Re: My reply regarding Sandra's column in HEM
Fetteroll
Helen,
I think there are some flaws in the logic of your response. And I think the
flaws are caused by:
1) the word unschooling being defined differently by different people. So
when people say HEM isn't about unschooling and you say you are, you aren't
all using the word unschooling to mean the same thing. Some people who write
to you are using unschooling to mean radical unschooling. You're using the
term to cover a much broader range of practices from radical unschooling to
wanting to dip their toes into learning by living.
2) assuming that since HEM in your view is an unschooling magazine and
people are saying only Sandra's column was unschooling, that must mean the
complaints are from Sandra's supporters and they mean no more than "Sandra's
supporters" are outraged at a perceived injustice towards Sandra.
First, I'll tell you how I define radical unschooling so we're on the same
page about that! ;-) Radical unschooling, too, gets defined differently by
different people. *To me* radical unschooling means applying the philosophy
of trusting children to learn from living to all aspects of their lives
including parenting.
Second, I think good things *beyond* reaching the unschooling audience HEM
is targeting can come from keeping the definition of unschooling broad and
presenting learning by living in the personal story way that HEM does. As a
wonderful *side effect*, HEM's gentle way presents a "user friendly" view of
unschooling to those who may even be outside of homeschooling. :-) There's
so much all unschoolers are learning about how children really learn that
flies in the face of conventional (school based) knowledge of how children
"need" to learn. And it's great to have a venue where outsiders can see
inside unschooling, can see that children don't need to be taught to learn,
without being turned off by ideas that are too radical.
So, when people say HEM isn't about unschooling, I bet many of them mean it
isn't about radical unschooling and that HEM isn't addressing the needs they
have as radical unschoolers.
Whether HEM should try to meet the needs of radical unschoolers (as I've
defined them) or not is a separate issue from recognizing how the needs of
radical unschoolers differ from unschoolers (using a broader definition).
Radical unschoolers aren't content to take from unschooling only what
they're comfortable with. They want what they perceive as the whole shebang.
:-) They want the effects that radical unschoolers talk of: the relationshp
and personal effects that come from completely trusting their kids
personally and academically.
*In general*, for unschoolers (using the broader definition) I think the
goal is to do what they feel is best for their children. They're going to
take what they feel are the best parts of unschooling for them and cobble
something together that works for their family. What they need and how they
go about making it work it can't be defined by anyone else.
But radical unschoolers (*in general* and as I described them), on the other
hand, do want something specific. They want to get to a specific place. But
conventional parenting and schoolish thinking are road blocks for many of
them. The personal stories in HEM aren't as useful to them because they
already understand the benefits of (radical) unschooling. What they don't
know is how (and why it's helpful) to think in new ways, and how they can do
something that makes them uncomfortable while they work on eliminating
conventional thinking roadblocks, so they can make radical unschooling work
for them. And they value the hard questioning that goes on in places like
UnschoolingDiscussion and Unschooling.com.
Unfortunately that more direct presentation of radical unschooling thought
is the antithesis of what many unschoolers (as defined more broadly) need.
Radical unschooling *is* an idea that exists separate from Sandra's writing
about it. Sandra just makes it sound so obvious which is one of the reasons
her writing is so popular! But the idea of radical unschooling is doing well
on the unschoolingbasics list (that Ren Allen started when you changed the
name of Unschooling-101) without Sandra. (Over 300 members and very busy.)
The hard questions are being asked, the conventional assumptions are being
challenged. The lists are meeting the needs of radical unschoolers in ways
that HEM isn't.
Not that HEM should necessarily try to meet the needs of radical
unschoolers. I don't think the needs of people who want to the take parts of
unschooling they like are compatible with people who want to challenge their
own thinking in order to get the whole shebang are compatible. (And why the
lists suffered too many blow ups.) But to dismiss people who are complaining
about Sandra's dropped column as "Sandra supporters" is to dismiss the needs
of radical unschoolers who make the UD and unschoolingbasics lists and
Unschooling.com boards so busy.
