Re : [AlwaysLearning] Re: interesting issue; please advise
Valentine
I dont' have this book anymore but i really disliked what they said about natural consequences, which for me were not natural at all.
Also, at some point, they give some advice to make things easier at the supermarket, and if it does not work and the kid still does not "behave" (they don't use this term I guess), then he's not allowed to come along the next time.
I wish i still had the book to be more precise. Someone remembers that?
It really is not about choices for me.
Asking a kid who does not want to go outside whether she wants to wear the red or blue jacket is not giving her real choices as we've decided to go anyway.
And it's not the same as saying "well, i'm sorry honey but i don't want to cancel this appointment (or whatever) and we're going anyway but look i have your great spiderman jacket, and you can take your nintendo and still be playing in the car, or but i've got a new book you're going to love waiting for you in the car or whatever.
And it's not the same as getting used to giving more and more choices to your kid.
Parents are not encouraged to rethink their "have tos" and to be honest and authentic with their kids. Maybe, it's no big deal, maybe it's still better than what they were doing before reading the book.
The problem i've noticed around me (our local attachment parenting was really fond of these books) is that parents believe they're being very respectful and they don't understand why their kids are still reluctant to do those things, have a lot of crisis... and they kind of blame the kids.
I believe it can be as harmful as nvc but maybe i'm wrong. I read it a long time ago.
Valentine
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Also, at some point, they give some advice to make things easier at the supermarket, and if it does not work and the kid still does not "behave" (they don't use this term I guess), then he's not allowed to come along the next time.
I wish i still had the book to be more precise. Someone remembers that?
It really is not about choices for me.
Asking a kid who does not want to go outside whether she wants to wear the red or blue jacket is not giving her real choices as we've decided to go anyway.
And it's not the same as saying "well, i'm sorry honey but i don't want to cancel this appointment (or whatever) and we're going anyway but look i have your great spiderman jacket, and you can take your nintendo and still be playing in the car, or but i've got a new book you're going to love waiting for you in the car or whatever.
And it's not the same as getting used to giving more and more choices to your kid.
Parents are not encouraged to rethink their "have tos" and to be honest and authentic with their kids. Maybe, it's no big deal, maybe it's still better than what they were doing before reading the book.
The problem i've noticed around me (our local attachment parenting was really fond of these books) is that parents believe they're being very respectful and they don't understand why their kids are still reluctant to do those things, have a lot of crisis... and they kind of blame the kids.
I believe it can be as harmful as nvc but maybe i'm wrong. I read it a long time ago.
Valentine
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-Also, at some point, they give some advice to make things easier at
the supermarket, and if it does not work and the kid still does not
"behave" (they don't use this term I guess), then he's not allowed to
come along the next time. =-
I'm not defending the book, I'm questioning the point.
Would you take a child to a store regardless of how he behaved in a
store? If so, are there no natural consequences?
I'm not talking about created punishments. I'm suggesting that there
is a purpose to going to the store. Sometimes there's time and mood
and energy to make the store a great museum of exploration. Sometimes
there's only time for the mom to sing and talk and entertain the child
to get through quickly. Sometimes someone needs medicine or
ingredients for a meal or a baking project or something and there's no
time at all for entertainment and learning. There can't be one set of
rules that apply to every visit to every store without any other
factors.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
the supermarket, and if it does not work and the kid still does not
"behave" (they don't use this term I guess), then he's not allowed to
come along the next time. =-
I'm not defending the book, I'm questioning the point.
Would you take a child to a store regardless of how he behaved in a
store? If so, are there no natural consequences?
I'm not talking about created punishments. I'm suggesting that there
is a purpose to going to the store. Sometimes there's time and mood
and energy to make the store a great museum of exploration. Sometimes
there's only time for the mom to sing and talk and entertain the child
to get through quickly. Sometimes someone needs medicine or
ingredients for a meal or a baking project or something and there's no
time at all for entertainment and learning. There can't be one set of
rules that apply to every visit to every store without any other
factors.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Joyce Fetteroll
On Dec 4, 2009, at 6:54 PM, Valentine wrote:
Talk" *and* unschooling advice. You referring to people who are
trying to build their own understanding of respect from "How to Talk"
and attachment parenting.
