a new 'democratic' school
bbllmm00
Hi All,
for most of us who like a free style of learning for our kids, there is a school that just does that !
Based on an experience occurred in England last century (you can google Summerhill UK) several of these type of schools have been opened here in Us as well.
For an example just go to this link:
circleschool.org
a school like this is being opened in the Stroudsburg/Bangor area in Pennsylvania and you can check it out at these two links:
http://patmulroy.blogspot.com
https://www.facebook.com/StartingASchoolAtKirkridge?fref=ts
'Democratic' schools are the closest institutionalized schools that honor the natural drive of the child and exposes the kid to several activities without actually telling him/her what to do.
(no tests, no adult driving the kid to this or that activity,
kids of all ages, indoor and outdoor time free to choose upon the child's choice, etc)
for more information you can e-mail Pat Mulroy at:
mulroy.pat@...
For anyone who is interested and ask questions in person, there will be a meeting held on March 24th at 3,30 pm at The Hermitage in Kirkrdige place (a place where retreats have been held so far; the place seems already undergoing some changes for the approval of the founding of the school).
Best wishes to all !
Luciana
for most of us who like a free style of learning for our kids, there is a school that just does that !
Based on an experience occurred in England last century (you can google Summerhill UK) several of these type of schools have been opened here in Us as well.
For an example just go to this link:
circleschool.org
a school like this is being opened in the Stroudsburg/Bangor area in Pennsylvania and you can check it out at these two links:
http://patmulroy.blogspot.com
https://www.facebook.com/StartingASchoolAtKirkridge?fref=ts
'Democratic' schools are the closest institutionalized schools that honor the natural drive of the child and exposes the kid to several activities without actually telling him/her what to do.
(no tests, no adult driving the kid to this or that activity,
kids of all ages, indoor and outdoor time free to choose upon the child's choice, etc)
for more information you can e-mail Pat Mulroy at:
mulroy.pat@...
For anyone who is interested and ask questions in person, there will be a meeting held on March 24th at 3,30 pm at The Hermitage in Kirkrdige place (a place where retreats have been held so far; the place seems already undergoing some changes for the approval of the founding of the school).
Best wishes to all !
Luciana
Sandra Dodd
-=-for most of us who like a free style of learning for our kids, there is a school that just does that !-=-
I let this through because once in a while it's good to discuss the difference between a school that "does that" and unschooling.
No school can unschool. It's not linguistically or logically or socially possible.
-=-Based on an experience occurred in England last century (you can google Summerhill UK) several of these type of schools have been opened here in Us as well.-=-
It's pretty day for a new school to start idealistically, and the plan can be seen as fair and workable, until real human beings are thrown into the mix.
-=-Welcoming all who can thrive, -=-
I guess that means that if someone isn't cooperative, they're no longer welcome. And that makes sense, but will it really be democratic to that level?
Not and have free bus service.
And it's not "free bus service," really.
-=-Although The Circle School doesn’t provide transportation, residents of at least the following school districts are eligible for free public school bus service to The Circle School:...
If you live in one of the above school districts, we’ll ask you at the time of enrollment if you want bus transportation, and submit a request to your district based on your wishes. Bus schedules and routes are determined by the public school district providing the transportation.-=-
http://circleschool.org/enrollment/transportation/
So each student at this school will either need to be delivered and picked up each day by parents or someone, or get on a school bus with public school students, but get OFF the bus at a private school. And then get on the bus after school.
I rode school busses for eleven years. They're not calm, peaceful places. They aren't the least bit democratic. Either the driver is "mean" and kids sit quietly but relative safely, or the driver is "nice" and some of the kids have leeway to be mean.
-=-a school like this is being opened in the Stroudsburg/Bangor area in Pennsylvania and you can check it out at these two links:-=-
WAY too local for this discussion, but it's good to point out that each such school will try to sell itself to local homeschoolers. They will figure (probably rightly) that some homeschoolers are homeschooling because they haven't found a school that will suit their child or calm their fears.
-=-'Democratic' schools are the closest institutionalized schools that honor the natural drive of the child and exposes the kid to several activities without actually telling him/her what to do.-=-
I would hope someone would tell him not to be destructive or mean. If he misses his mom, will they tell him to stop crying and complaining? If he's hungry, won't they tell him to wait for lunchtime or until he gets home?
-=-(no tests, no adult driving the kid to this or that activity,
kids of all ages, indoor and outdoor time free to choose upon the child's choice, etc)-=-
By "no adult driving the kid to this or that activity," do you mean the school doesn't take kids anywhere? Maybe it's in an urban environment and they walk or take public transportation. Or maybe it means "Hooray, parents! You won't need to drive your kids places anymore!" Except school every day, if you want to avoid that public school transportation system.
What unschooling provides is a child being at home, sleeping until he's slept long enough, eating or not eating without regard for the clock, not needing to dress up a certain way most days, having access to an adult or two who love him and have a lot of time for him, being able to leave projects out, being able to watch a DVD if he wants to, and pause it until later, or just turn it off and walk away without asking everyone else if it's okay to pause it or change the channel. Being home, a child can use the internet. He can go back to bed if he's tired or feels ill or stressed.
There are aspects of learning and living that people forget about when they claim that a school can provide what unschooling provides.
Sandra
I let this through because once in a while it's good to discuss the difference between a school that "does that" and unschooling.
No school can unschool. It's not linguistically or logically or socially possible.
-=-Based on an experience occurred in England last century (you can google Summerhill UK) several of these type of schools have been opened here in Us as well.-=-
It's pretty day for a new school to start idealistically, and the plan can be seen as fair and workable, until real human beings are thrown into the mix.
-=-Welcoming all who can thrive, -=-
I guess that means that if someone isn't cooperative, they're no longer welcome. And that makes sense, but will it really be democratic to that level?
Not and have free bus service.
And it's not "free bus service," really.
-=-Although The Circle School doesn’t provide transportation, residents of at least the following school districts are eligible for free public school bus service to The Circle School:...
If you live in one of the above school districts, we’ll ask you at the time of enrollment if you want bus transportation, and submit a request to your district based on your wishes. Bus schedules and routes are determined by the public school district providing the transportation.-=-
http://circleschool.org/enrollment/transportation/
So each student at this school will either need to be delivered and picked up each day by parents or someone, or get on a school bus with public school students, but get OFF the bus at a private school. And then get on the bus after school.
I rode school busses for eleven years. They're not calm, peaceful places. They aren't the least bit democratic. Either the driver is "mean" and kids sit quietly but relative safely, or the driver is "nice" and some of the kids have leeway to be mean.
-=-a school like this is being opened in the Stroudsburg/Bangor area in Pennsylvania and you can check it out at these two links:-=-
WAY too local for this discussion, but it's good to point out that each such school will try to sell itself to local homeschoolers. They will figure (probably rightly) that some homeschoolers are homeschooling because they haven't found a school that will suit their child or calm their fears.
-=-'Democratic' schools are the closest institutionalized schools that honor the natural drive of the child and exposes the kid to several activities without actually telling him/her what to do.-=-
I would hope someone would tell him not to be destructive or mean. If he misses his mom, will they tell him to stop crying and complaining? If he's hungry, won't they tell him to wait for lunchtime or until he gets home?
-=-(no tests, no adult driving the kid to this or that activity,
kids of all ages, indoor and outdoor time free to choose upon the child's choice, etc)-=-
By "no adult driving the kid to this or that activity," do you mean the school doesn't take kids anywhere? Maybe it's in an urban environment and they walk or take public transportation. Or maybe it means "Hooray, parents! You won't need to drive your kids places anymore!" Except school every day, if you want to avoid that public school transportation system.
What unschooling provides is a child being at home, sleeping until he's slept long enough, eating or not eating without regard for the clock, not needing to dress up a certain way most days, having access to an adult or two who love him and have a lot of time for him, being able to leave projects out, being able to watch a DVD if he wants to, and pause it until later, or just turn it off and walk away without asking everyone else if it's okay to pause it or change the channel. Being home, a child can use the internet. He can go back to bed if he's tired or feels ill or stressed.
There are aspects of learning and living that people forget about when they claim that a school can provide what unschooling provides.
Sandra
Tori Otero
I've visited Summerhill school twice now and as a school I loved it. It
seemed a very kind place, kids could choose to dress how they wanted to and
I can't imagine that they wouldn't comfort a distressed child at least i
didn't get that impression. i thought tge school was both permissive and
there were huge amounts of rules that had evolved organically over the
years, to allow the community, both children and adults to live peacefully.
Unschooling doesn't need to rely on structures and rules to manage
relationships or live peacefully. I decided to Unschool Charlie believing
that was best, it turned out that it was, that may change and Charlie might
want to try school. If he did I would probably encourage him to take a look
at Summerhill as one of the choices. Summerhill brought us to Unschooling
:) it's not the same as Unschooling ( it's missing the parent bit and it is
very different living in a community with lots of your peers) but as far as
schools go it's not bad :)
seemed a very kind place, kids could choose to dress how they wanted to and
I can't imagine that they wouldn't comfort a distressed child at least i
didn't get that impression. i thought tge school was both permissive and
there were huge amounts of rules that had evolved organically over the
years, to allow the community, both children and adults to live peacefully.
