on starting a transcript documentation service-school
Shauna Reisewitz
Hello always learning group.
I'm not sure if this is an appropriate place to post this inquiry-- I'll leave it to the moderators to decide..
I have been working with Wes Beach to start a similar "school" to his in Santa Cruz in Southern California.
http://www2.cruzio.com/~beachhi/home.html
Basically a school that gives a quick high school diploma to students who demonstrate a readiness to move on. This then gives kids under 18 a way to pursue anything that a kid with a high school diploma can. -- entrance into Community College, entrance into various vocational schools, something to put on a resume, etc... The spin I'm adding is to provide a transcript tracking service to unschoolers - to work with me through all or part of high school, or at the end, to develop a transcript. Now we all know that no one NEEDS this service, but some people may find it useful, so they can go on enjoying unschooling with their family, and get a little help with documenting their kids activities for transcript purposes.
I've come up with some feedback from a friend who is an ecologist and has worked starting many nonprofits, that my web site seems too negative and focuses on everything I don't do rather than what I do do. Which has gotten me trying to phrase it in a more positive way.
Which has gotten me thinking about top down and bottom up systems. (I also have an ecological background) so this has one meaning to ecologists, and a sort of corallary-ish meaning to educators. In education- top down (explicit going to implicit knowledge) is our basic model of education. teachers- teaching- the state having standards and requirements- that sort of explicitly taught to the children. While unschooling focuses more on bottom up knowledge acquisition- Children learn implicitly from their experiences. Then- where my mind wandered was to some combination of the two- when the implict drive to learn something new may lead to the seeking out of explicit learning experiences.
What do you think of implicit vs explicit learning? top down vs bottom up?
So what I'm offering is sort of a "top down" reward to kids who gain their readiness to move on in a "bottom-up" way. Their learning happens first- I document and write a transcript for it. This gives our kids who have had a wonderfully rich education all the benefits of a high school diploma. Again, something parents can provide themselves if they wanted.
Do you think there would be an interest in this in the unschooling world? I'm also trying to reach kids who are in the system, and give them a way to earn a high school diploma quickly without jumping through state mandated hoops. This is my main target market, really. But I have experience working in this way with homeschoolers and unschoolers, so am adding the transcript creation twist.
If anyone would like to check out my web site- I would very very much appreciate feedback. I'm looking for feedback from unschoolers to people in the "normal world"- who are just looking for an alternative to high school to help their kid.
www.pacificsandsacademy.com
If any one would like to talk to me about any of these ideas, I will be at the widesky conference in San Diego.
I'm really excited about this venture actually. I'm learning so much about starting a business-creating a web page- and may favorite part is really deeply thinking about these services can really help kids.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I'm not sure if this is an appropriate place to post this inquiry-- I'll leave it to the moderators to decide..
I have been working with Wes Beach to start a similar "school" to his in Santa Cruz in Southern California.
http://www2.cruzio.com/~beachhi/home.html
Basically a school that gives a quick high school diploma to students who demonstrate a readiness to move on. This then gives kids under 18 a way to pursue anything that a kid with a high school diploma can. -- entrance into Community College, entrance into various vocational schools, something to put on a resume, etc... The spin I'm adding is to provide a transcript tracking service to unschoolers - to work with me through all or part of high school, or at the end, to develop a transcript. Now we all know that no one NEEDS this service, but some people may find it useful, so they can go on enjoying unschooling with their family, and get a little help with documenting their kids activities for transcript purposes.
I've come up with some feedback from a friend who is an ecologist and has worked starting many nonprofits, that my web site seems too negative and focuses on everything I don't do rather than what I do do. Which has gotten me trying to phrase it in a more positive way.
Which has gotten me thinking about top down and bottom up systems. (I also have an ecological background) so this has one meaning to ecologists, and a sort of corallary-ish meaning to educators. In education- top down (explicit going to implicit knowledge) is our basic model of education. teachers- teaching- the state having standards and requirements- that sort of explicitly taught to the children. While unschooling focuses more on bottom up knowledge acquisition- Children learn implicitly from their experiences. Then- where my mind wandered was to some combination of the two- when the implict drive to learn something new may lead to the seeking out of explicit learning experiences.
What do you think of implicit vs explicit learning? top down vs bottom up?
So what I'm offering is sort of a "top down" reward to kids who gain their readiness to move on in a "bottom-up" way. Their learning happens first- I document and write a transcript for it. This gives our kids who have had a wonderfully rich education all the benefits of a high school diploma. Again, something parents can provide themselves if they wanted.
Do you think there would be an interest in this in the unschooling world? I'm also trying to reach kids who are in the system, and give them a way to earn a high school diploma quickly without jumping through state mandated hoops. This is my main target market, really. But I have experience working in this way with homeschoolers and unschoolers, so am adding the transcript creation twist.
If anyone would like to check out my web site- I would very very much appreciate feedback. I'm looking for feedback from unschoolers to people in the "normal world"- who are just looking for an alternative to high school to help their kid.
www.pacificsandsacademy.com
If any one would like to talk to me about any of these ideas, I will be at the widesky conference in San Diego.
I'm really excited about this venture actually. I'm learning so much about starting a business-creating a web page- and may favorite part is really deeply thinking about these services can really help kids.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
I let this through even though it doesn't apply to people who are outside the U.S., probably. Or maybe so! Has Wes Beach's school given diplomas to people outside the U.S.?
-=-Children learn implicitly from their experiences. Then- where my mind wandered was to some combination of the two- when the implict drive to learn something new may lead to the seeking out of explicit learning experiences.
-=-What do you think of implicit vs explicit learning? top down vs bottom up? -=-
I think that unless you really understand unschooling, you should avoid giving any advice to unschooling families. Some families might want this service and not have any idea that having someone track a child's learning will affect the child and the family, especially when it's someone who isn't fully clear about the disadvantages of weighing and measuring.
-=-This gives our kids who have had a wonderfully rich education...-=-
"Our kids" jumped out and then "education" jumped out on top of it. :-)
-=-What do you think of implicit vs explicit learning?-=-
It's true that unschooling is all about implicit learning.
Can you give an example of "explicit learning" that your school would.... recognize/recommend/teach?
Any examples I'm thinking of tend to be things that would compromise natural learning. Maybe I'm not picturing what you're picturing.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-=-Children learn implicitly from their experiences. Then- where my mind wandered was to some combination of the two- when the implict drive to learn something new may lead to the seeking out of explicit learning experiences.
-=-What do you think of implicit vs explicit learning? top down vs bottom up? -=-
I think that unless you really understand unschooling, you should avoid giving any advice to unschooling families. Some families might want this service and not have any idea that having someone track a child's learning will affect the child and the family, especially when it's someone who isn't fully clear about the disadvantages of weighing and measuring.
-=-This gives our kids who have had a wonderfully rich education...-=-
"Our kids" jumped out and then "education" jumped out on top of it. :-)
-=-What do you think of implicit vs explicit learning?-=-
It's true that unschooling is all about implicit learning.
Can you give an example of "explicit learning" that your school would.... recognize/recommend/teach?
Any examples I'm thinking of tend to be things that would compromise natural learning. Maybe I'm not picturing what you're picturing.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Shauna Reisewitz
Oh, Thanks for letting this
through,
I've been corresponding a little bit with Pam off the list since sending it, so
didn't expect to see my post here.
----I let this through even though it doesn't apply to people who are outside the U.S., probably. Or maybe so! Has Wes Beach's school given diplomas to people outside the U.S.?----
I'm not sure if Wes has had a student out of the US. I'm wondering and will ask
him -- or wondering if anyone knows the answer- if a high school diploma from a
private school in the US means anything official in any other country.
If you are 14 or 16 years old in France or Brazil or South Africa and get a high school diploma through
working on line with someone in California, I can't imagine it carrying much
weight- but maybe it does. I don't know the answer to that does anyone? Like everything, it probably depends on the situation.
Anyways I was mulling over the thought of implicit vs explicit
learning. Clearly we can all agree that the system is ridiculously out of
balance and focuses almost completely on leaning explicitly. Though ironically
I'm sure that all educators in the system would agree that "the best kind
of learning" happens when kids are implicitly interested in the material-
and they are interested and engaged- so the best of them do a lot of song and dance and try to get kids interests piqued. And there are the few charter type schools that offer various classes- that kids can choose to take if they are interested.
But is there a dance between top down(explict to implict) and bottom up(implicit to
explict) learning? I'm thinking that perhaps there is.. When a
child wants to learn a game for instance, and learns by playing (implicit), but
then an older child teaches the younger one something new about the game- the
next level- that would be explicit- no? It only works however when the implict
drive is there in the first place.
I have seen some parents rely almost completely on implicit learning, and their
kids have missed out on opportunities-- for example- a kid interested in
theater, but the parents never getting it together to enroll him for whatever
reason-- some of what that child may have learned in the theater group
would be taught from a explicit to implicit way. And of course there may have
been a lot of implicit learning going on as well.
I'm just throwing out an idea here- I haven't applied top down - bottom up
concepts to education before very recently- though of course I have thought of
these ideas in different ways.
------Can you give an example of "explicit learning" that your school would.... recognize/recommend /teach?
Any examples I'm thinking of tend to be things that would compromise natural learning. Maybe I'm not picturing what you're picturing.----
As far as my school goes- it would depend on the families. If I was working
with a strong unschooling family who just wanted help documenting their
transcripts-- I wouldn't give any recommendations or teachings unless asked for- I would
ask questions about what the teen was doing for record keeping recognization sake, and write
up a transcript according to what she did -- also helping her reach her goals ( a particular college's requirements for example). In the past I have turned hours of video gaming into classes I call "logic
and strategy" or a girl I know who helped her dad build an extra room in
her house- I called that "architectural design", "construction technology" and
"woodworking." An avid John Stewart fan- I called what he did
"Political Science" --stuff like that. If the teen needed grades, I
would ask her to self evaluate, and make some estimate of credits based on the
numbers of hours the teen put into it, how important it was to the teen and how
much the teen felt she learned from the experience.