I've read so many stories of people who started out with attachment
parenting who go onto controlling their kids. While attachment
parenting is great for babies, it's also in many ways appealing to
parents who want to be the one creating the world their children live
in. A parent who will want their child to only have healthy food and
healthy activities (no TV or video games or pretend guns) is also
likely to be drawn to wearing their child. The parent building a wall
around their home to keep out the stuff the parent doesn't want and
let in only the stuff the parent does want is just creating a bigger
Snuggly.
No one in the 14 years I've been reading unschooling posts has anyone
ever said "But in 'How to Talk' they suggested x and now you say
that's disrespectful ..." I suspect because it's totally obvious that
the book isn't about unschooling. The kids in it are going to school!
So it's obvious from the first page that some of it needs ignored. I
trust -- and there's no evidence to the contrary from people telling
us they were confused -- that people will be drawn to the advice that
meshes with what's said here and will reject the advice that sounds
like what they're trying to get rid of.
There's lots of speculation and guessing going on in this thread
about whether the book interferes or not with those who are already
sucking in information about unschooling. As a still undecided
unschooler 14 years ago, it helped me. A couple of others said it
helped them.
But *is* there anyone reading here who felt "How to Talk" got them
totally off base and they wish they hadn't read it?
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> The problem i've noticed around me (our local attachment parentingOh, so you're not referring to new unschoolers who are using "How to
> was really fond of these books) is that parents believe they're
> being very respectful and they don't understand why their kids are
> still reluctant to do those things, have a lot of crisis... and
> they kind of blame the kids.
Talk" *and* unschooling advice. You referring to people who are
trying to build their own understanding of respect from "How to Talk"
and attachment parenting.
I've read so many stories of people who started out with attachment
parenting who go onto controlling their kids. While attachment
parenting is great for babies, it's also in many ways appealing to
parents who want to be the one creating the world their children live
in. A parent who will want their child to only have healthy food and
healthy activities (no TV or video games or pretend guns) is also
likely to be drawn to wearing their child. The parent building a wall
around their home to keep out the stuff the parent doesn't want and
let in only the stuff the parent does want is just creating a bigger
Snuggly.
No one in the 14 years I've been reading unschooling posts has anyone
ever said "But in 'How to Talk' they suggested x and now you say
that's disrespectful ..." I suspect because it's totally obvious that
the book isn't about unschooling. The kids in it are going to school!
So it's obvious from the first page that some of it needs ignored. I
trust -- and there's no evidence to the contrary from people telling
us they were confused -- that people will be drawn to the advice that
meshes with what's said here and will reject the advice that sounds
like what they're trying to get rid of.
There's lots of speculation and guessing going on in this thread
about whether the book interferes or not with those who are already
sucking in information about unschooling. As a still undecided
unschooler 14 years ago, it helped me. A couple of others said it
helped them.
But *is* there anyone reading here who felt "How to Talk" got them
totally off base and they wish they hadn't read it?
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-I've read so many stories of people who started out with attachment
parenting who go onto controlling their kids. While attachment
parenting is great for babies, it's also in many ways appealing to
parents who want to be the one creating the world their children live
in.-=-
I have many sad stories I just never tell about the families we knew
when La Leche League was our main social world and source of
inspiration. Some of the greatest parents of infants seem, in
retrospect, to have treated those days as an innoculation against any
future problems. It doesn't work that way. It's probably better to
have been parented gently and generously, but if those sweet parents
then send a child to school and show surprise that the child isn't
better than other kids forever because of the enriched first few
years, it can make those children particularly frustrated. If a
mother shows that she knows, for sure, how to be attentive and then as
though an alarm went off and her mother days are at a close she sends
them off, it does send mixed messages.
