Commentary on unschooling
Sandra Dodd
This is commentary from someone who refused to use the word "unschooling" until just recently.
http://www.wendypriesnitz.com/blog/unschooling-is-not-one-size-fits-all.html
Two things especially interested me. I'm not going to give it away up front. Those of you who don't want to read it, come back tomorrow and I'll tell you what jumped up at me most. Those of you who feel like reading and have some analytical juices available, maybe you could guess (or just tell us what you saw when you read it).
Sandra
http://www.wendypriesnitz.com/blog/unschooling-is-not-one-size-fits-all.html
Two things especially interested me. I'm not going to give it away up front. Those of you who don't want to read it, come back tomorrow and I'll tell you what jumped up at me most. Those of you who feel like reading and have some analytical juices available, maybe you could guess (or just tell us what you saw when you read it).
Sandra
Sandra Dodd
I thought it was going to have a link to this article (that blogpost would, I mean), but it doesn't, I guess because the article is only going to be available free for a short while. Then it's back to pay-to-view.
I have had a number of requests from Life Learning Magazine subscribers to make this article from the March/April issue more widely available. So here it is, on the website for a couple of weeks. Feel free to share. http://www.lifelearningmagazine.com/1304/liberate_your_education_unschooling_is_not_one-size-fits-all.htm
Because that article is written by someone in Australia, it might be referencing people who have spoken there before, and nothing about this group at all. No tellin', really. But for that one I'll say that "don't do what you don't understand" has been recommended for a long time (and implied forever). http://sandradodd.com/gradualchange
And read a little, try a little, wait a while and watch doesn't mean "do what we say and don't ask anyone else's opinion."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I have had a number of requests from Life Learning Magazine subscribers to make this article from the March/April issue more widely available. So here it is, on the website for a couple of weeks. Feel free to share. http://www.lifelearningmagazine.com/1304/liberate_your_education_unschooling_is_not_one-size-fits-all.htm
Because that article is written by someone in Australia, it might be referencing people who have spoken there before, and nothing about this group at all. No tellin', really. But for that one I'll say that "don't do what you don't understand" has been recommended for a long time (and implied forever). http://sandradodd.com/gradualchange
And read a little, try a little, wait a while and watch doesn't mean "do what we say and don't ask anyone else's opinion."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
BRIAN POLIKOWSKY
I do not know what is jumping at you but the whole thing is not really well thought out in my opinion.
I am not a talented writer that can explain things very well. I try to be as direct as possible but I have so many issues with the ideas she presents and her thought process.
Give freedom and trust your kids but do not because they cannot handle it.
The big bad wolf ( bad big corporations) are there to get your kids addicted.
They will eat nothing but junk until they get sick ( that has never happened in my house and maybe because my kids were never limited)
Some unschooling groups tell people to "expose him to a wide variety of “junk” food so that he can learn to self-manage"
Well I have never read this in the groups I read. Nor the term "self-manage".
Bad wording and clarity. Bad ideas like sitting back and watching children damage their health. Really? IS that what she is getting from some unschooling groups?
<<<" However, bullying is not an exploration of ideas, and a small group of people usurping and defining a term, then dictating “right” and “wrong” ways for other people to live with their families does not help further the understanding of how to live respectfully with children. Just because someone has a strong opinion or a forceful way of communicating it doesn’t mean they’re any more “right” that you are.">>>
Does anyone in an online group really has the power to "dictate" how you live in your house?
The use of the term "usurping" :
u·surp [yoo-surp, -zurp] Show IPA
verb (used with object)
1.
to seize and hold (a position, office, power, etc.) by force or without legal right: The pretender tried tousurp the throne.
2.
to use without authority or right; employ wrongfully: The magazine usurped copyrighted material.
verb (used without object)
3.
to commit forcible or illegal seizure of an office, power, etc.; encroach.
That jumps out at me!!!!Big time!
I could go on. :)
Alex Polikowsky
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I am not a talented writer that can explain things very well. I try to be as direct as possible but I have so many issues with the ideas she presents and her thought process.
Give freedom and trust your kids but do not because they cannot handle it.
The big bad wolf ( bad big corporations) are there to get your kids addicted.
They will eat nothing but junk until they get sick ( that has never happened in my house and maybe because my kids were never limited)
Some unschooling groups tell people to "expose him to a wide variety of “junk” food so that he can learn to self-manage"
Well I have never read this in the groups I read. Nor the term "self-manage".
Bad wording and clarity. Bad ideas like sitting back and watching children damage their health. Really? IS that what she is getting from some unschooling groups?
<<<" However, bullying is not an exploration of ideas, and a small group of people usurping and defining a term, then dictating “right” and “wrong” ways for other people to live with their families does not help further the understanding of how to live respectfully with children. Just because someone has a strong opinion or a forceful way of communicating it doesn’t mean they’re any more “right” that you are.">>>
Does anyone in an online group really has the power to "dictate" how you live in your house?
The use of the term "usurping" :
u·surp [yoo-surp, -zurp] Show IPA
verb (used with object)
1.
to seize and hold (a position, office, power, etc.) by force or without legal right: The pretender tried tousurp the throne.
2.
to use without authority or right; employ wrongfully: The magazine usurped copyrighted material.
verb (used without object)
3.
to commit forcible or illegal seizure of an office, power, etc.; encroach.
That jumps out at me!!!!Big time!
I could go on. :)
Alex Polikowsky
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Virginia Warren
Two paragraphs after disdaining the very idea of an "unschooling guru", she
recommends we follow the advice of her guru, some Dr. Thomas Gordon who
apparently invented something called Parenting Effectiveness Training,
which apparently requires an abbreviation (PET), but no explanation of why
anyone would want to use his method.
I couldn't help noticing that one of the "PET" solutions was not "moving
the vase", especially since the owner of the vase was the only one who was
bothered in this hypothetical situation.
Here's a quote: "... In an effort to respect her children's freedom, she's
enslaving herself."
Sounds like she's got a case of the "have-tos".
http://sandradodd.com/haveto
Here's the rest of the paragraph:"A simple statement of, 'It would really
help me out if you guys could put your rubbish in the bin' might solve the
problem. If the children didn't modify their behavior, Beth would need to
talk to them further and move onto [sic] problem solving."
What is the problem, rubbish on the floor, or children not obeying? I think
the author pretends it is the first but reveals it is actually the second.
The "solution" is predefined as requiring compliance from the children. The
"method" seems to be nagging. It is conveniently left unspecified what
additional "problem solving" would look like if nagging somehow doesn't
"work".
Using "parenting effectiveness" strategies to find something that "works"
to get kids to comply is a poor substitute for good relationships.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
recommends we follow the advice of her guru, some Dr. Thomas Gordon who
apparently invented something called Parenting Effectiveness Training,
which apparently requires an abbreviation (PET), but no explanation of why
anyone would want to use his method.
I couldn't help noticing that one of the "PET" solutions was not "moving
the vase", especially since the owner of the vase was the only one who was
bothered in this hypothetical situation.
Here's a quote: "... In an effort to respect her children's freedom, she's
enslaving herself."
Sounds like she's got a case of the "have-tos".
http://sandradodd.com/haveto
Here's the rest of the paragraph:"A simple statement of, 'It would really
help me out if you guys could put your rubbish in the bin' might solve the
problem. If the children didn't modify their behavior, Beth would need to
talk to them further and move onto [sic] problem solving."
What is the problem, rubbish on the floor, or children not obeying? I think
the author pretends it is the first but reveals it is actually the second.
The "solution" is predefined as requiring compliance from the children. The
"method" seems to be nagging. It is conveniently left unspecified what
additional "problem solving" would look like if nagging somehow doesn't
"work".
Using "parenting effectiveness" strategies to find something that "works"
to get kids to comply is a poor substitute for good relationships.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Irena Quitzau
The author seems to imply that unschooling leads to such "hands off"
parenting that the childrens' welfare is endangered. She uses examples
such as children running around in front of cars or gorging themselves
on only junk food. I don't think anything could be further from the
truth.