I guess if I saw a family who was claiming to unschool and found our from the teen that he really really wanted to pass a particular test (i just had a case going on like this), but the parents were so anti- school that they were completely unsupportive, I'd look for a test taking program and encourage the parents to help support the teen in this endeavor. (This is the short description of what I'd do.) This may be an example of something that implicitly desired- but then explicitly supported. That class or program may be taught in an explicit to implicit way- but the desire to put oneself in it came from the implicit drive to prove to herself that she could pass a particular test.
If I had a different kind of teen, who was stuck in the school system and
wanted out, I would spend time helping him figure out his learning styles and
intelligences. And find out where his passions were. And spend time helping his
parents see that he wasn't a failure, etc, etc. Encourage him to set a goal,
any goal and find a way to complete it. Evaluate with him when he was ready to
move on. If he came to me read to move on, I'd ask him to complete a portfolio project (see web site-www.pacificsandsacademy.com) and give him the opportunity to move on.
Every thing I'd do here is more complicated that what I've described- but these are the lines of my thinking. I'm open to constructive criticism here.
Shauna
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
through,
I've been corresponding a little bit with Pam off the list since sending it, so
didn't expect to see my post here.
----I let this through even though it doesn't apply to people who are outside the U.S., probably. Or maybe so! Has Wes Beach's school given diplomas to people outside the U.S.?----
I'm not sure if Wes has had a student out of the US. I'm wondering and will ask
him -- or wondering if anyone knows the answer- if a high school diploma from a
private school in the US means anything official in any other country.
If you are 14 or 16 years old in France or Brazil or South Africa and get a high school diploma through
working on line with someone in California, I can't imagine it carrying much
weight- but maybe it does. I don't know the answer to that does anyone? Like everything, it probably depends on the situation.
Anyways I was mulling over the thought of implicit vs explicit
learning. Clearly we can all agree that the system is ridiculously out of
balance and focuses almost completely on leaning explicitly. Though ironically
I'm sure that all educators in the system would agree that "the best kind
of learning" happens when kids are implicitly interested in the material-
and they are interested and engaged- so the best of them do a lot of song and dance and try to get kids interests piqued. And there are the few charter type schools that offer various classes- that kids can choose to take if they are interested.
But is there a dance between top down(explict to implict) and bottom up(implicit to
explict) learning? I'm thinking that perhaps there is.. When a
child wants to learn a game for instance, and learns by playing (implicit), but
then an older child teaches the younger one something new about the game- the
next level- that would be explicit- no? It only works however when the implict
drive is there in the first place.
I have seen some parents rely almost completely on implicit learning, and their
kids have missed out on opportunities-- for example- a kid interested in
theater, but the parents never getting it together to enroll him for whatever
reason-- some of what that child may have learned in the theater group
would be taught from a explicit to implicit way. And of course there may have
been a lot of implicit learning going on as well.
I'm just throwing out an idea here- I haven't applied top down - bottom up
concepts to education before very recently- though of course I have thought of
these ideas in different ways.
------Can you give an example of "explicit learning" that your school would.... recognize/recommend /teach?
Any examples I'm thinking of tend to be things that would compromise natural learning. Maybe I'm not picturing what you're picturing.----
As far as my school goes- it would depend on the families. If I was working
with a strong unschooling family who just wanted help documenting their
transcripts-- I wouldn't give any recommendations or teachings unless asked for- I would
ask questions about what the teen was doing for record keeping recognization sake, and write
up a transcript according to what she did -- also helping her reach her goals ( a particular college's requirements for example). In the past I have turned hours of video gaming into classes I call "logic
and strategy" or a girl I know who helped her dad build an extra room in
her house- I called that "architectural design", "construction technology" and
"woodworking." An avid John Stewart fan- I called what he did
"Political Science" --stuff like that. If the teen needed grades, I
would ask her to self evaluate, and make some estimate of credits based on the
numbers of hours the teen put into it, how important it was to the teen and how
much the teen felt she learned from the experience.
I guess if I saw a family who was claiming to unschool and found our from the teen that he really really wanted to pass a particular test (i just had a case going on like this), but the parents were so anti- school that they were completely unsupportive, I'd look for a test taking program and encourage the parents to help support the teen in this endeavor. (This is the short description of what I'd do.) This may be an example of something that implicitly desired- but then explicitly supported. That class or program may be taught in an explicit to implicit way- but the desire to put oneself in it came from the implicit drive to prove to herself that she could pass a particular test.
If I had a different kind of teen, who was stuck in the school system and
wanted out, I would spend time helping him figure out his learning styles and
intelligences. And find out where his passions were. And spend time helping his
parents see that he wasn't a failure, etc, etc. Encourage him to set a goal,
any goal and find a way to complete it. Evaluate with him when he was ready to
move on. If he came to me read to move on, I'd ask him to complete a portfolio project (see web site-www.pacificsandsacademy.com) and give him the opportunity to move on.
Every thing I'd do here is more complicated that what I've described- but these are the lines of my thinking. I'm open to constructive criticism here.
Shauna
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-I'm not sure if Wes has had a student out of the US. I'm wondering and will ask
him -- or wondering if anyone knows the answer- -=-
It's not that I wanted to know the answer so much as I wanted to hint heavily to you that this is an inernational discussion list, so talking about the ideas is better than offering anything local or regional.
Helping you understand unschooling is the only reason I let that through.
-=- Clearly we can all agree that the system is ridiculously out of balance -=-
This sort of rhetoric isn't helpful, and I object to the term "ridiculous" every single time it comes through this discussion. If you state your belief, that's fine. If your belief shows a lack of clarity about unschooling, people will shine a light there. To discuss "the system" here is problematical because we have readers from fifteen countries or more.
-=-But is there a dance between top down(explict to implict) and bottom up(implicit to
explict) learning? I'm thinking that perhaps there is.-=-
When a child learns, he will learn as appropriate to various situations. It's not a dance. It's learning.
-=-When a
child wants to learn a game for instance, and learns by playing (implicit), but
then an older child teaches the younger one something new about the game- the
next level- that would be explicit- no?-=-
No.
-=-It only works however when the implict drive is there in the first place.-=-
Implicit learning isn't "a drive." There isn't "a drive" to learn. There is living in a rich environment and learning without even trying to, or learning from joy and exuberance.
An older child doesn't "teach" something about the game. He answers questions or show something cool. He doesn't create a class and become a teacher.
-=-I have seen some parents rely almost completely on implicit learning, and their
kids have missed out on opportunities-...-=-
Every human on earth misses out on opportunities. There's too much to do in the world for anyone to do even a measurable percent of if. If you think that "to rely almost completely on implicit learning" is a bad thing, but you think implicit learning is great, perhaps your confusion will make it difficult for you to be very helpful to unschoolers.
-=-a kid interested in theater, but the parents never getting it together to enroll him for whatever reason...-=-
"Enroll" isn't usually the term used for theatre. I guess you're thinking of theatre classes, which is fine, but there are also groups to join, and opportunities for auditions for productions.
-=-I'm just throwing out an idea here- I haven't applied top down - bottom up
concepts to education before very recently- though of course I have thought of
these ideas in different ways.-=-
Maybe it's a flawed model, "top down" and "bottom up." Perhaps you shouldn't be applying it.
-=-In the past I have turned hours of video gaming into classes I call "logic
and strategy"-=-
You can't turn it into "classes." Yikes.
Credits? You could call it credits--a number of hours spent exploring, using and learning about logic and strategy. But if you call it "a class," it's fraudulent and misleading to you and the college both. Or maybe my image of "class" is too narrow, but I think two credits in logic is honest, but two classes in logic is not.
-=-or a girl I know who helped her dad build an extra room in
her house- I called that "architectural design", "construction technology" and
"woodworking."-=-
That seems sensible. :-)
-=- I guess if I saw a family who was claiming to unschool and found our from the teen that he really really wanted to pass a particular test (i just had a case going on like this), but the parents were so anti- school that they were completely unsupportive, I'd look for a test taking program and encourage the parents to help support the teen in this endeavor.-=-
"Claiming to unschool" seems hostile. I'm sorry they weren't supportive about helping him prepare for a test, but for you to tell all of us that they were only "claiming to unschool" seems harsh. And if the test was a GED or high school equivalency or proficiency of some sort, they might have wanted the child to take the test without preparation, because the preparation can be frightening and intimidating, but the tests aren't so hard. I've known kids who started to study and decided it must be hard, to have such a big study guide, and they chickened out. I've known kids (my son Marty is one of several) who just took the test to see what they might need to study more on to retake it, and passed it easily the first time. That's a legitimate reason for a family not to want to "support" a "test taking program." I can see why someone unfamiliar with unschooling woudln't have considered that aspect of it, though--of the confidence that can be gained from doing something without instruction and coaching.
Sometimes people ask (as one did last week) what it could possibly hurt for someone to teach a child to read. It can hurt a lot. If the child doesn't learn to read during that instructional foray, it hurts confidence and puts a scar on his future reading. If the child DOES learn to read during those weeks or months, it causes both child and "teacher" to believe that the child wouldn't have learned to read otherwise.
http://sandradodd.com/r/deeper is short, and has things from Joyce, me, and Pam Sorooshian.
Those ideas can apply to later accomplishments and learning, as well.
I hope if you are going to be working with unschoolers that you will find ways to understand and respect unschooling, and not think you would be doing unschooling families a favor by introducing explicit learning in any sort of dance of your design. I would rather (since you asked) that you would not do anything to discourage others from understanding unschooling, by coming to understand it better yourself.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
him -- or wondering if anyone knows the answer- -=-
It's not that I wanted to know the answer so much as I wanted to hint heavily to you that this is an inernational discussion list, so talking about the ideas is better than offering anything local or regional.
Helping you understand unschooling is the only reason I let that through.