Of those families I knew in those days, a dozen to twenty families,
three are still intact. I was never a leader. I'm still married.
Lori Odhner is still married, and is running marriage enrichment
workshops or retreats in Pennsylvania. Dorothy Kerwin is still
married. She wasn't a leader either. (Lori was.)
Somewhere in there, those other families came apart. One was a
homeschooling (unschooling, mostly) family, but the others ended up
having kids in school, and parents separated for various reasons.
Alcoholic airline pilot husband. Alcohol. Frustration and violence.
Meanness and negativity. Promiscuity combined with sarcasm that
crushed the souls of mates first and children after.
There's no one book that advises on all those topics. People do need
to find the information they need, whether from other people, movies,
websites, books, organizations, therapists, counsellors... No one
can provide a single book or website that will cover all of those
aspects, though I've kinda tried to. <g>
Here's a reminder of something about my website, Joyce's, anyone
else's, and everyone's: Each person who comes there reads different
things, in different orders, with her own eyes and her own mind and
her own experiences to color the way it's perceived. Some are coming
to relax into learning. Some are coming to reassure themselves that
unschooling is stupid. Some are distraught and can hardly take in any
ideas at all. Some misread. No one will read it all. No two will
read it the same way.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
parenting who go onto controlling their kids. While attachment
parenting is great for babies, it's also in many ways appealing to
parents who want to be the one creating the world their children live
in.-=-
I have many sad stories I just never tell about the families we knew
when La Leche League was our main social world and source of
inspiration. Some of the greatest parents of infants seem, in
retrospect, to have treated those days as an innoculation against any
future problems. It doesn't work that way. It's probably better to
have been parented gently and generously, but if those sweet parents
then send a child to school and show surprise that the child isn't
better than other kids forever because of the enriched first few
years, it can make those children particularly frustrated. If a
mother shows that she knows, for sure, how to be attentive and then as
though an alarm went off and her mother days are at a close she sends
them off, it does send mixed messages.
Of those families I knew in those days, a dozen to twenty families,
three are still intact. I was never a leader. I'm still married.
Lori Odhner is still married, and is running marriage enrichment
workshops or retreats in Pennsylvania. Dorothy Kerwin is still
married. She wasn't a leader either. (Lori was.)
Somewhere in there, those other families came apart. One was a
homeschooling (unschooling, mostly) family, but the others ended up
having kids in school, and parents separated for various reasons.
Alcoholic airline pilot husband. Alcohol. Frustration and violence.
Meanness and negativity. Promiscuity combined with sarcasm that
crushed the souls of mates first and children after.
There's no one book that advises on all those topics. People do need
to find the information they need, whether from other people, movies,
websites, books, organizations, therapists, counsellors... No one
can provide a single book or website that will cover all of those
aspects, though I've kinda tried to. <g>
Here's a reminder of something about my website, Joyce's, anyone
else's, and everyone's: Each person who comes there reads different
things, in different orders, with her own eyes and her own mind and
her own experiences to color the way it's perceived. Some are coming
to relax into learning. Some are coming to reassure themselves that
unschooling is stupid. Some are distraught and can hardly take in any
ideas at all. Some misread. No one will read it all. No two will
read it the same way.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Anne Mills
But *is* there anyone reading here who felt "How to Talk" got them totally off base and they wish they hadn't read it?
------Me !It messed a lot with my head as I though ''jee, talking naturally to my child is not the way to go'' and ''this doctotr in psychology wants me to say to my child ''it is ok to be angry ...'' and I could not get why suddenly my child was being FURIOUS;i STOPPED communicating and trusting him - my child- and started burry in the book to find a way to shut my bubbly child and have him LISTEN INSTEAD.
This book is toxic in my humble opinion.
Anne
To: [email protected]
From: jfetteroll@...
