John Taylor Gatto
Joyce Fetteroll
Someone wrote at Wikipedia on John Taylor Gatto's page:
"He promotes homeschooling, and specifically unschooling."
Does anyone know if that's true? (It's not attributed.) There's a page
of some of his talks:
http://tinyurl.com/2d9rqr
and they're all about schools which is what I assumed he spoke about.
I suppose by speaking at homeschooling and unschooling conferences,
that's promoting, but "specifically unschooling"? Does he limit his
homeschooling conferences to those that are pro-unschooling?
Joyce
"He promotes homeschooling, and specifically unschooling."
Does anyone know if that's true? (It's not attributed.) There's a page
of some of his talks:
http://tinyurl.com/2d9rqr
and they're all about schools which is what I assumed he spoke about.
I suppose by speaking at homeschooling and unschooling conferences,
that's promoting, but "specifically unschooling"? Does he limit his
homeschooling conferences to those that are pro-unschooling?
Joyce
Paula Sjogerman
I have heard him speak several times this year, and while his talks are oriented to major critiques of the schools, he is very outspoken in his support of homeschoolers, and unschoolers specifically.
Paula
Paula
On May 8, 2010, at 4:53 AM, Joyce Fetteroll wrote:
> Someone wrote at Wikipedia on John Taylor Gatto's page:
>
> "He promotes homeschooling, and specifically unschooling."
>
> Does anyone know if that's true? (It's not attributed.) There's a page
> of some of his talks:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2d9rqr
>
> and they're all about schools which is what I assumed he spoke about.
>
> I suppose by speaking at homeschooling and unschooling conferences,
> that's promoting, but "specifically unschooling"? Does he limit his
> homeschooling conferences to those that are pro-unschooling?
>
> Joyce
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Sandra Dodd
-=-I have heard him speak several times this year, and while his talks
are oriented to major critiques of the schools, he is very outspoken
in his support of homeschoolers, and unschoolers specifically.-=-
I've heard him speak several times over the years, and although it's
nice once to hear his stories of schools and why he quit teaching,
those who want to learn how to unschool aren't going to learn it from
him.
Perhaps the reason Joyce is asking is because of this discussion:
http://familyrun.ning.com/forum/topics/repeated-movietv-watchinghelp?xg_source=activity
in which someone posted:
-----------------
It seems to me this is one area where unschoolers and radical
unschoolers differ in opinion.
John Taylor Gatto, certainly a friend of unschooling, wrote
"Television destroys the power to think by providing pre-seen sights,
pre-thought thoughts, and unwholesome fantasies." He didn't think it
was a very good idea at all.
----------------
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
are oriented to major critiques of the schools, he is very outspoken
in his support of homeschoolers, and unschoolers specifically.-=-
I've heard him speak several times over the years, and although it's
nice once to hear his stories of schools and why he quit teaching,
those who want to learn how to unschool aren't going to learn it from
him.
Perhaps the reason Joyce is asking is because of this discussion:
http://familyrun.ning.com/forum/topics/repeated-movietv-watchinghelp?xg_source=activity
in which someone posted:
-----------------
It seems to me this is one area where unschoolers and radical
unschoolers differ in opinion.
John Taylor Gatto, certainly a friend of unschooling, wrote
"Television destroys the power to think by providing pre-seen sights,
pre-thought thoughts, and unwholesome fantasies." He didn't think it
was a very good idea at all.
----------------
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Paula Sjogerman
On May 8, 2010, at 10:22 AM, Sandra Dodd wrote:
And it's good to check when he said what he's quoted as saying because his views on various things have shifted over the years.
Paula
> I've heard him speak several times over the years, and although it'sThat is definitely true. And that's good, because he's never been an unschooler. But I love to hear an old white man really give it to The System <g>.
> nice once to hear his stories of schools and why he quit teaching,
> those who want to learn how to unschool aren't going to learn it from
> him.
And it's good to check when he said what he's quoted as saying because his views on various things have shifted over the years.
Paula
Sandra Dodd
-=-And it's good to check when he said what he's quoted as saying
because his views on various things have shifted over the years.-=-
But they didn't shift from direct experience with unschooling
families, and the original statements weren't made because of direct
experience with unschooling, so it didn't seem like the best thing to
quote in a radical unschooling forum.
Some people don't understand that when questions are asked of other
unschoolers, the questioner has found a place like RUNning or this
list *because* they want the input of people with unschooling
experience. Quoting dubious experts or offering insipid "support"
aren't what people come for.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
because his views on various things have shifted over the years.-=-
But they didn't shift from direct experience with unschooling
families, and the original statements weren't made because of direct
experience with unschooling, so it didn't seem like the best thing to
quote in a radical unschooling forum.
Some people don't understand that when questions are asked of other
unschoolers, the questioner has found a place like RUNning or this
list *because* they want the input of people with unschooling
experience. Quoting dubious experts or offering insipid "support"
aren't what people come for.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Joyce Fetteroll
On May 8, 2010, at 11:22 AM, Sandra Dodd wrote:
removed from the discussion at RUN to ask there.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Perhaps the reason Joyce is asking is because of this discussion:Yes, it didn't just come out of the blue ;-) The question was a bit
removed from the discussion at RUN to ask there.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jenny Cyphers
***Someone wrote at Wikipedia on John Taylor Gatto's page:
"He promotes homeschooling, and specifically unschooling. "***
It seems that he will promote anything that is working against the school system at large. Unschooling and homeschooling both do that. This is what I found:
http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/learn-as-you-go/take-back-your-education/#1273065594"What Can You Do About All This? A lot.
You can make the system an offer it can’t refuse by doing small things, individually.
You can publicly oppose—in writing, in speech, in actions—anything that will perpetuate the institution as it is. The accumulated weight of your resistance and disapproval, together with that of thousands more, will erode the energy of any bureaucracy.
You can calmly refuse to take standardized tests. Follow the lead of Melville’s moral genius inBartleby, the Scrivener, and ask everyone, politely, to write: “I prefer not to take this test” on the face of the test packet.
You can, of course, homeschool or unschool. "
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
"He promotes homeschooling, and specifically unschooling. "***
It seems that he will promote anything that is working against the school system at large. Unschooling and homeschooling both do that. This is what I found:
http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/learn-as-you-go/take-back-your-education/#1273065594"What Can You Do About All This? A lot.
You can make the system an offer it can’t refuse by doing small things, individually.
You can publicly oppose—in writing, in speech, in actions—anything that will perpetuate the institution as it is. The accumulated weight of your resistance and disapproval, together with that of thousands more, will erode the energy of any bureaucracy.
You can calmly refuse to take standardized tests. Follow the lead of Melville’s moral genius inBartleby, the Scrivener, and ask everyone, politely, to write: “I prefer not to take this test” on the face of the test packet.
You can, of course, homeschool or unschool. "
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
emiLy Quick
Here's the thing, though. Does he have a better idea? Sure the school system sucks, but not everyone can homeschool. Not even close. Some sort of school/daycare system is necessary.