-=- Clearly we can all agree that the system is ridiculously out of balance -=-
This sort of rhetoric isn't helpful, and I object to the term "ridiculous" every single time it comes through this discussion. If you state your belief, that's fine. If your belief shows a lack of clarity about unschooling, people will shine a light there. To discuss "the system" here is problematical because we have readers from fifteen countries or more.
-=-But is there a dance between top down(explict to implict) and bottom up(implicit to
explict) learning? I'm thinking that perhaps there is.-=-
When a child learns, he will learn as appropriate to various situations. It's not a dance. It's learning.
-=-When a
child wants to learn a game for instance, and learns by playing (implicit), but
then an older child teaches the younger one something new about the game- the
next level- that would be explicit- no?-=-
No.
-=-It only works however when the implict drive is there in the first place.-=-
Implicit learning isn't "a drive." There isn't "a drive" to learn. There is living in a rich environment and learning without even trying to, or learning from joy and exuberance.
An older child doesn't "teach" something about the game. He answers questions or show something cool. He doesn't create a class and become a teacher.
-=-I have seen some parents rely almost completely on implicit learning, and their
kids have missed out on opportunities-...-=-
Every human on earth misses out on opportunities. There's too much to do in the world for anyone to do even a measurable percent of if. If you think that "to rely almost completely on implicit learning" is a bad thing, but you think implicit learning is great, perhaps your confusion will make it difficult for you to be very helpful to unschoolers.
-=-a kid interested in theater, but the parents never getting it together to enroll him for whatever reason...-=-
"Enroll" isn't usually the term used for theatre. I guess you're thinking of theatre classes, which is fine, but there are also groups to join, and opportunities for auditions for productions.
-=-I'm just throwing out an idea here- I haven't applied top down - bottom up
concepts to education before very recently- though of course I have thought of
these ideas in different ways.-=-
Maybe it's a flawed model, "top down" and "bottom up." Perhaps you shouldn't be applying it.
-=-In the past I have turned hours of video gaming into classes I call "logic
and strategy"-=-
You can't turn it into "classes." Yikes.
Credits? You could call it credits--a number of hours spent exploring, using and learning about logic and strategy. But if you call it "a class," it's fraudulent and misleading to you and the college both. Or maybe my image of "class" is too narrow, but I think two credits in logic is honest, but two classes in logic is not.
-=-or a girl I know who helped her dad build an extra room in
her house- I called that "architectural design", "construction technology" and
"woodworking."-=-
That seems sensible. :-)
-=- I guess if I saw a family who was claiming to unschool and found our from the teen that he really really wanted to pass a particular test (i just had a case going on like this), but the parents were so anti- school that they were completely unsupportive, I'd look for a test taking program and encourage the parents to help support the teen in this endeavor.-=-
"Claiming to unschool" seems hostile. I'm sorry they weren't supportive about helping him prepare for a test, but for you to tell all of us that they were only "claiming to unschool" seems harsh. And if the test was a GED or high school equivalency or proficiency of some sort, they might have wanted the child to take the test without preparation, because the preparation can be frightening and intimidating, but the tests aren't so hard. I've known kids who started to study and decided it must be hard, to have such a big study guide, and they chickened out. I've known kids (my son Marty is one of several) who just took the test to see what they might need to study more on to retake it, and passed it easily the first time. That's a legitimate reason for a family not to want to "support" a "test taking program." I can see why someone unfamiliar with unschooling woudln't have considered that aspect of it, though--of the confidence that can be gained from doing something without instruction and coaching.
Sometimes people ask (as one did last week) what it could possibly hurt for someone to teach a child to read. It can hurt a lot. If the child doesn't learn to read during that instructional foray, it hurts confidence and puts a scar on his future reading. If the child DOES learn to read during those weeks or months, it causes both child and "teacher" to believe that the child wouldn't have learned to read otherwise.
http://sandradodd.com/r/deeper is short, and has things from Joyce, me, and Pam Sorooshian.
Those ideas can apply to later accomplishments and learning, as well.
I hope if you are going to be working with unschoolers that you will find ways to understand and respect unschooling, and not think you would be doing unschooling families a favor by introducing explicit learning in any sort of dance of your design. I would rather (since you asked) that you would not do anything to discourage others from understanding unschooling, by coming to understand it better yourself.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Joyce Fetteroll
On Aug 24, 2012, at 8:01 AM, Shauna Reisewitz wrote:
There are some people who don't care about how the philosophy works. They absorb a basic (false) idea that it's kids learning on their own and then let that happen. I don't think such people are the kind who will be reading about implicit and explicit learning.
Though one problem that gives people the idea that unschooling is avoiding anything that looks like school is that people will come to forums to ask questions when they first begin. And they may be told to let go of anything schoolish in order to deschool and to give kids a chance to explore in other ways. If they don't come back and dig deeper when their kids are done, they're going to have a false idea of what unschooling is.
Joyce
> Clearly we can all agree that the system is ridiculously out ofWhat "the system" does is irrelevant to unschooling. It's like saying to someone who is baking bread at home ... "We can all agree that factories are completely devoid of the care and patience ..." The factory owners have different goals. They aren't wrong in their choices. People are wrong if they're looking to factories as ways to help them bake better bread at home or help their kids explore.
> balance and focuses almost completely on leaning explicitly.
> so the best of them do a lot of song and dance and try to get kids interests piqued."Song and dance" is a negative term. The best are sincerely trying to engage the kids. The problem is the system isn't set up with engagement as a goal. Memorization is what gets priority. It's a factory. Efficiency in getting scores up is what gets rewarded.
> But is there a dance between top down(explict to implict) and bottom up(implicit toI think it just adds a layer of confusion. If a parent's focus is on supporting the child in exploring whatever interests them, then it doesn't matter if the child is playing on their own, listening to another child explain something, reading from a book, watching a video on YouTube, stopping to spontaneously watch some construction workers, asking questions ... It's really about the child seeing the parent as their partner in helping them explore what interests them and creating a rich environment for discovering new interests in.
> explict) learning? I'm thinking that perhaps there is.. When a
> child wants to learn a game for instance, and learns by playing (implicit), but
> then an older child teaches the younger one something new about the game- the
> next level- that would be explicit- no? It only works however when the implict
> drive is there in the first place.
> I have seen some parents rely almost completely on implicit learning, and theirWell, that's just lazy ;-) Or school damage.
> kids have missed out on opportunities-- for example- a kid interested in
> theater, but the parents never getting it together to enroll him for whatever
> reason-- some of what that child may have learned in the theater group
> would be taught from a explicit to implicit way. And of course there may have
> been a lot of implicit learning going on as well.
There are some people who don't care about how the philosophy works. They absorb a basic (false) idea that it's kids learning on their own and then let that happen. I don't think such people are the kind who will be reading about implicit and explicit learning.
Though one problem that gives people the idea that unschooling is avoiding anything that looks like school is that people will come to forums to ask questions when they first begin. And they may be told to let go of anything schoolish in order to deschool and to give kids a chance to explore in other ways. If they don't come back and dig deeper when their kids are done, they're going to have a false idea of what unschooling is.
Joyce
Pam Sorooshian
Offlist I was talking with Shauna about the mechanics and needs that might
be met by a school such as she is developing (it is local to me). It IS a
school, though, so I didn't think that the details of what she's doing were
appropriate here. I left the post for other moderators to decide if they
wanted to respond to it on the list, though, because it contained some
stuff about unschooling, too.
I wonder if what Shauna is trying to get at with the concepts of implicit
versus explicit learning has to do with what I think of as incidental
versus intentional learning. I think most learning that young children do
and much learning in older kids, teens, and adults is incidental. By
incidental I mean that the learning isn't the point of what they are doing
- they are pursuing some activity, solving a specific problem, engaged in a
conversation, playing a game, watching a tv show, etc., and they happen to
learn a whole lot of stuff in the process. By intentional I mean that they
set out on purpose to learn something - maybe they decide to learn to play
guitar and they watch youtube videos to that purpose.
Incidental could be called implicit and intentional learning could be
referred to as explicit -- but the terms aren't as clear, imo. They have
more to do with what is displayed/seen/observed/expressed than whether it
is happening naturally or with a conscious choice to learn something
specific. (Implicit means understood to exist but not openly
expressed/explicit means fully and clearly expressed).
However, confusing these concepts (incidental versus intentional) with
bottom-up and top-down really muddies things. Implicit and explicit don't
seem to me to have anything to do with bottom-up and top-down learning. I
think maybe Shauna's point is that some learning happens without another
person giving direct information (a kid working out on their own how to
solve a puzzle, for example) while other learning involves someone giving
instructions (the older child explaining the rules of a game).
I get the feeling that this dichotomy might be used to justify the need for
teachers, though, as if some things are better taught (top-down) and other
things can be learned in a "bottom-up" way.
Thinking of how unschooled kids learn as either "bottom up" (on their own)
versus top-down (being taught) isn't a helpful way to better understand
unschooling. Unschooled kids learn in a zillion different ways and the
depth and breadth and wonder of how it works is lost in that dichotomy.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
be met by a school such as she is developing (it is local to me). It IS a
school, though, so I didn't think that the details of what she's doing were
appropriate here. I left the post for other moderators to decide if they
wanted to respond to it on the list, though, because it contained some
stuff about unschooling, too.
I wonder if what Shauna is trying to get at with the concepts of implicit
versus explicit learning has to do with what I think of as incidental
versus intentional learning. I think most learning that young children do
and much learning in older kids, teens, and adults is incidental. By
incidental I mean that the learning isn't the point of what they are doing
- they are pursuing some activity, solving a specific problem, engaged in a
conversation, playing a game, watching a tv show, etc., and they happen to
learn a whole lot of stuff in the process. By intentional I mean that they
set out on purpose to learn something - maybe they decide to learn to play
guitar and they watch youtube videos to that purpose.