Unschooling, from everything that I have read and seen (and I still
have Much to Learn), is about facilitating our children's ability to
learn in an environment where they are deeply respected and loved for
who they are. Where they are encouraged to follow their passions and
dreams... It is about abandoning the paradigm that Learning can only
happen within the four walls of a classroom, at a desk, because
Learning happens All the time in All kinds of situations... It is
about the Golden Rule. It often seems to flow out of Attachment
Parenting.
Putting our children in harms way is Bad parenting and has nothing to
do with Unschooling.
Irena MQ
parenting that the childrens' welfare is endangered. She uses examples
such as children running around in front of cars or gorging themselves
on only junk food. I don't think anything could be further from the
truth.
Unschooling, from everything that I have read and seen (and I still
have Much to Learn), is about facilitating our children's ability to
learn in an environment where they are deeply respected and loved for
who they are. Where they are encouraged to follow their passions and
dreams... It is about abandoning the paradigm that Learning can only
happen within the four walls of a classroom, at a desk, because
Learning happens All the time in All kinds of situations... It is
about the Golden Rule. It often seems to flow out of Attachment
Parenting.
Putting our children in harms way is Bad parenting and has nothing to
do with Unschooling.
Irena MQ
On 3/1/13, Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
> This is commentary from someone who refused to use the word "unschooling"
> until just recently.
>
> http://www.wendypriesnitz.com/blog/unschooling-is-not-one-size-fits-all.html
>
> Two things especially interested me. I'm not going to give it away up front.
> Those of you who don't want to read it, come back tomorrow and I'll tell
> you what jumped up at me most. Those of you who feel like reading and have
> some analytical juices available, maybe you could guess (or just tell us
> what you saw when you read it).
>
> Sandra
Jenny Cyphers
***Those of you who feel like reading and have some analytical juices available, maybe you could guess (or just tell us what you saw when you read it).***
The most obvious thing to me was that she linked an article all about defining unschooling, while one of the largest complaints on her facebook page was about not wanting to define unschooling and let it be a "mean whatever it means to your family" definition.
Both articles are implying that there are unschooling experts and/or gurus who are telling people that they should let their children do whatever they want or it isn't radical enough. I'd sure like to see some examples of what they are talking about.
***Some people said they enjoy a good knock‘em-sock‘em tangle with people and their ideas.***
Not one single person on her whole commentary said this. There were several people that said they enjoyed the discussion of unschooling and ideas and the defining and refining of unschooling.
After reading both articles, I'm left wondering where people are getting such terrible unschooling advice where they get themselves into such a trouble that they can't effectively live their lives peacefully.
The linked article by Susan Wight pretty much sums up what people here say. Be a mindful parent, try things, read about unschooling, don't do what doesn't work. Although, her advice to not replace school rules with unschooling rules, is good, she goes on to tell people to use PET, Parenting Effectiveness Training, which is just another set of parenting rules or ideas.
I don't understand why people get so confused about unschooling and parenting. It seems pretty simple to me. If learning is a priority and it doesn't need to come formally, then it can happen all the time with anything, but parents play a big role in that. As such, you can either make learning happen easier, or put up road blocks.
Food was mentioned in both articles. What always gets me about food discussions is all the negativity that people surround food with. Just like all that learning, food should be peaceful and enjoyable. The very basic of human learning experiences start with food as babies decide what is food and what isn't, but it all goes in the mouth to be sure. No baby does this on their own, they have a parent there and parents can make that process easy or put up road blocks.
Unlike Wendy, I'm not scared of corporations telling me what to eat or not, I do a pretty good job of figuring out what's good to eat and what isn't and I feel confident that my own kids can figure that out too.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
The most obvious thing to me was that she linked an article all about defining unschooling, while one of the largest complaints on her facebook page was about not wanting to define unschooling and let it be a "mean whatever it means to your family" definition.
Both articles are implying that there are unschooling experts and/or gurus who are telling people that they should let their children do whatever they want or it isn't radical enough. I'd sure like to see some examples of what they are talking about.
***Some people said they enjoy a good knock‘em-sock‘em tangle with people and their ideas.***
Not one single person on her whole commentary said this. There were several people that said they enjoyed the discussion of unschooling and ideas and the defining and refining of unschooling.
After reading both articles, I'm left wondering where people are getting such terrible unschooling advice where they get themselves into such a trouble that they can't effectively live their lives peacefully.
The linked article by Susan Wight pretty much sums up what people here say. Be a mindful parent, try things, read about unschooling, don't do what doesn't work. Although, her advice to not replace school rules with unschooling rules, is good, she goes on to tell people to use PET, Parenting Effectiveness Training, which is just another set of parenting rules or ideas.
I don't understand why people get so confused about unschooling and parenting. It seems pretty simple to me. If learning is a priority and it doesn't need to come formally, then it can happen all the time with anything, but parents play a big role in that. As such, you can either make learning happen easier, or put up road blocks.
Food was mentioned in both articles. What always gets me about food discussions is all the negativity that people surround food with. Just like all that learning, food should be peaceful and enjoyable. The very basic of human learning experiences start with food as babies decide what is food and what isn't, but it all goes in the mouth to be sure. No baby does this on their own, they have a parent there and parents can make that process easy or put up road blocks.
Unlike Wendy, I'm not scared of corporations telling me what to eat or not, I do a pretty good job of figuring out what's good to eat and what isn't and I feel confident that my own kids can figure that out too.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jenny Cyphers
***<<<" However, bullying is not an exploration of ideas, and a small group of people usurping and defining a term, then dictating “right” and “wrong” ways for other people to live with their families does not help further the understanding of how to live respectfully with children. Just because someone has a strong opinion or a forceful way of communicating it doesn’t mean they’re any more “right” that you are.">>>
Does anyone in an online group really has the power to "dictate" how you live in your house?
The use of the term "usurping" :***
If anyone has ever edited a wikipedia page, they will learn very quickly that they can't just make up any old definition and let it stick. Even on the unschooling wikipedia page. There IS a general consensus because there has to be in order for the page to exist at all. There is a right and wrong way to define it. I don't care whether anyone likes that or not, it's a fact. It doesn't, however, dictate how anyone lives in their own house. Nobody has to unschool and some people probably shouldn't.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Does anyone in an online group really has the power to "dictate" how you live in your house?
The use of the term "usurping" :***
If anyone has ever edited a wikipedia page, they will learn very quickly that they can't just make up any old definition and let it stick. Even on the unschooling wikipedia page. There IS a general consensus because there has to be in order for the page to exist at all. There is a right and wrong way to define it. I don't care whether anyone likes that or not, it's a fact. It doesn't, however, dictate how anyone lives in their own house. Nobody has to unschool and some people probably shouldn't.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
BRIAN POLIKOWSKY
<<<<<After reading both articles, I'm left wondering where people are getting such terrible unschooling advice where they get themselves into such a trouble that they can't effectively live their lives peacefully.>>
Not here!
But there are lots of bad advice around. All the "freedom" seekers and promoters. All the people writing about unschooling and bragging on kids doing their own things on their own. I have seen it.
Newcomers read a little. They read what not to do and they do not understand and know what to do.
They do not get it that unschooling parents need to be there engaged and present and connected and being a partner. They read " give them pop and candy" and not give them choices and make sure they have healthy foods available to0.
I have written about it before. But if one goes to some blogs and lists where the advice sound good but is not well thought out and clear people get really confuse. Some cannot even get it when getting good and clear advice or it takes them a long time.
For some reading about freedom ( and the author of that article in a way said unschooling and freedom are inherent) is what attracts them. Here in this list I like that we talk about choices and being a partner.
That is so important.
There is so much neglect and unenvolvement called unschooling around. Not here on this group but in many people I have met, blogs I have come upon and even unschooling advocates.
Alex Polikowsky
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Not here!
But there are lots of bad advice around. All the "freedom" seekers and promoters. All the people writing about unschooling and bragging on kids doing their own things on their own. I have seen it.
