AM Brown

Below is the response I got today from Helen at HEM. I had sent an email
stating my concern about the removal of Sandra's column, not so much
specific to Sandra but to the loss of what I saw as the only 'unschooling'
piece in the magazine. In the response, she asks that it be posted to
share the 'information'. I have some pretty strong feelings about what
she has written here but will let everyone else form their own opinions :)
Sorry if this is a repeat for anyone.

Anna



Hello Anna,

Here's the reply I sent in response to another person's letter this morning:

Hello <name withheld>,

Thanks for taking the time to write and share your concerns with me.
A number of people have written about the same concerns, but I've
been very busy with family matters these last few weeks and have not
had a chance to respond to anyone until now. If you have the
opportunity - via discussion lists, message boards or other forums -
perhaps you could share my reply here with others who are concerned
about the changes we've made at HEM regarding Sandra Dodd. It's not
necessary, of course, and I'll be trying to find those who wrote
earlier and reply to them directly, but their contact information may
be lost to me by now.

Anyway, I share your disappointment about Sandra's column no longer
appearing in Home Education Magazine. I've always loved the wonderful
way Sandra could put words together to convey a thought or an idea or
a concept - that's why she was selected to be an HEM columnist in the
first place. Her writing has a special quality, a clarity of purpose
and a way of making the reader feel as though they, too, can do all
the wonderful things she writes about doing, whether it's making math
simple and easy to understand or sharing music with her kids and
friends and family or just enjoying the simple wonderfulness of
watching her children figure things out for themselves. She could
write it all down in a way that made you feel like you could do all
of that and more with your own kids. Her writing is clean, pure, and
honest, and those qualities do not come through in everyone's writing
like they come through in hers. If it was ONLY about the writing, I'm
certain that Sandra would still be writing for HEM, but her writing
was only a small part of a much larger situation which led to our
making the decisions we made.

As I understand it there has always been plenty of Sandra's writing
available online, not only at her own website but at many other
sites, forums, discussion lists, and in books and magazines. I don't
think her absence in HEM will be much noticed by those who want to
read her writing, as I believe she wrote far more for other venues
than she ever wrote for our bimonthly magazine. She's a very prolific
writer and a tireless advocate on the lists and forums. In that
respect, HEM was never much of a source for those who wanted to
benefit from her writing and discussions.

At the same time, it has struck those of us here at HEM as odd that
people think there has been some significant change in the magazine.
Almost everyone associated with HEM - the publishers, editors,
writers, columnists, office staff and various others - are all
unschoolers at heart, all believe pretty much the same kinds of
things Sandra has written about and promoted, and have always worked
hard to share the unschooling philosophy with our readers. The odd
attitude that Sandra's column was the only thing worth reading in HEM
and it's not worth subscribing if she's not going to be writing for
it is a somewhat bizarre revelation to us - and it tells us all that
this is much more about Sandra's faithful followers defending some
perceived wrongdoing than about anything truly relating to our
magazine. That also strikes us as bizarre because we've always
thought true unschooling was about finding one's own path and not
simply dogging someone else's footsteps to learn.

I've always loved what John Holt had to say about that concept: That
true leaders don't look around to see who's following them, they
simply move ahead doing what they think is right and good and in
doing so they empower others to do the same for themselves. That's
what we've been doing at HEM for over 20 years, and it's what we'll
continue to do for the next 20.