Unschooling doesn't need to rely on structures and rules to manage
relationships or live peacefully. I decided to Unschool Charlie believing
that was best, it turned out that it was, that may change and Charlie might
want to try school. If he did I would probably encourage him to take a look
at Summerhill as one of the choices. Summerhill brought us to Unschooling
:) it's not the same as Unschooling ( it's missing the parent bit and it is
very different living in a community with lots of your peers) but as far as
schools go it's not bad :)
On Wednesday, 6 March 2013, Sandra Dodd wrote:
> -=-for most of us who like a free style of learning for our kids, there is
> a school that just does that !-=-
>
> I let this through because once in a while it's good to discuss the
> difference between a school that "does that" and unschooling.
>
> No school can unschool. It's not linguistically or logically or socially
> possible.
>
> -=-Based on an experience occurred in England last century (you can google
> Summerhill UK) several of these type of schools have been opened here in Us
> as well.-=-
>
> It's pretty day for a new school to start idealistically, and the plan can
> be seen as fair and workable, until real human beings are thrown into the
> mix.
>
> -=-Welcoming all who can thrive, -=-
>
> I guess that means that if someone isn't cooperative, they're no longer
> welcome. And that makes sense, but will it really be democratic to that
> level?
>
> Not and have free bus service.
> And it's not "free bus service," really.
> -=-Although The Circle School doesn�t provide transportation, residents of
> at least the following school districts are eligible for free public school
> bus service to The Circle School:...
> If you live in one of the above school districts, we�ll ask you at the
> time of enrollment if you want bus transportation, and submit a request to
> your district based on your wishes. Bus schedules and routes are determined
> by the public school district providing the transportation.-=-
> http://circleschool.org/enrollment/transportation/
>
> So each student at this school will either need to be delivered and picked
> up each day by parents or someone, or get on a school bus with public
> school students, but get OFF the bus at a private school. And then get on
> the bus after school.
>
> I rode school busses for eleven years. They're not calm, peaceful places.
> They aren't the least bit democratic. Either the driver is "mean" and
> kids sit quietly but relative safely, or the driver is "nice" and some of
> the kids have leeway to be mean.
>
> -=-a school like this is being opened in the Stroudsburg/Bangor area in
> Pennsylvania and you can check it out at these two links:-=-
>
> WAY too local for this discussion, but it's good to point out that each
> such school will try to sell itself to local homeschoolers. They will
> figure (probably rightly) that some homeschoolers are homeschooling because
> they haven't found a school that will suit their child or calm their fears.
>
> -=-'Democratic' schools are the closest institutionalized schools that
> honor the natural drive of the child and exposes the kid to several
> activities without actually telling him/her what to do.-=-
>
> I would hope someone would tell him not to be destructive or mean. If he
> misses his mom, will they tell him to stop crying and complaining? If
> he's hungry, won't they tell him to wait for lunchtime or until he gets
> home?
>
> -=-(no tests, no adult driving the kid to this or that activity,
> kids of all ages, indoor and outdoor time free to choose upon the child's
> choice, etc)-=-
>
> By "no adult driving the kid to this or that activity," do you mean the
> school doesn't take kids anywhere? Maybe it's in an urban environment and
> they walk or take public transportation. Or maybe it means "Hooray,
> parents! You won't need to drive your kids places anymore!" Except school
> every day, if you want to avoid that public school transportation system.
>
> What unschooling provides is a child being at home, sleeping until he's
> slept long enough, eating or not eating without regard for the clock, not
> needing to dress up a certain way most days, having access to an adult or
> two who love him and have a lot of time for him, being able to leave
> projects out, being able to watch a DVD if he wants to, and pause it until
> later, or just turn it off and walk away without asking everyone else if
> it's okay to pause it or change the channel. Being home, a child can use
> the internet. He can go back to bed if he's tired or feels ill or stressed.
>
> There are aspects of learning and living that people forget about when
> they claim that a school can provide what unschooling provides.
>
> Sandra
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Bernadette Lynn
What unschooling provides is a child being at home, sleeping until he's
most of the night catching up with a good friend who's been away from skype
for a few days. He's awake now watching game videos on Youtube.
My eldest daughter has spent the day watching Ben 10 DVDs and Minecraft
videos, curled up on the couch with a quilt, and occasionally going to
bounce a ball on the wooden floor in the hall (she managed 137 bounces in a
row last time). She's also played on the doorway chin-up bar a bit.
My second daughter got up around midday and has spent most of the afternoon
playing Minecraft and Top Model on the computer, though she had a shower
and washed her hair as well.
My youngest came with me to drive Granny to see Great Granny; we stopped at
the park afterwards and played together; she fell off her scooter on the
way back to the car but luckily an ice-cream van turned up just as we were
leaving so she soon felt better. We picked Granny up and took her back to
her house and stayed for a chat, then came home (via the station to pick
Daddy up) to make dinner.
I don't think any of that could have happened if the children were at even
a democratic school.
Bernadette.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> slept long enough, eating or not eating without regard for the clock, notToday my son spent a large part of the day asleep, because he was awake
> needing to dress up a certain way most days, having access to an adult or
> two who love him and have a lot of time for him, being able to leave
> projects out, being able to watch a DVD if he wants to, and pause it until
> later, or just turn it off and walk away without asking everyone else if
> it's okay to pause it or change the channel. Being home, a child can use
> the internet. He can go back to bed if he's tired or feels ill or stressed.
> ======================================
>
most of the night catching up with a good friend who's been away from skype
for a few days. He's awake now watching game videos on Youtube.
My eldest daughter has spent the day watching Ben 10 DVDs and Minecraft
videos, curled up on the couch with a quilt, and occasionally going to
bounce a ball on the wooden floor in the hall (she managed 137 bounces in a
row last time). She's also played on the doorway chin-up bar a bit.
My second daughter got up around midday and has spent most of the afternoon
playing Minecraft and Top Model on the computer, though she had a shower
and washed her hair as well.
My youngest came with me to drive Granny to see Great Granny; we stopped at
the park afterwards and played together; she fell off her scooter on the
way back to the car but luckily an ice-cream van turned up just as we were
leaving so she soon felt better. We picked Granny up and took her back to
her house and stayed for a chat, then came home (via the station to pick
Daddy up) to make dinner.
I don't think any of that could have happened if the children were at even
a democratic school.
Bernadette.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Hannah North
I know a couple of HE families who have visited Summerhill (and I know people who attended a very similar school in Devon - The Sands School) and have been very positive about what happens there.
These schools cannot be "unschooling" places.
I have to say, I cannot fathom the fee-paying aspect of a democratic school
These schools cannot be "unschooling" places.
I have to say, I cannot fathom the fee-paying aspect of a democratic school
Cinira Longuinho
I decided to check the website and I end up at the general policy
statement of the school... In reality it is the first chapter of the
book *Summerhill
� a radical approach to child rearing*� by the school�s founder, *A.S. Neill
*.
I would love to hear more about these 2 quotes.
This is from Summerhill, the above source:
"How much of our education is real doing, real self-expression? Handwork is
too often the making of a wooden box under the eye of an expert. Even the
Montessori system, well known as a system of directed play, is an
artificial way of making the child learn by doing. It has nothing creative
about it. In the home the child is always being taught. In almost every
home there is at least one ungrown-up grown-up who rushes to show Tommy how
his new engine works. There is always someone to lift the baby up on a
chair when the baby wants to examine something on the wall. Every time we
show Tommy how his engine works we are stealing from that child the joy of
life � the joy of discovery � the joy of overcoming an obstacle. Worse! We
make that child come to believe that he is inferior, and must depend on
help."
This is from Sandra Dodd, previous post:
""What unschooling provides is a child being at home, sleeping until he's
slept long enough, eating or not eating without regard for the clock, not
needing to dress up a certain way most days, having access to an adult or
two who love him and have a lot of time for him, being able to leave
projects out, being able to watch a DVD if he wants to, and pause it until
later, or just turn it off and walk away without asking everyone else if
it's okay to pause it or change the channel. Being home, a child can use
the internet. He can go back to bed if he's tired or feels ill or
stressed." ( brilliant! Thank you, Sandra Dodd)
Thanks!
statement of the school... In reality it is the first chapter of the
book *Summerhill
� a radical approach to child rearing*� by the school�s founder, *A.S. Neill
*.
I would love to hear more about these 2 quotes.
This is from Summerhill, the above source:
"How much of our education is real doing, real self-expression? Handwork is
too often the making of a wooden box under the eye of an expert. Even the
Montessori system, well known as a system of directed play, is an
artificial way of making the child learn by doing. It has nothing creative
about it. In the home the child is always being taught. In almost every
home there is at least one ungrown-up grown-up who rushes to show Tommy how
his new engine works. There is always someone to lift the baby up on a
chair when the baby wants to examine something on the wall. Every time we
show Tommy how his engine works we are stealing from that child the joy of
life � the joy of discovery � the joy of overcoming an obstacle. Worse! We
make that child come to believe that he is inferior, and must depend on
help."