Newcomers read a little. They read what not to do and they do not understand and know what to do.
They do not get it that unschooling parents need to be there engaged and present and connected and being a partner. They read " give them pop and candy" and not give them choices and make sure they have healthy foods available to0.
I have written about it before. But if one goes to some blogs and lists where the advice sound good but is not well thought out and clear people get really confuse. Some cannot even get it when getting good and clear advice or it takes them a long time.
For some reading about freedom ( and the author of that article in a way said unschooling and freedom are inherent) is what attracts them. Here in this list I like that we talk about choices and being a partner.
That is so important.
There is so much neglect and unenvolvement called unschooling around. Not here on this group but in many people I have met, blogs I have come upon and even unschooling advocates.
Alex Polikowsky
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sylvia Woodman
The thing that jumped off the page for me was where she says Unschooling is
about freedom. I disagree. Unschooling is about learning.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
about freedom. I disagree. Unschooling is about learning.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Deb Lewis
***Two things especially interested me. ***
I don’t know what your two things are but I was amused by the idea unschooling “gurus” are the problem, and the answer is...(wait for it...) Dr. Gordon! A licensed clinical psychologist and a “pioneer in teaching communication skills and conflict resolution methods to parents, teachers, youth...” etc..
There was Struggling Sarah, Super Tired Beth, Mandy (who just seems daft, really) and Frustrated Frances with her rubbish droppers, who are all supposed to look like victims of bad gurus, but who are instead very sad examples of people who aren’t using reason and judgment.
Dr. Gordon’s Parent Effectiveness Training books is $15.00 and he has other books you can buy.
I don’t know how much his workshops cost but here’s a bit about the training. You can train to become a certified instructor too! (but not a Guru, I guess)
***This intensive, proven program is taught only by instructors certified by Gordon Training International. The P.E.T. class consists of brief lectures, demonstrations, workbook exercises, role-playing, some homework and small group discussion.
Each class participant will receive a set of P.E.T. materials which includes the 30th anniversary edition of the P.E.T. book, a P.E.T. Workbook, a Participant Certificate and a copy of Dr. Gordon’s Credo. This is a 24-hour program and the schedule depends on the individual P.E.T. Instructor.***
The information about the author at the end of the article includes this: ***She’s big on informing and empowering new home educators but critical of anyone who sets themselves up as a home education guru. ***
I don’t know who is setting themselves up to be a home education guru. I admit I don’t read all the homeschooling and unschooling email lists and websites. Does she mean people who get paid to give advice? Home education magazine editors? People with websites? People who speak at conferences? Who does she mean? Who are these gurus?
Deb Lewis
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I don’t know what your two things are but I was amused by the idea unschooling “gurus” are the problem, and the answer is...(wait for it...) Dr. Gordon! A licensed clinical psychologist and a “pioneer in teaching communication skills and conflict resolution methods to parents, teachers, youth...” etc..
There was Struggling Sarah, Super Tired Beth, Mandy (who just seems daft, really) and Frustrated Frances with her rubbish droppers, who are all supposed to look like victims of bad gurus, but who are instead very sad examples of people who aren’t using reason and judgment.
Dr. Gordon’s Parent Effectiveness Training books is $15.00 and he has other books you can buy.
I don’t know how much his workshops cost but here’s a bit about the training. You can train to become a certified instructor too! (but not a Guru, I guess)
***This intensive, proven program is taught only by instructors certified by Gordon Training International. The P.E.T. class consists of brief lectures, demonstrations, workbook exercises, role-playing, some homework and small group discussion.
Each class participant will receive a set of P.E.T. materials which includes the 30th anniversary edition of the P.E.T. book, a P.E.T. Workbook, a Participant Certificate and a copy of Dr. Gordon’s Credo. This is a 24-hour program and the schedule depends on the individual P.E.T. Instructor.***
The information about the author at the end of the article includes this: ***She’s big on informing and empowering new home educators but critical of anyone who sets themselves up as a home education guru. ***
I don’t know who is setting themselves up to be a home education guru. I admit I don’t read all the homeschooling and unschooling email lists and websites. Does she mean people who get paid to give advice? Home education magazine editors? People with websites? People who speak at conferences? Who does she mean? Who are these gurus?
Deb Lewis
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jenny Cyphers
***The thing that jumped off the page for me was where she says Unschooling is
about freedom. I disagree. Unschooling is about learning.***
Well, yes! It's an educational choice that generally falls under the category of homeschooling, depending one where a person lives. It's ALL about what you do instead of putting your child in school. Unschooling isn't mentioned at all in the law here. Homeschooling is and it's an exception to the default of public school. I'm free to not use public school, but I'm not free to do whatever the heck I want.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
about freedom. I disagree. Unschooling is about learning.***
Well, yes! It's an educational choice that generally falls under the category of homeschooling, depending one where a person lives. It's ALL about what you do instead of putting your child in school. Unschooling isn't mentioned at all in the law here. Homeschooling is and it's an exception to the default of public school. I'm free to not use public school, but I'm not free to do whatever the heck I want.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Robin Bentley
Wendy's overarching fear (which she's written about for years) leads
her to make these kinds of nonsense statements: "So, although,
theoretically, being allowed to overeat candy and suffer the resulting
stomach ache should help a child learn to moderate her candy intake,
she was not born with the knowledge required to understand the
manipulative corporate agenda and avoid potentially very bad choices
(I hesitate to even use the word �choice� in this context)."
Are you kidding me? A child's overeating of candy (if there is such a
thing) is because they've been brainwashed by corporations? We are
sheep to the slaughter. We are powerless against them. :-)
So she's afraid of control by faceless, nameless "others". Then she
says: "As someone with that information, I could not sit back and
watch my young child damage her health � perhaps permanently � in the
name of preserving our relationship or some notion of freedom."
Permanent damage. From eating candy. To the point of being sick,
apparently every time the child eats candy. Because of corporate
manipulation. Sheep, we are. Fearful sheep, now. But, she wouldn't
give real, useful information like "a lot of candy might give you a
stomach ache" and let a child understand it for themselves? She'd stop
that from happening in the name of protecting her child from corporate
control and manipulation, *while* controlling and manipulating her
child.
That's not good for relationships. But apparently she doesn't care.
Beating back the evil corporations is *more important* than her
relationship with her child. And better that she is the shepherd,
then, with the controlling crook.
~~~~~~~
Wendy publishes a magazine that she sells. She needs readership. That
dust-up on her FB page was designed (she did *not* have to write it)
to direct people to (hopefully, eventually) buy her magazine. Isn't
that a "manipulative corporate agenda"? She'd swear up and down, I'm
sure, that she's nothing like evil corporate North America.
At one time, Wendy was the only "published" voice of "life learning"/
unschooling in Canada. She sold 20-page hand-Cerlox-bound treatises
back in the 90's. Nothing has ever been given away for free, like the
well-thought-out advice and principled philosophy is on this list.
I think she's a hypocrite.
Robin B.
her to make these kinds of nonsense statements: "So, although,
theoretically, being allowed to overeat candy and suffer the resulting
stomach ache should help a child learn to moderate her candy intake,
she was not born with the knowledge required to understand the
manipulative corporate agenda and avoid potentially very bad choices
(I hesitate to even use the word �choice� in this context)."
Are you kidding me? A child's overeating of candy (if there is such a
thing) is because they've been brainwashed by corporations? We are
sheep to the slaughter. We are powerless against them. :-)
So she's afraid of control by faceless, nameless "others". Then she
says: "As someone with that information, I could not sit back and
watch my young child damage her health � perhaps permanently � in the
name of preserving our relationship or some notion of freedom."
Permanent damage. From eating candy. To the point of being sick,
apparently every time the child eats candy. Because of corporate
manipulation. Sheep, we are. Fearful sheep, now. But, she wouldn't
give real, useful information like "a lot of candy might give you a
stomach ache" and let a child understand it for themselves? She'd stop
that from happening in the name of protecting her child from corporate
control and manipulation, *while* controlling and manipulating her
child.