-emiLy
-emiLy
On May 8, 2010, at 2:16 PM, Jenny Cyphers wrote:
> ***Someone wrote at Wikipedia on John Taylor Gatto's page:
>
> "He promotes homeschooling, and specifically unschooling. "***
>
> It seems that he will promote anything that is working against the school system at large. Unschooling and homeschooling both do that. This is what I found:
alexandriapalonia
He does not limit his conferences to unschooling (though he was at UWWG this February); he'll be at the WHO Convention in WA this summer.
He does specifically champion unschooling as well as homeschooling (or at least, I've been in the room listening to him do so). His vision of both is closely aligned with Holt's.
:-)
Andrea
He does specifically champion unschooling as well as homeschooling (or at least, I've been in the room listening to him do so). His vision of both is closely aligned with Holt's.
:-)
Andrea
> I suppose by speaking at homeschooling and unschooling conferences,
> that's promoting, but "specifically unschooling"? Does he limit his
> homeschooling conferences to those that are pro-unschooling?
>
> Joyce
>
alexandriapalonia
Is it?
He argues after about 4 it really isn't necessary, and he makes a pretty strong case for undoing the infantilization of our society.
Andrea
He argues after about 4 it really isn't necessary, and he makes a pretty strong case for undoing the infantilization of our society.
Andrea
> Here's the thing, though. Does he have a better idea? Sure the school system sucks, but not everyone can homeschool. Not even close. Some sort of school/daycare system is necessary.
>
> -emiLy
> > ***Someone wrote at Wikipedia on John Taylor Gatto's page:
> >
> > "He promotes homeschooling, and specifically unschooling. "***
emiLy Quick
What about all the kids whose parents both work? They have to go somewhere. Does he think 5 year olds can stay home by themselves or with siblings? If he's expecting people to work together with their neighbors and communities, he's just living in some fantasy world because that is not going to happen.
The towns around me compete against each other for school enrollment. One town started all day every day kindergarten last year (instead of half day or 3 days a week) and got 5 kids from a neighboring town. 5 kids is a lot around here. :) Now THAT town announced it's going to all day every day kindergarten. I'm not sure all day every day kindergarten isn't better than half day or 3 days a week. Maybe at least with all day every day kindergarten, their parents make an effort to pick them up straight from school (or from the bus... or BE THERE when they walk home from the bus...) rather than wait until 5 or 5:30 to pick them up from daycare that they get bussed to mid-day.
-emiLy
The towns around me compete against each other for school enrollment. One town started all day every day kindergarten last year (instead of half day or 3 days a week) and got 5 kids from a neighboring town. 5 kids is a lot around here. :) Now THAT town announced it's going to all day every day kindergarten. I'm not sure all day every day kindergarten isn't better than half day or 3 days a week. Maybe at least with all day every day kindergarten, their parents make an effort to pick them up straight from school (or from the bus... or BE THERE when they walk home from the bus...) rather than wait until 5 or 5:30 to pick them up from daycare that they get bussed to mid-day.
-emiLy
On May 8, 2010, at 8:16 PM, alexandriapalonia wrote:
> Is it?
> He argues after about 4 it really isn't necessary, and he makes a pretty strong case for undoing the infantilization of our society.
> Andrea
>
>
>> Here's the thing, though. Does he have a better idea? Sure the school system sucks, but not everyone can homeschool. Not even close. Some sort of school/daycare system is necessary.
>>
>> -emiLy
>
>>> ***Someone wrote at Wikipedia on John Taylor Gatto's page:
>>>
>>> "He promotes homeschooling, and specifically unschooling. "***
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
Joyce Fetteroll
On May 8, 2010, at 9:16 PM, alexandriapalonia wrote:
to and can do it. Right now,psychologically and socially, that isn't
the case. There are parents who don't want to. There are parents who
want the pathway to a great college that school supposedly offers.
There are parents who don't think they are capable. There are parents
whose kids are much better off having that escape from them each day.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> Is it?Biologically it's unnecessary but homeschooling needs parents who want
> He argues after about 4 it really isn't necessary, and he makes a
> pretty strong case for undoing the infantilization of our society.
to and can do it. Right now,psychologically and socially, that isn't
the case. There are parents who don't want to. There are parents who
want the pathway to a great college that school supposedly offers.
There are parents who don't think they are capable. There are parents
whose kids are much better off having that escape from them each day.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
organicmom111
Having kids is a priority. Yes I used to work outside the home. Made a very good salary, and had a horrible crazy home life. I dont anymore. We reprioritized and put family over the dollar. If you make some life adjustments it is possible. Women need to get over the myth that you can have it all . You cant . If you work outside the home, your homelife will suffer. Yes there are single moms, and situations where you have to earn money. But there are also jobs that can be done from home, etc... . and there are also grandparents, and family that can babysit. The idea that we have a kid and now someone else needs to be responsible for it baffles me. We are not having a people shortage. If you dont know how you will possibly take care of or watch your child because your life is too busy and your plate is too full, dont have one. I know many people who think they are good parents that have no real relationship with their kids, spend hardly any time with them, and get by just skimming the surface in life. Sad for the kids ,and the future generations. If people truly thought they would have to raise and educate their own children, less people would probably have them.
Depending on the federal government to provide a place for your child to be, while you are elsewhere, is not acceptable.
Depending on the federal government to provide a place for your child to be, while you are elsewhere, is not acceptable.
--- In [email protected], emiLy Quick <emilyjo@...> wrote:
>
> What about all the kids whose parents both work? They have to go somewhere. Does he think 5 year olds can stay home by themselves or with siblings? If he's expecting people to work together with their neighbors and communities, he's just living in some fantasy world because that is not going to happen.
>
> The towns around me compete against each other for school enrollment. One town started all day every day kindergarten last year (instead of half day or 3 days a week) and got 5 kids from a neighboring town. 5 kids is a lot around here. :) Now THAT town announced it's going to all day every day kindergarten. I'm not sure all day every day kindergarten isn't better than half day or 3 days a week. Maybe at least with all day every day kindergarten, their parents make an effort to pick them up straight from school (or from the bus... or BE THERE when they walk home from the bus...) rather than wait until 5 or 5:30 to pick them up from daycare that they get bussed to mid-day.
>
> -emiLy
>
>
> On May 8, 2010, at 8:16 PM, alexandriapalonia wrote:
>
> > Is it?
> > He argues after about 4 it really isn't necessary, and he makes a pretty strong case for undoing the infantilization of our society.
> > Andrea
> >
> >
> >> Here's the thing, though. Does he have a better idea? Sure the school system sucks, but not everyone can homeschool. Not even close. Some sort of school/daycare system is necessary.
