I agreed with *one*
idea in the article instead � which will teach me to be balanced and fair in
future! ;)
My text follows:
For the first time I am somewhat disappointed in an article in Life Learning
Magazine, which is the �Computers for Kids� report.
I think it is an error to extrapolate the results of studies done primarily
on schooled children to the lives of unschooled children. *** There is so
much focus in the article on the idea and of lessons, of academic
achievement as the primary goal of learning, curriculums, and even
discussion of school subjects. None of this language has anything whatsoever
to do with unschooling.****
I don�t agree that �it is safe to say that very early computer use � like
early television exposure � should be avoided or limited�. Hundreds of other
unschooling parents on line with years more experience than I, agree with me
from observing the enriched, varied and wonderful growth of their children
living in freedom. My daughter at 4.5 is free to utilize both of these
tools, or turn them off, at will � and she does. Since she does not have to
spend any hours either at school, doing homework, decompressing from the
stress of her day at school, or indeed engaging any activity not of her
choosing, she has ample time to be involved in low tech spontaneous
imaginative play or contemplation, with her father or I, her friends and
alone � and she does.
However I do agree that much of educational software aimed at younger ages
is just dopey, and simply reiterates the disconnected �pre-reading� or
�phonics� inadequacies of formal workbooks. Jayn plays computer games - for
fun - and her favorite ones are the drawing and dressing up types.
I suspect that the key difference is one of expectations. Approaching
computers with the idea that they are an educational panacea is part of the
push for early academics mindset, complete with pressure to conform to
school-type schedules and milestones, that is anathema to unschooling.
Robyn L. Coburn
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.658 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/2004
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.717 / Virus Database: 473 - Release Date: 7/8/2004
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Life Learning Magazine, my copy of which was lost. I only received it
yesterday, so I am a bit behind the original discussion about the Report
that was held online.
I was disappointed in the editing of my letter, even though I understand
that space constraints mean that sometimes letters must be cut. Aside from a
few words here and there, the paragraph that was cut (sentences between the
stars) happened be my primary reason for writing the letter in the first
place, and my main disagreements with the original article.
The editor chose to leave in the one paragraph where I agreed with *one*
idea in the article instead � which will teach me to be balanced and fair in
future! ;)
My text follows:
For the first time I am somewhat disappointed in an article in Life Learning
Magazine, which is the �Computers for Kids� report.
I think it is an error to extrapolate the results of studies done primarily
on schooled children to the lives of unschooled children. *** There is so
much focus in the article on the idea and of lessons, of academic
achievement as the primary goal of learning, curriculums, and even
discussion of school subjects. None of this language has anything whatsoever
to do with unschooling.****
I don�t agree that �it is safe to say that very early computer use � like
early television exposure � should be avoided or limited�. Hundreds of other
unschooling parents on line with years more experience than I, agree with me
from observing the enriched, varied and wonderful growth of their children
living in freedom. My daughter at 4.5 is free to utilize both of these
tools, or turn them off, at will � and she does. Since she does not have to
spend any hours either at school, doing homework, decompressing from the
stress of her day at school, or indeed engaging any activity not of her
choosing, she has ample time to be involved in low tech spontaneous
imaginative play or contemplation, with her father or I, her friends and
alone � and she does.
However I do agree that much of educational software aimed at younger ages
is just dopey, and simply reiterates the disconnected �pre-reading� or
�phonics� inadequacies of formal workbooks. Jayn plays computer games - for
fun - and her favorite ones are the drawing and dressing up types.
I suspect that the key difference is one of expectations. Approaching
computers with the idea that they are an educational panacea is part of the
push for early academics mindset, complete with pressure to conform to
school-type schedules and milestones, that is anathema to unschooling.
Robyn L. Coburn
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.658 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/2004
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.717 / Virus Database: 473 - Release Date: 7/8/2004
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
jane
Well said! I agree. I'm so sorry that it was edited. I'm also surprised that
letters to the editor are edited. Is that common practice? :( Jane
letters to the editor are edited. Is that common practice? :( Jane
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robyn Coburn" <dezigna@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 5:03 PM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] FW: Computers for Kids Article
Sandra suggested that I post here the *full* text of the letter I sent to
Life Learning Magazine, my copy of which was lost. I only received it
yesterday, so I am a bit behind the original discussion about the Report
that was held online.
I was disappointed in the editing of my letter, even though I understand
that space constraints mean that sometimes letters must be cut. Aside from a
few words here and there, the paragraph that was cut (sentences between the
stars) happened be my primary reason for writing the letter in the first
place, and my main disagreements with the original article.
The editor chose to leave in the one paragraph where I agreed with *one*
idea in the article instead - which will teach me to be balanced and fair in
future! ;)
My text follows:
For the first time I am somewhat disappointed in an article in Life Learning
Magazine, which is the "Computers for Kids" report.