That's not good for relationships. But apparently she doesn't care.
Beating back the evil corporations is *more important* than her
relationship with her child. And better that she is the shepherd,
then, with the controlling crook.
~~~~~~~
Wendy publishes a magazine that she sells. She needs readership. That
dust-up on her FB page was designed (she did *not* have to write it)
to direct people to (hopefully, eventually) buy her magazine. Isn't
that a "manipulative corporate agenda"? She'd swear up and down, I'm
sure, that she's nothing like evil corporate North America.
At one time, Wendy was the only "published" voice of "life learning"/
unschooling in Canada. She sold 20-page hand-Cerlox-bound treatises
back in the 90's. Nothing has ever been given away for free, like the
well-thought-out advice and principled philosophy is on this list.
I think she's a hypocrite.
Robin B.
> This is commentary from someone who refused to use the word[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> "unschooling" until just recently.
>
> http://www.wendypriesnitz.com/blog/unschooling-is-not-one-size-fits-all.html
>
> Two things especially interested me. I'm not going to give it away
> up front. Those of you who don't want to read it, come back
> tomorrow and I'll tell you what jumped up at me most. Those of you
> who feel like reading and have some analytical juices available,
> maybe you could guess (or just tell us what you saw when you read it).
>
> Sandra
>
Robyn Coburn
Sandra, are we looking at the blog post by Wendy or the article by the
Australian lady for the things that jump out? I'm confused now.
In passing - sounds like the Aussie is saying "no unschooling gurus unless
they are Rue Kream". I have no problem with anyone talking up Rue's
terrific book!
--
Robyn L. Coburn
Design Team www.ScraPerfect.com
www.iggyjingles.blogspot.com
www.robyncoburn.blogspot.com
www.allthingsdoll.blogspot.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Australian lady for the things that jump out? I'm confused now.
In passing - sounds like the Aussie is saying "no unschooling gurus unless
they are Rue Kream". I have no problem with anyone talking up Rue's
terrific book!
--
Robyn L. Coburn
Design Team www.ScraPerfect.com
www.iggyjingles.blogspot.com
www.robyncoburn.blogspot.com
www.allthingsdoll.blogspot.com
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Meredith
Jenny Cyphers <jenstarc4@...> wrote:
In my experience, they're getting advice from articles like these - articles complaining about something and misrepresenting it. And then someone who doesn't want to read more than a couple articles pulls out whatever he or she finds appealing - and a surprising amount of the time it's "those people who let their kids do whatever they want". That's Incredibly appealing to people with a certain kind of baggage, people who feel like they never got to do anything they wanted as kids, and that sucked, so they want to do the opposite with their own kids - but more importantly, They want to be the ones to do whatever they want right now. And saying "be free, my child" sounds like a perfect solution.
But there's no possible way to stop the chronic, persistent misrepresentation of unschooling. In a very real sense, "be free my child" is coming to Be the definition of unschooling as more of that kind of "information" gets spread via the internet.
---Meredith
>> After reading both articles, I'm left wondering where people are getting such terrible unschooling advice where they get themselves into such a trouble that they can't effectively live their lives peacefully.************
In my experience, they're getting advice from articles like these - articles complaining about something and misrepresenting it. And then someone who doesn't want to read more than a couple articles pulls out whatever he or she finds appealing - and a surprising amount of the time it's "those people who let their kids do whatever they want". That's Incredibly appealing to people with a certain kind of baggage, people who feel like they never got to do anything they wanted as kids, and that sucked, so they want to do the opposite with their own kids - but more importantly, They want to be the ones to do whatever they want right now. And saying "be free, my child" sounds like a perfect solution.
But there's no possible way to stop the chronic, persistent misrepresentation of unschooling. In a very real sense, "be free my child" is coming to Be the definition of unschooling as more of that kind of "information" gets spread via the internet.
---Meredith
Sandra Dodd
-=-Sandra, are we looking at the blog post by Wendy or the article by the
Australian lady for the things that jump out? I'm confused now.-=-
Some and some. Sorry to have confused the issue, but really the reason I saw the first one I linked was because I had seen the link to the second one. I thought both would be in one link, but after I sent to the list, I realized it wasn't in the blog post.
I'm trying to finish a page for my site, and the day isn't as smooth as could be at my house. Exciting, not quiet. But Pam Laricchia's second book is ready (electronically, for now) and I wanted to have the longer version up of an interview I did for the magazine of HSC (Homeschool Association of California). I shouldn't rush myself, but I do.
Pam Laricchia isn't saying "I'm a guru," but I'm telling you that her stuff is very, very good. Simple, straightforward, and not expensive. (Especially the free stuff, but the eb00ks are not much, nor will the paper version be when it's out, probably next month.)
As a soothing, healing palate cleanser for those who might be frustrated, here is some clarity:
http://livingjoyfully.ca/books/
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Australian lady for the things that jump out? I'm confused now.-=-
Some and some. Sorry to have confused the issue, but really the reason I saw the first one I linked was because I had seen the link to the second one. I thought both would be in one link, but after I sent to the list, I realized it wasn't in the blog post.
I'm trying to finish a page for my site, and the day isn't as smooth as could be at my house. Exciting, not quiet. But Pam Laricchia's second book is ready (electronically, for now) and I wanted to have the longer version up of an interview I did for the magazine of HSC (Homeschool Association of California). I shouldn't rush myself, but I do.
Pam Laricchia isn't saying "I'm a guru," but I'm telling you that her stuff is very, very good. Simple, straightforward, and not expensive. (Especially the free stuff, but the eb00ks are not much, nor will the paper version be when it's out, probably next month.)
As a soothing, healing palate cleanser for those who might be frustrated, here is some clarity:
http://livingjoyfully.ca/books/
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=- In a very real sense, "be free my child" is coming to Be the definition of unschooling as more of that kind of "information" gets spread via the internet. -=-
Maybe some people saying "That's not unschooling" would help!
:-)
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Maybe some people saying "That's not unschooling" would help!
:-)
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Schuyler
From things people have posted on Australian unschooling facebook lists I think she is referencing something specifically Australian. There seems to be a group saying that any parental input is coercion. Strewing is coercion. Reading a story is coercion. Offering an opinion or information is coercion. I'm not sure what lists those are, but they are definitely not ones I have ever read.
Schuyler
________________________________
Because that article is written by someone in Australia, it might be referencing people who have spoken there before, and nothing about this group at all. No tellin', really. But for that one I'll say that "don't do what you don't understand" has been recommended for a long time (and implied forever). http://sandradodd.com/gradualchange
And read a little, try a little, wait a while and watch doesn't mean "do what we say and don't ask anyone else's opinion."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Schuyler
________________________________
Because that article is written by someone in Australia, it might be referencing people who have spoken there before, and nothing about this group at all. No tellin', really. But for that one I'll say that "don't do what you don't understand" has been recommended for a long time (and implied forever). http://sandradodd.com/gradualchange
And read a little, try a little, wait a while and watch doesn't mean "do what we say and don't ask anyone else's opinion."
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-From things people have posted on Australian unschooling facebook lists I think she is referencing something specifically Australian. There seems to be a group saying that any parental input is coercion. Strewing is coercion. Reading a story is coercion. Offering an opinion or information is coercion. I'm not sure what lists those are, but they are definitely not ones I have ever read. -=-
Ah. Well. Two or three times over the years people have come and said that about strewing. That it's coercive or manipulative. The way I do it, it's not. I've never said "Look, I left something on the counter. Aren't you going to play with it? Seriously. It's science. It's history. Do it." If I leave a sundial or something, they're going to mess with it. If I leave a little catnip toy on the floor, my cat's going to whap it around, too. Am I manipulating my cat into playing, against his will? When he gets older he'll probably be less likely to play with such things. Maybe.