Incidental could be called implicit and intentional learning could be
referred to as explicit -- but the terms aren't as clear, imo. They have
more to do with what is displayed/seen/observed/expressed than whether it
is happening naturally or with a conscious choice to learn something
specific. (Implicit means understood to exist but not openly
expressed/explicit means fully and clearly expressed).
However, confusing these concepts (incidental versus intentional) with
bottom-up and top-down really muddies things. Implicit and explicit don't
seem to me to have anything to do with bottom-up and top-down learning. I
think maybe Shauna's point is that some learning happens without another
person giving direct information (a kid working out on their own how to
solve a puzzle, for example) while other learning involves someone giving
instructions (the older child explaining the rules of a game).
I get the feeling that this dichotomy might be used to justify the need for
teachers, though, as if some things are better taught (top-down) and other
things can be learned in a "bottom-up" way.
Thinking of how unschooled kids learn as either "bottom up" (on their own)
versus top-down (being taught) isn't a helpful way to better understand
unschooling. Unschooled kids learn in a zillion different ways and the
depth and breadth and wonder of how it works is lost in that dichotomy.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Pam Sorooshian
Rather than categorize the ways unschoolers learn into just two categories,
more helpful is to think of it as: watching, visiting, creating, building,
conversing, debating, listening, reading, making, playing, moving,
speaking, watching, collaborating, and so on.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
more helpful is to think of it as: watching, visiting, creating, building,
conversing, debating, listening, reading, making, playing, moving,
speaking, watching, collaborating, and so on.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-Thinking of how unschooled kids learn as either "bottom up" (on their own)
versus top-down (being taught) isn't a helpful way to better understand
unschooling. Unschooled kids learn in a zillion different ways and the
depth and breadth and wonder of how it works is lost in that dichotomy.-=-
Yes.
I've been around a lot of new video-game-playing lately, with a couple of pattern games--Flow Free and Flip Pix. We played with some of Holly's friends this weekend, I showed them to a couple of Pam's kids early last month, and some people in Europe last summer. :-)
Other people have shown me their games, and they showed me because they were excited about them. Neither of us was bottom or top. It was flowing back and forth on the same level.
To refer to what unschoolers do as "bottom up" puts natural learning on the bottom. Why? It's a good model to abandon.
If anything, school subject matter is the bottom, the shallow pond of prescribed knowledge schools have changed only gradually over the past hundred years. School kids are pressed to wade in that, to stay in and around that. Unschoolers are living up and away from it entirely, though the important and fun parts are available and accessible in a thousand different ways.
I learned some about WWII this summer that I hadn't known, because I was given a tile as a gift. http://sandradodd.com/leiden/tile
After I read those stories I followed them to others, and then talked to people there who had other information, about bicycles having been taken away by the Nazis, in the Netherlands. That was learned eagerly, and nobody taught me. I didn't need to know, I just wanted to know. It's not something that was ever mentioned to me in any history class, so does that mean it's not important?
People can learn about WWII if they make quilts with airplanes on them, or if they're interested in the history of military uniforms or tank technology, or popular music, hairstyles, motorcycles, cellulose leather-substitutes (early "naugahyde" type material, and vinyl replacements for "oil cloth"), tents, aluminum or stainless steel used in dishes, forks, spoons, airplanes. Quanset huts (I passed by two of them yesterday, in an older part of Albuquerque). Those are not things school will teach, but they are knowledge that other knowledge can be attached to and connected with.
Roaming the world with curiosity and joy is not "bottom up" learning. Information prescribed and "taught" so that someone can pass a test isn't "top down" in any moral or logical way. The history and mythology of our language and culture has heaven at top (God, angels) and evil at bottom (ignorance, devils, hell). Anyone planning to work with unschooling families might want to consider approaching them as equals or superiors, and not as inferiors who are randomly and accidentally learning, down below.
This might be too rough for some practicing, believing Christians, but here are some other ideas about what's up and what's down.
http://sandradodd.com/theology
Here's the part that's not too blasphemous:
It's not just a Christian idea that heaven is "up," so either heaven IS up, or humans in general have an idea that below the ground isn't the place to want to be, and that all that light and air and pretty cloud-stuff should be our goal. Is NASA like saints ascending? In any fewer than a dozen ways?
Why wouldn't people think there is fire and brimstone under the ground? THERE IS!!!! Anyone who has been around a sulphur spring or hot springs or volcanic activity knows that under the ground there's evil, painful, stinky hot stuff not conducive to human comfort. It's not rocket-theology to figure that one out. But the sky... OOOOh, it's pretty. It smells good lots of times. Those little breezes on your face are like a mother's touch (good touch). Rainbows. Sunrise and sunset light shows.
Ground?
Worms and bugs and rotting dead birds.
Air?
Singing birds. Oxygen. Clouds shaped like food.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
versus top-down (being taught) isn't a helpful way to better understand
unschooling. Unschooled kids learn in a zillion different ways and the
depth and breadth and wonder of how it works is lost in that dichotomy.-=-
Yes.
I've been around a lot of new video-game-playing lately, with a couple of pattern games--Flow Free and Flip Pix. We played with some of Holly's friends this weekend, I showed them to a couple of Pam's kids early last month, and some people in Europe last summer. :-)
Other people have shown me their games, and they showed me because they were excited about them. Neither of us was bottom or top. It was flowing back and forth on the same level.
To refer to what unschoolers do as "bottom up" puts natural learning on the bottom. Why? It's a good model to abandon.
If anything, school subject matter is the bottom, the shallow pond of prescribed knowledge schools have changed only gradually over the past hundred years. School kids are pressed to wade in that, to stay in and around that. Unschoolers are living up and away from it entirely, though the important and fun parts are available and accessible in a thousand different ways.
I learned some about WWII this summer that I hadn't known, because I was given a tile as a gift. http://sandradodd.com/leiden/tile
After I read those stories I followed them to others, and then talked to people there who had other information, about bicycles having been taken away by the Nazis, in the Netherlands. That was learned eagerly, and nobody taught me. I didn't need to know, I just wanted to know. It's not something that was ever mentioned to me in any history class, so does that mean it's not important?
People can learn about WWII if they make quilts with airplanes on them, or if they're interested in the history of military uniforms or tank technology, or popular music, hairstyles, motorcycles, cellulose leather-substitutes (early "naugahyde" type material, and vinyl replacements for "oil cloth"), tents, aluminum or stainless steel used in dishes, forks, spoons, airplanes. Quanset huts (I passed by two of them yesterday, in an older part of Albuquerque). Those are not things school will teach, but they are knowledge that other knowledge can be attached to and connected with.
Roaming the world with curiosity and joy is not "bottom up" learning. Information prescribed and "taught" so that someone can pass a test isn't "top down" in any moral or logical way. The history and mythology of our language and culture has heaven at top (God, angels) and evil at bottom (ignorance, devils, hell). Anyone planning to work with unschooling families might want to consider approaching them as equals or superiors, and not as inferiors who are randomly and accidentally learning, down below.
This might be too rough for some practicing, believing Christians, but here are some other ideas about what's up and what's down.
http://sandradodd.com/theology
Here's the part that's not too blasphemous:
It's not just a Christian idea that heaven is "up," so either heaven IS up, or humans in general have an idea that below the ground isn't the place to want to be, and that all that light and air and pretty cloud-stuff should be our goal. Is NASA like saints ascending? In any fewer than a dozen ways?
Why wouldn't people think there is fire and brimstone under the ground? THERE IS!!!! Anyone who has been around a sulphur spring or hot springs or volcanic activity knows that under the ground there's evil, painful, stinky hot stuff not conducive to human comfort. It's not rocket-theology to figure that one out. But the sky... OOOOh, it's pretty. It smells good lots of times. Those little breezes on your face are like a mother's touch (good touch). Rainbows. Sunrise and sunset light shows.
Ground?
Worms and bugs and rotting dead birds.
Air?
Singing birds. Oxygen. Clouds shaped like food.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
chris ester
> >>>>>Sometimes people ask (as one did last week) what it could possiblyshowed a lot of musical interest and ability at a very young age. I was
> hurt for someone to teach a child to read. It can hurt a lot. If the child
> doesn't learn to read during that instructional foray, it hurts confidence
> and puts a scar on his future reading. If the child DOES learn to read
> during those weeks or months, it causes both child and "teacher" to believe
> that the child wouldn't have learned to read otherwise.
> http://sandradodd.com/r/deeper is short, and has things from Joyce, me,
> and Pam Sorooshian.
>
>
>
> Sandra<<<<<
>
> A perfect example of this is something I did many years ago. My son
young and not yet sufficiently de-schooled and so I signed him up for an
early learning music class. Because of this class (which he hated) he
showed no interest in music for the next three years. I still wince when I
think of this blunder of mine.
He recovered eventually, and I have managed to let my guilt over it go
(mostly), and use it to teach others how we, as parents, might mean well
can muck things up for our kids.
Chris
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Shauna
What I was doing here was exploring an idea of applying a very interesting (to me) ecological concept of top down and bottom up systems to education. In ecology- there are systems that are driven ecologically by "bottom up" forces- winds and nutrients and such providing the basis of an ecosystem, and systems driven by "top down" forces- sea otters eating sea urchins, allowing kelp forests to flourish.(predators drive the system). One isn't better than the other they are just different, and in many many , actually most systems both types of interactions- nutrient availability and predator prey relationships-- both do sort of a dance that create a healthy ecosystem when everything is in balance and result in ecological degradation when something in that dance is out of kilter.
I was suggesting that education itself was "out of kilter"- because most of society relies only on top down educational forces defining education, and what I'm offering in my school (and what Wes does) is a more bottom up approach to allowing kids to earn a high school diploma.
Following the idea of top down and bottom up systems, I looked up top down bottom up learning on line- and got a scholarly paper (that made my eyes glaze over-- if you google that term you'll see what i mean) but what i got from the abstract was that top down meant explicit to implicit learning, and bottom up meant implicit to explicit learning-- that top down/ bottom up was actually in the educational literature.