> >>
> >> -emiLy
> >
> >>> ***Someone wrote at Wikipedia on John Taylor Gatto's page:
> >>>
> >>> "He promotes homeschooling, and specifically unschooling. "***
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
threegirlmama
I don't know a lot about him as far as speaking at conferences, but I have just finished reading "Weapons of Mass Instruction" and I will say, as a new unschooler, his book definitely has helped me become more convinced that unschooling is the right path for our family. I think that if someone reads that book that perhaps never considered homeschooling as an option or looked at the world through anything but school colored lenses might come away from reading it with a much greater understanding for people who homeschool or if they chose to homeschool because of it they might skip right over "school at home" to unschooling. So while I wouldn't look to him as someone with experience with unschooling and I might not go out of my way to hear him speak, I believe that my journey into unschooling has benefitted from reading this particular book.
That being said, I did also recently read 3 of John Holt's books and Sandra's book and I look to seasoned unschoolers' websites and this list for continued wisdom. I can't seem to get enough of it these days.
That being said, I did also recently read 3 of John Holt's books and Sandra's book and I look to seasoned unschoolers' websites and this list for continued wisdom. I can't seem to get enough of it these days.
emiLy Quick
I don't really disagree with you. I work at home. My husband works at home. We unschool. It's awesome, it's definitely the best way to live. :)
But there are many parents who are unfit to unschool. Not just because they want to have a career. But because school actually does a better job taking care of their kids than they do.
WANTING to have a career and send your kids to school is not the worst thing ever.
I live this way, but I fully realize that not everyone can, or wants to.
My point is that improving the school system is a much better idea than abolishing it altogether. It would take a HUGE, and I think impossible, shift in our culture, to make school unnecessary. I'm not doing anything to improve the school system - that would take time away from my kids, family, my career. School will evolve to fit the needs of those who need it. It seems like that means more and more hours in school, more meals served, more academics earlier. That's what people who use school want.
-emiLy
But there are many parents who are unfit to unschool. Not just because they want to have a career. But because school actually does a better job taking care of their kids than they do.
WANTING to have a career and send your kids to school is not the worst thing ever.
I live this way, but I fully realize that not everyone can, or wants to.
My point is that improving the school system is a much better idea than abolishing it altogether. It would take a HUGE, and I think impossible, shift in our culture, to make school unnecessary. I'm not doing anything to improve the school system - that would take time away from my kids, family, my career. School will evolve to fit the needs of those who need it. It seems like that means more and more hours in school, more meals served, more academics earlier. That's what people who use school want.
-emiLy
On May 9, 2010, at 1:34 PM, organicmom111 wrote:
> Having kids is a priority. Yes I used to work outside the home. Made a very good salary, and had a horrible crazy home life. I dont anymore. We reprioritized and put family over the dollar. If you make some life adjustments it is possible. Women need to get over the myth that you can have it all . You cant . If you work outside the home, your homelife will suffer. Yes there are single moms, and situations where you have to earn money. But there are also jobs that can be done from home, etc... . and there are also grandparents, and family that can babysit. The idea that we have a kid and now someone else needs to be responsible for it baffles me. We are not having a people shortage. If you dont know how you will possibly take care of or watch your child because your life is too busy and your plate is too full, dont have one. I know many people who think they are good parents that have no real relationship with their kids, spend hardly any time with them, and get by just skimming the surface in life. Sad for the kids ,and the future generations. If people truly thought they would have to raise and educate their own children, less people would probably have them.
>
> Depending on the federal government to provide a place for your child to be, while you are elsewhere, is not acceptable.
>
>
> --- In [email protected], emiLy Quick <emilyjo@...> wrote:
>>
>> What about all the kids whose parents both work? They have to go somewhere. Does he think 5 year olds can stay home by themselves or with siblings? If he's expecting people to work together with their neighbors and communities, he's just living in some fantasy world because that is not going to happen.
>>
>> The towns around me compete against each other for school enrollment. One town started all day every day kindergarten last year (instead of half day or 3 days a week) and got 5 kids from a neighboring town. 5 kids is a lot around here. :) Now THAT town announced it's going to all day every day kindergarten. I'm not sure all day every day kindergarten isn't better than half day or 3 days a week. Maybe at least with all day every day kindergarten, their parents make an effort to pick them up straight from school (or from the bus... or BE THERE when they walk home from the bus...) rather than wait until 5 or 5:30 to pick them up from daycare that they get bussed to mid-day.
>>
>> -emiLy
>>
>>
>> On May 8, 2010, at 8:16 PM, alexandriapalonia wrote:
>>
>>> Is it?
>>> He argues after about 4 it really isn't necessary, and he makes a pretty strong case for undoing the infantilization of our society.
>>> Andrea
>>>
>>>
>>>> Here's the thing, though. Does he have a better idea? Sure the school system sucks, but not everyone can homeschool. Not even close. Some sort of school/daycare system is necessary.
>>>>
>>>> -emiLy
>>>
>>>>> ***Someone wrote at Wikipedia on John Taylor Gatto's page:
>>>>>
>>>>> "He promotes homeschooling, and specifically unschooling. "***
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
organicmom111
"But there are many parents who are unfit to unschool. Not just because they
want to have a career. But because school actually does a better job taking
care of their kids than they do."
I agree. Its sad but true. :)
and having a choice is always a good thing.
but more school hours and meals served just enables irresponible parents to do even less for their children. high school is where alot of these parents become parents, and it seems like an endless cycle of people who have no business being parents (at least yet), becoming parents. I doubt the teen preg rate for homeschoolers (if there even is one :) is near that of pschooled kids. Public school is causing societal problems as well.
but yes, there are those who would just ruin the homeschool thing. for sure. I just think at some point people have to be responsible, and unfortunately school doesnt prevent these parents from abuse and neglect. (and alot of school personell are child predators - see 101 reasons to homeschool)
We shouldnt create a monster federal government, that we are all subservient to , to deal with those who are unfit to be around their own children.
want to have a career. But because school actually does a better job taking
care of their kids than they do."
I agree. Its sad but true. :)
and having a choice is always a good thing.
but more school hours and meals served just enables irresponible parents to do even less for their children. high school is where alot of these parents become parents, and it seems like an endless cycle of people who have no business being parents (at least yet), becoming parents. I doubt the teen preg rate for homeschoolers (if there even is one :) is near that of pschooled kids. Public school is causing societal problems as well.
but yes, there are those who would just ruin the homeschool thing. for sure. I just think at some point people have to be responsible, and unfortunately school doesnt prevent these parents from abuse and neglect. (and alot of school personell are child predators - see 101 reasons to homeschool)
We shouldnt create a monster federal government, that we are all subservient to , to deal with those who are unfit to be around their own children.
--- In [email protected], emiLy Quick <emilyjo@...> wrote:
>
> I don't really disagree with you. I work at home. My husband works at home. We unschool. It's awesome, it's definitely the best way to live. :)
>
> But there are many parents who are unfit to unschool. Not just because they want to have a career. But because school actually does a better job taking care of their kids than they do.
>
> WANTING to have a career and send your kids to school is not the worst thing ever.