When people do something fun because they want to, it's a heck of a stretch to call that coercion. And who would stretch so far? I think maybe lazy people who hope unschooling is nothing, that there's no "good unschooling," just a simple lack of school and curriculum. People who want to think that nobody knows any more about unschooling than they do might want to make those stretches. If they want to assert that if they say they're unschooling, they are (whether the kids are learning or happy or not), then they might want to insult others who are actively providing and maintaining a rich unschooling nest. And if they like to say that learning happens all the time, so whether the parents are paying attention to the kids, or being interesting, or providing a variety of cool stimuli or not, it's all the same thing. (Oh, no, wait. Not the same thing. Better NOT to provide, because that's coercion. If the parents are interesting and kind, is that coercion?)
I don't want those people to come to my house. Maybe they could some to this discussion, though and 1) get cranky and then 2) get calm and then 3) get more thoughtful and aware. Or not.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Ah. Well. Two or three times over the years people have come and said that about strewing. That it's coercive or manipulative. The way I do it, it's not. I've never said "Look, I left something on the counter. Aren't you going to play with it? Seriously. It's science. It's history. Do it." If I leave a sundial or something, they're going to mess with it. If I leave a little catnip toy on the floor, my cat's going to whap it around, too. Am I manipulating my cat into playing, against his will? When he gets older he'll probably be less likely to play with such things. Maybe.
When people do something fun because they want to, it's a heck of a stretch to call that coercion. And who would stretch so far? I think maybe lazy people who hope unschooling is nothing, that there's no "good unschooling," just a simple lack of school and curriculum. People who want to think that nobody knows any more about unschooling than they do might want to make those stretches. If they want to assert that if they say they're unschooling, they are (whether the kids are learning or happy or not), then they might want to insult others who are actively providing and maintaining a rich unschooling nest. And if they like to say that learning happens all the time, so whether the parents are paying attention to the kids, or being interesting, or providing a variety of cool stimuli or not, it's all the same thing. (Oh, no, wait. Not the same thing. Better NOT to provide, because that's coercion. If the parents are interesting and kind, is that coercion?)
I don't want those people to come to my house. Maybe they could some to this discussion, though and 1) get cranky and then 2) get calm and then 3) get more thoughtful and aware. Or not.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Schuyler
The aspects I find most interesting are fear and poor information. Wendy hasn't examined her own fears from a meaningful and separate perspective. She's just fuelled them, as far as I can tell.
In the discussion that this was borne from, which I read a few days ago, she and Helen Hegener both wrote about how neglect framed their children's parenting. They were saying in a light hearted kind of way. But it disturbed me. It disturbed me in the way that it disturbs me when one parent recommends tough love to another parent. It disturbed me in a dangerous recommendation to an open audience who may walk away thinking, well, let the children get on with it. Let them fill their own world with whatever and I'll go publish my magazines and knit my socks and read my books and get on with my life. It was bad advice. Very bad advice. Publicly given.
I know a lot of people aren't on this list. I know most of the world isn't on this list. It would be damnedably unwieldy if they were. I wish, though, that the people who were seeking to spread unschooling ideas and give unschooling advice and live unschooling lives were reading here. Were seeking out measured and clear ideas and working to give those kinds of ideas to others instead of muddled thinking, poorly examined, anything goes, no definition is better than another definition, don't blame the victim ideas.
Schuyler
________________________________
From: Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
To: Always Learning <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, 2 March 2013, 3:56
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Commentary on unschooling
This is commentary from someone who refused to use the word "unschooling" until just recently.
http://www.wendypriesnitz.com/blog/unschooling-is-not-one-size-fits-all.html
Two things especially interested me. I'm not going to give it away up front. Those of you who don't want to read it, come back tomorrow and I'll tell you what jumped up at me most. Those of you who feel like reading and have some analytical juices available, maybe you could guess (or just tell us what you saw when you read it).
Sandra
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
In the discussion that this was borne from, which I read a few days ago, she and Helen Hegener both wrote about how neglect framed their children's parenting. They were saying in a light hearted kind of way. But it disturbed me. It disturbed me in the way that it disturbs me when one parent recommends tough love to another parent. It disturbed me in a dangerous recommendation to an open audience who may walk away thinking, well, let the children get on with it. Let them fill their own world with whatever and I'll go publish my magazines and knit my socks and read my books and get on with my life. It was bad advice. Very bad advice. Publicly given.
I know a lot of people aren't on this list. I know most of the world isn't on this list. It would be damnedably unwieldy if they were. I wish, though, that the people who were seeking to spread unschooling ideas and give unschooling advice and live unschooling lives were reading here. Were seeking out measured and clear ideas and working to give those kinds of ideas to others instead of muddled thinking, poorly examined, anything goes, no definition is better than another definition, don't blame the victim ideas.
Schuyler
________________________________
From: Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
To: Always Learning <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, 2 March 2013, 3:56
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Commentary on unschooling
This is commentary from someone who refused to use the word "unschooling" until just recently.
http://www.wendypriesnitz.com/blog/unschooling-is-not-one-size-fits-all.html
Two things especially interested me. I'm not going to give it away up front. Those of you who don't want to read it, come back tomorrow and I'll tell you what jumped up at me most. Those of you who feel like reading and have some analytical juices available, maybe you could guess (or just tell us what you saw when you read it).
Sandra
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Schuyler
The title of the linked article is Liberate your Education Unschooling is not One-Size-Fits-All. But of course it is. Because it is a paradigm, it is a philosophy before it is a methodology. Or, while it is also a methodology. The methodology is derived from it's principles and the principles can thus be derived from it's methodology. If you look to the child as your guiding light, as your marker, if you look for the learning and the engagement, how does that not tailor the unschooling to fit all?
Joyce wrote the other day on unschooling basics, in a discussion about how the list works: "What we discuss here works for anyone. It's based on human nature not on personality. It works on kids. It works on spouses. Which is why we try to help people understand the inner workings rather than handing them solutions. If they can understand what works and why then they can use the tools to craft solutions that work for the particular mix of personalities in their own families."
That isn't what's coming out of the discussions that Wendy is hosting. That isn't what is coming out of the article she linked. Unschooling is one size fits all because it is about human nature.
Schuyler
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Joyce wrote the other day on unschooling basics, in a discussion about how the list works: "What we discuss here works for anyone. It's based on human nature not on personality. It works on kids. It works on spouses. Which is why we try to help people understand the inner workings rather than handing them solutions. If they can understand what works and why then they can use the tools to craft solutions that work for the particular mix of personalities in their own families."
That isn't what's coming out of the discussions that Wendy is hosting. That isn't what is coming out of the article she linked. Unschooling is one size fits all because it is about human nature.
Schuyler
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Eileen
To me the article title is a moot point. I have never heard anyone recommend that it is or should be One-Size-Fits-All. I think it is a bogus notion.
The face book interchange was not wonderful as Wendy suggests. I didn't follow it's entirety for this reason. I sensed the opposition quickly and recognized the dispute. I had no input there but saw the implications against my most valued resource for understanding how to unschool better.
The complaints on facebook and in this most recent article seem to miss the point of discussing the challenging ideas of preserving marriage and family peace as a pilar of better unschooling. Listening to and supporting a child and honoring desires for the sake of real/individual learning. Whether about eating, video game play or watching tv, or extending principles of kindness and honoring to partners. These provocative discussions in favor of paying close attention and remaining positively engaged in the process with our children and partners are what I have derived from The Always Learning List.
I think Wendy has misunderstood and perhaps has never excersized what she has written.The misconstrued idea of freedom as it pertains to radical unschooling has been clarified many times over on this list and no one is forcing any opinions upon me about how to be a better partner with my children or my spouse. There are thought provoking discussions that have helped me to question and grow as I make deliberate choices, every minute, every day and there are no
have-to's!
That's what I love about The Always Learning List!
On the contrary Wendy's words are not helpful. I find the article vague, negative and an inaccurate.
A long time ago Joyce's website pointed me toward joy and real happiness in learning with my family. Her site led to compelling discussions and interchange among contributors here on the Always Learning List.
I find subtlety in Sandra's plain language (some call blunt). It is genius to me! I get her.