This is from Sandra Dodd, previous post:
""What unschooling provides is a child being at home, sleeping until he's
slept long enough, eating or not eating without regard for the clock, not
needing to dress up a certain way most days, having access to an adult or
two who love him and have a lot of time for him, being able to leave
projects out, being able to watch a DVD if he wants to, and pause it until
later, or just turn it off and walk away without asking everyone else if
it's okay to pause it or change the channel. Being home, a child can use
the internet. He can go back to bed if he's tired or feels ill or
stressed." ( brilliant! Thank you, Sandra Dodd)
Thanks!
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:55 AM, Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
> -=-for most of us who like a free style of learning for our kids, there is
> a school that just does that !-=-
>
> I let this through because once in a while it's good to discuss the
> difference between a school that "does that" and unschooling.
>
> No school can unschool. It's not linguistically or logically or socially
> possible.
>
> -=-Based on an experience occurred in England last century (you can google
> Summerhill UK) several of these type of schools have been opened here in Us
> as well.-=-
>
> It's pretty day for a new school to start idealistically, and the plan can
> be seen as fair and workable, until real human beings are thrown into the
> mix.
>
> -=-Welcoming all who can thrive, -=-
>
> I guess that means that if someone isn't cooperative, they're no longer
> welcome. And that makes sense, but will it really be democratic to that
> level?
>
> Not and have free bus service.
> And it's not "free bus service," really.
> -=-Although The Circle School doesn�t provide transportation, residents of
> at least the following school districts are eligible for free public school
> bus service to The Circle School:...
> If you live in one of the above school districts, we�ll ask you at the
> time of enrollment if you want bus transportation, and submit a request to
> your district based on your wishes. Bus schedules and routes are determined
> by the public school district providing the transportation.-=-
> http://circleschool.org/enrollment/transportation/
>
> So each student at this school will either need to be delivered and picked
> up each day by parents or someone, or get on a school bus with public
> school students, but get OFF the bus at a private school. And then get on
> the bus after school.
>
> I rode school busses for eleven years. They're not calm, peaceful places.
> They aren't the least bit democratic. Either the driver is "mean" and
> kids sit quietly but relative safely, or the driver is "nice" and some of
> the kids have leeway to be mean.
>
> -=-a school like this is being opened in the Stroudsburg/Bangor area in
> Pennsylvania and you can check it out at these two links:-=-
>
> WAY too local for this discussion, but it's good to point out that each
> such school will try to sell itself to local homeschoolers. They will
> figure (probably rightly) that some homeschoolers are homeschooling because
> they haven't found a school that will suit their child or calm their fears.
>
> -=-'Democratic' schools are the closest institutionalized schools that
> honor the natural drive of the child and exposes the kid to several
> activities without actually telling him/her what to do.-=-
>
> I would hope someone would tell him not to be destructive or mean. If he
> misses his mom, will they tell him to stop crying and complaining? If
> he's hungry, won't they tell him to wait for lunchtime or until he gets
> home?
>
> -=-(no tests, no adult driving the kid to this or that activity,
> kids of all ages, indoor and outdoor time free to choose upon the child's
> choice, etc)-=-
>
> By "no adult driving the kid to this or that activity," do you mean the
> school doesn't take kids anywhere? Maybe it's in an urban environment and
> they walk or take public transportation. Or maybe it means "Hooray,
> parents! You won't need to drive your kids places anymore!" Except school
> every day, if you want to avoid that public school transportation system.
>
> What unschooling provides is a child being at home, sleeping until he's
> slept long enough, eating or not eating without regard for the clock, not
> needing to dress up a certain way most days, having access to an adult or
> two who love him and have a lot of time for him, being able to leave
> projects out, being able to watch a DVD if he wants to, and pause it until
> later, or just turn it off and walk away without asking everyone else if
> it's okay to pause it or change the channel. Being home, a child can use
> the internet. He can go back to bed if he's tired or feels ill or stressed.
>
> There are aspects of learning and living that people forget about when
> they claim that a school can provide what unschooling provides.
>
> Sandra
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-as far as schools go it's not bad :) -=-
Theoretically. If a child wants to be there, it could be less bad than other schools, true. :-)
Theoretically. If a child wants to be there, it could be less bad than other schools, true. :-)
Sandra Dodd
-=-I have to say, I cannot fathom the fee-paying aspect of a democratic school-=-
So you would be willing to work full time for free just because you believed in the philosophy of the school?
Or would you be willing to live full time comforting other people's children?
They probably need to pay for food, dishes, cookware, kitchen, beds and bedding, buildings, the land they're on, cars and trucks, groundskeeping equipment. Maybe they have musical instruments, and those need to be maintained and replaced sometimes. Possibly they have books and computers?
How can you think those would be free just because people had some options once they got there?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
So you would be willing to work full time for free just because you believed in the philosophy of the school?
Or would you be willing to live full time comforting other people's children?
They probably need to pay for food, dishes, cookware, kitchen, beds and bedding, buildings, the land they're on, cars and trucks, groundskeeping equipment. Maybe they have musical instruments, and those need to be maintained and replaced sometimes. Possibly they have books and computers?
How can you think those would be free just because people had some options once they got there?
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=- In the home the child is always being taught. In almost every
home there is at least one ungrown-up grown-up who rushes to show Tommy how
his new engine works. There is always someone to lift the baby up on a
chair when the baby wants to examine something on the wall.-=-
If the guy thought that little of families and homes, I doubt he maintained an environment in which the kids were glad to get back to their parents and siblings.
Separations from families are more likely to break bonds than strengthen them.
Sandra
home there is at least one ungrown-up grown-up who rushes to show Tommy how
his new engine works. There is always someone to lift the baby up on a
chair when the baby wants to examine something on the wall.-=-
If the guy thought that little of families and homes, I doubt he maintained an environment in which the kids were glad to get back to their parents and siblings.
Separations from families are more likely to break bonds than strengthen them.
Sandra
Bernadette Lynn
On 6 March 2013 21:39, Tori Otero <tori.otero@...> wrote:
playground and hurt herself badly. I got a phone call to say she was hurt
but being brave and did I want to collect her? I told the woman (a good
friend who had known Charlotte since she was born) that Charlotte was
usually OK after a hug, and she told me that as long as Charlotte was on
the school grounds, during school hours, she wasn't allowed to hug her. I
got there to find my little girl, covered in blood, having put a tooth
right through her lip and taken the skin off both knees, sitting on her
own in floods of tears, and not one of the staff was allowed to give her a
cuddle.
It's not that they didn't want to, but in a school you're subject to laws
that simply don't exist for normal situations, and school staff are
apparently not allowed to demonstrate physical affection towards a child in
their care even when the child is distressed. Parents don't get to set the
boundaries when their child is in school.
Bernadette.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> I've visited Summerhill school twice now and as a school I loved it. ItWhen my Charlotte was 5 and at school, she was pushed over in the
> seemed a very kind place, kids could choose to dress how they wanted to and
> I can't imagine that they wouldn't comfort a distressed child at least i
> didn't get that impression.
>
> ==========================
>
playground and hurt herself badly. I got a phone call to say she was hurt
but being brave and did I want to collect her? I told the woman (a good
friend who had known Charlotte since she was born) that Charlotte was
usually OK after a hug, and she told me that as long as Charlotte was on
the school grounds, during school hours, she wasn't allowed to hug her. I
got there to find my little girl, covered in blood, having put a tooth
right through her lip and taken the skin off both knees, sitting on her
own in floods of tears, and not one of the staff was allowed to give her a
cuddle.
It's not that they didn't want to, but in a school you're subject to laws
that simply don't exist for normal situations, and school staff are
apparently not allowed to demonstrate physical affection towards a child in
their care even when the child is distressed. Parents don't get to set the
boundaries when their child is in school.
Bernadette.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Tori Otero
I have a fondness for A S Neill and from what I know I guess that he didn
't have an experience of Unschooling. I think if he were alive today these
discussions and ideas may
challenged his original thoughts about children and independence, and
perhaps lead to a revision of Some of them. He seemed open to learning and
was progressive given the time he was writing. His school is progressive
today when compared to other schools. Which is shocking. If course not
everyone can unschool, I think it would be great if people who wanted to
send their children to school, either because it was preferred or because
they were unable to make the emotional and practical transition, could have
the option of sending their kids to a democratic school.