>
> I live this way, but I fully realize that not everyone can, or wants to.
>
> My point is that improving the school system is a much better idea than abolishing it altogether. It would take a HUGE, and I think impossible, shift in our culture, to make school unnecessary. I'm not doing anything to improve the school system - that would take time away from my kids, family, my career. School will evolve to fit the needs of those who need it. It seems like that means more and more hours in school, more meals served, more academics earlier. That's what people who use school want.
>
> -emiLy
>
>
> On May 9, 2010, at 1:34 PM, organicmom111 wrote:
>
> > Having kids is a priority. Yes I used to work outside the home. Made a very good salary, and had a horrible crazy home life. I dont anymore. We reprioritized and put family over the dollar. If you make some life adjustments it is possible. Women need to get over the myth that you can have it all . You cant . If you work outside the home, your homelife will suffer. Yes there are single moms, and situations where you have to earn money. But there are also jobs that can be done from home, etc... . and there are also grandparents, and family that can babysit. The idea that we have a kid and now someone else needs to be responsible for it baffles me. We are not having a people shortage. If you dont know how you will possibly take care of or watch your child because your life is too busy and your plate is too full, dont have one. I know many people who think they are good parents that have no real relationship with their kids, spend hardly any time with them, and get by just skimming the surface in life. Sad for the kids ,and the future generations. If people truly thought they would have to raise and educate their own children, less people would probably have them.
> >
> > Depending on the federal government to provide a place for your child to be, while you are elsewhere, is not acceptable.
> >
> >
> > --- In [email protected], emiLy Quick <emilyjo@> wrote:
> >>
> >> What about all the kids whose parents both work? They have to go somewhere. Does he think 5 year olds can stay home by themselves or with siblings? If he's expecting people to work together with their neighbors and communities, he's just living in some fantasy world because that is not going to happen.
> >>
> >> The towns around me compete against each other for school enrollment. One town started all day every day kindergarten last year (instead of half day or 3 days a week) and got 5 kids from a neighboring town. 5 kids is a lot around here. :) Now THAT town announced it's going to all day every day kindergarten. I'm not sure all day every day kindergarten isn't better than half day or 3 days a week. Maybe at least with all day every day kindergarten, their parents make an effort to pick them up straight from school (or from the bus... or BE THERE when they walk home from the bus...) rather than wait until 5 or 5:30 to pick them up from daycare that they get bussed to mid-day.
> >>
> >> -emiLy
> >>
> >>
> >> On May 8, 2010, at 8:16 PM, alexandriapalonia wrote:
> >>
> >>> Is it?
> >>> He argues after about 4 it really isn't necessary, and he makes a pretty strong case for undoing the infantilization of our society.
> >>> Andrea
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Here's the thing, though. Does he have a better idea? Sure the school system sucks, but not everyone can homeschool. Not even close. Some sort of school/daycare system is necessary.
> >>>>
> >>>> -emiLy
> >>>
> >>>>> ***Someone wrote at Wikipedia on John Taylor Gatto's page:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "He promotes homeschooling, and specifically unschooling. "***
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
Sandra Dodd
-=-"But there are many parents who are unfit to unschool. Not just
because they
want to have a career. But because school actually does a better job
taking
care of their kids than they do."-=-
But wait...
That makes me unfit to ski. I'm unfit to teach botany.
I don't want to be "unfit." It's a failure. I want to have
preferences.
Many people don't have the slightest interest in unschooling. It's
not that they're "unfit unschoolers." They're not any kind of
unschoolers, just like I'm no kind of snowboarder or waterskiier.
If no one else ever unschools EVER, that doesn't change the fact that
I did, that lots of the people on this list did, and are. It's not
anything that needs more people, or a majority, or approval of the
masses, or recognition of "good job." It's one of millions of
permutations of choices and opportunities and possibilities. Someone
might be "fit to unschool" in a dozen ways and still not get to be an
unschooler, for any of thousands of combinations of reasons.
-=-but more school hours and meals served just enables irresponible
parents to do even less for their children. high school is where alot
of these parents become parents, and it seems like an endless cycle of
people who have no business being parents (at least yet), becoming
parents.-=-
Birth control pills have been available to *some* people (not just
anyone who wants them, still) for exactly fifty years today. Before
then, having children had nothing to do with making a responsible
choice. Even now, for the majority of people on the planet, having
children is a byproduct of having sex for fun (if they're lucky and if
it's fun).
-=- I doubt the teen preg rate for homeschoolers (if there even is
one :) is near that of pschooled kids. Public school is causing
societal problems as well. -=-
There were pregnant teens before there were public schools.
-=-but yes, there are those who would just ruin the homeschool thing.
for sure. -=-
Is there "a homeschool thing"? I don't think so.
-=-I just think at some point people have to be responsible-=-
All of them? All at the same time? Or each individual at some point
"has to be responsible"?
Do you mean that it would be a nice thing if somehow magically people
all became responsible?
And does "responsible" mean being more like you are?
Please think clearly about statements you make on this list.
-=-...and unfortunately school doesnt prevent these parents from abuse
and neglect. (and alot of school personell are child predators - see
101 reasons to homeschool) -=-
If ALL of school personnel were child predators, how would that affect
the abuse or neglect of parents? If zero school employees are or ever
were child predators, how would that prevent the abuse or neglect of
parents?
-=-We shouldnt create a monster federal government, that we are all
subservient to , to deal with those who are unfit to be around their
own children. -=-
Who's "we"? There are people here from a dozen different nations.
If you're talking about the U.S., we've had a monster federal
government we're all subservient to for over 200 years. Any energy
spent thinking that's new or deadly will be energy that would have
been better spent finding ways to be cheery with your children.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
because they
want to have a career. But because school actually does a better job
taking
care of their kids than they do."-=-
But wait...
That makes me unfit to ski. I'm unfit to teach botany.
I don't want to be "unfit." It's a failure. I want to have
preferences.
Many people don't have the slightest interest in unschooling. It's
not that they're "unfit unschoolers." They're not any kind of
unschoolers, just like I'm no kind of snowboarder or waterskiier.
If no one else ever unschools EVER, that doesn't change the fact that
I did, that lots of the people on this list did, and are. It's not
anything that needs more people, or a majority, or approval of the
masses, or recognition of "good job." It's one of millions of
permutations of choices and opportunities and possibilities. Someone
might be "fit to unschool" in a dozen ways and still not get to be an
unschooler, for any of thousands of combinations of reasons.
-=-but more school hours and meals served just enables irresponible
parents to do even less for their children. high school is where alot
of these parents become parents, and it seems like an endless cycle of
people who have no business being parents (at least yet), becoming
parents.-=-
Birth control pills have been available to *some* people (not just
anyone who wants them, still) for exactly fifty years today. Before
then, having children had nothing to do with making a responsible
choice. Even now, for the majority of people on the planet, having
children is a byproduct of having sex for fun (if they're lucky and if
it's fun).