(I love how she states that she likes her husband Keith) this is so sweetly provacitive.
It is such a good thought. I've already seen it repeated and I don't think it coincidence. What Sandra has to say makes good sense to me. Real ideas to be borrowed and put to good use!
To me Sandra presents peices to a puzzle. She gives excellent clues in her plain language(blunt to some) to solve your very own mysteries. She shares just enough wisdom and opinion based on personal history and real experiences! She preserves tons of collected wisdoms, experiences and opinions of others and claims no glory for herself because it is your own process that you find answers to your very own questions.
She knows how learning occurs. It is individual! It is not One-Size-Fits-All ever.
Eileen
The face book interchange was not wonderful as Wendy suggests. I didn't follow it's entirety for this reason. I sensed the opposition quickly and recognized the dispute. I had no input there but saw the implications against my most valued resource for understanding how to unschool better.
The complaints on facebook and in this most recent article seem to miss the point of discussing the challenging ideas of preserving marriage and family peace as a pilar of better unschooling. Listening to and supporting a child and honoring desires for the sake of real/individual learning. Whether about eating, video game play or watching tv, or extending principles of kindness and honoring to partners. These provocative discussions in favor of paying close attention and remaining positively engaged in the process with our children and partners are what I have derived from The Always Learning List.
I think Wendy has misunderstood and perhaps has never excersized what she has written.The misconstrued idea of freedom as it pertains to radical unschooling has been clarified many times over on this list and no one is forcing any opinions upon me about how to be a better partner with my children or my spouse. There are thought provoking discussions that have helped me to question and grow as I make deliberate choices, every minute, every day and there are no
have-to's!
That's what I love about The Always Learning List!
On the contrary Wendy's words are not helpful. I find the article vague, negative and an inaccurate.
A long time ago Joyce's website pointed me toward joy and real happiness in learning with my family. Her site led to compelling discussions and interchange among contributors here on the Always Learning List.
I find subtlety in Sandra's plain language (some call blunt). It is genius to me! I get her.
(I love how she states that she likes her husband Keith) this is so sweetly provacitive.
It is such a good thought. I've already seen it repeated and I don't think it coincidence. What Sandra has to say makes good sense to me. Real ideas to be borrowed and put to good use!
To me Sandra presents peices to a puzzle. She gives excellent clues in her plain language(blunt to some) to solve your very own mysteries. She shares just enough wisdom and opinion based on personal history and real experiences! She preserves tons of collected wisdoms, experiences and opinions of others and claims no glory for herself because it is your own process that you find answers to your very own questions.
She knows how learning occurs. It is individual! It is not One-Size-Fits-All ever.
Eileen
>
>
On Mar 1, 2013, at 3:13 PM, Sylvia Woodman <sylvia057@...> wrote:
> The thing that jumped off the page for me was where she says Unschooling is
> about freedom. I disagree. Unschooling is about learning.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Karen
>>>>> The author seems to imply that unschooling leads to such "hands off"One of the many ironies for me in this piece of writing is that the author of this article also wrote *this* on the so-called inspiring lengthy Facebook discussion:
> parenting that the childrens' welfare is endangered. She uses examples
> such as children running around in front of cars or gorging themselves
> on only junk food. I don't think anything could be further from the
> truth.<<<<<
"I've often described our life as my daughter bringing up themselves!"
That, to me, is not something I would particularly want to boast about. It also makes me question to what extent this person is a good representative of unschooling, at least as I have come to understand it.
Tori Otero
I started to read the article and just felt same old, same old. I've only
been Unschooling for 3 years, (my life and my family are so much happier
and peaceful as a result) and I'm fed up of hearing the same old stuff,
enough already.
For me there seems to be a real competence/vulnerability split, a fantasy
that people are reinforcing. For me the experienced unschoolers on this
list have a job to do, and a role to perform, and when we do something we
try to do it with as much competence as possible. I don't think people get
this.
They are uncomfortable because they are in a different place, and feel
unsure and vulnerable. Others expressions of vulnerability makes them feel
less alone (and for some it makes them feel more competent) and other
people's confidence and knowing makes them feel more vulnerable.
Unfortunately people can't acknowledge this and own it, instead they expect
and need others to feel vulnerable with them and be in the same place.
People need to manage there own expectations and recognise their own
competence even when they feel unsure and are around others with more
experience. Not just hand it away and locate all their competence in
somebody else, then blame that fantasy competent person by implying they
have set themselves up as gurus. I think it is the experienced unschoolers
who are being set up as guru's by those who are struggling to manage their
vulnerability and who are then complaining. I understand why it's hard for
people and where they are at, but it is not ok to be unkind and devalue
what others are offering. If it's not for you, don't be destructive,
just be polite and walk away. Some people want experienced Unschoolers to
be either their (fantasy) parent or their peers. Experienced Unschoolers
are people, they give their time to help others.
Feeling a bit defensive, mostly because I work in a similar role in another
field. Sorry if I've spoken out of turn .
been Unschooling for 3 years, (my life and my family are so much happier
and peaceful as a result) and I'm fed up of hearing the same old stuff,
enough already.
For me there seems to be a real competence/vulnerability split, a fantasy
that people are reinforcing. For me the experienced unschoolers on this
list have a job to do, and a role to perform, and when we do something we
try to do it with as much competence as possible. I don't think people get
this.
They are uncomfortable because they are in a different place, and feel
unsure and vulnerable. Others expressions of vulnerability makes them feel
less alone (and for some it makes them feel more competent) and other
people's confidence and knowing makes them feel more vulnerable.
Unfortunately people can't acknowledge this and own it, instead they expect
and need others to feel vulnerable with them and be in the same place.
People need to manage there own expectations and recognise their own
competence even when they feel unsure and are around others with more
experience. Not just hand it away and locate all their competence in
somebody else, then blame that fantasy competent person by implying they
have set themselves up as gurus. I think it is the experienced unschoolers
who are being set up as guru's by those who are struggling to manage their
vulnerability and who are then complaining. I understand why it's hard for
people and where they are at, but it is not ok to be unkind and devalue
what others are offering. If it's not for you, don't be destructive,
just be polite and walk away. Some people want experienced Unschoolers to
be either their (fantasy) parent or their peers. Experienced Unschoolers
are people, they give their time to help others.
Feeling a bit defensive, mostly because I work in a similar role in another
field. Sorry if I've spoken out of turn .
On Saturday, 2 March 2013, Eileen wrote:
> **
>
>
>
>
> To me the article title is a moot point. I have never heard anyone
> recommend that it is or should be One-Size-Fits-All. I think it is a bogus
> notion.
>
> The face book interchange was not wonderful as Wendy suggests. I didn't
> follow it's entirety for this reason. I sensed the opposition quickly and
> recognized the dispute. I had no input there but saw the implications
> against my most valued resource for understanding how to unschool better.
>
> The complaints on facebook and in this most recent article seem to miss
> the point of discussing the challenging ideas of preserving marriage and
> family peace as a pilar of better unschooling. Listening to and supporting
> a child and honoring desires for the sake of real/individual learning.
> Whether about eating, video game play or watching tv, or extending
> principles of kindness and honoring to partners. These provocative
> discussions in favor of paying close attention and remaining positively
> engaged in the process with our children and partners are what I have
> derived from The Always Learning List.
>
> I think Wendy has misunderstood and perhaps has never excersized what she
> has written.The misconstrued idea of freedom as it pertains to radical
> unschooling has been clarified many times over on this list and no one is
> forcing any opinions upon me about how to be a better partner with my
> children or my spouse. There are thought provoking discussions that have
> helped me to question and grow as I make deliberate choices, every minute,
> every day and there are no
> have-to's!
> That's what I love about The Always Learning List!
>
> On the contrary Wendy's words are not helpful. I find the article vague,
> negative and an inaccurate.
>
> A long time ago Joyce's website pointed me toward joy and real happiness
> in learning with my family. Her site led to compelling discussions and
> interchange among contributors here on the Always Learning List.