During the deschooling process Charlie did start to feel as though I
thought he couldn't manage things. He appreciated my support and actively
asked for it to, and sometimes he said I'm not a baby I can do it. Maybe I
wasn't 't partnering effectively, maybe when you stop expecting children to
do things that were previously expected ofthen, maybe because we rushed
into unschooling we found ourselves in that place. Things have changed, now
Charlie has come to trust that it is my intention to be on his team and
support him. Not restrict him or his independence. I am very glad we chose
to Unschool, it has been transforming and a gift to us all, and although
not cheap, cheaper than Summerhill and we get to live, learn and grow
together
:)
't have an experience of Unschooling. I think if he were alive today these
discussions and ideas may
challenged his original thoughts about children and independence, and
perhaps lead to a revision of Some of them. He seemed open to learning and
was progressive given the time he was writing. His school is progressive
today when compared to other schools. Which is shocking. If course not
everyone can unschool, I think it would be great if people who wanted to
send their children to school, either because it was preferred or because
they were unable to make the emotional and practical transition, could have
the option of sending their kids to a democratic school.
During the deschooling process Charlie did start to feel as though I
thought he couldn't manage things. He appreciated my support and actively
asked for it to, and sometimes he said I'm not a baby I can do it. Maybe I
wasn't 't partnering effectively, maybe when you stop expecting children to
do things that were previously expected ofthen, maybe because we rushed
into unschooling we found ourselves in that place. Things have changed, now
Charlie has come to trust that it is my intention to be on his team and
support him. Not restrict him or his independence. I am very glad we chose
to Unschool, it has been transforming and a gift to us all, and although
not cheap, cheaper than Summerhill and we get to live, learn and grow
together
:)
On Thursday, 7 March 2013, Sandra Dodd wrote:
> **
>
>
> -=- In the home the child is always being taught. In almost every
> home there is at least one ungrown-up grown-up who rushes to show Tommy how
> his new engine works. There is always someone to lift the baby up on a
> chair when the baby wants to examine something on the wall.-=-
>
> If the guy thought that little of families and homes, I doubt he
> maintained an environment in which the kids were glad to get back to their
> parents and siblings.
>
> Separations from families are more likely to break bonds than strengthen
> them.
>
> Sandra
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Tori Otero
On Thursday, 7 March 2013, Bernadette Lynn wrote:
Summerhill parents don't get to manage those boundaries. However Summerhill
had been very relaxed about such things. Maybe now things have had
to change, I don't know for sure. However the school and the kids took on
Ofsted (school inspectors) and the government in court and won the right to
have no formal curriculum so my guess is that they would challenge
something that required a fundamental change to their philosophy
and approach.
> **I don't know how Summerhill is managing this. And I agree even at
> -=- It's not that they didn't want to, but in a school you're subject to
> laws
> that simply don't exist for normal situations, and school staff are
> apparently not allowed to demonstrate physical affection towards a child in
> their care even when the child is distressed. Parents don't get to set the
> boundaries when their child is in school. -=-
>
Summerhill parents don't get to manage those boundaries. However Summerhill
had been very relaxed about such things. Maybe now things have had
to change, I don't know for sure. However the school and the kids took on
Ofsted (school inspectors) and the government in court and won the right to
have no formal curriculum so my guess is that they would challenge
something that required a fundamental change to their philosophy
and approach.
> On 6 March 2013 21:39, Tori Otero tori.otero@...<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'tori.otero%40gmail.com');>>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> wrote:
>
> > I've visited Summerhill school twice now and as a school I loved it. It
> > seemed a very kind place, kids could choose to dress how they wanted to
> and
> > I can't imagine that they wouldn't comfort a distressed child at least i
> > didn't get that impression.
> >
> > ==========================
> >
>
> When my Charlotte was 5 and at school, she was pushed over in the
> playground and hurt herself badly. I got a phone call to say she was hurt
> but being brave and did I want to collect her? I told the woman (a good
> friend who had known Charlotte since she was born) that Charlotte was
> usually OK after a hug, and she told me that as long as Charlotte was on
> the school grounds, during school hours, she wasn't allowed to hug her. I
> got there to find my little girl, covered in blood, having put a tooth
> right through her lip and taken the skin off both knees, sitting on her
> own in floods of tears, and not one of the staff was allowed to give her a
> cuddle.
>
> It's not that they didn't want to, but in a school you're subject to laws
> that simply don't exist for normal situations, and school staff are
> apparently not allowed to demonstrate physical affection towards a child in
> their care even when the child is distressed. Parents don't get to set the
> boundaries when their child is in school.
>
> Bernadette.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
Tori Otero
Sandra wrote
-=- If the guy thought that little of families and homes, I doubt he
maintained an environment in which the kids were glad to get back to their
parents and siblings.
Separations from families are more likely to break bonds than strengthen
them. -=-
I agree, he didn't and that did put strain on families and their bonds.
Kids did struggle to go back to their parents and feel happy. The kids
changed but the families didn't have the opportunity to grow with them.
Some families did manage it though because they shared a similar philosophy
from the start. I think from what i have read and seen the connection was
maintained by the parents having a deeper understanding of their childs
experience and by supporting the approach. For a time Summerhill became a
place for pupils who didn't get on in mainstream schools and whose parents
didn 't know how to work with their children. So many families had a
problem connecting in the first place, I think sometimes it improved the
situation for some children and their families.
One of the reasons we took Charlie out of school was because we couldn't
support the way his school and the system worked. If Charlie had remained
in school it would have had a damaging effect on his ability to manage at
school. It would have damaged his connection and sense of belonging at
school and left him experiencing conflict that was ours not his.
-=- If the guy thought that little of families and homes, I doubt he
maintained an environment in which the kids were glad to get back to their
parents and siblings.
Separations from families are more likely to break bonds than strengthen
them. -=-
I agree, he didn't and that did put strain on families and their bonds.
Kids did struggle to go back to their parents and feel happy. The kids
changed but the families didn't have the opportunity to grow with them.
Some families did manage it though because they shared a similar philosophy
from the start. I think from what i have read and seen the connection was
maintained by the parents having a deeper understanding of their childs
experience and by supporting the approach. For a time Summerhill became a
place for pupils who didn't get on in mainstream schools and whose parents
didn 't know how to work with their children. So many families had a
problem connecting in the first place, I think sometimes it improved the
situation for some children and their families.
One of the reasons we took Charlie out of school was because we couldn't
support the way his school and the system worked. If Charlie had remained
in school it would have had a damaging effect on his ability to manage at
school. It would have damaged his connection and sense of belonging at
school and left him experiencing conflict that was ours not his.
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> On Thursday, 7 March 2013, Bernadette Lynn wrote:
>
>> **
>> -=- It's not that they didn't want to, but in a school you're subject
>> to laws
>> that simply don't exist for normal situations, and school staff are
>> apparently not allowed to demonstrate physical affection towards a child
>> in
>> their care even when the child is distressed. Parents don't get to set the
>> boundaries when their child is in school. -=-
>>
>
> I don't know how Summerhill is managing this. And I agree even at
> Summerhill parents don't get to manage those boundaries. However Summerhill
> had been very relaxed about such things. Maybe now things have had
> to change, I don't know for sure. However the school and the kids took on
> Ofsted (school inspectors) and the government in court and won the right to
> have no formal curriculum so my guess is that they would challenge
> something that required a fundamental change to their philosophy
> and approach.
>
> On 6 March 2013 21:39, Tori Otero tori.otero@...> wrote:
>
> > I've visited Summerhill school twice now and as a school I loved it. It
> > seemed a very kind place, kids could choose to dress how they wanted to
> and
> > I can't imagine that they wouldn't comfort a distressed child at least i
> > didn't get that impression.
> >
> > ==========================
> >
>
> When my Charlotte was 5 and at school, she was pushed over in the
> playground and hurt herself badly. I got a phone call to say she was hurt
> but being brave and did I want to collect her? I told the woman (a good
> friend who had known Charlotte since she was born) that Charlotte was
> usually OK after a hug, and she told me that as long as Charlotte was on
> the school grounds, during school hours, she wasn't allowed to hug her. I
> got there to find my little girl, covered in blood, having put a tooth
> right through her lip and taken the skin off both knees, sitting on her
> own in floods of tears, and not one of the staff was allowed to give her a
> cuddle.
>
> It's not that they didn't want to, but in a school you're subject to laws
> that simply don't exist for normal situations, and school staff are
> apparently not allowed to demonstrate physical affection towards a child in
> their care even when the child is distressed. Parents don't get to set the
> boundaries when their child is in school.
>
> Bernadette.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> Reply via web post<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxZ2c2NGpuBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzQ0MTAyNTAEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NTQyMTExBG1zZ0lkAzcwODEyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTM2MjYyMTA3OA--?act=reply&messageNum=70812> Reply
> to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJla3M1NTZyBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzQ0MTAyNTAEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NTQyMTExBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTM2MjYyMTA3OA--> Messages
> in this topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/message/70803;_ylc=X3oDMTM2Zmp0YWkxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzQ0MTAyNTAEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NTQyMTExBG1zZ0lkAzcwODEyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTM2MjYyMTA3OAR0cGNJZAM3MDgwMw-->(10)
> Recent Activity:
>
> - New Members<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/members;_ylc=X3oDMTJmN3VxNG1iBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzQ0MTAyNTAEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NTQyMTExBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZtYnJzBHN0aW1lAzEzNjI2MjEwNzg-?o=6>
> 22
>
>
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning;_ylc=X3oDMTJlaWRsNHNrBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzQ0MTAyNTAEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NTQyMTExBHNlYwN2dGwEc2xrA3ZnaHAEc3RpbWUDMTM2MjYyMTA3OA-->
>
>
Tori Otero
That's not to say that I think a connection maintained by supporting your
child's experience of school and seeing eye to eye with the philosophy
result in a connection between parent and child that is in anyway
comparable with the connection Unschooling parents and kids have.