Thanks again for writing,
Helen
~~~~
Helen Hegener, publisher
Home Education Magazine
http://www.homeedmag.com

Robyn Coburn

<<<<Anyway, I share your disappointment about Sandra's column no longer
appearing in Home Education Magazine. I've always loved the wonderful
way Sandra could put words together to convey a thought or an idea or
a concept .......{snip} [going from individual to group position]
At the same time, it has struck those of us here at HEM as odd that
people think there has been some significant change in the magazine.
Almost everyone associated with HEM - the publishers, editors,
writers, columnists, office staff and various others - are all
unschoolers at heart, all believe pretty much the same kinds of
things Sandra has written about and promoted, and have always worked
hard to share the unschooling philosophy with our readers. The odd
attitude that Sandra's column was the only thing worth reading in HEM
and it's not worth subscribing if she's not going to be writing for
it is a somewhat bizarre revelation to us - and it tells us all that
this is much more about Sandra's faithful followers defending some
perceived wrongdoing than about anything truly relating to our
magazine. That also strikes us as bizarre because we've always
thought true unschooling was about finding one's own path and not
simply dogging someone else's footsteps to learn.>>>>

So:

We love Sandra BUT we're firing her anyway.
We agree with everything she says BUT we're firing her anyway.
If you have a problem with the content of the magazine you must just be one
of her unthinking followers, so who needs you.
You are too dumb and brainwashed by her to see that the rest of us are
better Unschoolers anyway.

And then the back handed zinger:

<<<I've always loved what John Holt had to say about that concept: That
true leaders don't look around to see who's following them, they
simply move ahead doing what they think is right and good and in
doing so they empower others to do the same for themselves. That's
what we've been doing at HEM for over 20 years, and it's what we'll
continue to do for the next 20.>>>

Sandra isn't a "true" leader because she must want followers.

I notice they don't say anything about promoting Unschooling in the next 20
years, just what they think is right.

Does Helen realize the above meanings can be read into her letter? I can't
believe someone who has published a magazine of this long standing could be
writing unintentionally or be oblivious to the insulting tone.

Well I have never subscribed to HEM, because from the odd copy I have
perused it did look like it was trying to cast too broad a net of general
Home Schooling, and I was interested in Radical Unschooling. Actually the
point they make that Sandra has a lot published on the web is true. However
not everyone who reads HEM is necessarily on line a lot, and now new
subscribers won't even hear her name in that publication or about her
website. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth to feel like they resent her
popularity on line.

There is clearly more to be revealed in the message boards situation too.
Hmmmm. :/

Thanks for sharing that Anna.

Robyn L. Coburn

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.752 / Virus Database: 503 - Release Date: 9/3/2004

Kelli Traaseth

Well, I guess I was the <name withheld>, cuz I got the letter. Some others may have too, I suppose.


Here's what I wrote so you can see Helen's contradictions as loud and clear as I have.


***********************************

Dear Helen Hegener, I was really disappointed to see that Sandra Dodd was not in the latest issue of your magazine. As an unschooling mom, I really felt a connection with that column and now..... not much there for me. With the other articles and columns in HEM, I would be thinking, "yeah, this is kind-of like me". But they were never on target. They were either too controlling or too schooly. The reason I started home educating my children was to get away from that. That didn't work so why would I replicate that? Sandra's column was like a breath of fresh air. It really spoke to me in a way that the others never did. I saw that Sandra's focus was her children and their relationship. Not what her children needed to know. The focus wasn't on what the parent thought the child should learn, it was on what the child thought he or she should learn. Isn't that how we all learn best anyway? When we're doing what we want, when we're following our own passions and dreams? I
don't see that in the other articles/columns. I'm sorry to see your magazine going in this direction. I won't be renewing my subscription. Kelli Traaseth, unschooling mom to 3
*****************************************************



I know HEM wasn't ever very 'unschooly' but it sometimes had unschooling articles and then it had Sandra's column. I looked forward to those.



Previously, Helen has made claims that she wants to try and unify the home educating population. Obviously, she doesn't want to include unschooling (or our definition of unschooling) in that population. To me, she has just divided the home educating community even more.





The more and more I thought about it, and after discussing it with Sandra too, I'm fine in missing the magazine. Like I said there wasn't much there for me anyway. But now the masses are missing out on it too. That's one big thing that made me sad.



Kelli~





Hello Anna,

Here's the reply I sent in response to another person's letter this morning:

Hello <name withheld>,

Thanks for taking the time to write and share your concerns with me.
A number of people have written about the same concerns, but I've
been very busy with family matters these last few weeks and have not
had a chance to respond to anyone until now. If you have the
opportunity - via discussion lists, message boards or other forums -
perhaps you could share my reply here with others who are concerned
about the changes we've made at HEM regarding Sandra Dodd. It's not
necessary, of course, and I'll be trying to find those who wrote
earlier and reply to them directly, but their contact information may
be lost to me by now.

Anyway, I share your disappointment about Sandra's column no longer
appearing in Home Education Magazine. I've always loved the wonderful
way Sandra could put words together to convey a thought or an idea or
a concept - that's why she was selected to be an HEM columnist in the
first place. Her writing has a special quality, a clarity of purpose
and a way of making the reader feel as though they, too, can do all
the wonderful things she writes about doing, whether it's making math
simple and easy to understand or sharing music with her kids and
friends and family or just enjoying the simple wonderfulness of
watching her children figure things out for themselves. She could
write it all down in a way that made you feel like you could do all
of that and more with your own kids. Her writing is clean, pure, and
honest, and those qualities do not come through in everyone's writing
like they come through in hers. If it was ONLY about the writing, I'm
certain that Sandra would still be writing for HEM, but her writing
was only a small part of a much larger situation which led to our
making the decisions we made.

As I understand it there has always been plenty of Sandra's writing
available online, not only at her own website but at many other
sites, forums, discussion lists, and in books and magazines. I don't
think her absence in HEM will be much noticed by those who want to
read her writing, as I believe she wrote far more for other venues
than she ever wrote for our bimonthly magazine. She's a very prolific
writer and a tireless advocate on the lists and forums. In that
respect, HEM was never much of a source for those who wanted to
benefit from her writing and discussions.

At the same time, it has struck those of us here at HEM as odd that
people think there has been some significant change in the magazine.
Almost everyone associated with HEM - the publishers, editors,
writers, columnists, office staff and various others - are all
unschoolers at heart, all believe pretty much the same kinds of
things Sandra has written about and promoted, and have always worked
hard to share the unschooling philosophy with our readers. The odd
attitude that Sandra's column was the only thing worth reading in HEM
and it's not worth subscribing if she's not going to be writing for
it is a somewhat bizarre revelation to us - and it tells us all that
this is much more about Sandra's faithful followers defending some
perceived wrongdoing than about anything truly relating to our
magazine. That also strikes us as bizarre because we've always
thought true unschooling was about finding one's own path and not
simply dogging someone else's footsteps to learn.

I've always loved what John Holt had to say about that concept: That
true leaders don't look around to see who's following them, they
simply move ahead doing what they think is right and good and in
doing so they empower others to do the same for themselves. That's
what we've been doing at HEM for over 20 years, and it's what we'll
continue to do for the next 20.

Thanks again for writing,
Helen
~~~~
Helen Hegener, publisher
Home Education Magazine
http://www.homeedmag.com




Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT


---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links



To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/

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

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




---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.

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

Deb Lewis

Helen's MO is to try to agree with everyone while trying to undermine
certain unschoolers with innuendo.
I'm insulted and offended, not to mention, plain sick of her. But
then, it's easy for me to say what I mean because I'm not trying to sell
magazine subscriptions and I'm not selling advertising space to
curriculum providers. I don't have to try to be all things to all
people.

Good news!
There are lists where people are talking about unschooling. This list
with 559 members and 64 messages in the last week.
UnschoolingDiscussion,
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UnschoolingDiscussion/ with 1,628 members
and 457 messages in the last week. Unschoolingbasics
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unschoolingbasics/?yguid=74604204 with 303
members and 89 messages in the last week.

There are other magazines where the owner doesn't have to *tell* people
the magazine is an unschooling magazine, people can really find
unschooling articles in them! Life Learning Magazine,
http://lifelearningmagazine.com/ Live Free Learn Free,
http://livefreelearnfree.com/ and All Round,
http://www.allroundmagazine.com/.

Sandra's website, www.sandradodd.com/unschooling and other good
websites by unschoolers. Maybe some of you will list yours here.

Deb L

[email protected]

In a message dated 9/11/2004 4:08:08 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
dezigna@... writes:

Actually the
point they make that Sandra has a lot published on the web is true. However
not everyone who reads HEM is necessarily on line a lot, <<<<<

That is so true and what I think HEM will be missing. I know when we first
considered homeschooling here in NC, I didn't have to register with the state
until my oldest was 7 so I really didn't think about it until then. But at
that point DH and I had decided that we didn't want to change anything about
our lives, no curriculum, no school-at-home etc. We wanted to continue
living life.

I was at that time reading HEM and was so drawn to Sandra's column. And
that was all I knew about her. I was not on any yahoo lists and had never seen
her web site. Wasn't really online much at all. But when I started
searching the Internet and ran across Kelly's site for the SOS group and saw the Live
and Learn Conference (of course I didn't know it was the first one..LOL)
that was what I saw, Sandra. I told Jackson, DH, that I didn't know any
unschoolers, and didn't know anyone going to the conference, but I did recognize
Sandra's name from HEM. We talked about going and took the plunge and had a
great time and came away knowing that we were unschoolers, it had a name and
from there I went online and joined lists, etc.

Now some 3 years later I have the North Carolina Unschoolers list and web
site and plan get togethers for unschoolers all the time. It has really snow
balled but it started with HEM and the little SOS group.

I am not sure Helen realizes how many people were affected by that column.
It is not just people searching for writings by Sandra. But maybe Helen does
realize that and it is not the slant that HEM wants to take. Anyway it is a
loss for the unschooling community but maybe the Live Free Learn Free
magazine will fill that a little. I loved the first issue of LFLF.