> I find subtlety in Sandra's plain language (some call blunt). It is genius
> to me! I get her.
> (I love how she states that she likes her husband Keith) this is so
> sweetly provacitive.
> It is such a good thought. I've already seen it repeated and I don't think
> it coincidence. What Sandra has to say makes good sense to me. Real ideas
> to be borrowed and put to good use!
>
> To me Sandra presents peices to a puzzle. She gives excellent clues in her
> plain language(blunt to some) to solve your very own mysteries. She shares
> just enough wisdom and opinion based on personal history and real
> experiences! She preserves tons of collected wisdoms, experiences and
> opinions of others and claims no glory for herself because it is your own
> process that you find answers to your very own questions.
>
> She knows how learning occurs. It is individual! It is not
> One-Size-Fits-All ever.
>
> Eileen
>
> >
> >
>
> On Mar 1, 2013, at 3:13 PM, Sylvia Woodman sylvia057@...<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'sylvia057%40gmail.com');>>
> wrote:
>
> > The thing that jumped off the page for me was where she says Unschooling
> is
> > about freedom. I disagree. Unschooling is about learning.
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Marina DeLuca-Howard
Her contention is that food choice is unparenting, and it is akin to
letting toddlers play in the middle of the road.
The effects of what she calls junk food are less clear than letting a child
get hit by a car.
I searched diet=bad health and the jury is still out.
Search for "safe to let toddler play in traffic" and you won't find
validation :) No articles by anyone doubting that letting your child play
in traffic is dangerous. No scientific studies claiming it is safe.
Diet claims abound however. Athletes need more calories. Heredity plays a
role in health too.
The claim that one size fits all diets reminds me of the study in Italy
that showed the residents of Limone who ate high calorie desserts and
drank. They even had bad closestrol yet were in perfect health. There are
lots of articles about that one being genetic mutation that provided good
health
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2482&dat=19930808&id=ykdSAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ajYNAAAAIBAJ&pg=4619,2750577
The other idea is the notion of the bully. This word is so overused right
now that its become like the medieval equivalent witch. Instantly one
named as such acquires "characteristics" that release anyone who disagrees
with the so-named bully from having to debate ideas. How can we have
meaningful dialogue if we dismiss people as "witches". If we see the world
as one of victims and bullies.
Marina
--
When will our consciences grow so tender that we will act to prevent human
misery rather than avenge it? Eleanor Roosevelt
*Nemo risum praebuit, qui ex se coepit* - Nobody is laughed at, who laughs
at himself. (Seneca)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
letting toddlers play in the middle of the road.
The effects of what she calls junk food are less clear than letting a child
get hit by a car.
I searched diet=bad health and the jury is still out.
Search for "safe to let toddler play in traffic" and you won't find
validation :) No articles by anyone doubting that letting your child play
in traffic is dangerous. No scientific studies claiming it is safe.
Diet claims abound however. Athletes need more calories. Heredity plays a
role in health too.
The claim that one size fits all diets reminds me of the study in Italy
that showed the residents of Limone who ate high calorie desserts and
drank. They even had bad closestrol yet were in perfect health. There are
lots of articles about that one being genetic mutation that provided good
health
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2482&dat=19930808&id=ykdSAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ajYNAAAAIBAJ&pg=4619,2750577
The other idea is the notion of the bully. This word is so overused right
now that its become like the medieval equivalent witch. Instantly one
named as such acquires "characteristics" that release anyone who disagrees
with the so-named bully from having to debate ideas. How can we have
meaningful dialogue if we dismiss people as "witches". If we see the world
as one of victims and bullies.
Marina
--
When will our consciences grow so tender that we will act to prevent human
misery rather than avenge it? Eleanor Roosevelt
*Nemo risum praebuit, qui ex se coepit* - Nobody is laughed at, who laughs
at himself. (Seneca)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
Tori, I'm sorry your post didn't come through sooner. I was waiting and waiting. Facebook is lumpy today.
-=-I understand why it's hard for
people and where they are at, but it is not ok to be unkind and devalue
what others are offering. If it's not for you, don't be destructive,-=-
I think it's social vandalism. Random acts of wanton defacement and destruction. Then they hoot and congratulate their friends of the evening. Social, but not sociable.
Than you for saying this in such a clear way. It has baffled me: -=-Some people want experienced Unschoolers to be either their (fantasy) parent or their peers.-=-
A dozen times or more someone has been very specific that they wanted me to treat them as I "claim" to treat my children. I don't treat strange men the way I treat my husband. I don't treat strange older women the way I treated my mother, when she was old. I don't treat other children the way I treat my children.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
-=-I understand why it's hard for
people and where they are at, but it is not ok to be unkind and devalue
what others are offering. If it's not for you, don't be destructive,-=-
I think it's social vandalism. Random acts of wanton defacement and destruction. Then they hoot and congratulate their friends of the evening. Social, but not sociable.
Than you for saying this in such a clear way. It has baffled me: -=-Some people want experienced Unschoolers to be either their (fantasy) parent or their peers.-=-
A dozen times or more someone has been very specific that they wanted me to treat them as I "claim" to treat my children. I don't treat strange men the way I treat my husband. I don't treat strange older women the way I treated my mother, when she was old. I don't treat other children the way I treat my children.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
chris ester
On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:30 PM, Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
I am not surprised that you have had people want you to be a surrogate
mom... honestly, I think the number is probably higher though...
Or maybe the ones who specifically asked for you to treat them as you would
your own children were actually a bit more honest than some others about
what they were seeking in your various free resources... :)
Age and parenthood, unfortunately, do not guarantee that a person is a
fully independent grown up.
chris
> **Sandra,
>
>
> _--__---__A dozen times or more someone has been very specific that they
> wanted me to treat them as I "claim" to treat my children. I don't treat
> strange men the way I treat my husband. I don't treat strange older women
> the way I treated my mother, when she was old. I don't treat other children
> the way I treat my children.
>
> Sandra__----__---
>
I am not surprised that you have had people want you to be a surrogate
mom... honestly, I think the number is probably higher though...
Or maybe the ones who specifically asked for you to treat them as you would
your own children were actually a bit more honest than some others about
what they were seeking in your various free resources... :)
Age and parenthood, unfortunately, do not guarantee that a person is a
fully independent grown up.
chris
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
Meredith
Schuyler <s.waynforth@...> wrote:
That dilema is one of the problems inherent with framing unschooling in terms of freedom - it sets parents up to ask over and over "how much freedom am I allowing?" and "is this coercive?" And that keeps parents from looking directly at their kids and interacting with them like people. I went through a stage like that and the most helpful piece of advice I remember was to think about the way I approach the same sorts of things with an adult friend.
One of the seeming downsides of groups where everyone's kind of floundering around together, trying to figure out what unschooling is and how it works (Free! from Experts) is that periodically they get stuck in those kinds of dilemas. I see that as part of how learning happens - some people need the "floundering around" stage in order for other things to make sense. And some people don't ever get past that stage - not because there's no other information in the world but because of their own stuff, because their own needs or baggage or fears are so big they'll be rehashing the same old gunk for decades.
---Meredith
>There seems to be a group saying that any parental input is coercion. Strewing is coercion. Reading a story is coercion. Offering an opinion or information is coercion.*************
That dilema is one of the problems inherent with framing unschooling in terms of freedom - it sets parents up to ask over and over "how much freedom am I allowing?" and "is this coercive?" And that keeps parents from looking directly at their kids and interacting with them like people. I went through a stage like that and the most helpful piece of advice I remember was to think about the way I approach the same sorts of things with an adult friend.
One of the seeming downsides of groups where everyone's kind of floundering around together, trying to figure out what unschooling is and how it works (Free! from Experts) is that periodically they get stuck in those kinds of dilemas. I see that as part of how learning happens - some people need the "floundering around" stage in order for other things to make sense. And some people don't ever get past that stage - not because there's no other information in the world but because of their own stuff, because their own needs or baggage or fears are so big they'll be rehashing the same old gunk for decades.