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 06:04:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Re : [AlwaysLearning] Re: interesting issue; please advise
------Me !It messed a lot with my head as I though ''jee, talking naturally to my child is not the way to go'' and ''this doctotr in psychology wants me to say to my child ''it is ok to be angry ...'' and I could not get why suddenly my child was being FURIOUS;i STOPPED communicating and trusting him - my child- and started burry in the book to find a way to shut my bubbly child and have him LISTEN INSTEAD.
This book is toxic in my humble opinion.
Anne
To: [email protected]
From: jfetteroll@...
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 06:04:07 -0500
Subject: Re: Re : [AlwaysLearning] Re: interesting issue; please advise
On Dec 4, 2009, at 6:54 PM, Valentine wrote:
> The problem i've noticed around me (our local attachment parenting
> was really fond of these books) is that parents believe they're
> being very respectful and they don't understand why their kids are
> still reluctant to do those things, have a lot of crisis... and
> they kind of blame the kids.
Oh, so you're not referring to new unschoolers who are using "How to
Talk" *and* unschooling advice. You referring to people who are
trying to build their own understanding of respect from "How to Talk"
and attachment parenting.
I've read so many stories of people who started out with attachment
parenting who go onto controlling their kids. While attachment
parenting is great for babies, it's also in many ways appealing to
parents who want to be the one creating the world their children live
in. A parent who will want their child to only have healthy food and
healthy activities (no TV or video games or pretend guns) is also
likely to be drawn to wearing their child. The parent building a wall
around their home to keep out the stuff the parent doesn't want and
let in only the stuff the parent does want is just creating a bigger
Snuggly.
No one in the 14 years I've been reading unschooling posts has anyone
ever said "But in 'How to Talk' they suggested x and now you say
that's disrespectful ..." I suspect because it's totally obvious that
the book isn't about unschooling. The kids in it are going to school!
So it's obvious from the first page that some of it needs ignored. I
trust -- and there's no evidence to the contrary from people telling
us they were confused -- that people will be drawn to the advice that
meshes with what's said here and will reject the advice that sounds
like what they're trying to get rid of.
There's lots of speculation and guessing going on in this thread
about whether the book interferes or not with those who are already
sucking in information about unschooling. As a still undecided
unschooler 14 years ago, it helped me. A couple of others said it
helped them.
But *is* there anyone reading here who felt "How to Talk" got them
totally off base and they wish they hadn't read it?
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
_________________________________________________________________
Tchattez en direct en en vid�o avec vos amis !
http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-But *is* there anyone reading here who felt "How to Talk" got them
totally off base and they wish they hadn't read it?-=-
I've never spoken in scripts to my child. If a book suggested saying
"It's okay to be frustrated" or "I know younger siblings can be a
pain," I said it in my own voice, in my own way, not in a parrot
voice, not in a poodle voice.
I have heard parents absolutely BOTCH the entire communicative
process, both in coldhearted mean ways and in mincingly irritating
falsely sweet and clueless ways.
I can't see how anything on that page is suggesting anything at all
like that. Is someone on another list (apparently in France?)
suggesting that I think that is a book to live by or what?
Look:
http://sandradodd.com/siblings
After EIGHT links to unschooling information by and for unschoolers
(each of which leads to other pages), at the very bottom of the page
it says this:
From outside the unschooling realm, consider this: Siblings Without
Rivalry, by Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish.
--------------------
IF a person wants something above and beyond those eight links, then
that book might give them another perspective and the perspective of
people who aren't unschoolers.
Nothing has ever gotten me totally off base because I've always read
and thought and looked at my kids and thought some more, and read
other things, talked to people, discussed things... how could one
single source get a person totally off base unless that was the
person's starting place and the person thought one book could be *it*?
I love Whole Child, Whole Parent, but when she said TV was evil, I
didn't repeat mindless-zombie-style "TV is Evil." I figured she
meant if you're maintaining a designer-spiritual-pastel baby house,
then TV won't go with the other decor. The friends who will be
impressed with your hand-carved toys won't be impressed with Mr.