Pam G


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

eriksmama2001

You are very perceptive to see the truth.

Pat--- In [email protected], "Robyn Coburn"
<dezigna@c...> wrote:
> <<<<Anyway, I share your disappointment about Sandra's column no
longer
> appearing in Home Education Magazine. I've always loved the
wonderful
> way Sandra could put words together to convey a thought or an idea
or
> a concept .......{snip} [going from individual to group position]
> At the same time, it has struck those of us here at HEM as odd that
> people think there has been some significant change in the
magazine.
> Almost everyone associated with HEM - the publishers, editors,
> writers, columnists, office staff and various others - are all
> unschoolers at heart, all believe pretty much the same kinds of
> things Sandra has written about and promoted, and have always
worked
> hard to share the unschooling philosophy with our readers. The odd
> attitude that Sandra's column was the only thing worth reading in
HEM
> and it's not worth subscribing if she's not going to be writing for
> it is a somewhat bizarre revelation to us - and it tells us all
that
> this is much more about Sandra's faithful followers defending some
> perceived wrongdoing than about anything truly relating to our
> magazine. That also strikes us as bizarre because we've always
> thought true unschooling was about finding one's own path and not
> simply dogging someone else's footsteps to learn.>>>>
>
> So:
>
> We love Sandra BUT we're firing her anyway.
> We agree with everything she says BUT we're firing her anyway.
> If you have a problem with the content of the magazine you must
just be one
> of her unthinking followers, so who needs you.
> You are too dumb and brainwashed by her to see that the rest of us
are
> better Unschoolers anyway.
>
> And then the back handed zinger:
>
> <<<I've always loved what John Holt had to say about that concept:
That
> true leaders don't look around to see who's following them, they
> simply move ahead doing what they think is right and good and in
> doing so they empower others to do the same for themselves. That's
> what we've been doing at HEM for over 20 years, and it's what we'll
> continue to do for the next 20.>>>
>
> Sandra isn't a "true" leader because she must want followers.
>
> I notice they don't say anything about promoting Unschooling in the
next 20
> years, just what they think is right.
>
> Does Helen realize the above meanings can be read into her letter?
I can't
> believe someone who has published a magazine of this long standing
could be
> writing unintentionally or be oblivious to the insulting tone.
>
> Well I have never subscribed to HEM, because from the odd copy I
have
> perused it did look like it was trying to cast too broad a net of
general
> Home Schooling, and I was interested in Radical Unschooling.
Actually the
> point they make that Sandra has a lot published on the web is true.
However
> not everyone who reads HEM is necessarily on line a lot, and now new
> subscribers won't even hear her name in that publication or about
her
> website. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth to feel like they
resent her
> popularity on line.
>
> There is clearly more to be revealed in the message boards
situation too.
> Hmmmm. :/
>
> Thanks for sharing that Anna.
>
> Robyn L. Coburn
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.752 / Virus Database: 503 - Release Date: 9/3/2004

Barbara Chase

>> I've always loved what John Holt had to say about that concept: That
>> true leaders don't look around to see who's following them, they
>> simply move ahead doing what they think is right and good and in
>> doing so they empower others to do the same for themselves. That's
>> what we've been doing at HEM for over 20 years, and it's what we'll
>> continue to do for the next 20.

This is so sad... what a great idea and how frustrating it is that it can
be used to justify the *right* and *good* thing for us all. I'd love to
find the original John Holt quote to see how he really worded it.

What I see as a hidden message with Helen's use of this idea is that HEM is
doing the right thing, they are being true leaders - following their own
vision. But with that vision they only share certain points of view in
their magazine, and by doing so they believe they are helping others see
those same POV, which are the "right" views to have. So in the end, this
is actually the same thing as having followers. In fact, you can even see
in the wording that she used that it may not be about whether or not to
have followers, it's just about not caring "who" they are (ie. if we don't
have any unschoolers following us, that's just fine -- which seems to be
their stance.)

But that's not what I've ever gotten out of John Holt's writing (or
Sandra's!) The idea isn't about empowering someone else to figure out for
themselves that your POV is the right one, it's about empowering them to
find their own true path - which may look very different from yours!

I have a word/idea that I've been thinking about recently, and that is
self-validation. I think this really fits my own interpretation of John
Holt's idea. A true leader is self-validated; they don't need followers to
help tell them they are right, they don't need to convince others to have
the same POV in order to be validated.


ciao
--bc--

Robyn Coburn

<<<But that's not what I've ever gotten out of John Holt's writing (or
Sandra's!) The idea isn't about empowering someone else to figure out for
themselves that your POV is the right one, it's about empowering them to
find their own true path - which may look very different from yours!>>>>

Oh this is a great insight. "You can have any color you want as long as it's
the same as mine".

