a side trip into "science" and critical thought
Sandra Dodd
Don’t believe everything you read.
Don’t believe ANYthing you read, unless it seems true and there is some back-up corroboration, evidence, sense to it.
I read something and it smelled like… bullshit.
And I read it again and saw that it had been written in a very leading (misleading) way, but with joy and enthusiasm.
So I’m looking up above and see that it could apply to my whole website.
And I agree. And I’ve said “Don’t do anything you don’t understand” a fair number of times!
And I've said “Read a little, try a little, wait a while, watch” a hundred dozen times.
But this will come into your life: Your relatives, and friends, and detractors are going to bring you articles and say “LOOK! Scientists know that…” and in the chessgame that conversations are, it’s going to be your move. Now what?
I have a “field trip” for people with some extra time and curiosity. It’s not about unschooling, but it IS the sort of information that can cause backstage confusion in an unschooling life. Skip it if you’re busy or don’t care. No problem.
I have a small set of internet writings (I won’t say “articles,” because the line between “article” and “blogpost” and “comment” has gone all blurry recently) you can practice on. I want to comment on them, but I’m going to leave the links and wait a while to see what others discover. It’s a group project. It’s a test some could fail, so don’t jump in and comment easily, nor even at all, if you don’t have time to read thoughtfully and carefully.
In the first one, the writing itself is the subject of the rest.
The first comment (there aren’t many) has a Big Clue about how it’s being read, and (perhaps) what kind of people are excited about it. Extra points for finding what I rolled my eyes about when I saw the first comment.
But before I saw that comment, I went to look for the cited psychologist. Found one (1) page/mention. But she’s Russian, so the rest might not be accessible to me. Okay.
Found the second piece of writing. Read comments (there are very few) and I commented.
I’ll be back here to write some more. MAYBE I can wait until tomorrow. POSSIBLY I can wait eight hours. It kind of depends on how I feel and whether other people post and whether other more interesting things come into my day. :-)
If you go, I hope you have fun. :-)
http://brightside.me/article/a-thought-provoking-experiment-showed-what-happens-when-children-dont-have-the-internet-for-a-whole-day-42855/
http://tinyurl.com/jpm35h2
(one comment there has the link to the page on the author that I mentioned above)
Sandra
(P.S. I had not used the site tinyurl.com for YEARS, since the time came that webpages weren’t counting characters! It might be worth people on twitter knowing it exists. I shortened the second link because the URL had the title and I don’t want to spoil the path.)
Don’t believe ANYthing you read, unless it seems true and there is some back-up corroboration, evidence, sense to it.
I read something and it smelled like… bullshit.
And I read it again and saw that it had been written in a very leading (misleading) way, but with joy and enthusiasm.
So I’m looking up above and see that it could apply to my whole website.
And I agree. And I’ve said “Don’t do anything you don’t understand” a fair number of times!
And I've said “Read a little, try a little, wait a while, watch” a hundred dozen times.
But this will come into your life: Your relatives, and friends, and detractors are going to bring you articles and say “LOOK! Scientists know that…” and in the chessgame that conversations are, it’s going to be your move. Now what?
I have a “field trip” for people with some extra time and curiosity. It’s not about unschooling, but it IS the sort of information that can cause backstage confusion in an unschooling life. Skip it if you’re busy or don’t care. No problem.
I have a small set of internet writings (I won’t say “articles,” because the line between “article” and “blogpost” and “comment” has gone all blurry recently) you can practice on. I want to comment on them, but I’m going to leave the links and wait a while to see what others discover. It’s a group project. It’s a test some could fail, so don’t jump in and comment easily, nor even at all, if you don’t have time to read thoughtfully and carefully.
In the first one, the writing itself is the subject of the rest.
The first comment (there aren’t many) has a Big Clue about how it’s being read, and (perhaps) what kind of people are excited about it. Extra points for finding what I rolled my eyes about when I saw the first comment.
But before I saw that comment, I went to look for the cited psychologist. Found one (1) page/mention. But she’s Russian, so the rest might not be accessible to me. Okay.