Everything about Unschooling deepens and strengthens this connection and
relationship. That is just one of the gifts of Unschooling.
child's experience of school and seeing eye to eye with the philosophy
result in a connection between parent and child that is in anyway
comparable with the connection Unschooling parents and kids have.
Everything about Unschooling deepens and strengthens this connection and
relationship. That is just one of the gifts of Unschooling.
On Thursday, 7 March 2013, Tori Otero wrote:
>
> Sandra wrote
>
> -=- If the guy thought that little of families and homes, I doubt he
> maintained an environment in which the kids were glad to get back to their
> parents and siblings.
>
> Separations from families are more likely to break bonds than strengthen
> them. -=-
>
> I agree, he didn't and that did put strain on families and their bonds.
> Kids did struggle to go back to their parents and feel happy. The kids
> changed but the families didn't have the opportunity to grow with them.
> Some families did manage it though because they shared a similar philosophy
> from the start. I think from what i have read and seen the connection was
> maintained by the parents having a deeper understanding of their childs
> experience and by supporting the approach. For a time Summerhill became a
> place for pupils who didn't get on in mainstream schools and whose parents
> didn 't know how to work with their children. So many families had a
> problem connecting in the first place, I think sometimes it improved the
> situation for some children and their families.
>
> One of the reasons we took Charlie out of school was because we couldn't
> support the way his school and the system worked. If Charlie had remained
> in school it would have had a damaging effect on his ability to manage at
> school. It would have damaged his connection and sense of belonging at
> school and left him experiencing conflict that was ours not his.
>
>
>
>
> On Thursday, 7 March 2013, Bernadette Lynn wrote:
>
> **
> -=- It's not that they didn't want to, but in a school you're subject to
> laws
> that simply don't exist for normal situations, and school staff are
> apparently not allowed to demonstrate physical affection towards a child in
> their care even when the child is distressed. Parents don't get to set the
> boundaries when their child is in school. -=-
>
>
> I don't know how Summerhill is managing this. And I agree even at
> Summerhill parents don't get to manage those boundaries. However Summerhill
> had been very relaxed about such things. Maybe now things have had
> to change, I don't know for sure. However the school and the kids took on
> Ofsted (school inspectors) and the government in court and won the right to
> have no formal curriculum so my guess is that they would challenge
> something that required a fundamental change to their philosophy
> and approach.
>
> On 6 March 2013 21:39, Tori Otero tori.otero@...> wrote:
>
> > I've visited Summerhill school twice now and as a school I loved it. It
> > seemed a very kind place, kids could choose to dress how they wanted to
> and
> > I can't imagine that they wouldn't comfort a distressed child at least i
> > didn't get that impression.
> >
> > ==========================
> >
>
> When my Charlotte was 5 and at school, she was pushed over in the
> playground and hurt herself badly. I got a phone call to say she was hurt
> but being brave and did I want to collect her? I told the woman (a good
> friend who had known Charlotte since she was born) that Charlotte was
> usually OK after a hug, and she told me that as long as Charlotte was on
> the school grounds, during school hours, she wasn't allowed to hug her. I
> got there to find my little girl, covered in blood, having put a tooth
> right through her lip and taken the skin off both knees, sitting on her
> own in floods of tears, and not one of the staff was allowed to give her a
> cuddle.
>
> It's not that they didn't want to, but in a school you're subject to laws
> that simply don't exist for normal situations, and school staff are
> apparently not allowed to demonstrate physical affection towards a child in
> their care even when the child is distressed. Parents don't get to set the
> boundaries when their child is in school.
>
> Bernadette.
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> Reply via web post<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJxZ2c2NGpuBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzQ0MTAyNTAEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NTQyMTExBG1zZ0lkAzcwODEyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3JwbHkEc3RpbWUDMTM2MjYyMTA3OA--?act=reply&messageNum=70812> Reply
> to sender Reply to group Start a New Topic<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/post;_ylc=X3oDMTJla3M1NTZyBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzQ0MTAyNTAEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NTQyMTExBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA250cGMEc3RpbWUDMTM2MjYyMTA3OA-->
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/message/70803;_ylc=X3oDMTM2Zmp0YWkxBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzQ0MTAyNTAEZ3Jwc3BJZAMxNzA1NTQyMTExBG1zZ0lkAzcwODEyBHNlYwNmdHIEc2xrA3Z0cGMEc3RpbWUDMTM2MjYyMTA3OAR0cGNJZAM3MDgwMw-->
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
chris ester
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
they need someone else to direct their child's learning (or influence their
learning, or provide for their learning...) because families and homes are
no place for a child to thrive. The assumption seems to be that a person
needs special training to help a child learn--an expert.
I was particularly struck by the line that referred to "stealing from a
child the joy of discovery". Nevermind that some children have a low
frustration tolerance and benefit from a parent's assistance. It is a
matter of most parents become 'expert' at what works with their own
children. My son never wanted help, my daughter would ask for advice on
how to do things. I learned and adapted accordingly--which of my children
did I steal the "joy of discovery" from?
Chris
> **My thought was that this seems to be another 'expert' telling parents that
>
>
> >>>>-=- In the home the child is always being taught. In almost every
>
> home there is at least one ungrown-up grown-up who rushes to show Tommy how
> his new engine works. There is always someone to lift the baby up on a
> chair when the baby wants to examine something on the wall.-=-
>
> If the guy thought that little of families and homes, I doubt he
> maintained an environment in which the kids were glad to get back to their
> parents and siblings.
>
> Separations from families are more likely to break bonds than strengthen
> them.
>
> Sandra<<<<<<
>
they need someone else to direct their child's learning (or influence their
learning, or provide for their learning...) because families and homes are
no place for a child to thrive. The assumption seems to be that a person
needs special training to help a child learn--an expert.
I was particularly struck by the line that referred to "stealing from a
child the joy of discovery". Nevermind that some children have a low
frustration tolerance and benefit from a parent's assistance. It is a
matter of most parents become 'expert' at what works with their own
children. My son never wanted help, my daughter would ask for advice on
how to do things. I learned and adapted accordingly--which of my children
did I steal the "joy of discovery" from?
Chris
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Karen
>>>>>Every time we show Tommy how his engine works we are stealing from that child the joy of life the joy of discovery the joy of overcoming an obstacle. Worse! We make that child come to believe that he is inferior, and must depend on help." <<<<<I think this is interesting because I believe it is where some unschooling parents might get stuck sometimes. Some kids like to figure things out for themselves, sure. But, some children (and adults) like to be shown how to do things. And, some would prefer to have things done for them entirely.
I remember drawing on my neighbour's driveway a few summers ago. Their daughter wanted me to draw everything she could possibly imagine. She didn't want to draw herself, but she did want to direct my drawing, and watch me work. Their middle son, on the other hand, liked to draw things for himself, but he would get very frustrated when it didn't come out looking like how he imagined it should. So, for him, I would draw beside his drawing, and he would try to copy it. My own son likes to draw things his way, entirely out of his own imagination. He doesn't want to watch me draw, and doesn't want to copy or look at other people's drawings.
If the focus is on the "joy of discovery" or "the joy of overcoming an obstacle" and not on the child, we risk compromising the child's very real and unique needs in any given situation. In coming together over an engine, or a drawing, or tying one's shoes, there can be so much more to learn than simply discovering the how. We'll never realize that vast potential if we are looking at anything other than the child him/herself.
Shauna Reisewitz
+++No school can unschool. It's not linguistically or logically or socially possible.+++
I have a slightly different perspective. Perhaps it's true that a school itself can't unschool, but there can be a school that supports unschoolers.
I may be the only person that this applies to but my "birth and babyhood" as an unschooler happened while I was a teacher in a public charter school that completely supported unschoolers (for a while).
We encouraged and deeply respected familial relationships, children growing at their own pace. Everything was optional. We did meet with the parents but it wasn't to discuss standards and requirements, it was to enjoy tea, and get to know the children and see all the cool things they were working on. We encouraged people who came to us from school to spend months or years (if necessary) deschooling. We encouraged and respected teens' needs to cocoon. We encouraged families with really young children to stay home. One of the central pieces of our program happened in this wonderful house, where all ages of kids would gather and play games, eat lunch, work on their computer games, swing, chat, do art, lay all over each other like piles of puppies, with a grandmother type teacher, and me and a younger teacher interacting and just hanging out observing the children, helping them when they needed help, socially, physically, getting food organized.
We offered swimming classes at the local pool, chess from a local master, improvisational theater, art, organic gardening on a real farm, doll making, quilting, writing, field trips that families would go on together. Parents were welcome everywhere. And again everything was optional. Many lovely unschooling families enjoyed our program..