-=- I doubt the teen preg rate for homeschoolers (if there even is
one :) is near that of pschooled kids. Public school is causing
societal problems as well. -=-
There were pregnant teens before there were public schools.
-=-but yes, there are those who would just ruin the homeschool thing.
for sure. -=-
Is there "a homeschool thing"? I don't think so.
-=-I just think at some point people have to be responsible-=-
All of them? All at the same time? Or each individual at some point
"has to be responsible"?
Do you mean that it would be a nice thing if somehow magically people
all became responsible?
And does "responsible" mean being more like you are?
Please think clearly about statements you make on this list.
-=-...and unfortunately school doesnt prevent these parents from abuse
and neglect. (and alot of school personell are child predators - see
101 reasons to homeschool) -=-
If ALL of school personnel were child predators, how would that affect
the abuse or neglect of parents? If zero school employees are or ever
were child predators, how would that prevent the abuse or neglect of
parents?
-=-We shouldnt create a monster federal government, that we are all
subservient to , to deal with those who are unfit to be around their
own children. -=-
Who's "we"? There are people here from a dozen different nations.
If you're talking about the U.S., we've had a monster federal
government we're all subservient to for over 200 years. Any energy
spent thinking that's new or deadly will be energy that would have
been better spent finding ways to be cheery with your children.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
1000 Sunny
organicmom111 schrieb:
do a better job than school? Can't politics concentrate more funds on
enabling parents instead of funding school? I think even a world
completely without school is possible. It's a dream that can come true.
But we have to think differently! Schools are a bad thing - and they
always were - from platons fascist dreams to nowadays mass indoctrination.
>I don't think that it's true. Why should it be? Can't parents learn to
>
> "But there are many parents who are unfit to unschool. Not just
> because they
> want to have a career. But because school actually does a better job
> taking
> care of their kids than they do."
>
> I agree. Its sad but true. :)
>
do a better job than school? Can't politics concentrate more funds on
enabling parents instead of funding school? I think even a world
completely without school is possible. It's a dream that can come true.
But we have to think differently! Schools are a bad thing - and they
always were - from platons fascist dreams to nowadays mass indoctrination.
Joyce Fetteroll
On May 10, 2010, at 4:01 AM, 1000 Sunny wrote:
math is good for people, why aren't kids just learning it?
People need to want something first in order to put their energy into
it! Far more people know about homeschooling now than when I first
started 15 years ago. Parents are even more free to choose and most
are still choosing school.
from the general population to do so? Most parents who care about
education are still invested in making schools better.
Just because you're certain something is good and right and true,
doesn't make everyone suddenly believe it's so. There's an even larger
force of people, many of whom are politically active, who just as
strongly believe their religious beliefs are good and right and true
and want to impose them on everyone. Does that make their beliefs
right? Does it make their desire to impose their beliefs on everyone
right?
will always be a desire for some kind of professional education. I can
picture a community college type of model where people of all ages
pick and choose what they want to learn from someone. But right now
far too many people can't imagine how people can learn without being
taught what is agreed is important that I bet if schools were
abolished tomorrow, parents would just recreate them.
and values and point of view.
think is bad? I'd bet there are far more parents who think TV is bad
enough to they need to keep their kids away from it than parents who
think school is bad enough they need to keep their kids away from it.
schools? What's this force's goal?
This sounds too much like conspiracy theory. *Parents* are choosing
schools. *Parents* are supporting schools. They're passing on their
beliefs about the necessity of schools to their kids. Who do you think
is brainwashing parents and for what purposes? The Illuminati? The
Masons? The textbook companies?
And it sounds like you want to mass indoctrinate everyone into
believing schools are bad. You want to yank schools away from people
who are freely choosing them. Sounds like a fascist dream to me.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> I don't think that it's true. Why should it be? Can't parents learn toCan't kids learn to do math better? If it's so universally agreed that
> do a better job than school?
math is good for people, why aren't kids just learning it?
People need to want something first in order to put their energy into
it! Far more people know about homeschooling now than when I first
started 15 years ago. Parents are even more free to choose and most
are still choosing school.
> Can't politics concentrate more funds onPoliticians could, but why would they? Where's the social pressure
> enabling parents instead of funding school?
from the general population to do so? Most parents who care about
education are still invested in making schools better.
Just because you're certain something is good and right and true,
doesn't make everyone suddenly believe it's so. There's an even larger
force of people, many of whom are politically active, who just as
strongly believe their religious beliefs are good and right and true
and want to impose them on everyone. Does that make their beliefs
right? Does it make their desire to impose their beliefs on everyone
right?
> I think even a worldPerhaps possible, but I think choice is even better. I suspect there
> completely without school is possible. It's a dream that can come
> true.
will always be a desire for some kind of professional education. I can
picture a community college type of model where people of all ages
pick and choose what they want to learn from someone. But right now
far too many people can't imagine how people can learn without being
taught what is agreed is important that I bet if schools were
abolished tomorrow, parents would just recreate them.
> But we have to think differently!Who is we? Producing kids doesn't imbue everyone with the same goals
and values and point of view.
> Schools are a bad thingAccording to who? Are parents sending their kids to something they
think is bad? I'd bet there are far more parents who think TV is bad
enough to they need to keep their kids away from it than parents who
think school is bad enough they need to keep their kids away from it.
> - and theyThen why have schools thrived? Who or what is the force behind public
> always were
schools? What's this force's goal?
This sounds too much like conspiracy theory. *Parents* are choosing
schools. *Parents* are supporting schools. They're passing on their
beliefs about the necessity of schools to their kids. Who do you think
is brainwashing parents and for what purposes? The Illuminati? The
Masons? The textbook companies?
> from platons fascist dreams to nowadays mass indoctrination.Who's platon?
And it sounds like you want to mass indoctrinate everyone into
believing schools are bad. You want to yank schools away from people
who are freely choosing them. Sounds like a fascist dream to me.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
1000 Sunny
Joyce Fetteroll schrieb:
homeschooling tomorrow. But if you would get the real choice, you'd hear
something like this: Your kid gets 500$ funding per month in school or
outside school - you or your kid can choose. Is it like this in the USA?
So *I* ask for choice.
You don't need to *believe* that schools are bad. It is quite proven and
platon was the first who thougt about a public school system (back in
old greece).
So don't call me fascist if you don't understand and perhaps not want
to, what I am talking about. That would be nice.
Greetings from Germany,
where everyone is still forced to go to school and children are abducted
in the still of night
>I did nowhere write, to abolish schools today and only allow
>
>
> On May 10, 2010, at 4:01 AM, 1000 Sunny wrote:
>
> > I don't think that it's true. Why should it be? Can't parents learn to
> > do a better job than school?
>
> Can't kids learn to do math better? If it's so universally agreed that
> math is good for people, why aren't kids just learning it?
>
> People need to want something first in order to put their energy into
> it! Far more people know about homeschooling now than when I first
> started 15 years ago. Parents are even more free to choose and most
> are still choosing school.