Roger's Neighborhood. By the time I read that book, though, I had
friends who were impressed with music, art, research, history and my
own ability to reason, and so whether or not I had a TV wasn't going
to make me any friends nor lose me any friends. Anyone who wants to
shun me or my kids because we watch TV sometimes can get the hell out
of my house. I don't care.
John Holt disparaged TV, though it's kinda hypocritical since the
inspiration for the term "unschooling" came from a TV commercial. <g>
http://sandradodd.com/unschool/theterm
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
totally off base and they wish they hadn't read it?-=-
I've never spoken in scripts to my child. If a book suggested saying
"It's okay to be frustrated" or "I know younger siblings can be a
pain," I said it in my own voice, in my own way, not in a parrot
voice, not in a poodle voice.
I have heard parents absolutely BOTCH the entire communicative
process, both in coldhearted mean ways and in mincingly irritating
falsely sweet and clueless ways.
I can't see how anything on that page is suggesting anything at all
like that. Is someone on another list (apparently in France?)
suggesting that I think that is a book to live by or what?
Look:
http://sandradodd.com/siblings
After EIGHT links to unschooling information by and for unschoolers
(each of which leads to other pages), at the very bottom of the page
it says this:
From outside the unschooling realm, consider this: Siblings Without
Rivalry, by Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish.
--------------------
IF a person wants something above and beyond those eight links, then
that book might give them another perspective and the perspective of
people who aren't unschoolers.
Nothing has ever gotten me totally off base because I've always read
and thought and looked at my kids and thought some more, and read
other things, talked to people, discussed things... how could one
single source get a person totally off base unless that was the
person's starting place and the person thought one book could be *it*?
I love Whole Child, Whole Parent, but when she said TV was evil, I
didn't repeat mindless-zombie-style "TV is Evil." I figured she
meant if you're maintaining a designer-spiritual-pastel baby house,
then TV won't go with the other decor. The friends who will be
impressed with your hand-carved toys won't be impressed with Mr.
Roger's Neighborhood. By the time I read that book, though, I had
friends who were impressed with music, art, research, history and my
own ability to reason, and so whether or not I had a TV wasn't going
to make me any friends nor lose me any friends. Anyone who wants to
shun me or my kids because we watch TV sometimes can get the hell out
of my house. I don't care.
John Holt disparaged TV, though it's kinda hypocritical since the
inspiration for the term "unschooling" came from a TV commercial. <g>
http://sandradodd.com/unschool/theterm
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Joyce Fetteroll
On Dec 5, 2009, at 1:51 PM, Anne Mills wrote:
potential to be toxic.
And that's what makes helping people understand unschooling
difficult. Many people come asking for what to do. The want new
"unschooling" actions to replace old actions. But unschooling doesn't
work like that. It's about listening to and trusting your kids, not
other people. But to unlearn how to override kids, you need to listen
to other people ;-) Unfortunately schools are good at impressing on
kids that they need to sit down, shut up and listen to learn. So
people bring lots of baggage with them to learning about unschooling
and the transition can be rough.
Sorry you went through that.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> It messed a lot with my head as I though ''jee, talking naturallyIf someone is looking for new rules, just about any book has the
> to my child is not the way to go'' and ''this doctotr in psychology
> wants me to say to my child ''it is ok to be angry ...'' and I
> could not get why suddenly my child was being FURIOUS;i STOPPED
> communicating and trusting him - my child- and started burry in the
> book to find a way to shut my bubbly child and have him LISTEN
> INSTEAD.
potential to be toxic.
And that's what makes helping people understand unschooling
difficult. Many people come asking for what to do. The want new
"unschooling" actions to replace old actions. But unschooling doesn't
work like that. It's about listening to and trusting your kids, not
other people. But to unlearn how to override kids, you need to listen
to other people ;-) Unfortunately schools are good at impressing on
kids that they need to sit down, shut up and listen to learn. So
people bring lots of baggage with them to learning about unschooling
and the transition can be rough.