---Meredith
Joyce Fetteroll
On Mar 2, 2013, at 9:12 AM, Meredith wrote:
Those who continue to flounder, can't shift their thinking. Using freedom as a guidepost won't always work, will sometimes have unfortunate consequences, but they don't want to let go of freedom. So their thinking stays stuck.
It's not necessary to have others who've been there, done that to point out a better way. Some people will figure it out themselves. But it usually takes longer. And maybe their kids will be grown before they figure out something better.
The learning is more profound when you figure something out yourself rather than being told the right answer. That's why it's great for unschooling, great for most learning. But it's not so great when you need to know NOW.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> some people need the "floundering around" stage in order for other things to make senseIf they get out of it, it's because they've gained a better understanding of what they want and what values to put first to get it.
Those who continue to flounder, can't shift their thinking. Using freedom as a guidepost won't always work, will sometimes have unfortunate consequences, but they don't want to let go of freedom. So their thinking stays stuck.
It's not necessary to have others who've been there, done that to point out a better way. Some people will figure it out themselves. But it usually takes longer. And maybe their kids will be grown before they figure out something better.
The learning is more profound when you figure something out yourself rather than being told the right answer. That's why it's great for unschooling, great for most learning. But it's not so great when you need to know NOW.
Joyce
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Meredith
Tori Otero <tori.otero@...> wrote:
Sometimes people complain that lists like this one don't "model" unschooling very well but in fact what's being modeled is a kind of thought process. Like a parent verbalizing how he or she solves a particular kind of problem so a kid can witness the processes which mostly go on internally. I hadn't really thought of it in those terms before. And just like modelling as a parent, what's actually learned will vary a lot. My daughter gets annoyed with me if I verbalize while I do something - but she's happy to be handed a book of instructions. Ray likes to hear what other people have to say but he's also good at letting most of it wash through him and pulling out what's interesting to him in the moment.
At my job (I re-upholster furniture) if someone else makes a mistake, I'm interested in seeing it - some of that is for the reasons Toni brought up: it's reassuring and makes me feel more competent. But I also love mistakes because I get to watch my more experienced co-workers solve problems. My boss is really creative when it comes to fixing and hiding mistakes. Her son isn't quite as creative but he's a talker - he's really good at articulating his thought process so I can "see" him thinking things through. To me, that's gold. I can figure things out, but it helps a lot to know how to think about the problem in the first place - it goes a lot faster.
Not everyone likes that or learns like that. That's okay. This list isn't for everyone, it's for the people who like to learn this way, even though it's sometimes uncomfortable.
---Meredith
>> They are uncomfortable because they are in a different place, and feelOh, I like that - it reminds me of something. Sometimes people don't like to learn "in front of" other people. I was just writing about that elsewhere, in regards to a kid who's afraid to try new things. One of the problems with internet text-only communication is that there's no good way to really watch what other people are doing and learn from it. At best, we can trade ideas and tell stories and try to dig down into the words we use to do that for more ideas. That sets people up to feel exposed - not necessarily a bad thing. At my job, I often feel exposed and vulnerable because we're all working in the same big room And we all check each others' work before it goes out the door as part of our quality control process. And I'm the new guy - everyone looks extra hard at my work So That I can learn.
> unsure and vulnerable. Others expressions of vulnerability makes them feel
> less alone (and for some it makes them feel more competent) and other
> people's confidence and knowing makes them feel more vulnerable.
Sometimes people complain that lists like this one don't "model" unschooling very well but in fact what's being modeled is a kind of thought process. Like a parent verbalizing how he or she solves a particular kind of problem so a kid can witness the processes which mostly go on internally. I hadn't really thought of it in those terms before. And just like modelling as a parent, what's actually learned will vary a lot. My daughter gets annoyed with me if I verbalize while I do something - but she's happy to be handed a book of instructions. Ray likes to hear what other people have to say but he's also good at letting most of it wash through him and pulling out what's interesting to him in the moment.
At my job (I re-upholster furniture) if someone else makes a mistake, I'm interested in seeing it - some of that is for the reasons Toni brought up: it's reassuring and makes me feel more competent. But I also love mistakes because I get to watch my more experienced co-workers solve problems. My boss is really creative when it comes to fixing and hiding mistakes. Her son isn't quite as creative but he's a talker - he's really good at articulating his thought process so I can "see" him thinking things through. To me, that's gold. I can figure things out, but it helps a lot to know how to think about the problem in the first place - it goes a lot faster.
Not everyone likes that or learns like that. That's okay. This list isn't for everyone, it's for the people who like to learn this way, even though it's sometimes uncomfortable.
---Meredith
Marie Vijendran
I think I have worked through the traffic 'analogy' and even something that
some people see as black and white just isn't. Why some people see
unschooling as being neglectful. Yet again, evidence that this is a
paradigm shift that some people just don't get. And perhaps why unless you
realise it is a paradigm shift you may in fact practise neglectful
'unschooling'.
in traffic is dangerous. No scientific studies claiming it is safe.
This takes me back instantly to when five years ago when I was presenting
to city councillors in Cambridge UK requesting that they consider an
innovative design for a 'home zone' on our quiet backstreet of the city
being used as a 'rat-run'. I had carefully worked up a design for a 'shared
surface' with an architect. One of the councillors got very agressive with
me. He couldn't take the level of innovation in our design. Another said to
me "I don't think it's right for anyone to encourage their children to play
in the streets with cars around; you'd be being a neglectful parent". It
was very frustrating.
Cars and children can use the same place given the right conditions. Remove
the boundary between pavement and road and you change the paradigm. You can
add signs saying 'you are entering a home zone', you can change the colour
of the 'shared surface'. You can tell people: 'Here is something different.
Stop your usual way of operating and pay attention'. Cease operating on
auto-pilot.
And guess what? By doing so you significantly reduce the risk. But more
importantly you significantly reduce, if not eliminate, the fear. You can't
eliminate the risk necessarily but you can reduce the situation to basic
humanity . You trust that drivers don't want to kill children and that
children have an innate ability to judge risk. It works. I know because I
live now in a country (the Netherlands) where shared surfaces and home
zones are commonplace. Sadly some people are just not up to accepting such
'radical' ways of thinking. The crux of the argument is in the detail of
the situation and interaction.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
some people see as black and white just isn't. Why some people see
unschooling as being neglectful. Yet again, evidence that this is a
paradigm shift that some people just don't get. And perhaps why unless you
realise it is a paradigm shift you may in fact practise neglectful
'unschooling'.
>>Search for "safe to let toddler play in traffic" and you won't findvalidation :) No articles by anyone doubting that letting your child play
in traffic is dangerous. No scientific studies claiming it is safe.
This takes me back instantly to when five years ago when I was presenting
to city councillors in Cambridge UK requesting that they consider an
innovative design for a 'home zone' on our quiet backstreet of the city
being used as a 'rat-run'. I had carefully worked up a design for a 'shared
surface' with an architect. One of the councillors got very agressive with
me. He couldn't take the level of innovation in our design. Another said to
me "I don't think it's right for anyone to encourage their children to play
in the streets with cars around; you'd be being a neglectful parent". It
was very frustrating.
Cars and children can use the same place given the right conditions. Remove
the boundary between pavement and road and you change the paradigm. You can
add signs saying 'you are entering a home zone', you can change the colour
of the 'shared surface'. You can tell people: 'Here is something different.
Stop your usual way of operating and pay attention'. Cease operating on
auto-pilot.
And guess what? By doing so you significantly reduce the risk. But more
importantly you significantly reduce, if not eliminate, the fear. You can't
eliminate the risk necessarily but you can reduce the situation to basic
humanity . You trust that drivers don't want to kill children and that
children have an innate ability to judge risk. It works. I know because I
live now in a country (the Netherlands) where shared surfaces and home
zones are commonplace. Sadly some people are just not up to accepting such
'radical' ways of thinking. The crux of the argument is in the detail of
the situation and interaction.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]