Re: [AlwaysLearning] Digest Number 154
[email protected]
Sandra -
You are defining something as "not homeschooling" because of the reality of
the way it works - saying it isn't homeschooling because it involves being at
the center and doing what the teachers say the way they say to do it and so
on and doesn't allow the freedom to do things their own way.
I don't have any problem with saying that isn't homeschooling. I'd have no
problem saying, "I don't think people enrolled in 'The Learning Center' are
really homeschooling. They're really more in school than out."
I'm saying that just being signed up for a public school program doesn't mean
that that is the way it will be. There are many different kinds of public
school programs and that includes the AEPs in Washingington. Some are MUCH
looser than many private cover schools. There are public school programs that
encourage unschooling - I once went to an excellent workshop that ENCOURAGED
unschooling at our county's public school program. There are public school
programs where people only see somebody from that program once a year or
twice a year or every three months or even never at all. There are public
school programs where they have drop-in centers that offer workshops and the
people can use them or not, as they wish. There are a b'zillion different
kinds of programs.
So - if you want to look at what one family is doing or what one particular
program requires, and say "That isn't really homeschooling," based on what
they are REALLY doing -- fine. But these people in Washington are insisting
that it is "in black and white" and we should all just accept what the law
says. They aren't looking at what people are really doing, individually. They
aren't interested in the difference between different programs. They are just
saying that their LAW distinguishes between families in AEPs versus "real"
homeschoolers and they want to keep that distinction and they get extremely
heated up over it when people aren't willing to maintain that distinction.
There are people in that state who have really been hurt and driven away from
the rest of the homeschooling community by this extremely rigid thinking
which is repeated over and over.
I've been in a public school program and I was just as much a homeschooler
then as I am now. We started unschooling while in a public school program,
after experimenting with doing unit studies for a while. We saw the program
staff person ONCE, when we signed up. They didn't tell us what to do, they
offered materials and workshops and some field trips and a park day, that we
could use IF we wanted to use them. We have board members of the National
Home Education Network who are in public school programs and they are not
only homeschooling, they are unschoolers. Shall we kick them off the board,
telling them they aren't "real homeschoolers" because they're enrolled in a
public school program?
Nichoel, I've been involved in this discussion for the past 6 years and I've
read all the statutes. In fact, by quoting all the statutes, you're just
emphasizing my point that you want to let the law define who is a
homeschooler. WHY would we homeschoolers want to let the government define
who is and who isn't a homeschooler? Some of the most prominent homeschoolers
in the State of Washington are underground and would not be called
homeschoolers according to your own statutes, in fact they'd technically be
called "criminals" since they are breaking the law. Do you insist that they
not call themselves homeschoolers since they aren't, legally, operating under
the actual homeschooling statutes?
I don't object to looking at the programs and talking about the problems with
them and the problems that could be created in the homeschooling community by
them and so on. I don't object to looking at a particular program and saying,
"It doesn't look like homeschooling to me when they have to be there and have
to work on somebody else's schedule and have to do what somebody else
requires," and so on. That's based on reality, not on what the LAW defines.
I very very strongly object to the argument that the LAW defines some people
as homeschoolers and other people as not homeschoolers and that we should all
support that definition. It flies in the face of reality and requires us to
deny our own observations. There are radical unschoolers who are enrolled in
public school programs - and there are people in Washington State telling
THEM that they don't have the right to call themselves real homeschoolers.
I find it disheartening that there are homeschoolers who so adamantly
continue to argue that we should all call ourselves exactly what the
government says we should call ourselves without giving any consideration to
what people are REALLY doing. WHY should we let the law define who is and who
isn't a real homeschooler? I'm discouraged that people don't think about the
further ramifications of that kind of thinking.
I think I've already repeated myself on this too much on this already and I'm
sure it is getting tedious and I promise I will resist doing it again if I
have nothing new to say <G>.
--pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
You are defining something as "not homeschooling" because of the reality of
the way it works - saying it isn't homeschooling because it involves being at
the center and doing what the teachers say the way they say to do it and so
on and doesn't allow the freedom to do things their own way.