Sorry you went through that.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Valentine
It's not that I don't want to discuss it, it's that there's no
It was my post sandra was talking about! Sorry for that.
In French, this passage sounds terrible (to me at least!) and after the talk about faber and mazlich, i was just wondering if it could be a problem of translation.
Also, in our local parenting group which became a homeschooling group, rosenberg, gordon, and faber and mazlich were of great influence.
At first, this influence seemed really positive but now i can say it's been more negative than anything else.
It would be very long to describe but it's like it complicated everything. It was really disempowering as it gave the impression we needed a method to do better. It was also recommended to follow workshops.
I know it's what we made of the books and it does not necessarily mean the books are awful.
But it's weird that people can spend a lot of energy defending these books even though their family life is far from peaceful. And they say "well, it's just that I can't apply properly what the authors say but NVC is still a great thing", or they don't even realize things can be simpler, more peaceful.
Reading Rue Kream, John Holt, and Sandra Dodd has really been great for me so I tell friends about it and lend them the books (and I wish your books were translated into French Sandra). But if they don't like it, no big deal, I'm not going to argue and try to convince them. I just know how it helped me and how life is so much better right now. It's all that counts.
If somebody thinks NVC or another book helped having a better relationships with their children, good for them. But why defend these books if you don't like that much your life with your kids, if your kids do not look very happy, if they're not peaceful, if many aspects of your life are complicated...? It's mystery to me.
And it does not affect my life right now but it did affect it because people kept using these books, promoting it without saying (or not realizing?) it had done no real good in their lifes. I found out that later when I got to know them better.
I was lucky enough to be told about Sandra's website quite early, and lucky to read English too. Unfortunately, a lot of parents I know can't read English.
I realized things could be simple, not always easy but so much simpler. I enjoyed more and more my life with my kids, and (re)discovered it could be fun to learn. I'll always remember one of the first advice that went right through my heart and started it all, it was something called "it only takes a second to Do better" on the parenting peacefully page. Waouh, so simple, so true. I turned off the computer and went to play with my son and from this point never (almost!) said "hold on" when he wanted to show me something and I was on the computer (hold on! i'm talking about being respectful to you and having a great life together on the computer! It's more important than going to see the great tower you've just built and you want to show me!!!!!!!!!!)
Sorry for this very long and confused message, it will be my last one for a while because it takes me too much time to write in English and my kids are still very young and need me A LOT. But I will keep reading you (and your books, and your blogs and websites) at night when they are asleep. I enjoy it so much.
Valentine
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> advantage to someone bringing a quote from a book that's never
> recommended for unschoolers and asking us what we think. I neither
> want to critique nor defend passages from books.
>
> Sandra
It was my post sandra was talking about! Sorry for that.
In French, this passage sounds terrible (to me at least!) and after the talk about faber and mazlich, i was just wondering if it could be a problem of translation.
Also, in our local parenting group which became a homeschooling group, rosenberg, gordon, and faber and mazlich were of great influence.
At first, this influence seemed really positive but now i can say it's been more negative than anything else.
It would be very long to describe but it's like it complicated everything. It was really disempowering as it gave the impression we needed a method to do better. It was also recommended to follow workshops.
I know it's what we made of the books and it does not necessarily mean the books are awful.
But it's weird that people can spend a lot of energy defending these books even though their family life is far from peaceful. And they say "well, it's just that I can't apply properly what the authors say but NVC is still a great thing", or they don't even realize things can be simpler, more peaceful.
Reading Rue Kream, John Holt, and Sandra Dodd has really been great for me so I tell friends about it and lend them the books (and I wish your books were translated into French Sandra). But if they don't like it, no big deal, I'm not going to argue and try to convince them. I just know how it helped me and how life is so much better right now. It's all that counts.