Found the second piece of writing. Read comments (there are very few) and I commented.
I’ll be back here to write some more. MAYBE I can wait until tomorrow. POSSIBLY I can wait eight hours. It kind of depends on how I feel and whether other people post and whether other more interesting things come into my day. :-)
If you go, I hope you have fun. :-)
http://brightside.me/article/a-thought-provoking-experiment-showed-what-happens-when-children-dont-have-the-internet-for-a-whole-day-42855/
http://tinyurl.com/jpm35h2
(one comment there has the link to the page on the author that I mentioned above)
Sandra
(P.S. I had not used the site tinyurl.com for YEARS, since the time came that webpages weren’t counting characters! It might be worth people on twitter knowing it exists. I shortened the second link because the URL had the title and I don’t want to spoil the path.)
Alex & Brian Polikowsky
So these kids are banned from interacting with others and it is the electronics that are bad?
Don't they use solitary confinement to punish people and make them suffer??
Alex Polikwosky- happily connecting over my electronics!!
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 24, 2016, at 1:40 PM, Sandra Dodd Sandra@... [AlwaysLearning] <[email protected]> wrote:
Don’t believe everything you read.
Don’t believe ANYthing you read, unless it seems true and there is some back-up corroboration, evidence, sense to it.
I read something and it smelled like… bullshit.
And I read it again and saw that it had been written in a very leading (misleading) way, but with joy and enthusiasm.
So I’m looking up above and see that it could apply to my whole website.
And I agree. And I’ve said “Don’t do anything you don’t understand” a fair number of times!
And I've said “Read a little, try a little, wait a while, watch” a hundred dozen times.
But this will come into your life: Your relatives, and friends, and detractors are going to bring you articles and say “LOOK! Scientists know that…” and in the chessgame that conversations are, it’s going to be your move. Now what?
I have a “field trip” for people with some extra time and curiosity. It’s not about unschooling, but it IS the sort of information that can cause backstage confusion in an unschooling life. Skip it if you’re busy or don’t care. No problem.
I have a small set of internet writings (I won’t say “articles,” because the line between “article” and “blogpost” and “comment” has gone all blurry recently) you can practice on. I want to comment on them, but I’m going to leave the links and wait a while to see what others discover. It’s a group project. It’s a test some could fail, so don’t jump in and comment easily, nor even at all, if you don’t have time to read thoughtfully and carefully.
In the first one, the writing itself is the subject of the rest.
The first comment (there aren’t many) has a Big Clue about how it’s being read, and (perhaps) what kind of people are excited about it. Extra points for finding what I rolled my eyes about when I saw the first comment.
But before I saw that comment, I went to look for the cited psychologist. Found one (1) page/mention. But she’s Russian, so the rest might not be accessible to me. Okay.
Found the second piece of writing. Read comments (there are very few) and I commented.
I’ll be back here to write some more. MAYBE I can wait until tomorrow. POSSIBLY I can wait eight hours. It kind of depends on how I feel and whether other people post and whether other more interesting things come into my day. :-)
If you go, I hope you have fun. :-)
http://brightside.me/article/a-thought-provoking-experiment-showed-what-happens-when-children-dont-have-the-internet-for-a-whole-day-42855/
http://tinyurl.com/jpm35h2
(one comment there has the link to the page on the author that I mentioned above)
Sandra
(P.S. I had not used the site tinyurl.com for YEARS, since the time came that webpages weren’t counting characters! It might be worth people on twitter knowing it exists. I shortened the second link because the URL had the title and I don’t want to spoil the path.)
sukaynalabboun@...
1- scientific method is to * disprove* a hypothesis....
2- schooled kids using stress release via internet, tv etc....this is not like unschooling, different parameters. And why can't they talk to people??? Is that bad for you now, too?
3-solitary confinement for anyone, since forever, causes those same symptoms...it is barbaric and should be illegal, ( rant over).
Those are my initial thoughts, at 1 am before bed :-)
Confidentiality Note: This message is intended only for the named
recipient and may contain confidential, proprietary or legally
privileged information. Unauthorized individuals or entities are not
permitted access to this information. Any dissemination, distribution,
or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-
mail, and delete this message and any attachments.