This really is a key idea, sometimes challenge, for Unschooling parents. The
idea that if you are creating an environment of genuine choice for your
children, sometimes they are going to make choices that you disagree with,
or come to conclusions that are different from yours.

<<<<I have a word/idea that I've been thinking about recently, and that is
self-validation. I think this really fits my own interpretation of John
Holt's idea. A true leader is self-validated; they don't need followers to
help tell them they are right, they don't need to convince others to have
the same POV in order to be validated.>>>>

I guess Helen and her staff members don't feel the need to be validated by
Unschoolers - but they still want to suggest that we are the ones in the
wrong place - or perhaps more accurately the "less right" place.

Self-validation is another great concept for Unschoolers to embrace.

Robyn L. Coburn

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.752 / Virus Database: 503 - Release Date: 9/3/2004

Gold Standard

>> I've always loved what John Holt had to say about that concept: That
>> true leaders don't look around to see who's following them, they
>> simply move ahead doing what they think is right and good and in
>> doing so they empower others to do the same for themselves. <<

What strikes me about this inference is that, in my short time on this list,
and in my long life having never followed Sandra, it is very apparent to me
that Sandra leads exactly the way John Holt has spoken of...without caring
whether anyone is following or not. It appears that Helen has not paid much,
or any, attention to this list, or how Sandra leads.

Jacki

eriksmama2001

<<<<I think we were just waiting for you ;)
Jacki>>>>

******No one sees the irony of this?

Nor the fact that I have posted a challenging concept to the status
quo about "unschoolers" succumbing to school without anyone being
willing to comment until we "wait for Sandra" to weigh in on it?

Can we just discuss the IDEAS, without waiting to be told how and
what to think? That is the point! Model thinking, not following! But
step gently on that trap door....THINK WITH YOUR OWN MIND!

Pat



--- In [email protected], "Gold Standard" <contact@b...>
wrote:
>
> >> I've always loved what John Holt had to say about that concept:
That
> >> true leaders don't look around to see who's following them, they
> >> simply move ahead doing what they think is right and good and in
> >> doing so they empower others to do the same for themselves. <<
>
> What strikes me about this inference is that, in my short time on
this list,
> and in my long life having never followed Sandra, it is very
apparent to me
> that Sandra leads exactly the way John Holt has spoken of...without
caring
> whether anyone is following or not. It appears that Helen has not
paid much,
> or any, attention to this list, or how Sandra leads.
>
> Jacki

Nichole, ubiquitous

I wasn't part of that discussion at all, and that's why I replied offlist originally. I continue to think that it was beautifully written and brilliantly thought-out.

:o)
Nichole
----- Original Message -----
From: eriksmama2001
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, September 12, 2004 6:11 AM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Sandra followers was Re: HEMs response to my complaint


Nor the fact that I have posted a challenging concept to the status
quo about "unschoolers" succumbing to school without anyone being
willing to comment until we "wait for Sandra" to weigh in on it?

Can we just discuss the IDEAS, without waiting to be told how and
what to think? That is the point! Model thinking, not following! But
step gently on that trap door....THINK WITH YOUR OWN MIND!

Pat



--- In [email protected], "Gold Standard" <contact@b...>
wrote:
>
> >> I've always loved what John Holt had to say about that concept:
That
> >> true leaders don't look around to see who's following them, they
> >> simply move ahead doing what they think is right and good and in
> >> doing so they empower others to do the same for themselves. <<
>
> What strikes me about this inference is that, in my short time on
this list,
> and in my long life having never followed Sandra, it is very
apparent to me
> that Sandra leads exactly the way John Holt has spoken of...without
caring
> whether anyone is following or not. It appears that Helen has not
paid much,
> or any, attention to this list, or how Sandra leads.
>
> Jacki


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/

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.