I don't have any problem with saying that isn't homeschooling. I'd have no
problem saying, "I don't think people enrolled in 'The Learning Center' are
really homeschooling. They're really more in school than out."
I'm saying that just being signed up for a public school program doesn't mean
that that is the way it will be. There are many different kinds of public
school programs and that includes the AEPs in Washingington. Some are MUCH
looser than many private cover schools. There are public school programs that
encourage unschooling - I once went to an excellent workshop that ENCOURAGED
unschooling at our county's public school program. There are public school
programs where people only see somebody from that program once a year or
twice a year or every three months or even never at all. There are public
school programs where they have drop-in centers that offer workshops and the
people can use them or not, as they wish. There are a b'zillion different
kinds of programs.
So - if you want to look at what one family is doing or what one particular
program requires, and say "That isn't really homeschooling," based on what
they are REALLY doing -- fine. But these people in Washington are insisting
that it is "in black and white" and we should all just accept what the law
says. They aren't looking at what people are really doing, individually. They
aren't interested in the difference between different programs. They are just
saying that their LAW distinguishes between families in AEPs versus "real"
homeschoolers and they want to keep that distinction and they get extremely
heated up over it when people aren't willing to maintain that distinction.
There are people in that state who have really been hurt and driven away from
the rest of the homeschooling community by this extremely rigid thinking
which is repeated over and over.
I've been in a public school program and I was just as much a homeschooler
then as I am now. We started unschooling while in a public school program,
after experimenting with doing unit studies for a while. We saw the program
staff person ONCE, when we signed up. They didn't tell us what to do, they
offered materials and workshops and some field trips and a park day, that we
could use IF we wanted to use them. We have board members of the National
Home Education Network who are in public school programs and they are not
only homeschooling, they are unschoolers. Shall we kick them off the board,
telling them they aren't "real homeschoolers" because they're enrolled in a
public school program?
Nichoel, I've been involved in this discussion for the past 6 years and I've
read all the statutes. In fact, by quoting all the statutes, you're just
emphasizing my point that you want to let the law define who is a
homeschooler. WHY would we homeschoolers want to let the government define
who is and who isn't a homeschooler? Some of the most prominent homeschoolers
in the State of Washington are underground and would not be called
homeschoolers according to your own statutes, in fact they'd technically be
called "criminals" since they are breaking the law. Do you insist that they
not call themselves homeschoolers since they aren't, legally, operating under
the actual homeschooling statutes?
I don't object to looking at the programs and talking about the problems with
them and the problems that could be created in the homeschooling community by
them and so on. I don't object to looking at a particular program and saying,
"It doesn't look like homeschooling to me when they have to be there and have
to work on somebody else's schedule and have to do what somebody else
requires," and so on. That's based on reality, not on what the LAW defines.
I very very strongly object to the argument that the LAW defines some people
as homeschoolers and other people as not homeschoolers and that we should all
support that definition. It flies in the face of reality and requires us to
deny our own observations. There are radical unschoolers who are enrolled in
public school programs - and there are people in Washington State telling
THEM that they don't have the right to call themselves real homeschoolers.
I find it disheartening that there are homeschoolers who so adamantly
continue to argue that we should all call ourselves exactly what the
government says we should call ourselves without giving any consideration to
what people are REALLY doing. WHY should we let the law define who is and who
isn't a real homeschooler? I'm discouraged that people don't think about the
further ramifications of that kind of thinking.
I think I've already repeated myself on this too much on this already and I'm
sure it is getting tedious and I promise I will resist doing it again if I
have nothing new to say <G>.
--pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Nichoel
Pam
And I do see your point, honestly I understand why on a case by case basis it is important to look at what the family does, however when it comes down to protecting the homeschooling laws as they sit now I'm on the other side of the fence from you on this issue it seems. I thank you for the conversation and the debate however, it really has brought up some interesting points that I will need to ponder my position on =)!
Nichoel
Fertility Friend Online Support Guide
Now you CAN conceive online..
www.fertilityfriend.com/sm/21749/
And I do see your point, honestly I understand why on a case by case basis it is important to look at what the family does, however when it comes down to protecting the homeschooling laws as they sit now I'm on the other side of the fence from you on this issue it seems. I thank you for the conversation and the debate however, it really has brought up some interesting points that I will need to ponder my position on =)!