When I first started working there no one (or only a couple people) chose to test. None of what we offered was compulsory. we did need to collect work samples and note what people did each month- but we were very loose about what we accepted. people would just give a xeroxed list over and over.. send a picture of chocolate chip cookies their child made... It really was idyllic. I'd bring my babies and nurse as I talked to kids and parents, or taught a science class. Things changed though, and it is no longer what it used to be. Testing is required, and now parents and teachers do have to go over the standards, and I was no longer able to bring my children, so I quit.
But it WAS a school that supported unschooling families. It's possible, and it was cutting edge education wise- It allowed people of all socioeconomic levels (and we had some very poor people) to unschool and have access to classes and activities and field trips that would otherwise be cost prohibitive for them. It also provided a wonderful multi aged community. We saw different combinations of people from this community everyday.. It was really rich. Some people we saw very infrequently, or not at all, others we saw nearly daily.
Maybe this list isn't the place to do it, but I think it's important to keep that vision of a school as a possibility for public education.
I also think that some of these stepping stone programs like democratic schools or the one that i am setting up, are good and useful to give families options to allow their kids more freedom, and joy. Unschooling can be really daunting for "regular people" And at least these types of programs give a community and some mentorship where people can get closer to living lives of freedom and joy and rich learning with their children in a place where they feel supported, and more comfortable than they would be going at it alone.
I have a slightly different perspective. Perhaps it's true that a school itself can't unschool, but there can be a school that supports unschoolers.
I may be the only person that this applies to but my "birth and babyhood" as an unschooler happened while I was a teacher in a public charter school that completely supported unschoolers (for a while).
We encouraged and deeply respected familial relationships, children growing at their own pace. Everything was optional. We did meet with the parents but it wasn't to discuss standards and requirements, it was to enjoy tea, and get to know the children and see all the cool things they were working on. We encouraged people who came to us from school to spend months or years (if necessary) deschooling. We encouraged and respected teens' needs to cocoon. We encouraged families with really young children to stay home. One of the central pieces of our program happened in this wonderful house, where all ages of kids would gather and play games, eat lunch, work on their computer games, swing, chat, do art, lay all over each other like piles of puppies, with a grandmother type teacher, and me and a younger teacher interacting and just hanging out observing the children, helping them when they needed help, socially, physically, getting food organized.
We offered swimming classes at the local pool, chess from a local master, improvisational theater, art, organic gardening on a real farm, doll making, quilting, writing, field trips that families would go on together. Parents were welcome everywhere. And again everything was optional. Many lovely unschooling families enjoyed our program..
When I first started working there no one (or only a couple people) chose to test. None of what we offered was compulsory. we did need to collect work samples and note what people did each month- but we were very loose about what we accepted. people would just give a xeroxed list over and over.. send a picture of chocolate chip cookies their child made... It really was idyllic. I'd bring my babies and nurse as I talked to kids and parents, or taught a science class. Things changed though, and it is no longer what it used to be. Testing is required, and now parents and teachers do have to go over the standards, and I was no longer able to bring my children, so I quit.
But it WAS a school that supported unschooling families. It's possible, and it was cutting edge education wise- It allowed people of all socioeconomic levels (and we had some very poor people) to unschool and have access to classes and activities and field trips that would otherwise be cost prohibitive for them. It also provided a wonderful multi aged community. We saw different combinations of people from this community everyday.. It was really rich. Some people we saw very infrequently, or not at all, others we saw nearly daily.
Maybe this list isn't the place to do it, but I think it's important to keep that vision of a school as a possibility for public education.
I also think that some of these stepping stone programs like democratic schools or the one that i am setting up, are good and useful to give families options to allow their kids more freedom, and joy. Unschooling can be really daunting for "regular people" And at least these types of programs give a community and some mentorship where people can get closer to living lives of freedom and joy and rich learning with their children in a place where they feel supported, and more comfortable than they would be going at it alone.
Claire
--- In [email protected], "Karen" <semajrak@...> wrote:
One of the things I love about unschooling is that it helps me to strike the right balance between creating a space in which my children can happily learn and explore, and being mindfully present with them, especially in helping them to resolve conflicts. Even if I simply say,'how do you think we can solve this?', my presence and input helps them to resolve the issue in a timely way.
It seems that those who focus on 'freedom' rather than their child also on some level want a bit of freedom from their child. To me it looks disconnected, and sometimes, irresponsible. My kids are 8 and 5, so according to Sandra's joke graph that's actually pretty accurate, I should and do put in most of my waking hours playing with, caring for and nurturing my kids.
http://sandradodd.com/howto/precisely
Claire
> If the focus is on the "joy of discovery" or "the joy of overcoming an obstacle" and not on the child, we risk compromising the child's very real and unique needs in any given situation. In coming together over an engine, or a drawing, or tying one's shoes, there can be so much more to learn than simply discovering the how. We'll never realize that vast potential if we are looking at anything other than the child him/herself.Thanks for clarifying this in such a lovely concise way. I've just been reading a discussion about free-range parenting, and it was this very point that kept troubling me. All too often, proponents of free-range parenting seem to focus on some idealised notion of 'freedom' - to roam about, to undertake adventures, to explore and learn new things. It all sounds wonderful, but their focus is not on their child.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
One of the things I love about unschooling is that it helps me to strike the right balance between creating a space in which my children can happily learn and explore, and being mindfully present with them, especially in helping them to resolve conflicts. Even if I simply say,'how do you think we can solve this?', my presence and input helps them to resolve the issue in a timely way.
It seems that those who focus on 'freedom' rather than their child also on some level want a bit of freedom from their child. To me it looks disconnected, and sometimes, irresponsible. My kids are 8 and 5, so according to Sandra's joke graph that's actually pretty accurate, I should and do put in most of my waking hours playing with, caring for and nurturing my kids.
http://sandradodd.com/howto/precisely
Claire
khalsakaur
I loved this response, it really spoke to me as I've been trying to work out what my son needs in this regard - he gets frustrated when he can't do something perfectly the first time, but then to my amazement he thoroughly enjoyed copying some writing from another person, and doing it himself. Thank you. I don't think I've posted on this group before, but I read many of the posts and get so much from them.
Morgan
Morgan
--- In [email protected], "Karen" <semajrak@...> wrote:
>
> >>>>>Every time we show Tommy how his engine works we are stealing from that child the joy of life the joy of discovery the joy of overcoming an obstacle. Worse! We make that child come to believe that he is inferior, and must depend on help." <<<<<
>
> I think this is interesting because I believe it is where some unschooling parents might get stuck sometimes. Some kids like to figure things out for themselves, sure. But, some children (and adults) like to be shown how to do things. And, some would prefer to have things done for them entirely.
>
> I remember drawing on my neighbour's driveway a few summers ago. Their daughter wanted me to draw everything she could possibly imagine. She didn't want to draw herself, but she did want to direct my drawing, and watch me work. Their middle son, on the other hand, liked to draw things for himself, but he would get very frustrated when it didn't come out looking like how he imagined it should. So, for him, I would draw beside his drawing, and he would try to copy it. My own son likes to draw things his way, entirely out of his own imagination. He doesn't want to watch me draw, and doesn't want to copy or look at other people's drawings.
>
> If the focus is on the "joy of discovery" or "the joy of overcoming an obstacle" and not on the child, we risk compromising the child's very real and unique needs in any given situation. In coming together over an engine, or a drawing, or tying one's shoes, there can be so much more to learn than simply discovering the how. We'll never realize that vast potential if we are looking at anything other than the child him/herself.
>
Sandra Dodd
-=- So many families had a
problem connecting in the first place, I think sometimes it improved the
situation for some children and their families.-=-
Yes. If a child's spirit was being lost or crushed in a family, then giving him a chance to flourish elsewhere is good!
The reason I want to run these comparisons from time to time, though, is to remind people that if they can manage to get radical unschooling to work at their home, a child spirit isn't likely to be lost or crushed.
If a democratic school is chosen as the lesser of some array of school evils, that's fine.
If it's being chosen because the parent believes that professionals and strangers can "unschool" their child, then that's a problem with their perception of unschooling, and a potential loss of a wonderful home environment.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
problem connecting in the first place, I think sometimes it improved the
situation for some children and their families.-=-
Yes. If a child's spirit was being lost or crushed in a family, then giving him a chance to flourish elsewhere is good!
The reason I want to run these comparisons from time to time, though, is to remind people that if they can manage to get radical unschooling to work at their home, a child spirit isn't likely to be lost or crushed.
If a democratic school is chosen as the lesser of some array of school evils, that's fine.
If it's being chosen because the parent believes that professionals and strangers can "unschool" their child, then that's a problem with their perception of unschooling, and a potential loss of a wonderful home environment.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
BRIAN POLIKOWSKY
Free-range children.
That is another notion that bothers me.
Not that I did not go out in adventures with friends when I was a child.I did.
It was fun. But we made some really bad decisions and we are lucky we are all in one piece.