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

[email protected]

Nor the fact that I have posted a challenging concept to the status
quo about "unschoolers" succumbing to school without anyone being
willing to comment until we "wait for Sandra" to weigh in on it? <<<<<<<<



It might be that it wasn't an interesting post to some of us. I seriously
don't remember what you said. I think it is incorrect to assume that all of
us on this list are "blind followers of Sandra," except you. There is no
brainwashing here, we have thoughtful discussions all the time.
Pam G


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

[email protected]

Nor the fact that I have posted a challenging concept to the status
quo about "unschoolers" succumbing to school without anyone being
willing to comment until we "wait for Sandra" to weigh in on it? <<<<<<



I did go back and reread your post. I am assuming it was the post about
helping the child figure out what their real needs are, in wanting to go to PS,
and helping them to work out solutions and opportunities that meet those
needs and do not involve PS. That is not a new concept and has been discussed
here and on other lists many times. You could probably search the archives and
see what others have said about the subject. Maybe search public school or
my child wants to go to school etc.

I personally cannot relate. My boys have never been to school and have no
desire to "try it out".

Pam G


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

Elizabeth Hill

**

<<<<I think we were just waiting for you
Jacki>>>>

******No one sees the irony of this?

Nor the fact that I have posted a challenging concept to the status
quo about "unschoolers" succumbing to school without anyone being
willing to comment until we "wait for Sandra" to weigh in on it?

Can we just discuss the IDEAS, without waiting to be told how and
what to think? That is the point! Model thinking, not following! But
step gently on that trap door....THINK WITH YOUR OWN MIND!**


Hi -

When you are not getting the response you want, it's best just to repost
it or rephrase it and see if you can raise more interest. Insulting
people will get you attention, but it won't increase the discussion of
ideas, which you stated was your goal. I think your post was a broad
insult to everyone who read yesterday and didn't post. If that wasn't
your intention, then I'd appreciate it if you'd clarify what the above
post meant.

(At this point, the water is pretty cloudy and I have no idea what
"challenging concept to the status quo about "unschoolers" succumbing to
school you are talking about. A quote from your original post would
have been clearer.)

Betsy

PS If my child wanted to go to public school, I wouldn't be thrilled,
but if I couldn't meet his perceived needs at home, I am committed to
letting him try it. Because I feel no child should be unschooled
against his will. That would be an oxymoron. Do some of you disagree
with that approach?

PPS (Now that I have gone back and re-read in the archives, I can say
that I agreed with your post on Saturday that it would be desireable to
meet a child's needs by enhancing community. However, I don't often
comment about posts that I agree with.)

Pam Hartley

> <<<<I think we were just waiting for you
> Jacki>>>>
>
> ******No one sees the irony of this?
>
> Nor the fact that I have posted a challenging concept to the status
> quo about "unschoolers" succumbing to school without anyone being
> willing to comment until we "wait for Sandra" to weigh in on it?


Sandra (the list owner) is out of town and I've been racing around like the
proverbial headless chicken all weekend on non-list business matters. I'd
really prefer NOT to have to play police officer Pam this weekend, so if you
could refrain from posting messages to the list about what people do and do
not choose to respond to and why, it would make my life easier and my temper
less iffy, not to mention the small matter of keeping the list to its
intended purpose instead of de-railed into discussions that have nothing to
do with unschooling.

Another poster on moderation already had a post rejected yesterday for being
nothing but flame-bait. This is not in general a moderated list (new members
are moderated so we can avoid spam messages and once in a blue moon a member
is put on moderation or left on moderation if they truly cannot converse
like socially-able adults), and neither the list owner nor the other
moderators are interested in moderating a lot of members. We're far more
likely just to send them on their way.

If no one responds to a post, it is most likely because a) They weren't
interested or b) They, like me, had a few other things to see to on the day
it was posted. You can always try posting again (courtesy works), reword the
post, or try another topic. If you don't find enough folks here to converse
with, you can also try another list.

Thank you,

Pam, moderator

Christine ONeal

eriksmama2001 <scubamama@...> wrote:

>>Nor the fact that I have posted a challenging concept to the status
quo about "unschoolers" succumbing to school without anyone being
willing to comment until we "wait for Sandra" to weigh in on it? >>

I don't think anyone wasn't "willing" to comment. I think maybe no one was interested in commenting. Just because you write something doesn't mean people are going to comment. I don't think anyone was waiting for Sandra to get back to give us permission to discuss this topic. If we were interested in discussing it, we would have.

Christy O



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!

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

Deb Lewis

***Another poster on moderation already had a post rejected yesterday for
being
nothing but flame-bait. ***

I sent several posts to this list in the last few days and none of them
posted. I went through the range of anger at Yahoo! for messing things
up again, paranoia over cosmic karma and after your post, certainty that
I was the moderated member. I have been considered by some a flame
baiter. Maybe the master flame baiter. Master baiter? No, that's a
different list....