>
> > Can't politics concentrate more funds on
> > enabling parents instead of funding school?
>
> Politicians could, but why would they? Where's the social pressure
> from the general population to do so? Most parents who care about
> education are still invested in making schools better.
>
> Just because you're certain something is good and right and true,
> doesn't make everyone suddenly believe it's so. There's an even larger
> force of people, many of whom are politically active, who just as
> strongly believe their religious beliefs are good and right and true
> and want to impose them on everyone. Does that make their beliefs
> right? Does it make their desire to impose their beliefs on everyone
> right?
>
> > I think even a world
> > completely without school is possible. It's a dream that can come
> > true.
>
> Perhaps possible, but I think choice is even better. I suspect there
> will always be a desire for some kind of professional education. I can
> picture a community college type of model where people of all ages
> pick and choose what they want to learn from someone. But right now
> far too many people can't imagine how people can learn without being
> taught what is agreed is important that I bet if schools were
> abolished tomorrow, parents would just recreate them.
>
> > But we have to think differently!
>
> Who is we? Producing kids doesn't imbue everyone with the same goals
> and values and point of view.
>
> > Schools are a bad thing
>
> According to who? Are parents sending their kids to something they
> think is bad? I'd bet there are far more parents who think TV is bad
> enough to they need to keep their kids away from it than parents who
> think school is bad enough they need to keep their kids away from it.
>
> > - and they
> > always were
>
> Then why have schools thrived? Who or what is the force behind public
> schools? What's this force's goal?
>
> This sounds too much like conspiracy theory. *Parents* are choosing
> schools. *Parents* are supporting schools. They're passing on their
> beliefs about the necessity of schools to their kids. Who do you think
> is brainwashing parents and for what purposes? The Illuminati? The
> Masons? The textbook companies?
>
> > from platons fascist dreams to nowadays mass indoctrination.
>
> Who's platon?
>
> And it sounds like you want to mass indoctrinate everyone into
> believing schools are bad. You want to yank schools away from people
> who are freely choosing them. Sounds like a fascist dream to me.
>
> Joyce
>
homeschooling tomorrow. But if you would get the real choice, you'd hear
something like this: Your kid gets 500$ funding per month in school or
outside school - you or your kid can choose. Is it like this in the USA?
So *I* ask for choice.
You don't need to *believe* that schools are bad. It is quite proven and
platon was the first who thougt about a public school system (back in
old greece).
So don't call me fascist if you don't understand and perhaps not want
to, what I am talking about. That would be nice.
Greetings from Germany,
where everyone is still forced to go to school and children are abducted
in the still of night
Kelly Halldorson
+++And it sounds like you want to mass indoctrinate everyone into
believing schools are bad. You want to yank schools away from people
who are freely choosing them. Sounds like a fascist dream to me.+++
I agree there are many people that feel this way. That are against all schools.
However, there is a big difference between people that don't like schools period and people who believe compulsory public education is wrong.
*I* don't have any problem with people freely choosing to send kids to any kind type of school they/style want. Montesorri, Christian, Jewish, Alternative, Free School etc etc...
The problem comes when people are *forced* to do so. When it is required by law and the money to pay for the schools are taken by force from another person. And the force is backed up by a guns and the threat of imprisonment.
Peace,
Kelly
MARKETPLACE
Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest . Unsubscribe . Terms of Use.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
believing schools are bad. You want to yank schools away from people
who are freely choosing them. Sounds like a fascist dream to me.+++
I agree there are many people that feel this way. That are against all schools.
However, there is a big difference between people that don't like schools period and people who believe compulsory public education is wrong.
*I* don't have any problem with people freely choosing to send kids to any kind type of school they/style want. Montesorri, Christian, Jewish, Alternative, Free School etc etc...
The problem comes when people are *forced* to do so. When it is required by law and the money to pay for the schools are taken by force from another person. And the force is backed up by a guns and the threat of imprisonment.
Peace,
Kelly
MARKETPLACE
Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest . Unsubscribe . Terms of Use.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Rebecca M.
--- Joyce Fetteroll wrote:
Last year, I listened to a conversation in which Dr. Gabor Mate (who is supportive of attachment parenting and helped Gordon Neufeld write his book, "Hold On To Your Kids: Why Parents Matter") discussed full-day and early Kindergarten programs (for 3 & 4 year olds) with an policy advisor in Ontario and an academic who has studied ECE in Canada. Ontario and BC are implementing additional Kindergarten programs starting this fall.
The podcast of the interview has been taken down from the CBC site, but what stuck out in my mind was that one of the "experts" in favour of full-day kindergarten (a professor of sociology at the University of Manitoba) was quick to say that it more than paid for itself (something like 1.5x) as it meant that mothers returned to the work force earlier. This person's opinion has certainly informed public policy.
I found this blurb, although the link to the podcast was down:
"The province of Ontario is planning to launch a full-day, fully funded child-care and kindergarten program in the fall of 2010. Advocates of early childhood education say the program is long overdue and promises huge payoffs -- that children who attend all day kindergarten will be more likely to get a post-secondary education and have higher earning potential, in addition to being less likely to fall into crime." I recall that Dr. Mate urged the policy makers to look at the statistics for Sweden (more about Sweden here: http://www.stratletter.com/dec10speech.html) as what's happening in that country, as a result of a state-funded early childhood program, does not support those supposed long term payoffs.
I have a friend who is into social ecology who sees homeschooling as elitist (only for those who can afford to do it). I don't agree with him as I've seen parents from all sorts of socioeconomic backgrounds successfully homeschooling their kids, but I can understand why many people don't think they can "afford" to do it.
- Rebecca
> Then why have schools thrived? Who or what is the force behind publicI don't believe there is a conspiracy. However, I do think that public education and economics are so entwined that it will be extremely difficult to separate the two for many many years.
> schools? What's this force's goal?
Last year, I listened to a conversation in which Dr. Gabor Mate (who is supportive of attachment parenting and helped Gordon Neufeld write his book, "Hold On To Your Kids: Why Parents Matter") discussed full-day and early Kindergarten programs (for 3 & 4 year olds) with an policy advisor in Ontario and an academic who has studied ECE in Canada. Ontario and BC are implementing additional Kindergarten programs starting this fall.
The podcast of the interview has been taken down from the CBC site, but what stuck out in my mind was that one of the "experts" in favour of full-day kindergarten (a professor of sociology at the University of Manitoba) was quick to say that it more than paid for itself (something like 1.5x) as it meant that mothers returned to the work force earlier. This person's opinion has certainly informed public policy.
I found this blurb, although the link to the podcast was down:
"The province of Ontario is planning to launch a full-day, fully funded child-care and kindergarten program in the fall of 2010. Advocates of early childhood education say the program is long overdue and promises huge payoffs -- that children who attend all day kindergarten will be more likely to get a post-secondary education and have higher earning potential, in addition to being less likely to fall into crime." I recall that Dr. Mate urged the policy makers to look at the statistics for Sweden (more about Sweden here: http://www.stratletter.com/dec10speech.html) as what's happening in that country, as a result of a state-funded early childhood program, does not support those supposed long term payoffs.