But you free-range chickens and not children. Free range chickens get killed all the time.
Many people who free-range chicken will shrug it off :" Oh you may loose a few".
Interesting thing is that when my mom or dad or someone older was with us in one of our adventures we had even more fun and I remember those occasions.
Most of our adventures as kids were in our grandfather's hobby farm that was surrounded by family or very close family friend's farms so we all knew each other.
SO maybe my notion of what people call Free-range children is incorrect but I imagine young kids left alone to wonder and parents oblivious to what they are doing or where they are.
That bothers me.
Alex Polikowsky
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
That is another notion that bothers me.
Not that I did not go out in adventures with friends when I was a child.I did.
It was fun. But we made some really bad decisions and we are lucky we are all in one piece.
But you free-range chickens and not children. Free range chickens get killed all the time.
Many people who free-range chicken will shrug it off :" Oh you may loose a few".
Interesting thing is that when my mom or dad or someone older was with us in one of our adventures we had even more fun and I remember those occasions.
Most of our adventures as kids were in our grandfather's hobby farm that was surrounded by family or very close family friend's farms so we all knew each other.
SO maybe my notion of what people call Free-range children is incorrect but I imagine young kids left alone to wonder and parents oblivious to what they are doing or where they are.
That bothers me.
Alex Polikowsky
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
Claire, I think you're shone a light into confusion with this:
"It seems that those who focus on 'freedom' rather than their child also on some level want a bit of freedom from their child."
Some unschoolers want childhood for themselves, instead of choosing, as adults, to provide a great childhood for their children. Heck yes, parents can have more fun if their children are having fun, but they should still be responsible for the safety, security, organization and provision of the life they're creating.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
"It seems that those who focus on 'freedom' rather than their child also on some level want a bit of freedom from their child."
Some unschoolers want childhood for themselves, instead of choosing, as adults, to provide a great childhood for their children. Heck yes, parents can have more fun if their children are having fun, but they should still be responsible for the safety, security, organization and provision of the life they're creating.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-Maybe this list isn't the place to do it, but I think it's important to keep that vision of a school as a possibility for public education. -=-
But it failed.
In the 1960's, there were scientifically proven principles that were put into practice with "The open classroom," the cutting-edge model of what school could be, and should be.
In lab schools, it worked!
In public schools, it failed.
At home, those ideas can work and work well, with radical unschooling. It's the open classroom without a classroom.
-=-I also think that some of these stepping stone programs like democratic schools or the one that i am setting up, are good and useful to give families options to allow their kids more freedom, and joy.-=-
Yes, if their other option was another school. If school was required, that might be better than other schools.
-=-Unschooling can be really daunting for "regular people" -=-
Yes, but this discussion is set up to help them understand it. Anything someone doesn't really wholeheartedly want to do is probably daunting, and some things people DO want to do, but there are people here all hours of the day and night, thanks to international time zones, who will continue to help regular people understand it if they want to understand it better.
-=-And at least these types of programs give a community and some mentorship where people can get closer to living lives of freedom and joy and rich learning with their children in a place where they feel supported, and more comfortable than they would be going at it alone.-=-
The "it" isn't the same "it," though.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
But it failed.
In the 1960's, there were scientifically proven principles that were put into practice with "The open classroom," the cutting-edge model of what school could be, and should be.
In lab schools, it worked!
In public schools, it failed.
At home, those ideas can work and work well, with radical unschooling. It's the open classroom without a classroom.
-=-I also think that some of these stepping stone programs like democratic schools or the one that i am setting up, are good and useful to give families options to allow their kids more freedom, and joy.-=-
Yes, if their other option was another school. If school was required, that might be better than other schools.
-=-Unschooling can be really daunting for "regular people" -=-
Yes, but this discussion is set up to help them understand it. Anything someone doesn't really wholeheartedly want to do is probably daunting, and some things people DO want to do, but there are people here all hours of the day and night, thanks to international time zones, who will continue to help regular people understand it if they want to understand it better.
-=-And at least these types of programs give a community and some mentorship where people can get closer to living lives of freedom and joy and rich learning with their children in a place where they feel supported, and more comfortable than they would be going at it alone.-=-
The "it" isn't the same "it," though.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-SO maybe my notion of what people call Free-range children is incorrect but I imagine young kids left alone to wonder and parents oblivious to what they are doing or where they are.
That bothers me.-=-
I think people think of it as chickens who are eating natural food and choosing when to eat and where, rather than eating when the food first comes out, that pellet food that's created for chickens. Like real world vs. curriculum and schedules.
Past that, though, the analogy does break down. And I think for purposes of the legality of labels on egg cartons, "free range" probably can just mean a really large enclosure, rather than cages.
But real-world, normal life free-range chickens aren't penned, and could take off and leave the farm altogether. I don't think that's what these homeschoolers who like the say their kids are free-range learners mean. They probably mean "like open classroom without a classroom." The freedom to learn from unexpeced things.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
That bothers me.-=-
I think people think of it as chickens who are eating natural food and choosing when to eat and where, rather than eating when the food first comes out, that pellet food that's created for chickens. Like real world vs. curriculum and schedules.
Past that, though, the analogy does break down. And I think for purposes of the legality of labels on egg cartons, "free range" probably can just mean a really large enclosure, rather than cages.
But real-world, normal life free-range chickens aren't penned, and could take off and leave the farm altogether. I don't think that's what these homeschoolers who like the say their kids are free-range learners mean. They probably mean "like open classroom without a classroom." The freedom to learn from unexpeced things.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Juliet Kemp
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 08:13:29AM -0800, BRIAN POLIKOWSKY wrote:
children indoors more than any actual risk would justify. So, letting
your kids go out by themselves to the extent that they're able and
responsible enough to do so, but not (necessarily?) without the parent
knowing what's going on.
For example: when I was 8 or so (so nearly 30 years ago), my younger
sister and I were allowed to walk up to the sweetie shop, about a 15
minute walk away, to spend our pocket-money. There were no big roads to
cross (one or two very small ones), and Mum knew where we were going. I
have no doubt that if we hadn't been back again in a reasonable time,
she would have been out looking for us. Similarly we were allowed to
walk up the road to visit a friend by ourselves, but our Mum and her Mum
had a "dropped-call" code (two rings and put the phone down, back when
daytime phone calls were expensive!) to let the other mother know when
we'd set off and when we arrived. As a young teenager I learnt to ride a
bike safely on the road, and then I set off on excursions for the
morning or afternoon.
My kid isn't anything like that age yet, but I gather that (from hearing
other parents speak) a lot of parents now would consider going up the
shops on your own "too dangerous". But without giving children
responsibility, as they can handle it, what happens when they reach 16
or 18 or 21 and suddenly have much more responsibility all at once? The
perception of danger (from terrifying news stories) doesn't match the
actuality of it, either.
Unschooling as partnering your child: to be a partner to me suggests
supporting but also stepping back when your partner can and wants to go
it alone. Supporting them in learning the skills and world-knowledge
that they need to go up the shops and buy sweeties (that was so exciting
when I was little!), or take a long bike ride on their own, when/if they
want to do that.
also adventures on my own or with my sister. I very vividly remember the
excitement of going off on those solo bike rides. A bike ride with my
parents would have been fun too (they didn't ride, though), but
different fun. It's all good.
Juliet
> >>> SO maybe my notion of what people call Free-range children isI've seen it more as the opposite to a (perceived?) tendency to keep
> incorrect but I imagine young kids left alone to wonder and parents
> oblivious to what they are doing or where they are. That bothers me.
> <<<
children indoors more than any actual risk would justify. So, letting
your kids go out by themselves to the extent that they're able and
responsible enough to do so, but not (necessarily?) without the parent
knowing what's going on.
For example: when I was 8 or so (so nearly 30 years ago), my younger
sister and I were allowed to walk up to the sweetie shop, about a 15
minute walk away, to spend our pocket-money. There were no big roads to
cross (one or two very small ones), and Mum knew where we were going. I
have no doubt that if we hadn't been back again in a reasonable time,
she would have been out looking for us. Similarly we were allowed to
walk up the road to visit a friend by ourselves, but our Mum and her Mum
had a "dropped-call" code (two rings and put the phone down, back when
daytime phone calls were expensive!) to let the other mother know when
we'd set off and when we arrived. As a young teenager I learnt to ride a
bike safely on the road, and then I set off on excursions for the
morning or afternoon.
My kid isn't anything like that age yet, but I gather that (from hearing
other parents speak) a lot of parents now would consider going up the
shops on your own "too dangerous". But without giving children
responsibility, as they can handle it, what happens when they reach 16
or 18 or 21 and suddenly have much more responsibility all at once? The
perception of danger (from terrifying news stories) doesn't match the
actuality of it, either.
Unschooling as partnering your child: to be a partner to me suggests
supporting but also stepping back when your partner can and wants to go
it alone. Supporting them in learning the skills and world-knowledge
that they need to go up the shops and buy sweeties (that was so exciting
when I was little!), or take a long bike ride on their own, when/if they
want to do that.