So moving away from education to just plain learning, I started thinking is there any value at all to "top down" explicit to implicit learning? I was just exploring an idea here. And answering a question_ would I ever suggest or support explicit to implicit learning experiences in my school?
I can see in the course of this conversation where my analogy breaks down and that's partially why I threw it out there. I wanted it to get chewed up and mulled around. I agree that learning itself isn't linear and doesn't only go in two directions- it's much more of a spiral multi dimensional process-- that takes place through playing, discussing, watching, reading, singing, acting, more playing, listening, climbing over, taking a class, teaching a class, learning from a friend,analyzing, experimenting, more playing, dancing,etc.... And yes there would be times when I would encourage a student to follow his passions and work with a particular mentor or take a particular class if I saw him looking for something like that. Whether that is top down or bottom up or implicit or explicit is a bit irrelevant- I see that.
But I still like my analogy to explain to my science-friends who basically regular school their kids-It helps them understand what I'm trying to do offering a bottom up approach to education. (not learning) It works for me with particular people.
When I analyze my own intelligences, linguistic facility is not my strongest point (which may be apparent by my posts : ))- I'm not terrible at it, though, and have found ways to use "educationalese" words to describe what homeschoolers/unschooers have done in the past for the purpose of writing transcripts. So I have given credits to kids who played hours of video games and called it a "class" because I was in a system that in order to give credits- you assign credits to a "class." I have a fairly long history of doing this kind of "subversive" activity in a charter school, and never felt it fraudulent-- because I knew that kids learned from activities that the regular school system would not give them credits for. I was in the system- and believed / knew they deserved credits for learning. I have always supported unschoolers in our particular charter school system. I don't think anyone has ever found me hostile or at all unsupportive to unschooling-
Linguistic facility is not my strongest intelligence, but intrapersonal is. And I know myself. I know that I support and understand unschooling (maybe not perfectly- but pretty darn well). And in the new school I'm pursuing, unschoolers would feel supported- and if they didn't I would be open to learning from them and hearing their criticism. Perhaps I have used words or terms in this discussion which may lead some people to think I don't understand unschooling. And I'm OK with seeing the holes- because when I see my shortcomings , I'm pretty good and shoring them up and getting stronger.
I agree that roaming the world with curiosity and joy isn't bottom up learning. "Bottom up learning" is too narrow a term for curiosity and joy. I see that. But I'm trying to create a school (and a system) that offers a high school diploma and a transcript (if they want)to kids who roam the world with curiosity and joy, or who WANT the opportunity to roam the world with curiosity and joy, but for whom high school requirements stand in the way.
Hopefully that makes sense.
I was suggesting that education itself was "out of kilter"- because most of society relies only on top down educational forces defining education, and what I'm offering in my school (and what Wes does) is a more bottom up approach to allowing kids to earn a high school diploma.
Following the idea of top down and bottom up systems, I looked up top down bottom up learning on line- and got a scholarly paper (that made my eyes glaze over-- if you google that term you'll see what i mean) but what i got from the abstract was that top down meant explicit to implicit learning, and bottom up meant implicit to explicit learning-- that top down/ bottom up was actually in the educational literature.
So moving away from education to just plain learning, I started thinking is there any value at all to "top down" explicit to implicit learning? I was just exploring an idea here. And answering a question_ would I ever suggest or support explicit to implicit learning experiences in my school?
I can see in the course of this conversation where my analogy breaks down and that's partially why I threw it out there. I wanted it to get chewed up and mulled around. I agree that learning itself isn't linear and doesn't only go in two directions- it's much more of a spiral multi dimensional process-- that takes place through playing, discussing, watching, reading, singing, acting, more playing, listening, climbing over, taking a class, teaching a class, learning from a friend,analyzing, experimenting, more playing, dancing,etc.... And yes there would be times when I would encourage a student to follow his passions and work with a particular mentor or take a particular class if I saw him looking for something like that. Whether that is top down or bottom up or implicit or explicit is a bit irrelevant- I see that.
But I still like my analogy to explain to my science-friends who basically regular school their kids-It helps them understand what I'm trying to do offering a bottom up approach to education. (not learning) It works for me with particular people.
When I analyze my own intelligences, linguistic facility is not my strongest point (which may be apparent by my posts : ))- I'm not terrible at it, though, and have found ways to use "educationalese" words to describe what homeschoolers/unschooers have done in the past for the purpose of writing transcripts. So I have given credits to kids who played hours of video games and called it a "class" because I was in a system that in order to give credits- you assign credits to a "class." I have a fairly long history of doing this kind of "subversive" activity in a charter school, and never felt it fraudulent-- because I knew that kids learned from activities that the regular school system would not give them credits for. I was in the system- and believed / knew they deserved credits for learning. I have always supported unschoolers in our particular charter school system. I don't think anyone has ever found me hostile or at all unsupportive to unschooling-
Linguistic facility is not my strongest intelligence, but intrapersonal is. And I know myself. I know that I support and understand unschooling (maybe not perfectly- but pretty darn well). And in the new school I'm pursuing, unschoolers would feel supported- and if they didn't I would be open to learning from them and hearing their criticism. Perhaps I have used words or terms in this discussion which may lead some people to think I don't understand unschooling. And I'm OK with seeing the holes- because when I see my shortcomings , I'm pretty good and shoring them up and getting stronger.
I agree that roaming the world with curiosity and joy isn't bottom up learning. "Bottom up learning" is too narrow a term for curiosity and joy. I see that. But I'm trying to create a school (and a system) that offers a high school diploma and a transcript (if they want)to kids who roam the world with curiosity and joy, or who WANT the opportunity to roam the world with curiosity and joy, but for whom high school requirements stand in the way.
Hopefully that makes sense.
--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
>
> -=-Thinking of how unschooled kids learn as either "bottom up" (on their own)
> versus top-down (being taught) isn't a helpful way to better understand
> unschooling. Unschooled kids learn in a zillion different ways and the
> depth and breadth and wonder of how it works is lost in that dichotomy.-=-
>
> Yes.
> I've been around a lot of new video-game-playing lately, with a couple of pattern games--Flow Free and Flip Pix. We played with some of Holly's friends this weekend, I showed them to a couple of Pam's kids early last month, and some people in Europe last summer. :-)
>
> Other people have shown me their games, and they showed me because they were excited about them. Neither of us was bottom or top. It was flowing back and forth on the same level.
>
> To refer to what unschoolers do as "bottom up" puts natural learning on the bottom. Why? It's a good model to abandon.
>
> If anything, school subject matter is the bottom, the shallow pond of prescribed knowledge schools have changed only gradually over the past hundred years. School kids are pressed to wade in that, to stay in and around that. Unschoolers are living up and away from it entirely, though the important and fun parts are available and accessible in a thousand different ways.
>
> I learned some about WWII this summer that I hadn't known, because I was given a tile as a gift. http://sandradodd.com/leiden/tile
>
> After I read those stories I followed them to others, and then talked to people there who had other information, about bicycles having been taken away by the Nazis, in the Netherlands. That was learned eagerly, and nobody taught me. I didn't need to know, I just wanted to know. It's not something that was ever mentioned to me in any history class, so does that mean it's not important?
>
> People can learn about WWII if they make quilts with airplanes on them, or if they're interested in the history of military uniforms or tank technology, or popular music, hairstyles, motorcycles, cellulose leather-substitutes (early "naugahyde" type material, and vinyl replacements for "oil cloth"), tents, aluminum or stainless steel used in dishes, forks, spoons, airplanes. Quanset huts (I passed by two of them yesterday, in an older part of Albuquerque). Those are not things school will teach, but they are knowledge that other knowledge can be attached to and connected with.
>
> Roaming the world with curiosity and joy is not "bottom up" learning. Information prescribed and "taught" so that someone can pass a test isn't "top down" in any moral or logical way. The history and mythology of our language and culture has heaven at top (God, angels) and evil at bottom (ignorance, devils, hell). Anyone planning to work with unschooling families might want to consider approaching them as equals or superiors, and not as inferiors who are randomly and accidentally learning, down below.
>
>
> This might be too rough for some practicing, believing Christians, but here are some other ideas about what's up and what's down.
> http://sandradodd.com/theology
>
> Here's the part that's not too blasphemous:
>
> It's not just a Christian idea that heaven is "up," so either heaven IS up, or humans in general have an idea that below the ground isn't the place to want to be, and that all that light and air and pretty cloud-stuff should be our goal. Is NASA like saints ascending? In any fewer than a dozen ways?
>
> Why wouldn't people think there is fire and brimstone under the ground? THERE IS!!!! Anyone who has been around a sulphur spring or hot springs or volcanic activity knows that under the ground there's evil, painful, stinky hot stuff not conducive to human comfort. It's not rocket-theology to figure that one out. But the sky... OOOOh, it's pretty. It smells good lots of times. Those little breezes on your face are like a mother's touch (good touch). Rainbows. Sunrise and sunset light shows.
>
> Ground?
> Worms and bugs and rotting dead birds.
>
> Air?
> Singing birds. Oxygen. Clouds shaped like food.
>
>
> Sandra
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
keetry
==I wonder if what Shauna is trying to get at with the concepts of implicit versus explicit learning has to do with what I think of as incidental versus intentional learning.==
==(Implicit means understood to exist but not openly expressed/explicit means fully and clearly expressed).==
This makes a lot more sense to me. The implicit vs. explicit learning was confusing me.
== However, confusing these concepts (incidental versus intentional) with bottom-up and top-down really muddies things.==
==Thinking of how unschooled kids learn as either "bottom up" (on their own)versus top-down (being taught) isn't a helpful way to better understand unschooling.==
This, too. I couldn't figure out what top-down and bottom-up learning meant. I was kind of getting that it comes from the idea that some parents think of themselves as on the top and their children on the bottom but I don't like that at all, especially when it comes to unschooling. Most parents that I've known who think and talk that way are very controlling. That does not fit with unschooling.