I have a friend who is into social ecology who sees homeschooling as elitist (only for those who can afford to do it). I don't agree with him as I've seen parents from all sorts of socioeconomic backgrounds successfully homeschooling their kids, but I can understand why many people don't think they can "afford" to do it.
- Rebecca
Kelly Halldorson
> Then why have schools thrived?Thrived in what way? Part of the reason they thrive is that "indoctrination" piece. I hate that word though because it's so in your face and I think it's actually much more subtle than that. People who teach in the schools are generally (at least where I live and grow up) all very liberal-minded...the general belief is that schools are good or at least trying to be good and above all needed and noble.
>Who or what is the force behind publicThe people with the guns who demand the tax money to pay for them and the truant officers and DCYF workers who will take your kids if you don't prove they are being schooled. I know that sounds dramatic...but in reality that is what happens.
> schools? What's this force's goal?I don't claim to know. I can think of a number of possibilities.
Some people really believe they are doing right by the children.
Raising adults who are pro-government...pro-various causes.
Raising citizens who are not independently-minded.
kelly
MARKETPLACE
Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest . Unsubscribe . Terms of Use.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
1000 Sunny
Joyce Fetteroll schrieb:
sorry for my last post, but it made me feel quite angry how you
misunderstood me. It felt like you were really trying hard to put me in
a fascist concpiracy theoritics corner.
With the type of community college you described we are not to far from
one another :)
You asked, what's the force's goal. I think the goal of "the force" is
to conserve existing structures. And this is not one "club" like the
illuminati or so, but a sociological trend. Big systems organize around
each other and reinforce each other. So if one of the big systems
changes to much and to fast, the other systems may crumble. E.g. public
health couldn't work like it does now, if you abolish schools tomorrow -
because they are interconnected. Additionally you have customs and
tradition and the like, that "indoctrinate" you (you have to read the
indoctrinate like in Monroe-Doctrine) .
But if they change slowly, then they can mutually adapt. Taking schools
of the table was (as far as I know) first thougt of by Buckminster
Fuller in the 1960s and since then more and more are sharing that goal.
And it is evolving quite fast in the USA - as far as I see. But it could
be a bit faster, if parents would get the same funding and support for
having their children in as outside of school. I think as soon as the
schoolfree movement will grow above 5% or 6% they can claim equal
funding and then politicians will be very aware of that claim.
system and constructed it as the basis of a philosophers state which
should follow the instable democracy (in those days democracy tumbled
into tyranny every few decades). He is one of the most influential
political thinkers and lot of politician scientists will tell you that
all political science is just a footnote to plato.
have it, anything else would be fascist. But we have to stand up for the
free choice - as explained above.
Hope that clarifies what I meant and takes the radical edge out of our
misunderstanding (as far as it was one).
Cordialement
Richard
>Hi Joyce,
>
>
> On May 10, 2010, at 4:01 AM, 1000 Sunny wrote:
>
> Then why have schools thrived? Who or what is the force behind public
> schools? What's this force's goal?
>
sorry for my last post, but it made me feel quite angry how you
misunderstood me. It felt like you were really trying hard to put me in
a fascist concpiracy theoritics corner.
With the type of community college you described we are not to far from
one another :)
You asked, what's the force's goal. I think the goal of "the force" is
to conserve existing structures. And this is not one "club" like the
illuminati or so, but a sociological trend. Big systems organize around
each other and reinforce each other. So if one of the big systems
changes to much and to fast, the other systems may crumble. E.g. public
health couldn't work like it does now, if you abolish schools tomorrow -
because they are interconnected. Additionally you have customs and
tradition and the like, that "indoctrinate" you (you have to read the
indoctrinate like in Monroe-Doctrine) .
But if they change slowly, then they can mutually adapt. Taking schools
of the table was (as far as I know) first thougt of by Buckminster
Fuller in the 1960s and since then more and more are sharing that goal.
And it is evolving quite fast in the USA - as far as I see. But it could
be a bit faster, if parents would get the same funding and support for
having their children in as outside of school. I think as soon as the
schoolfree movement will grow above 5% or 6% they can claim equal
funding and then politicians will be very aware of that claim.
>Plato was an old greek philosopher, who examined the spartan school
> > from platons fascist dreams to nowadays mass indoctrination.
>
> Who's platon?
>
system and constructed it as the basis of a philosophers state which
should follow the instable democracy (in those days democracy tumbled
into tyranny every few decades). He is one of the most influential
political thinkers and lot of politician scientists will tell you that
all political science is just a footnote to plato.
>If I meet someone who is *freely* choosing school, then he/she shall
> And it sounds like you want to mass indoctrinate everyone into
> believing schools are bad. You want to yank schools away from people
> who are freely choosing them. Sounds like a fascist dream to me.
>
have it, anything else would be fascist. But we have to stand up for the
free choice - as explained above.
Hope that clarifies what I meant and takes the radical edge out of our
misunderstanding (as far as it was one).
Cordialement
Richard
Cara Barlow
===The problem comes when people are *forced* to do so. When it is required
by law and the money to pay for the schools are taken by force from another
person. And the force is backed up by a guns and the threat of
imprisonment.===
OK. You live in the United States and enjoy the benefits of living here.
Paying taxes is part of the social contract of living in the United States.
You are not being "forced" to do anything. You are choosing to live here.
You could choose to live somewhere else.
The "guns and threat of imprisonment" is the basis of enforcement of any
complete social system. Even if libertarians reduced all laws to "don't
commit fraud or initiate force", how would they enforce that? I suspect it
might be with guns and the threat of imprisonment.
Best wishes, Cara
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
by law and the money to pay for the schools are taken by force from another
person. And the force is backed up by a guns and the threat of
imprisonment.===
OK. You live in the United States and enjoy the benefits of living here.
Paying taxes is part of the social contract of living in the United States.
You are not being "forced" to do anything. You are choosing to live here.
You could choose to live somewhere else.
The "guns and threat of imprisonment" is the basis of enforcement of any
complete social system. Even if libertarians reduced all laws to "don't
commit fraud or initiate force", how would they enforce that? I suspect it
might be with guns and the threat of imprisonment.
Best wishes, Cara
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Kelly Halldorson
+++OK. You live in the United States and enjoy the benefits of living here.
Paying taxes is part of the social contract of living in the United States.+++
This is the red herring often thrown out in such arguments. "You are not patriotic! If you don't like it leave!!"
+++You are not being "forced" to do anything. You are choosing to live here.
You could choose to live somewhere else.+++
Would you apply this same logic to a child? How about a teen? If they don't like the rules of the home they are living in should they just leave? Are parents justified in making any such rules and punishments they deem fit including spanking as part of a familial contract?