Anyway when I went to sent messages to check the details I found the
address I was using said AlwaysLearning at yahoo "gorups" . I don't
know what a gorup is but I now know if you send mail there it disappears
entirely, never to be seen again. (or so I'm assuming)

In a happy twist of fate it led me to reconsider one post - a snarky,
nasty, immature, neener-neener thing about HEM which I've now deleted
forever. (well, that's my story now, anyway)


Deb L

[email protected]

In a message dated 9/12/2004 1:41:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
ddzimlew@... writes:

In a happy twist of fate it led me to reconsider one post - a snarky,
nasty, immature, neener-neener thing about HEM which I've now deleted
forever. (well, that's my story now, anyway) <<<

But my best friend Deb will send it to ME so I can get a chuckle!

Right? <g>

~Kelly


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

[email protected]

Pat wrote:
<<<<< I want to interject another perspective. I haven't been
following this whole thread, so it may have already been presented.
>>>>>

I've noticed that it's usually better to have read the entire
thread before commenting.


<<<<< The issue is empowering our children to discern their specific
needs such as to 'challenge themselves academically', 'social
outlet', 'shared interests', 'more responsibilities', 'separation
from other siblings for periods of time', 'desires to explore new
interests', 'apprentice opportunities', 'evaluation of their
knowledge', 'ability to fit in', 'desire to be a part of the
community', 'desire to grow without parental influence', etc. Develop
and facilitate means of meeting those *real needs* in a consensual
manner that doesn't include the negative aspects of school. >>>>>


Most people on this list who have children who have expressed a
desire to go to school have done all the things mentioned above and
more.



Pat wrote:
>>Nor the fact that I have posted a challenging concept to the status
quo about "unschoolers" succumbing to school without anyone being
willing to comment until we "wait for Sandra" to weigh in on it? >>

The above concept wasn't that challenging to long-time
unschoolers/mindful parents.

I just figured that the poster had young children and hadn't yet
had the opportunity to fully appreciate the critical thinking ability
of life-long unschoolers. Apologies if that assumption is
incorrect.

One interesting thing about people who have always been supported in
their decisions, is that they make good decisions for themselves.
Regardless of age.

My daughter is now pursuing psychology. She has expressed a desire
to go to school because she wants to understand why schooled children
think the way they do. She feels one of the ways to gain that
understanding is to go to school.

She is 13.

She hasn't gone (yet).

Mercedes
who isn't worried about the effects school may have on her if she
goes (OK - not TOO worried. . . . . :-)

Robyn Coburn

<<<<Nor the fact that I have posted a challenging concept to the status
quo about "unschoolers" succumbing to school without anyone being
willing to comment until we "wait for Sandra" to weigh in on it? >>>

You know there have been times when I have written something I thought was
erudite and fabulous and then...nuttin'. And then other times I make some
minor comment in passing and bingo a huge and wide ranging discussion
ensues.

It's completely unpredictable.

I agree with Pam G. The idea of winkling out the "real" need behind the
desire to go to school *has* been expressed often here and on U/D. The
aspect of freedom is that we may still have to be prepared for the kid to
say, "I get that you will help me find other friends (or whatever the need
is), but I still want to see about school for myself."

That being said, I read the post, enjoyed the expression, but it is up 'til
now irrelevant to my life. Also as I have posted often, I avoid school
conversations, and this looked like it *might* go in that direction.

Robyn L. Coburn


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.752 / Virus Database: 503 - Release Date: 9/3/2004

[email protected]

In a message dated 9/12/2004 6:12:31 AM Central Standard Time,
scubamama@... writes:

Nor the fact that I have posted a challenging concept to the status
quo about "unschoolers" succumbing to school without anyone being
willing to comment until we "wait for Sandra" to weigh in on it?



~~~

What the hell does that mean? Did I miss a post that said we should wait
for Sandra to post before we do?


I don't know what you are referring to when you say "challenging concept..."
so I will go back and look. But maybe, just maybe, the people who haven't
commented found your post completely un-challenging and not worth their time
to respond?

Karen


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

gbdawson

> Below is the response I got today from Helen at HEM. I had sent
> an email stating my concern about the removal of Sandra's column

> Hello Anna,
>
> Here's the reply I sent in response to another person's letter
this morning:
> If you have the opportunity - via discussion lists, message boards
> or other forums - perhaps you could share my reply here with
> others who are concerned about the changes we've made at HEM
> regarding Sandra Dodd.
> ~~~~
> Helen Hegener, publisher
> Home Education Magazine

I thought this was an odd and inappropriate way for the publisher of
a national homeschooling publication to circulate her rationale for
what is essentially a personnel action.

First, did the information need to be circulated at all? (Seems to
me that it is a private matter between an editor and author.) But if
so, why not post it on the publisher's own e-mail list at HEM-
Unschooling Cafe? Finally, might not the most appropriate venue to
discuss her rationale be within the editorial pages of Home
Education Magazine?

For the record: I do not know any of the parties involved.

Gail Dawson

Sandra Dodd

-=---- In [email protected], Deb Lewis
<ddzimlew@j...> wrote:

> Good news!
> There are lists where people are talking about unschooling.
This list
> with 559 members and 64 messages in the last week.
> UnschoolingDiscussion,
. . . 1,628 members
> and 457 messages in the last week.
Unschooling. . . 303
> members and 89 messages in the last week.


And I am in Chicago, having spoken at the SECOND exclusively
unschooling conference in two weeks' time.

One in Peabody with hundreds of people.
One in Chicago with dozens of people (but it was a limited, small
conference from the get-go).

Both all and entirely unschooling.

I won't be back until Tuesday night. I'm looking at nearly 100
posts here I haven't read and won't have time to read, and it
tempts me sorely. Maybe I'll stay up late tonight and catch up, or
maybe tomorrow night.

I was writing about unschooling from the time I got on *Prodigy,
in I think 1993 (not positive about that date). I was writing TONS
on AOL before I read any HEM. I gladly took on editing an online
newsletter for HEM in those old days (1997?? I'd have to check
on my own computer), before the days of anything like
yahoogroups. I kept a list of subscribers on my Mac, and
checked new and "remove me" against my list every month "by
hand" with over a thousand subscribers (though I found a clever
way to do it quickly by putting new people in green font, outgoing
in red, alphabetizing the whole list and deleting what was
duplicated with red, and deleting the black-match if a green was
duplicated.) I ran an online chat every week (Tuesday from 1:00
to 3:00, I think) and then edited it down into a readable format for
uploading to the unschooling library there.

Somewhere in there I was asked to write for the magazine. I
didn't write for the magazine first and then start helping other
unschoolers.

I'm curious to see what else has been written, but people are
going to come over here to hang out in a bit. Some who were at
the conference on Saturday and maybe some who weren't.

Sunday I was force-marched a mile or so to the El and then all
over downtown Chicago, Millenium Park, in and out of cool
buildings, over bridges for better views of architectural details...
my feet HURT. But I got to hang out with two unschooling moms
who hadn't been at the conference. And today I got to see part of
The Field Museum. Part. All would have taken two or three days.

Tomorrow, home!!

If you don't hear from me again until then, it's just me trying to be
a good guest here in foreign-land.

Sandra

Sandra Dodd

--- In [email protected], "eriksmama2001"
<scubamama@e...> wrote:
> <<<<I think we were just waiting for you ;)
> Jacki>>>>
>
> ******No one sees the irony of this?


It was a joke.

If I was gone and people started talking about how parents could
best deal with teachers and nothing else, that wasn't the
purpose of the list.

When I peeked in on the list, no one was talking about the HEM
problem. That came soon after, and I didn't know that until now
(Monday night).

But with or without that, it was a joke. It would have been a joke
even without the winky-smile.

If you don't get a joke, it doesn't help anyone for you to say so.






>
> Nor the fact that I have posted a challenging concept to the
status
> quo about "unschoolers" succumbing to school without
anyone being
> willing to comment until we "wait for Sandra" to weigh in on it?


When I posted what I did, I don't think your post had come
through. I hadn't seen it. That was a response to MY complaint.
If you didn't see mine, go back and read Friday night (I think it
was Friday).





>
> Can we just discuss the IDEAS, without waiting to be told how
and
> what to think? That is the point! Model thinking, not following!
But
> step gently on that trap door....THINK WITH YOUR OWN MIND!

No doubt, if people WANT to discuss the ideas they can. There
is no such thing as thinking with anyone else's mind, so don't
yell about it.

This list was not created to discuss school.
If school is to be discussed, it should only be discussed in ways
in which it will help people better understand unschooling.

That was my point a few nights ago, and that is my point now.
And if people agree or disagree with me the point is not THAT
(whether they think as I do), but the point is that this list is my list,
created by me, and if I say "take this school discussion to
another list so that we can discuss unschooling," that's not me
telling anyone how to think. It's me saying "Help me maintain the
integrity of this unschooling list."

Way too much explanation for one little joke.

Sandra