I said recently that I wouldn't mind participating in a "radical
unschooling" (and/or "radical unschooling parenting") corner of a message
board like AOL used to have where the full range of unschooling is
discussed. I think it's valuable for unschoolers to see -- even if they
don't want to do it -- how far it's possible to let go and still raise great
kids. The knowledge that a conventional practice is a choice not a necessity
can be very freeing. :-) Frankly, I think radical unschoolers's needs are
met by discussing radical unschooling ideas amongst each other on the lists
and boards that serve them (and the new magazines that have come out in the
last year). But it doesn't help other unschoolers see how far it's possible
to let go since the lists and boards are more oriented towards people who
already know they want radical unschooling or are sure they want to know
more about it, not to people who are causaully curious.
Joyce
I think there are some flaws in the logic of your response. And I think the
flaws are caused by:
1) the word unschooling being defined differently by different people. So
when people say HEM isn't about unschooling and you say you are, you aren't
all using the word unschooling to mean the same thing. Some people who write
to you are using unschooling to mean radical unschooling. You're using the
term to cover a much broader range of practices from radical unschooling to
wanting to dip their toes into learning by living.
2) assuming that since HEM in your view is an unschooling magazine and
people are saying only Sandra's column was unschooling, that must mean the
complaints are from Sandra's supporters and they mean no more than "Sandra's
supporters" are outraged at a perceived injustice towards Sandra.
First, I'll tell you how I define radical unschooling so we're on the same
page about that! ;-) Radical unschooling, too, gets defined differently by
different people. *To me* radical unschooling means applying the philosophy
of trusting children to learn from living to all aspects of their lives
including parenting.
Second, I think good things *beyond* reaching the unschooling audience HEM
is targeting can come from keeping the definition of unschooling broad and
presenting learning by living in the personal story way that HEM does. As a
wonderful *side effect*, HEM's gentle way presents a "user friendly" view of
unschooling to those who may even be outside of homeschooling. :-) There's
so much all unschoolers are learning about how children really learn that
flies in the face of conventional (school based) knowledge of how children
"need" to learn. And it's great to have a venue where outsiders can see
inside unschooling, can see that children don't need to be taught to learn,
without being turned off by ideas that are too radical.
So, when people say HEM isn't about unschooling, I bet many of them mean it
isn't about radical unschooling and that HEM isn't addressing the needs they
have as radical unschoolers.
Whether HEM should try to meet the needs of radical unschoolers (as I've
defined them) or not is a separate issue from recognizing how the needs of
radical unschoolers differ from unschoolers (using a broader definition).
Radical unschoolers aren't content to take from unschooling only what
they're comfortable with. They want what they perceive as the whole shebang.
:-) They want the effects that radical unschoolers talk of: the relationshp
and personal effects that come from completely trusting their kids
personally and academically.
*In general*, for unschoolers (using the broader definition) I think the
goal is to do what they feel is best for their children. They're going to
take what they feel are the best parts of unschooling for them and cobble
something together that works for their family. What they need and how they
go about making it work it can't be defined by anyone else.
But radical unschoolers (*in general* and as I described them), on the other
hand, do want something specific. They want to get to a specific place. But
conventional parenting and schoolish thinking are road blocks for many of
them. The personal stories in HEM aren't as useful to them because they
already understand the benefits of (radical) unschooling. What they don't
know is how (and why it's helpful) to think in new ways, and how they can do
something that makes them uncomfortable while they work on eliminating
conventional thinking roadblocks, so they can make radical unschooling work
for them. And they value the hard questioning that goes on in places like
UnschoolingDiscussion and Unschooling.com.
Unfortunately that more direct presentation of radical unschooling thought
is the antithesis of what many unschoolers (as defined more broadly) need.
Radical unschooling *is* an idea that exists separate from Sandra's writing
about it. Sandra just makes it sound so obvious which is one of the reasons
her writing is so popular! But the idea of radical unschooling is doing well
on the unschoolingbasics list (that Ren Allen started when you changed the
name of Unschooling-101) without Sandra. (Over 300 members and very busy.)
The hard questions are being asked, the conventional assumptions are being
challenged. The lists are meeting the needs of radical unschoolers in ways
that HEM isn't.
Not that HEM should necessarily try to meet the needs of radical
unschoolers. I don't think the needs of people who want to the take parts of
unschooling they like are compatible with people who want to challenge their
own thinking in order to get the whole shebang are compatible. (And why the
lists suffered too many blow ups.) But to dismiss people who are complaining
about Sandra's dropped column as "Sandra supporters" is to dismiss the needs
of radical unschoolers who make the UD and unschoolingbasics lists and
Unschooling.com boards so busy.