> Interesting thing is that when my mom or dad or someone older was withIt's different though, right? I remember adventures with my parents, but
> us in one of our adventures we had even more fun and I remember
> those occasions.
also adventures on my own or with my sister. I very vividly remember the
excitement of going off on those solo bike rides. A bike ride with my
parents would have been fun too (they didn't ride, though), but
different fun. It's all good.
Juliet
Sandra Dodd
-=-I've seen it more as the opposite to a (perceived?) tendency to keep
children indoors more than any actual risk would justify. So, letting
your kids go out by themselves to the extent that they're able and
responsible enough to do so, but not (necessarily?) without the parent
knowing what's going on. -=-
Are you guessing, then or have you read people saying so?
I hadn't seen that, I don't think.
Partly, it depends where people live, whether it's safe to let kids go out without an adult. And in some places and times of day or times of year, children out without a parent could be a flag for inquiry. if it's "during school hours," it's a potential problem. Nothing we write here can change that, where it could be an issue.
When one of mine was out "on a school day," I would send a note with my phone number. Like a hall pass to the mall or the state fair or wherever they had gone (usually with another family, but sometimes with other older unschoolers we knew).
Kirby and Marty used to walk up to a card shop, and a convenience store, but the first time they took Holly, it was memorable and I rushed out after them to get a photo:
http://sandradodd.blogspot.com/2006/07/three-teens-i-have-three-teens.html
It's there, with a photo of the first time they were all three going to the same party, without anyone else along.
The term "free range," for homeschooling was, I think, an alternative to unschooling, though it might have differentiated further after a while.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
children indoors more than any actual risk would justify. So, letting
your kids go out by themselves to the extent that they're able and
responsible enough to do so, but not (necessarily?) without the parent
knowing what's going on. -=-
Are you guessing, then or have you read people saying so?
I hadn't seen that, I don't think.
Partly, it depends where people live, whether it's safe to let kids go out without an adult. And in some places and times of day or times of year, children out without a parent could be a flag for inquiry. if it's "during school hours," it's a potential problem. Nothing we write here can change that, where it could be an issue.
When one of mine was out "on a school day," I would send a note with my phone number. Like a hall pass to the mall or the state fair or wherever they had gone (usually with another family, but sometimes with other older unschoolers we knew).
Kirby and Marty used to walk up to a card shop, and a convenience store, but the first time they took Holly, it was memorable and I rushed out after them to get a photo:
http://sandradodd.blogspot.com/2006/07/three-teens-i-have-three-teens.html
It's there, with a photo of the first time they were all three going to the same party, without anyone else along.
The term "free range," for homeschooling was, I think, an alternative to unschooling, though it might have differentiated further after a while.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Juliet Kemp
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 12:50:41PM -0700, Sandra Dodd wrote:
http://www.freerangekids.com/
and that's the association I have with it.
That person has a book to promote so they may have an investment in
overstating the extent to which "people think it's too dangerous to let
their kids out alone".
However, I've also seen online discussions elsewhere about that kind of
'free range' (some people agreeing that it's a good idea, some people
saying that they worry too much to let their kids out alone, some people
in the middle) so there's at least some real people worrying about how
much 'freedom' (to be out alone) is 'too much' or 'too dangerous'. And
saying in those words that when they were kids they were out alone more
often but they worry too much about their own children.
Juliet
> -=-I've seen it more as the opposite to a (perceived?) tendency to keepThis is the website/book I've seen using the term
> children indoors more than any actual risk would justify. So, letting
> your kids go out by themselves to the extent that they're able and
> responsible enough to do so, but not (necessarily?) without the parent
> knowing what's going on. -=-
>
> Are you guessing, then or have you read people saying so?
> I hadn't seen that, I don't think.
http://www.freerangekids.com/
and that's the association I have with it.
That person has a book to promote so they may have an investment in
overstating the extent to which "people think it's too dangerous to let
their kids out alone".
However, I've also seen online discussions elsewhere about that kind of
'free range' (some people agreeing that it's a good idea, some people
saying that they worry too much to let their kids out alone, some people
in the middle) so there's at least some real people worrying about how
much 'freedom' (to be out alone) is 'too much' or 'too dangerous'. And
saying in those words that when they were kids they were out alone more
often but they worry too much about their own children.
> The term "free range," for homeschooling was, I think, an alternativeI'm not familiar with that term, just the one above.
> to unschooling, though it might have differentiated further after a
> while.
Juliet
Sandra Dodd
-=-This is the website/book I've seen using the term
http://www.freerangekids.com/
and that's the association I have with it. 0-=-
OH!
Whole different thing from "free-range learning" discussions over the years. One person wrote a book by that title, but it's an obvious sort of construct and other people have written and spoken of free-range learning and free-range education, too.
So maybe that freerange kids author has kids in school? (Had?)
I grew up where we would walk a mile, or drive fifteen miles, to ditch school. :-) Not that ditching school is a great example, except that a friend of mine who grew up in New York City said once he was a young teen, preoccupied and walking without looking up, got a full block past his normal territory, and was terrified to find himself in what he thought was an extremely dangerous part of the city. His mother had always said NEVER, ever go there. There he was.
So "range" must be quite a variable idea.
Honestly, I think religion can have a hand in what mothers will handle or accept sometimes, and historically. Before birth control, some mothers had more kids than they ever would have chosen to have if there had been good ways to choose. And there were things like rheumatic fever and scarlet fever (speaking for one of my grandmothers) and farm injuries, and so for kids to go away from the house for hours to parts uncharted and unknown might have been put in to the hands of the same God who brought children #7, #8...
When a family (think China, for instance) isn't likely to have more than one or two children, and that's it, the parents will probably be much more cautious and protective.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
http://www.freerangekids.com/
and that's the association I have with it. 0-=-
OH!
Whole different thing from "free-range learning" discussions over the years. One person wrote a book by that title, but it's an obvious sort of construct and other people have written and spoken of free-range learning and free-range education, too.
So maybe that freerange kids author has kids in school? (Had?)
I grew up where we would walk a mile, or drive fifteen miles, to ditch school. :-) Not that ditching school is a great example, except that a friend of mine who grew up in New York City said once he was a young teen, preoccupied and walking without looking up, got a full block past his normal territory, and was terrified to find himself in what he thought was an extremely dangerous part of the city. His mother had always said NEVER, ever go there. There he was.
So "range" must be quite a variable idea.
Honestly, I think religion can have a hand in what mothers will handle or accept sometimes, and historically. Before birth control, some mothers had more kids than they ever would have chosen to have if there had been good ways to choose. And there were things like rheumatic fever and scarlet fever (speaking for one of my grandmothers) and farm injuries, and so for kids to go away from the house for hours to parts uncharted and unknown might have been put in to the hands of the same God who brought children #7, #8...
When a family (think China, for instance) isn't likely to have more than one or two children, and that's it, the parents will probably be much more cautious and protective.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Joyce Fetteroll
Speaking of free range, someone just answered "What does 'radical unschooling' mean to you?" at the Radical Unschoolers Network with:
"Learning happens All the time, in All circumstances.. It is different from "child-led" or "free range" in the sense that the parent is passionately involved, aware, and engaged in the child's life... It is Intentional parenting and fully meeting the child's needs."
So at least one person is interpreting free range to mean less parental involvement.
Joyce
"Learning happens All the time, in All circumstances.. It is different from "child-led" or "free range" in the sense that the parent is passionately involved, aware, and engaged in the child's life... It is Intentional parenting and fully meeting the child's needs."
So at least one person is interpreting free range to mean less parental involvement.
Joyce
Pam Sorooshian
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 1:12 AM, Shauna Reisewitz
<shaunareisewitz@...>wrote:
state-funded program that started out very loosely defined and so people
took advantage of that looseness to create a learning center/support
approach that they wanted, but the reason it changed was exactly because
they weren't running it as an actual school with requirements for teacher
credentialing and testing and so on. In normal language the word school
implies something other than a bunch of families getting together to enjoy
activities that they freely choose - getting it paid for by the government
or not.
Cool program? Yes. One that, for a while, could even be enjoyed by
unschoolers? Yes. Would I, personally, like to see schools replaced by that
kind of program? Yes. But not something many people in the world would
recognize as a school and it confuses the point to include that kind of
setup as if it really is a school.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
<shaunareisewitz@...>wrote:
> But it WAS a school that supported unschooling families.Not really. Not a "school" in the usual sense of the world. It was a
state-funded program that started out very loosely defined and so people
took advantage of that looseness to create a learning center/support
approach that they wanted, but the reason it changed was exactly because
they weren't running it as an actual school with requirements for teacher
credentialing and testing and so on. In normal language the word school
implies something other than a bunch of families getting together to enjoy
activities that they freely choose - getting it paid for by the government
or not.
Cool program? Yes. One that, for a while, could even be enjoyed by
unschoolers? Yes. Would I, personally, like to see schools replaced by that
kind of program? Yes. But not something many people in the world would
recognize as a school and it confuses the point to include that kind of
setup as if it really is a school.
-pam
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]