Nichoel
Fertility Friend Online Support Guide
Now you CAN conceive online..
www.fertilityfriend.com/sm/21749/
----- Original Message -----
From: PSoroosh@...
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 9:34 AM
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] Digest Number 154
Sandra -
You are defining something as "not homeschooling" because of the reality of
the way it works - saying it isn't homeschooling because it involves being at
the center and doing what the teachers say the way they say to do it and so
on and doesn't allow the freedom to do things their own way.
I don't have any problem with saying that isn't homeschooling. I'd have no
problem saying, "I don't think people enrolled in 'The Learning Center' are
really homeschooling. They're really more in school than out."
I'm saying that just being signed up for a public school program doesn't mean
that that is the way it will be. There are many different kinds of public
school programs and that includes the AEPs in Washingington. Some are MUCH
looser than many private cover schools. There are public school programs that
encourage unschooling - I once went to an excellent workshop that ENCOURAGED
unschooling at our county's public school program. There are public school
programs where people only see somebody from that program once a year or
twice a year or every three months or even never at all. There are public
school programs where they have drop-in centers that offer workshops and the
people can use them or not, as they wish. There are a b'zillion different
kinds of programs.
So - if you want to look at what one family is doing or what one particular
program requires, and say "That isn't really homeschooling," based on what
they are REALLY doing -- fine. But these people in Washington are insisting
that it is "in black and white" and we should all just accept what the law
says. They aren't looking at what people are really doing, individually. They
aren't interested in the difference between different programs. They are just
saying that their LAW distinguishes between families in AEPs versus "real"
homeschoolers and they want to keep that distinction and they get extremely
heated up over it when people aren't willing to maintain that distinction.
There are people in that state who have really been hurt and driven away from
the rest of the homeschooling community by this extremely rigid thinking
which is repeated over and over.
I've been in a public school program and I was just as much a homeschooler
then as I am now. We started unschooling while in a public school program,
after experimenting with doing unit studies for a while. We saw the program
staff person ONCE, when we signed up. They didn't tell us what to do, they
offered materials and workshops and some field trips and a park day, that we
could use IF we wanted to use them. We have board members of the National
Home Education Network who are in public school programs and they are not
only homeschooling, they are unschoolers. Shall we kick them off the board,
telling them they aren't "real homeschoolers" because they're enrolled in a
public school program?
Nichoel, I've been involved in this discussion for the past 6 years and I've
read all the statutes. In fact, by quoting all the statutes, you're just
emphasizing my point that you want to let the law define who is a
homeschooler. WHY would we homeschoolers want to let the government define
who is and who isn't a homeschooler? Some of the most prominent homeschoolers
in the State of Washington are underground and would not be called
homeschoolers according to your own statutes, in fact they'd technically be
called "criminals" since they are breaking the law. Do you insist that they
not call themselves homeschoolers since they aren't, legally, operating under
the actual homeschooling statutes?
I don't object to looking at the programs and talking about the problems with
them and the problems that could be created in the homeschooling community by
them and so on. I don't object to looking at a particular program and saying,
"It doesn't look like homeschooling to me when they have to be there and have
to work on somebody else's schedule and have to do what somebody else
requires," and so on. That's based on reality, not on what the LAW defines.
I very very strongly object to the argument that the LAW defines some people
as homeschoolers and other people as not homeschoolers and that we should all
support that definition. It flies in the face of reality and requires us to
deny our own observations. There are radical unschoolers who are enrolled in
public school programs - and there are people in Washington State telling
THEM that they don't have the right to call themselves real homeschoolers.
I find it disheartening that there are homeschoolers who so adamantly
continue to argue that we should all call ourselves exactly what the
government says we should call ourselves without giving any consideration to
what people are REALLY doing. WHY should we let the law define who is and who
isn't a real homeschooler? I'm discouraged that people don't think about the
further ramifications of that kind of thinking.
I think I've already repeated myself on this too much on this already and I'm
sure it is getting tedious and I promise I will resist doing it again if I
have nothing new to say <G>.
--pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]