Confidentiality Note: This message is intended only for the named
recipient and may contain confidential, proprietary or legally
privileged information. Unauthorized individuals or entities are not
permitted access to this information. Any dissemination, distribution,
or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-
mail, and delete this message and any attachments.
On Apr 24, 2016, at 9:40 PM, Sandra Dodd Sandra@... [AlwaysLearning] <[email protected]> wrote:
Don’t believe everything you read.
Don’t believe ANYthing you read, unless it seems true and there is some back-up corroboration, evidence, sense to it.
I read something and it smelled like… bullshit.
And I read it again and saw that it had been written in a very leading (misleading) way, but with joy and enthusiasm.
So I’m looking up above and see that it could apply to my whole website.
And I agree. And I’ve said “Don’t do anything you don’t understand” a fair number of times!
And I've said “Read a little, try a little, wait a while, watch” a hundred dozen times.
But this will come into your life: Your relatives, and friends, and detractors are going to bring you articles and say “LOOK! Scientists know that…” and in the chessgame that conversations are, it’s going to be your move. Now what?
I have a “field trip” for people with some extra time and curiosity. It’s not about unschooling, but it IS the sort of information that can cause backstage confusion in an unschooling life. Skip it if you’re busy or don’t care. No problem.
I have a small set of internet writings (I won’t say “articles,” because the line between “article” and “blogpost” and “comment” has gone all blurry recently) you can practice on. I want to comment on them, but I’m going to leave the links and wait a while to see what others discover. It’s a group project. It’s a test some could fail, so don’t jump in and comment easily, nor even at all, if you don’t have time to read thoughtfully and carefully.
In the first one, the writing itself is the subject of the rest.
The first comment (there aren’t many) has a Big Clue about how it’s being read, and (perhaps) what kind of people are excited about it. Extra points for finding what I rolled my eyes about when I saw the first comment.
But before I saw that comment, I went to look for the cited psychologist. Found one (1) page/mention. But she’s Russian, so the rest might not be accessible to me. Okay.
Found the second piece of writing. Read comments (there are very few) and I commented.
I’ll be back here to write some more. MAYBE I can wait until tomorrow. POSSIBLY I can wait eight hours. It kind of depends on how I feel and whether other people post and whether other more interesting things come into my day. :-)
If you go, I hope you have fun. :-)
http://brightside.me/article/a-thought-provoking-experiment-showed-what-happens-when-children-dont-have-the-internet-for-a-whole-day-42855/
http://tinyurl.com/jpm35h2
(one comment there has the link to the page on the author that I mentioned above)
Sandra
(P.S. I had not used the site tinyurl.com for YEARS, since the time came that webpages weren’t counting characters! It might be worth people on twitter knowing it exists. I shortened the second link because the URL had the title and I don’t want to spoil the path.)
------------------------------------
Posted by: Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
sukaynalabboun@...
Just finally loaded comments....all in daycare and "education" industries.....
Confidentiality Note: This message is intended only for the named
recipient and may contain confidential, proprietary or legally
privileged information. Unauthorized individuals or entities are not
permitted access to this information. Any dissemination, distribution,
or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-
mail, and delete this message and any attachments.
Confidentiality Note: This message is intended only for the named
recipient and may contain confidential, proprietary or legally
privileged information. Unauthorized individuals or entities are not
permitted access to this information. Any dissemination, distribution,
or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-
mail, and delete this message and any attachments.
On Apr 25, 2016, at 1:07 AM, sukaynalabboun@... wrote:
1- scientific method is to * disprove* a hypothesis....2- schooled kids using stress release via internet, tv etc....this is not like unschooling, different parameters. And why can't they talk to people??? Is that bad for you now, too?3-solitary confinement for anyone, since forever, causes those same symptoms...it is barbaric and should be illegal, ( rant over).Those are my initial thoughts, at 1 am before bed :-)
Confidentiality Note: This message is intended only for the named
recipient and may contain confidential, proprietary or legally
privileged information. Unauthorized individuals or entities are not
permitted access to this information. Any dissemination, distribution,
or copying of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this message in error, please advise the sender by reply e-
mail, and delete this message and any attachments.Don’t believe everything you read.