I think it is an error to extrapolate the results of studies done primarily
on schooled children to the lives of unschooled children. *** There is so
much focus in the article on the idea and of lessons, of academic
achievement as the primary goal of learning, curriculums, and even
discussion of school subjects. None of this language has anything whatsoever
to do with unschooling.****
I don't agree that "it is safe to say that very early computer use - like
early television exposure - should be avoided or limited". Hundreds of other
unschooling parents on line with years more experience than I, agree with me
from observing the enriched, varied and wonderful growth of their children
living in freedom. My daughter at 4.5 is free to utilize both of these
tools, or turn them off, at will - and she does. Since she does not have to
spend any hours either at school, doing homework, decompressing from the
stress of her day at school, or indeed engaging any activity not of her
choosing, she has ample time to be involved in low tech spontaneous
imaginative play or contemplation, with her father or I, her friends and
alone - and she does.
However I do agree that much of educational software aimed at younger ages
is just dopey, and simply reiterates the disconnected "pre-reading" or
"phonics" inadequacies of formal workbooks. Jayn plays computer games - for
fun - and her favorite ones are the drawing and dressing up types.
I suspect that the key difference is one of expectations. Approaching
computers with the idea that they are an educational panacea is part of the
push for early academics mindset, complete with pressure to conform to
school-type schedules and milestones, that is anathema to unschooling.
Robyn L. Coburn
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.658 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/2004
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.717 / Virus Database: 473 - Release Date: 7/8/2004
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Links
jane
I realize that if they are really long but your was short and to the point.
:( Jane
:( Jane
----- Original Message -----
From: "jane" <jane@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 5:10 PM
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] FW: Computers for Kids Article
> Well said! I agree. I'm so sorry that it was edited. I'm also surprised
that
> letters to the editor are edited. Is that common practice? :( Jane
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Robyn Coburn" <dezigna@...>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 5:03 PM
> Subject: [AlwaysLearning] FW: Computers for Kids Article
>
>
> Sandra suggested that I post here the *full* text of the letter I sent to
> Life Learning Magazine, my copy of which was lost. I only received it
> yesterday, so I am a bit behind the original discussion about the Report
> that was held online.
>
>
>
> I was disappointed in the editing of my letter, even though I understand
> that space constraints mean that sometimes letters must be cut. Aside from
a
> few words here and there, the paragraph that was cut (sentences between
the
> stars) happened be my primary reason for writing the letter in the first
> place, and my main disagreements with the original article.
>
>
>
> The editor chose to leave in the one paragraph where I agreed with *one*
> idea in the article instead - which will teach me to be balanced and fair
in
> future! ;)
>
>
>
> My text follows:
>
>
>
> For the first time I am somewhat disappointed in an article in Life
Learning
> Magazine, which is the "Computers for Kids" report.
>
>
>
> I think it is an error to extrapolate the results of studies done
primarily
> on schooled children to the lives of unschooled children. *** There is so
> much focus in the article on the idea and of lessons, of academic
> achievement as the primary goal of learning, curriculums, and even
> discussion of school subjects. None of this language has anything
whatsoever
> to do with unschooling.****
>
>
>
> I don't agree that "it is safe to say that very early computer use - like
> early television exposure - should be avoided or limited". Hundreds of
other
> unschooling parents on line with years more experience than I, agree with
me
> from observing the enriched, varied and wonderful growth of their children
> living in freedom. My daughter at 4.5 is free to utilize both of these
> tools, or turn them off, at will - and she does. Since she does not have
to
> spend any hours either at school, doing homework, decompressing from the
> stress of her day at school, or indeed engaging any activity not of her
> choosing, she has ample time to be involved in low tech spontaneous
> imaginative play or contemplation, with her father or I, her friends and
> alone - and she does.
>
>
>
> However I do agree that much of educational software aimed at younger ages
> is just dopey, and simply reiterates the disconnected "pre-reading" or
> "phonics" inadequacies of formal workbooks. Jayn plays computer games -
for
> fun - and her favorite ones are the drawing and dressing up types.
>
>
>
> I suspect that the key difference is one of expectations. Approaching
> computers with the idea that they are an educational panacea is part of
the
> push for early academics mindset, complete with pressure to conform to
> school-type schedules and milestones, that is anathema to unschooling.
>
>
>
> Robyn L. Coburn
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.658 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/2004
>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.717 / Virus Database: 473 - Release Date: 7/8/2004
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
Elizabeth Hill
**
However I do agree that much of educational software aimed at younger ages
is just dopey, and simply reiterates the disconnected “pre-reading” or
“phonics” inadequacies of formal workbooks.**
Frank Smith wrote a book about some of the earliest learn to read software developed for classrooms.
The book is called _Insult to Intelligence_.
Betsy
However I do agree that much of educational software aimed at younger ages
is just dopey, and simply reiterates the disconnected “pre-reading” or
“phonics” inadequacies of formal workbooks.**
Frank Smith wrote a book about some of the earliest learn to read software developed for classrooms.
The book is called _Insult to Intelligence_.
Betsy