Alysia
==(Implicit means understood to exist but not openly expressed/explicit means fully and clearly expressed).==
This makes a lot more sense to me. The implicit vs. explicit learning was confusing me.
== However, confusing these concepts (incidental versus intentional) with bottom-up and top-down really muddies things.==
==Thinking of how unschooled kids learn as either "bottom up" (on their own)versus top-down (being taught) isn't a helpful way to better understand unschooling.==
This, too. I couldn't figure out what top-down and bottom-up learning meant. I was kind of getting that it comes from the idea that some parents think of themselves as on the top and their children on the bottom but I don't like that at all, especially when it comes to unschooling. Most parents that I've known who think and talk that way are very controlling. That does not fit with unschooling.
Alysia
keetry
== People can learn about WWII if they make quilts with airplanes on them, or if they're interested in the history of military uniforms or tank technology, or popular music, hairstyles, motorcycles, cellulose leather-substitutes (early "naugahyde" type material, and vinyl replacements for "oil cloth"), tents, aluminum or stainless steel used in dishes, forks, spoons, airplanes. Quanset huts (I passed by two of them yesterday, in an older part of Albuquerque).==
My 5 and 8 year olds have learned about WWII through their interest in video games and guns, two things that many parents consider off-limits.
They like to watch YouTube videos on building different guns. My 8 year old was watching one just the other day on how to modify those tiny Lego guns. They have modified their Nerf guns.
What "subjects" would that include? Engineering, geometry, geography, history, mechanics? They understand all of these things on an intuitive level as opposed to only being able to walk through the steps of a made up problem written on a piece of paper in order to pass a test.
Alysia
My 5 and 8 year olds have learned about WWII through their interest in video games and guns, two things that many parents consider off-limits.
They like to watch YouTube videos on building different guns. My 8 year old was watching one just the other day on how to modify those tiny Lego guns. They have modified their Nerf guns.
What "subjects" would that include? Engineering, geometry, geography, history, mechanics? They understand all of these things on an intuitive level as opposed to only being able to walk through the steps of a made up problem written on a piece of paper in order to pass a test.
Alysia
Joyce Fetteroll
On Aug 25, 2012, at 8:15 AM, Shauna wrote:
I'm betting lots of people did get it and what you got back was a reflection of what those ideas looked like through an unschooling lens. Basically the ideas came up way short. They're awkward and misleading.
Regardless of whether ecologists or any other micro-subset of people will see a positive spin on top-down and bottom-up, it's the people who will be reading what you write whose interpretation you should be focused on. Top-down and bottom-up are going to conjure negative images of superior and inferior for most people.
If you want to create an analogy, it should be one the audience you're writing for can easily grasp and not add a layer of false impressions that need explained away. People will use their first impression. And the first impression wasn't a good one.
Feeling trapped, feeling you "have to" do something to get around a system, feeling the system just doesn't understand reality, doesn't change a lie into a truth. It's helpful for clarity of thought to see things for what they are. If you see things as they really are, then perhaps you'll be able to come up with a better solution. Or at least not be upset when a college calls you on the fabrication.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> What I was doing here was exploring an idea of applying a veryAnd I think because no one said "Yes, I see that," you're guessing no one understood what you were trying to do.
> interesting (to me) ecological concept of top down and bottom up systems to education
I'm betting lots of people did get it and what you got back was a reflection of what those ideas looked like through an unschooling lens. Basically the ideas came up way short. They're awkward and misleading.
Regardless of whether ecologists or any other micro-subset of people will see a positive spin on top-down and bottom-up, it's the people who will be reading what you write whose interpretation you should be focused on. Top-down and bottom-up are going to conjure negative images of superior and inferior for most people.
If you want to create an analogy, it should be one the audience you're writing for can easily grasp and not add a layer of false impressions that need explained away. People will use their first impression. And the first impression wasn't a good one.
> So I have given credits to kids who played hours of video games and called it a "class" because I was in a system that in order to give credits- you assign credits to a "class."If in that system class had a very flexible meaning, that wasn't lying. Outside that system, it's not a class unless there's a teacher and specific goals. If your school creates a transcript for a kid to send to a college and lists classes that were kids playing video games at home, you've misrepresented what they did. It *is* a lie. If a college checks into it, you've lost integrity.
Feeling trapped, feeling you "have to" do something to get around a system, feeling the system just doesn't understand reality, doesn't change a lie into a truth. It's helpful for clarity of thought to see things for what they are. If you see things as they really are, then perhaps you'll be able to come up with a better solution. Or at least not be upset when a college calls you on the fabrication.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Pam Sorooshian
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:15 AM, Shauna <shaunareisewitz@...> wrote:
It isn't like the educational researchers have much going for them in
terms of having had a useful impact on helping children learn, right?
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> that top down/ bottom up was actually in the educational literature.>>>Not a good reason to use it. Might be a good reason to avoid it.
It isn't like the educational researchers have much going for them in
terms of having had a useful impact on helping children learn, right?
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Pam Sorooshian
On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 5:15 AM, Shauna <shaunareisewitz@...> wrote:
unschooling, but it isn't a good place to get help in figuring out how to
run your California private school.
Believing in unschooling (believing that learning happens in many ways and
that kids don't need lessons and worksheets and "top-down" control) isn't
the same as understanding unschooling.
Recognizing learning happens in many ways and being capable of putting that
learning into educational terminology is a useful skill, sometimes, but it
isn't the same as understanding unschooling.
You've come here as a long-time teacher and hope-to-be school administrator
- I've assumed you plan to raise your young children as unschoolers, and
maybe that was an incorrect assumption. But when I say that your
descriptions of learning (implicit/explicit or bottom-up/top-down) are not
indicating an in-depth understanding of unschooling, I'm speaking to you as
a parent.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> I agree that roaming the world with curiosity and joy isn't bottom upThis is a great place for you to really come to understand more about
> learning. "Bottom up learning" is too narrow a term for curiosity and joy.
> I see that. But I'm trying to create a school (and a system) that offers a
> high school diploma and a transcript (if they want)to kids who roam the
> world with curiosity and joy, or who WANT the opportunity to roam the world
> with curiosity and joy, but for whom high school requirements stand in the
> way.
>
> Hopefully that makes sense.>>>
>
unschooling, but it isn't a good place to get help in figuring out how to
run your California private school.
Believing in unschooling (believing that learning happens in many ways and
that kids don't need lessons and worksheets and "top-down" control) isn't
the same as understanding unschooling.
Recognizing learning happens in many ways and being capable of putting that
learning into educational terminology is a useful skill, sometimes, but it
isn't the same as understanding unschooling.
You've come here as a long-time teacher and hope-to-be school administrator
- I've assumed you plan to raise your young children as unschoolers, and
maybe that was an incorrect assumption. But when I say that your
descriptions of learning (implicit/explicit or bottom-up/top-down) are not
indicating an in-depth understanding of unschooling, I'm speaking to you as
a parent.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-> that top down/ bottom up was actually in the educational literature.>>>
-=-Not a good reason to use it. Might be a good reason to avoid it.
-=-It isn't like the educational researchers have much going for them in
terms of having had a useful impact on helping children learn, right?-=-
There is no bigger cesspool of bullpoo than "the educational literature."
Pay is based on college credits and years in the classroom (in many, most or all, in places where merit pay doesn't also add to it, and there are very few places that have adopted merit pay). Teachers take fluff-and-nonsense graduate courses, and they really want a masters or phD (I'm talking U.S. at this point; I don't know what in other countries will get a person an automatic raise that way). But gosh, they must do research! And the research I've seen (I was a teacher, and followed that stuff for years) involved new terminology for existing ideas, new lists of considerations to replace older lists (what used to be an eight-point set of factors tweaked to be only six, or maybe now nine!), or they want to critique the methods used by publishers to create materials. So much of what they're doing is just stirring the same nonsense around and re-labelling things. Then they make more money each paycheck. Public school doesn't get better. Teachers don't know more about teaching.
And they create jargon so that they feel educated and in the know and part of a profession with specialized knowledge. If they use regular English, then ANYone could understand them.
Unschooling is best discussed in regular English. If we and our children are going to be learning in natural ways from the real world, no veil of labels and secret terminology can help in any way. Seeing directly is valuable in natural learning. Seeing educationese is valuable to teachers.
The offer of these "transcript documentation" is to turn real world into jargon, but it can still be done honestly. And it would be good if it can be done without any adverse effect on the family and their unschooling. Especially if a family is fairly new to unschooling, dealing with someone who doesn't understand unschooling can easily set them back, and they only have so many years to clearly understand unschooling.
Schools and jobs don't always actually need transcripts, either. A letter stating that the person was homeschooled has gotten them past the alleged "have to have" point in hundreds of situations.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-=-Not a good reason to use it. Might be a good reason to avoid it.
-=-It isn't like the educational researchers have much going for them in
terms of having had a useful impact on helping children learn, right?-=-
There is no bigger cesspool of bullpoo than "the educational literature."
Pay is based on college credits and years in the classroom (in many, most or all, in places where merit pay doesn't also add to it, and there are very few places that have adopted merit pay). Teachers take fluff-and-nonsense graduate courses, and they really want a masters or phD (I'm talking U.S. at this point; I don't know what in other countries will get a person an automatic raise that way). But gosh, they must do research! And the research I've seen (I was a teacher, and followed that stuff for years) involved new terminology for existing ideas, new lists of considerations to replace older lists (what used to be an eight-point set of factors tweaked to be only six, or maybe now nine!), or they want to critique the methods used by publishers to create materials. So much of what they're doing is just stirring the same nonsense around and re-labelling things. Then they make more money each paycheck. Public school doesn't get better. Teachers don't know more about teaching.
And they create jargon so that they feel educated and in the know and part of a profession with specialized knowledge. If they use regular English, then ANYone could understand them.
Unschooling is best discussed in regular English. If we and our children are going to be learning in natural ways from the real world, no veil of labels and secret terminology can help in any way. Seeing directly is valuable in natural learning. Seeing educationese is valuable to teachers.