When you are born into a family are you not living under a familial contract? Shouldn't you then abide by those rules?
peace,
Kelly
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (22)
Recent Activity: a.. New Members 16
Visit Your Group
MARKETPLACE
Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest . Unsubscribe . Terms of Use.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Paying taxes is part of the social contract of living in the United States.+++
This is the red herring often thrown out in such arguments. "You are not patriotic! If you don't like it leave!!"
+++You are not being "forced" to do anything. You are choosing to live here.
You could choose to live somewhere else.+++
Would you apply this same logic to a child? How about a teen? If they don't like the rules of the home they are living in should they just leave? Are parents justified in making any such rules and punishments they deem fit including spanking as part of a familial contract?
When you are born into a family are you not living under a familial contract? Shouldn't you then abide by those rules?
peace,
Kelly
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (22)
Recent Activity: a.. New Members 16
Visit Your Group
MARKETPLACE
Stay on top of your group activity without leaving the page you're on - Get the Yahoo! Toolbar now.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Get great advice about dogs and cats. Visit the Dog & Cat Answers Center.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hobbies & Activities Zone: Find others who share your passions! Explore new interests.
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest . Unsubscribe . Terms of Use.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=Can't parents learn to
do a better job than school? Can't politics concentrate more funds on
enabling parents instead of funding school? I think even a world
completely without school is possible. It's a dream that can come true.
But we have to think differently! Schools are a bad thing - and they
always were - from platons fascist dreams to nowadays mass
indoctrination.-=-
This is all political and not the purpose of this group discussion.
There are a lot of "possible world" imaginings, but then there is the
real world that defies anyone's imagination.
-=-Can't parents learn to do a better job than school? -=-
Very few want to even think about that. Most parents don't think they
can do a better job than school. They don't WANT to learn to do a
better job than school.
So the answer to that question, for me, is that some can and some
can't. Those who can't aren't the topic of this list, and those who
want to try are here to discuss natural learning and unschooling with
other unschoolers.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
do a better job than school? Can't politics concentrate more funds on
enabling parents instead of funding school? I think even a world
completely without school is possible. It's a dream that can come true.
But we have to think differently! Schools are a bad thing - and they
always were - from platons fascist dreams to nowadays mass
indoctrination.-=-
This is all political and not the purpose of this group discussion.
There are a lot of "possible world" imaginings, but then there is the
real world that defies anyone's imagination.
-=-Can't parents learn to do a better job than school? -=-
Very few want to even think about that. Most parents don't think they
can do a better job than school. They don't WANT to learn to do a
better job than school.
So the answer to that question, for me, is that some can and some
can't. Those who can't aren't the topic of this list, and those who
want to try are here to discuss natural learning and unschooling with
other unschoolers.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-===The problem comes when people are *forced* to do so. When it is
required
by law and the money to pay for the schools are taken by force from
another
person. And the force is backed up by a guns and the threat of
imprisonment.===
-=-OK. You live in the United States and enjoy the benefits of living
here.
Paying taxes is part of the social contract of living in the United
States.-=-
a .de e-mail is Germany, not the U.S.
These notes are to various bits of the discussion:
I had already sent back a response to this thread yesterday for being
all politics and no unschooling. I went to sleep (as I do, each
night) and this morning the list is full of a big political discussion
that's gone all mean.
"Platon" isn't "Plato." Joyce would have known who "Plato" was.
Germans have no excuse not to capitalize names. Clarity in writing is
one of the requirements for posting here (for being allowed to
continue to post, anyway).
There haven't been "truant officers" for decades, if there ever were.
It's a boogeyman.
Everyone who has posted to this topic, especially new members to the
list, please read carefully (or review, if you've read them before)
these:
http://sandradodd.com/lists/alwayslearningNEW
http://sandradodd.com/lists/alwayslearningPOSTS
They're also files in the Always Learning group's yahoo page.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
required
by law and the money to pay for the schools are taken by force from
another
person. And the force is backed up by a guns and the threat of
imprisonment.===
-=-OK. You live in the United States and enjoy the benefits of living
here.
Paying taxes is part of the social contract of living in the United
States.-=-
a .de e-mail is Germany, not the U.S.
These notes are to various bits of the discussion:
I had already sent back a response to this thread yesterday for being
all politics and no unschooling. I went to sleep (as I do, each
night) and this morning the list is full of a big political discussion
that's gone all mean.
"Platon" isn't "Plato." Joyce would have known who "Plato" was.
Germans have no excuse not to capitalize names. Clarity in writing is
one of the requirements for posting here (for being allowed to
continue to post, anyway).
There haven't been "truant officers" for decades, if there ever were.
It's a boogeyman.
Everyone who has posted to this topic, especially new members to the
list, please read carefully (or review, if you've read them before)
these:
http://sandradodd.com/lists/alwayslearningNEW
http://sandradodd.com/lists/alwayslearningPOSTS
They're also files in the Always Learning group's yahoo page.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
Maybe I'm wrong about truant officers. I've never met anyone who knew/
saw one, and I've worked at schools. There were some in the 1930's,
I've heard. But that's local.
Here's a note I got on the side:
---------
++There haven't been "truant officers" for decades, if there ever were.
It's a boogeyman.++
When I was a teenager, exactly two decades ago. My best friend had a
truant officer who actually came to her house in the mornings in
attempt to get her to go to school.
The New Hampshire BOE are working on "rules" for the NH Homeschooling
law for a truancy component. It will be enforced through truant
officers.
-----------------
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
saw one, and I've worked at schools. There were some in the 1930's,
I've heard. But that's local.
Here's a note I got on the side:
---------
++There haven't been "truant officers" for decades, if there ever were.
It's a boogeyman.++
When I was a teenager, exactly two decades ago. My best friend had a
truant officer who actually came to her house in the mornings in
attempt to get her to go to school.
The New Hampshire BOE are working on "rules" for the NH Homeschooling
law for a truancy component. It will be enforced through truant
officers.
-----------------
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Miguelkll
I'm new so I am mostly reading(learning and absorbing) and not posting anything yet, but just had to comment that I had a truant officer at my home on Friday! It seems that my sons Homebound form had not yet been submitted so on the 10th "absence" the truant officer is dispatched.
Jennifer
Jennifer
--- On Mon, 5/10/10, Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
From: Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] Re: John Taylor Gatto
To: [email protected]
Date: Monday, May 10, 2010, 11:49 AM
Maybe I'm wrong about truant officers. I've never met anyone who knew/
saw one, and I've worked at schools. There were some in the 1930's,
I've heard. But that's local.
Here's a note I got on the side:
---------
++There haven't been "truant officers" for decades, if there ever were.
It's a boogeyman.++
When I was a teenager, exactly two decades ago. My best friend had a
truant officer who actually came to her house in the mornings in
attempt to get her to go to school.
The New Hampshire BOE are working on "rules" for the NH Homeschooling
law for a truancy component. It will be enforced through truant
officers.
------------ -----
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]