Don’t believe ANYthing you read, unless it seems true and there is some back-up corroboration, evidence, sense to it.
I read something and it smelled like… bullshit.
And I read it again and saw that it had been written in a very leading (misleading) way, but with joy and enthusiasm.
So I’m looking up above and see that it could apply to my whole website.
And I agree. And I’ve said “Don’t do anything you don’t understand” a fair number of times!
And I've said “Read a little, try a little, wait a while, watch” a hundred dozen times.
But this will come into your life: Your relatives, and friends, and detractors are going to bring you articles and say “LOOK! Scientists know that…” and in the chessgame that conversations are, it’s going to be your move. Now what?
I have a “field trip” for people with some extra time and curiosity. It’s not about unschooling, but it IS the sort of information that can cause backstage confusion in an unschooling life. Skip it if you’re busy or don’t care. No problem.
I have a small set of internet writings (I won’t say “articles,” because the line between “article” and “blogpost” and “comment” has gone all blurry recently) you can practice on. I want to comment on them, but I’m going to leave the links and wait a while to see what others discover. It’s a group project. It’s a test some could fail, so don’t jump in and comment easily, nor even at all, if you don’t have time to read thoughtfully and carefully.
In the first one, the writing itself is the subject of the rest.
The first comment (there aren’t many) has a Big Clue about how it’s being read, and (perhaps) what kind of people are excited about it. Extra points for finding what I rolled my eyes about when I saw the first comment.
But before I saw that comment, I went to look for the cited psychologist. Found one (1) page/mention. But she’s Russian, so the rest might not be accessible to me. Okay.
Found the second piece of writing. Read comments (there are very few) and I commented.
I’ll be back here to write some more. MAYBE I can wait until tomorrow. POSSIBLY I can wait eight hours. It kind of depends on how I feel and whether other people post and whether other more interesting things come into my day. :-)
If you go, I hope you have fun. :-)
http://brightside.me/article/a-thought-provoking-experiment-showed-what-happens-when-children-dont-have-the-internet-for-a-whole-day-42855/
http://tinyurl.com/jpm35h2
(one comment there has the link to the page on the author that I mentioned above)
Sandra
(P.S. I had not used the site tinyurl.com for YEARS, since the time came that webpages weren’t counting characters! It might be worth people on twitter knowing it exists. I shortened the second link because the URL had the title and I don’t want to spoil the path.)
------------------------------------
Posted by: Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
Sarah Thompson
Talk about confirmation bias! These kids were set up to fail. To me, this says a lot more about what school is doing to kids than what computers are causing.
Sarah
Michelle Marr
I was SO confused by that first article! To the point that I read it twice trying to figure out if I'd misunderstood. Was it a study on kids who were, as the title indicated, without the internet for a whole day? Or was it a study of kids who weren't allowed to communicate with anyone at all by any means for a whole day? I finally figured out that it was the second but they described it as the first.
And what's with "entertained by things not of their making"..... Wouldn't that include reading books or following needlework patterns...or if we want to stretch it far enough riding a bike that someone else had invented and manufactured? Or playing a game someone had taught them?
Michelle
And what's with "entertained by things not of their making"..... Wouldn't that include reading books or following needlework patterns...or if we want to stretch it far enough riding a bike that someone else had invented and manufactured? Or playing a game someone had taught them?
Michelle
robin.bentley@...
I rolled my eyes at this:
~ today’s generation of young people are too often entertained by things not of their making, are incapable of finding ways to keep themselves busy, and are completely unfamiliar with the idea of the world of their imagination ~
So the books (I assume they were books) were of their own making? They were required to write, then read their own stories? Ha!
And the instruments they were allowed to play - were they made by someone else for the purpose of entertaining the player? Not allowed, by this criteria. Nor, I suspect, the music written that they might read in order to play.