I said recently that I wouldn't mind participating in a "radical
unschooling" (and/or "radical unschooling parenting") corner of a message
board like AOL used to have where the full range of unschooling is
discussed. I think it's valuable for unschoolers to see -- even if they
don't want to do it -- how far it's possible to let go and still raise great
kids. The knowledge that a conventional practice is a choice not a necessity
can be very freeing. :-) Frankly, I think radical unschoolers's needs are
met by discussing radical unschooling ideas amongst each other on the lists
and boards that serve them (and the new magazines that have come out in the
last year). But it doesn't help other unschoolers see how far it's possible
to let go since the lists and boards are more oriented towards people who
already know they want radical unschooling or are sure they want to know
more about it, not to people who are causaully curious.
Joyce
> 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
<<<<I think it's valuable for unschoolers to see -- even if they
don't want to do it -- how far it's possible to let go and still raise great
kids. The knowledge that a conventional practice is a choice not a necessity
can be very freeing. :-) Frankly, I think radical unschoolers's needs are
met by discussing radical unschooling ideas amongst each other on the lists
and boards that serve them (and the new magazines that have come out in the
last year).>>>
Well this is the crux of why I never responded to the magazine the few times
I got hold of a copy. My needs *are* mostly being met by the lists, and my
less frequent reading of the boards - where I would mostly lurk for the sake
of getting a good dose of the rad stuff especially when the lists were
quiet. Also I am enjoying the other mags most of the time.
<<<<But it doesn't help other unschoolers see how far it's possible
to let go since the lists and boards are more oriented towards people who
already know they want radical unschooling or are sure they want to know
more about it, not to people who are causaully curious.>>>>
And this point is the reason why I think it's a shame that Sandra's column
has been removed.
Sandra has posted that she is OK with that situation and grateful for the
past opportunities. However the response to subscribers' assorted
dissatisfaction has by no means been as gracious.
Which brings us back to the boards and what will end up happening to them,
and more importantly those wonderful voices (like Lyle) who are (were?)
there but not on the lists. Anne O. has recently joined Basics, for the
information anyone here who didn't know, although I believe she has
previously been more active on the boards by preference for the format
presumably. There is so much in the archives that it would be a shame to
lose also.
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
don't want to do it -- how far it's possible to let go and still raise great
kids. The knowledge that a conventional practice is a choice not a necessity
can be very freeing. :-) Frankly, I think radical unschoolers's needs are
met by discussing radical unschooling ideas amongst each other on the lists
and boards that serve them (and the new magazines that have come out in the
last year).>>>
Well this is the crux of why I never responded to the magazine the few times
I got hold of a copy. My needs *are* mostly being met by the lists, and my
less frequent reading of the boards - where I would mostly lurk for the sake
of getting a good dose of the rad stuff especially when the lists were
quiet. Also I am enjoying the other mags most of the time.
<<<<But it doesn't help other unschoolers see how far it's possible
to let go since the lists and boards are more oriented towards people who
already know they want radical unschooling or are sure they want to know
more about it, not to people who are causaully curious.>>>>
And this point is the reason why I think it's a shame that Sandra's column
has been removed.
Sandra has posted that she is OK with that situation and grateful for the
past opportunities. However the response to subscribers' assorted
dissatisfaction has by no means been as gracious.
Which brings us back to the boards and what will end up happening to them,
and more importantly those wonderful voices (like Lyle) who are (were?)
there but not on the lists. Anne O. has recently joined Basics, for the
information anyone here who didn't know, although I believe she has
previously been more active on the boards by preference for the format
presumably. There is so much in the archives that it would be a shame to
lose also.
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
Fetteroll
on 9/13/04 3:26 AM, Robyn Coburn at dezigna@... wrote:
doesn't like all that mail!
> Anne O. has recently joined BasicsShe also has her own list. Which is very brave and nice of her since she
doesn't like all that mail!
> Hi everyone! As suggested by people at the conference after hearing my *Out ofJoyce
> Sync/Highly Sensitive* talk, I started a list at yahoo called *Unschooling
> Non-Typical Children* ~
>
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shinewithunschooling/
>
>
> Please forward this link to anyone you think may find value in it...
>
> Looking forward to connecting with others...
>
> Be Well ~
> Anne