If somebody thinks NVC or another book helped having a better relationships with their children, good for them. But why defend these books if you don't like that much your life with your kids, if your kids do not look very happy, if they're not peaceful, if many aspects of your life are complicated...? It's mystery to me.
And it does not affect my life right now but it did affect it because people kept using these books, promoting it without saying (or not realizing?) it had done no real good in their lifes. I found out that later when I got to know them better.
I was lucky enough to be told about Sandra's website quite early, and lucky to read English too. Unfortunately, a lot of parents I know can't read English.
I realized things could be simple, not always easy but so much simpler. I enjoyed more and more my life with my kids, and (re)discovered it could be fun to learn. I'll always remember one of the first advice that went right through my heart and started it all, it was something called "it only takes a second to Do better" on the parenting peacefully page. Waouh, so simple, so true. I turned off the computer and went to play with my son and from this point never (almost!) said "hold on" when he wanted to show me something and I was on the computer (hold on! i'm talking about being respectful to you and having a great life together on the computer! It's more important than going to see the great tower you've just built and you want to show me!!!!!!!!!!)
Sorry for this very long and confused message, it will be my last one for a while because it takes me too much time to write in English and my kids are still very young and need me A LOT. But I will keep reading you (and your books, and your blogs and websites) at night when they are asleep. I enjoy it so much.
Valentine
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Bea
--- In [email protected], Valentine <matsacha33@...> wrote:
Being French myself, I think there is even more of a need for deschooling in France than there is in the US. Schools in France are even more about rote memorization and "do as you are told" than in the English speaking world. My husband, who is German, went to university (ecole de commerce, actually, for those who understand the system) in France and was appalled that there was no dialog in class, the French students never questioned what the prof said. I think that might be why French parents feel like they need to do exactly what a book says must be done, without thinking much about how and where it applies to their real life and children.
Bea
>A lot of people do not realize their lives are complicated, not peaceful, etc. Also, a lot of people's lives would be even worse without those books ;-)
> If somebody thinks NVC or another book helped�having a better relationships with their children, good for them. But why defend these books if you don't like that much your life with your kids, if your kids do not look very happy, if they're not peaceful, if many aspects of your life are complicated...? It's mystery�to me.
> �
>
Being French myself, I think there is even more of a need for deschooling in France than there is in the US. Schools in France are even more about rote memorization and "do as you are told" than in the English speaking world. My husband, who is German, went to university (ecole de commerce, actually, for those who understand the system) in France and was appalled that there was no dialog in class, the French students never questioned what the prof said. I think that might be why French parents feel like they need to do exactly what a book says must be done, without thinking much about how and where it applies to their real life and children.
Bea
Sandra Dodd
-=- My husband, who is German, went to university (ecole de commerce,
actually, for those who understand the system) in France and was
appalled that there was no dialog in class, the French students never
questioned what the prof said. I think that might be why French
parents feel like they need to do exactly what a book says must be
done, without thinking much about how and where it applies to their
real life and children.-=-
The whole purpose of a discussion list like this is to really examine
ideas from all angles, and to tweak and improve them when we can, and
to find the exceptions.
In a discussion like these on AlwaysLearning, each person who's
interested in any thread can learn things to connect to what he or she
is already thinking or knowing, or can look at it as "Good. Knew
that." or "Confirms what I thought," and that's learning too; it's
reinforcement of belief, maybe.
I didn't write a "how to" about unschooling because there isn't a how
to that doesn't involve the reader/unschooler and what she knows,
likes and does. We can't tell anyone how to unschool, we can only
help them become the kind of people who can be unschooling parents.
If ANY other club, method or belief system has given an individual
parent tools she or he can use to be a better unschooling parent,
that's great. Some people remember one particular teacher who was
patient and enthusiastic and sometimes they try to be that way with
their kids. Some people remember a great summer where they learned a
lot about nature, and they try to work some of those opportunities
in. That's why people say "unschooling is different in every
family." Or that's why they should say it. <bwg> Sometimes they say
it to justify lazy, lame parenting.