The offer of these "transcript documentation" is to turn real world into jargon, but it can still be done honestly. And it would be good if it can be done without any adverse effect on the family and their unschooling. Especially if a family is fairly new to unschooling, dealing with someone who doesn't understand unschooling can easily set them back, and they only have so many years to clearly understand unschooling.
Schools and jobs don't always actually need transcripts, either. A letter stating that the person was homeschooled has gotten them past the alleged "have to have" point in hundreds of situations.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Melissa Dietrick
hi sandra,
interesting for some unschoolers in italy.
to get into highschool here, one must take the 8th grade licence exam, and
to get into college, one must take the end of highschool "maturity" exam.
But recent European Community laws allow for students from other countries
to show their school level equivalent (transcripts or diplomas) to be able
to waive the need for the exams.
I know of one family whose daughter was homeschooling in italy (italian
dad, american mom) who was able to receive her college level diploma from
the music conservatory by taking the SAT exams as a substitute for the
italian "maturity" exam. All at 17yrs, when by law one must be at least 19
yrs to take the Maturity exam, so she shouldnt have even been at the
conservatory yet, and here she is all ready to graduate :)
hello from italy
melissa
http://apprendimentonaturale.blogspot.com/
www.nontogliermiilsorriso.org
http://www.indianbambooflute.blogspot.com/
http://www.etsy.com/shop/larimeloom
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/apprendimentonaturale/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> I let this through even though it doesn't apply to people who areI dont know about Wes beach's school, but I know that this could be very
> outside the U.S., probably. Or maybe so! Has Wes Beach's school given
> diplomas to people outside the U.S.?
>
interesting for some unschoolers in italy.
to get into highschool here, one must take the 8th grade licence exam, and
to get into college, one must take the end of highschool "maturity" exam.
But recent European Community laws allow for students from other countries
to show their school level equivalent (transcripts or diplomas) to be able
to waive the need for the exams.
I know of one family whose daughter was homeschooling in italy (italian
dad, american mom) who was able to receive her college level diploma from
the music conservatory by taking the SAT exams as a substitute for the
italian "maturity" exam. All at 17yrs, when by law one must be at least 19
yrs to take the Maturity exam, so she shouldnt have even been at the
conservatory yet, and here she is all ready to graduate :)
hello from italy
melissa
http://apprendimentonaturale.blogspot.com/
www.nontogliermiilsorriso.org
http://www.indianbambooflute.blogspot.com/
http://www.etsy.com/shop/larimeloom
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/apprendimentonaturale/
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
keetry
== What I was doing here was exploring an idea of applying a very interesting (to me) ecological concept of top down and bottom up systems to education. In ecology- there are systems that are driven ecologically by "bottom up" forces- winds and nutrients and such providing the basis of an ecosystem, and systems driven by "top down" forces- sea otters eating sea urchins, allowing kelp forests to flourish.(predators drive the system). ==
I have a B.S. in biology with an emphasis on ecology and animal behavior and I don't recall coming across those terms in any of my scientific studies.
So the analogy would be that our children are like the detritus and we parents are the predators?
== Following the idea of top down and bottom up systems, I looked up top down bottom up learning on line- and got a scholarly paper (that made my eyes glaze over-- if you google that term you'll see what i mean) but what i got from the abstract was that top down meant explicit to implicit learning, and bottom up meant implicit to explicit learning-- that top down/ bottom up was actually in the educational literature. ==
Educational literature isn't very helpful to unschooling. I can see how people in the educational system would label things as top-down. Teachers are above, superior to, the students and must try to pass on their vast array of knowledge to the students who otherwise would not know about it.
I don't think that works with unschooling.
Alysia
I have a B.S. in biology with an emphasis on ecology and animal behavior and I don't recall coming across those terms in any of my scientific studies.
So the analogy would be that our children are like the detritus and we parents are the predators?
== Following the idea of top down and bottom up systems, I looked up top down bottom up learning on line- and got a scholarly paper (that made my eyes glaze over-- if you google that term you'll see what i mean) but what i got from the abstract was that top down meant explicit to implicit learning, and bottom up meant implicit to explicit learning-- that top down/ bottom up was actually in the educational literature. ==
Educational literature isn't very helpful to unschooling. I can see how people in the educational system would label things as top-down. Teachers are above, superior to, the students and must try to pass on their vast array of knowledge to the students who otherwise would not know about it.
I don't think that works with unschooling.
Alysia
Bonny Moss
How to get into anything without a diploma.
==This then gives kids under 18 a way to pursue anything that a kid with a high school diploma can. -- entrance into Community College, entrance into various vocational schools, something to put on a resume, etc...==
As someone who unschooled through high school myself, perhaps i can shed some light on this issue:
I have *never* needed a high school diploma. I have worked, gone to college twice, and done all sorts of interesting things in the 15 years since my teenhood, and despite listening to lots of folks tell me i'd need a diploma, it has *never once* been even a momentary problem.
If you want to know more, here's how i dealt with it:
While a teen, i enrolled in a local high school in order to take advantage of a state program (Running Start, in WA) that allowed me to take community college classes for free.
When i could no longer take what i wanted and needed, i called my high school and told them they were fired.
When i wanted to go back to this college later, i enrolled as a "returning student" and no-one ever asked for a diploma.
When i have had to fill out forms asking about my education level, i write "some college." Anyone could write this - i have never been asked for documentation.
When i have filled out forms asking about high school, i simply write in "Homeschooled." Again, i have never once been asked for documentation of any kind.
I have been accepted to university by writing in "homeschooled." They didn't even ask about it.
I have filled out more forms in my life, for private and public institutions, than most people can shake a stick at, and have always gotten what i needed. I have also been honest, all along.
Remember, it is always a real live person making the decision. My engaging attitude, confident eye contact, and articulate speaking - classic unschooler traits - have been my ticket to getting my needs met. Not a diploma.
If i got into a situation now where i needed a diploma, i'd look some up online, write one that resonated with me and was true, name the school something awesome, and have my mom sign it.
I hope this is helpful!
-Bonny
(Quick intro, since this is my first post: My name is Bonny Moss, i was homeschooled/unschooled my whole life - there wasn't much of a distinction in those days before curriculums - and am now unschooling my 8 year old and 10 month old, and thoroughly enjoying the conversation here! I am challenged and opened by the most radical of the thinking, but am frequently mystified by the way you all talk about things - until i remember that while you may be unschooling your own children, most of you went to compulsory education for many formative years and so have a fundamentally different approach to life than i. Anyway, THANK YOU ALL for taking the time to go into many of these issues with such vulnerability, passion, experience, and conviction! My children and i are the better for it and it brings tears to my eyes to find so many others who share my values! Your ability to articulate much of which is so deep in me that it is sub-verbal has brought it up to the level of my conscious mind and allowed me to examine my own thinking and effect profound and subtle change in my life.)
==This then gives kids under 18 a way to pursue anything that a kid with a high school diploma can. -- entrance into Community College, entrance into various vocational schools, something to put on a resume, etc...==
As someone who unschooled through high school myself, perhaps i can shed some light on this issue:
I have *never* needed a high school diploma. I have worked, gone to college twice, and done all sorts of interesting things in the 15 years since my teenhood, and despite listening to lots of folks tell me i'd need a diploma, it has *never once* been even a momentary problem.
If you want to know more, here's how i dealt with it:
While a teen, i enrolled in a local high school in order to take advantage of a state program (Running Start, in WA) that allowed me to take community college classes for free.
When i could no longer take what i wanted and needed, i called my high school and told them they were fired.
When i wanted to go back to this college later, i enrolled as a "returning student" and no-one ever asked for a diploma.
When i have had to fill out forms asking about my education level, i write "some college." Anyone could write this - i have never been asked for documentation.
When i have filled out forms asking about high school, i simply write in "Homeschooled." Again, i have never once been asked for documentation of any kind.
I have been accepted to university by writing in "homeschooled." They didn't even ask about it.
I have filled out more forms in my life, for private and public institutions, than most people can shake a stick at, and have always gotten what i needed. I have also been honest, all along.
Remember, it is always a real live person making the decision. My engaging attitude, confident eye contact, and articulate speaking - classic unschooler traits - have been my ticket to getting my needs met. Not a diploma.
If i got into a situation now where i needed a diploma, i'd look some up online, write one that resonated with me and was true, name the school something awesome, and have my mom sign it.
I hope this is helpful!
-Bonny
(Quick intro, since this is my first post: My name is Bonny Moss, i was homeschooled/unschooled my whole life - there wasn't much of a distinction in those days before curriculums - and am now unschooling my 8 year old and 10 month old, and thoroughly enjoying the conversation here! I am challenged and opened by the most radical of the thinking, but am frequently mystified by the way you all talk about things - until i remember that while you may be unschooling your own children, most of you went to compulsory education for many formative years and so have a fundamentally different approach to life than i. Anyway, THANK YOU ALL for taking the time to go into many of these issues with such vulnerability, passion, experience, and conviction! My children and i are the better for it and it brings tears to my eyes to find so many others who share my values! Your ability to articulate much of which is so deep in me that it is sub-verbal has brought it up to the level of my conscious mind and allowed me to examine my own thinking and effect profound and subtle change in my life.)
Pam Sorooshian
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 10:46 AM, Bonny Moss <bonny.moss@...> wrote:
diploma. We can't really talk about this stuff on this list - it is state
specific/country specific. I'll give one example to make my point - but
not to start a discussion on how to get in to various colleges. California
state law requires students entering the University of California system to
have a high school graduation date on their high school transcripts. That's
true EVEN for students transferring from another college as a junior.