So where was I? Sorry.
If Bea's right and there is a tradition in France of choosing a
professor/teacher/leader and then following his advice to the letter,
then I can see why they would villify some books and glorify others.
And if a group has moved from one extreme to another, the desire to
jettison the name of the old group, their meeting place, all their
books and their team colors might be natural, but it might not be
healthy.
If I'm playing American football (anyone who knows me knows I'm not,
and haven't since we were little kids playing flag football in the
yard at with the neighbors)... if I'm playing football and I abruptly
change sports and decide to play rugby, a lot of things will be
different. But if I am in a reactionary mode and say EVERYthing is
different now, and I say "football players drink water between plays,
and I'm not a football player, so I'm not going to drink water," or
"football players do this particular stretch before they play, and I'm
playing a different sport now, so I will never do that stretch again,"
that's being reactionary rather than rational. That's being emotional
rather than logical.
I've seen unschoolers declare with feeling that their kids will NEVER
have to learn/do/be this or that that the parents associated with
school. Standing in line, or taking a test, or being with kids they
don't like. But the parents have gone too far sometimes. One mother
said that critical thinking was something they taught in school, and
she was really angry that she had been asked to think critically about
things in a homeschooling forum.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
actually, for those who understand the system) in France and was
appalled that there was no dialog in class, the French students never
questioned what the prof said. I think that might be why French
parents feel like they need to do exactly what a book says must be
done, without thinking much about how and where it applies to their
real life and children.-=-
The whole purpose of a discussion list like this is to really examine
ideas from all angles, and to tweak and improve them when we can, and
to find the exceptions.
In a discussion like these on AlwaysLearning, each person who's
interested in any thread can learn things to connect to what he or she
is already thinking or knowing, or can look at it as "Good. Knew
that." or "Confirms what I thought," and that's learning too; it's
reinforcement of belief, maybe.
I didn't write a "how to" about unschooling because there isn't a how
to that doesn't involve the reader/unschooler and what she knows,
likes and does. We can't tell anyone how to unschool, we can only
help them become the kind of people who can be unschooling parents.
If ANY other club, method or belief system has given an individual
parent tools she or he can use to be a better unschooling parent,
that's great. Some people remember one particular teacher who was
patient and enthusiastic and sometimes they try to be that way with
their kids. Some people remember a great summer where they learned a
lot about nature, and they try to work some of those opportunities
in. That's why people say "unschooling is different in every
family." Or that's why they should say it. <bwg> Sometimes they say
it to justify lazy, lame parenting.
So where was I? Sorry.
If Bea's right and there is a tradition in France of choosing a
professor/teacher/leader and then following his advice to the letter,
then I can see why they would villify some books and glorify others.
And if a group has moved from one extreme to another, the desire to
jettison the name of the old group, their meeting place, all their
books and their team colors might be natural, but it might not be
healthy.
If I'm playing American football (anyone who knows me knows I'm not,
and haven't since we were little kids playing flag football in the
yard at with the neighbors)... if I'm playing football and I abruptly
change sports and decide to play rugby, a lot of things will be
different. But if I am in a reactionary mode and say EVERYthing is
different now, and I say "football players drink water between plays,
and I'm not a football player, so I'm not going to drink water," or
"football players do this particular stretch before they play, and I'm
playing a different sport now, so I will never do that stretch again,"
that's being reactionary rather than rational. That's being emotional
rather than logical.
I've seen unschoolers declare with feeling that their kids will NEVER
have to learn/do/be this or that that the parents associated with
school. Standing in line, or taking a test, or being with kids they
don't like. But the parents have gone too far sometimes. One mother
said that critical thinking was something they taught in school, and
she was really angry that she had been asked to think critically about
things in a homeschooling forum.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]