I like the sentiment, though, of figuring out how to do what you want to do
in a way that works for you. Just a warning to be careful of sweeping
generalizations based on personal experience of one person in one place in
one time. This list has people from all over the world - there are people
in places where homeschooling isn't even legal, much less unschooling.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> How to get into anything without a diploma.It is an exaggeration to say a person can get into anything without a
>
diploma. We can't really talk about this stuff on this list - it is state
specific/country specific. I'll give one example to make my point - but
not to start a discussion on how to get in to various colleges. California
state law requires students entering the University of California system to
have a high school graduation date on their high school transcripts. That's
true EVEN for students transferring from another college as a junior.
I like the sentiment, though, of figuring out how to do what you want to do
in a way that works for you. Just a warning to be careful of sweeping
generalizations based on personal experience of one person in one place in
one time. This list has people from all over the world - there are people
in places where homeschooling isn't even legal, much less unschooling.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
keetry
==This then gives kids under 18 a way to pursue anything that a kid with a high school diploma can. -- entrance into Community College, entrance into various vocational schools, something to put on a resume, etc...==
My oldest took classes at the community college without a high school diploma. It's not required. If you haven't had any schooling, you take tests and then take any classes you need to get up to college level. Many people test right out of those classes.
The same thing happens if you decide to go back to school after being out for several years. I have a high school diploma but did not go to college right out of high school. When I decided to try some community college classes, I still had to take the entrance exams and even take some general level English and math classes before I could enroll in the college level courses.
Alysia
My oldest took classes at the community college without a high school diploma. It's not required. If you haven't had any schooling, you take tests and then take any classes you need to get up to college level. Many people test right out of those classes.
The same thing happens if you decide to go back to school after being out for several years. I have a high school diploma but did not go to college right out of high school. When I decided to try some community college classes, I still had to take the entrance exams and even take some general level English and math classes before I could enroll in the college level courses.
Alysia
Shauna Reisewitz
I know, I see where my analogy completely broke down, especially when it was interpreted as top down being superior to bottom up in any way, or that kids were detritus? really? For interests sake- bottom up driven system-- blue whales feeding on krill---top down driven system-- sea urchins decimating a kelp forest--- (there was no bottom- top judgment--if anything it was opposite) Again, I came from a world in ecology where this was a really lively and interesting discussion- and it helps with one particular friend who is a "bottom up" champion in the ecological field- but who believes in (my definition) top down schooling. It's an analogy that helps me, and maybe will help him understand what I'm doing, with the "school" I'm starting. but the idea got shredded on this list- and I appreciate the shredding- and agree with where the conversation led for the most part.
I also know that many many people don't really need a high school diploma- I love the idea that really what we need in life is the confidence to look someone in the eye and say, yeah I can do it-- and i'm excited that there are a whole host of kids growing up and becoming young adults, and now entering their 30s who were raised as unschoolers.
What I'm trying to do and what Wes does - is give kids a way to get a high school diploma for having that confidence and gumption to seek him out, look him in the eye, tell him they are ready to move on, have some idea of where they want to go, and put that desire in writing, because there are a lot of kids out there not being raised as unschoolers. On the other hand, I do know many unschoolers who have used Beach High School (Wes's program) to get a diploma or a transcript.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I also know that many many people don't really need a high school diploma- I love the idea that really what we need in life is the confidence to look someone in the eye and say, yeah I can do it-- and i'm excited that there are a whole host of kids growing up and becoming young adults, and now entering their 30s who were raised as unschoolers.
What I'm trying to do and what Wes does - is give kids a way to get a high school diploma for having that confidence and gumption to seek him out, look him in the eye, tell him they are ready to move on, have some idea of where they want to go, and put that desire in writing, because there are a lot of kids out there not being raised as unschoolers. On the other hand, I do know many unschoolers who have used Beach High School (Wes's program) to get a diploma or a transcript.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Bonny Moss
Creative thinking/living/problem-solving re: diplomas and other
bureaucratic issues...
Mediators - you may want to read this before letting it thru, as i'm not
sure whether or not this is a direction you'll find helpful... i leave it
up to you.
== It is an exaggeration to say a person can get into anything without a
diploma. ==
Thank you for the clarification, esp. That is true... Maybe. Honestly, i'm
not so sure. Bear with me here...
It's hard for me to articulate, but i don't seem to think of rules as,
well, rules. In fact, i don't think of them much. I do get really upset
when people don't act as i think they should (ie: standing up for what they
believe in), but that's different . . . or is it? I guess the fundamental
truth about *any* rule is that it only really exists in the heads of those
making, interpreting, or imagining them. Many to most written laws never
get enforced at all, and the rest of them are subjectively interpreted by
real people in real time - often in opposition to the original intent!
My point is to remind parents not to underestimate your unschooler's (and
your own) ability to think creatively and find people with power to help
you get what you want. This does not have to include lying or cheating,
though it might include highlighting various aspects of the truth most
palatable to the dominant culture.
Some sort of diploma program might be one creative way to do this. Making
your own "diploma" might be another. Sweet talking someone into letting you
in on the secret word to write in that slot that will let you by
no-questions-asked might be another. Asking to be tested instead might be
another. Designing a power-point lecture or mini one-act play or act of
mathematical genius or musical revue or homemade film documentary and
showing it to the Dean might be another. Showing up at a school-board
meeting with irresistibly cute signs made by kindergartners (done it -
though it didn't work as well as i'd hoped) might be another strategy to
try out. Writing a killer essay sometimes works. Getting overrides from
specific teachers once you've had a chance to impress them might be
another. Making up your "homeschool's" name and hoping they don't actually
look it up (while still prepared to defend it) is an option too - most
databases are shockingly out of date and folks rarely look up anything they
don't need to. Don't underestimate the power of a fancy-looking signature,
even if it's your mom's.
After years of dealing with US bureaucracy over many issues, and some
experience with that of Thailand and New Zealand, my experience has been
that the human beings (administrators, bureaucrats, etc) standing between i
and my goal have enormous power to put things through or stop them; my
treating them with respect, understanding, an expectation of success and
good cheer has caused all kinds of "hard and fast" rules to melt into
nothing.
I am of the (unsubstantiated) opinion that my unschooling attitude of
creatively tackling goals - thinking outside the box, if you will - has had
a lot to do with this, as does my relative confidence built by successfully
surmounting many obstacles throughout childhood.
In other words, i personally have yet to find a "requirement" that can't be
unmasked as a "guideline" -- or vice-verse if i've gotten on someone's bad
side. I have been known to beg out of a conversation and come back later to
get a different person and try again. (Though i must admit i've never tried
to cheat on my taxes, sell drugs, plagiarize, launder money or participate
in other ethically questionable acts of flaunting the law - perhaps i'd
have a much different experience!)
I have found that making decisions out of a fear that i'll get in trouble
later if i don't has rarely worked out well. Neither has swearing at people
over the phone. Ok, maybe that's never worked...
I don't mean to minimize any heart-wrenching, life-stopping and frustrating
experiences other parents may have had, i just want to remind you to think
creatively and let your unschooler think creatively. Like, really
creatively.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
bureaucratic issues...
Mediators - you may want to read this before letting it thru, as i'm not
sure whether or not this is a direction you'll find helpful... i leave it
up to you.
== It is an exaggeration to say a person can get into anything without a
diploma. ==
Thank you for the clarification, esp. That is true... Maybe. Honestly, i'm
not so sure. Bear with me here...
It's hard for me to articulate, but i don't seem to think of rules as,
well, rules. In fact, i don't think of them much. I do get really upset
when people don't act as i think they should (ie: standing up for what they
believe in), but that's different . . . or is it? I guess the fundamental
truth about *any* rule is that it only really exists in the heads of those
making, interpreting, or imagining them. Many to most written laws never
get enforced at all, and the rest of them are subjectively interpreted by
real people in real time - often in opposition to the original intent!
My point is to remind parents not to underestimate your unschooler's (and
your own) ability to think creatively and find people with power to help
you get what you want. This does not have to include lying or cheating,
though it might include highlighting various aspects of the truth most
palatable to the dominant culture.
Some sort of diploma program might be one creative way to do this. Making
your own "diploma" might be another. Sweet talking someone into letting you
in on the secret word to write in that slot that will let you by
no-questions-asked might be another. Asking to be tested instead might be
another. Designing a power-point lecture or mini one-act play or act of
mathematical genius or musical revue or homemade film documentary and
showing it to the Dean might be another. Showing up at a school-board
meeting with irresistibly cute signs made by kindergartners (done it -
though it didn't work as well as i'd hoped) might be another strategy to
try out. Writing a killer essay sometimes works. Getting overrides from
specific teachers once you've had a chance to impress them might be
another. Making up your "homeschool's" name and hoping they don't actually
look it up (while still prepared to defend it) is an option too - most
databases are shockingly out of date and folks rarely look up anything they
don't need to. Don't underestimate the power of a fancy-looking signature,
even if it's your mom's.
After years of dealing with US bureaucracy over many issues, and some
experience with that of Thailand and New Zealand, my experience has been
that the human beings (administrators, bureaucrats, etc) standing between i
and my goal have enormous power to put things through or stop them; my
treating them with respect, understanding, an expectation of success and
good cheer has caused all kinds of "hard and fast" rules to melt into
nothing.
I am of the (unsubstantiated) opinion that my unschooling attitude of
creatively tackling goals - thinking outside the box, if you will - has had
a lot to do with this, as does my relative confidence built by successfully
surmounting many obstacles throughout childhood.
In other words, i personally have yet to find a "requirement" that can't be
unmasked as a "guideline" -- or vice-verse if i've gotten on someone's bad
side. I have been known to beg out of a conversation and come back later to
get a different person and try again. (Though i must admit i've never tried
to cheat on my taxes, sell drugs, plagiarize, launder money or participate
in other ethically questionable acts of flaunting the law - perhaps i'd
have a much different experience!)
I have found that making decisions out of a fear that i'll get in trouble
later if i don't has rarely worked out well. Neither has swearing at people
over the phone. Ok, maybe that's never worked...
I don't mean to minimize any heart-wrenching, life-stopping and frustrating
experiences other parents may have had, i just want to remind you to think
creatively and let your unschooler think creatively. Like, really
creatively.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]