Hmm. Needlework. (Seriously? Only nerds like me do embroidery...) Who made the needles, the fabric, the embroidery floss? Eight hours is not enough time to have crafted all those things.
Well, I could go on about that one thing ("not of their making") and get into the other two hypotheses, but this one thing casts the entire experiment in a bullshit light, to me.
What would adults of my generation do if all the things they did in this time and place were removed? Let's go back to oil lamps, horses for transport, fires to cook over. No telephones, no cars, no grocery stores. I think I would freak the hell out for eight hours. Maybe, if I was plunked into such a situation through time travel, I would eventually figure out how to cope. But if you look at time travel stories (i.e. Outlander and Faith: The Great Doctor - two of my favorites!), the first eight hours are horrendous for those whose normality (their regular lives, complete with family and friends) has been yanked out from under them. Why would it be any different for teens?
Robin B.
~ today’s generation of young people are too often entertained by things not of their making, are incapable of finding ways to keep themselves busy, and are completely unfamiliar with the idea of the world of their imagination ~
So the books (I assume they were books) were of their own making? They were required to write, then read their own stories? Ha!
And the instruments they were allowed to play - were they made by someone else for the purpose of entertaining the player? Not allowed, by this criteria. Nor, I suspect, the music written that they might read in order to play.
Hmm. Needlework. (Seriously? Only nerds like me do embroidery...) Who made the needles, the fabric, the embroidery floss? Eight hours is not enough time to have crafted all those things.
Well, I could go on about that one thing ("not of their making") and get into the other two hypotheses, but this one thing casts the entire experiment in a bullshit light, to me.
What would adults of my generation do if all the things they did in this time and place were removed? Let's go back to oil lamps, horses for transport, fires to cook over. No telephones, no cars, no grocery stores. I think I would freak the hell out for eight hours. Maybe, if I was plunked into such a situation through time travel, I would eventually figure out how to cope. But if you look at time travel stories (i.e. Outlander and Faith: The Great Doctor - two of my favorites!), the first eight hours are horrendous for those whose normality (their regular lives, complete with family and friends) has been yanked out from under them. Why would it be any different for teens?
Robin B.
Alex & Brian Polikowsky
I find that people are even more creative now!!!
YouTube , Pinterest, Facebook, Instagram, and mauve more are full of inspiration for so many!
Alex Polikowsky!
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 25, 2016, at 2:48 PM, robin.bentley@... [AlwaysLearning] <[email protected]> wrote:
I rolled my eyes at this:
~ today’s generation of young people are too often entertained by things not of their making, are incapable of finding ways to keep themselves busy, and are completely unfamiliar with the idea of the world of their imagination ~
So the books (I assume they were books) were of their own making? They were required to write, then read their own stories? Ha!
And the instruments they were allowed to play - were they made by someone else for the purpose of entertaining the player? Not allowed, by this criteria. Nor, I suspect, the music written that they might read in order to play.
Hmm. Needlework. (Seriously? Only nerds like me do embroidery...) Who made the needles, the fabric, the embroidery floss? Eight hours is not enough time to have crafted all those things.
Well, I could go on about that one thing ("not of their making") and get into the other two hypotheses, but this one thing casts the entire experiment in a bullshit light, to me.
What would adults of my generation do if all the things they did in this time and place were removed? Let's go back to oil lamps, horses for transport, fires to cook over. No telephones, no cars, no grocery stores. I think I would freak the hell out for eight hours. Maybe, if I was plunked into such a situation through time travel, I would eventually figure out how to cope. But if you look at time travel stories (i.e. Outlander and Faith: The Great Doctor - two of my favorites!), the first eight hours are horrendous for those whose normality (their regular lives, complete with family and friends) has been yanked out from under them. Why would it be any different for teens?
Robin B.
K Pennell
I am not a big fan of the whole "Oh, screen time is so bad" concept and it bugs me anyway. But this experiment seems flawed to me even apart from that.
One thought that struck me was that it is almost like two experiments: what it is billed as, and what it really is. It seems like it is billed as an experiment into our increasing interest in/dependence on electronic devices and social media. But "it was forbidden to communicate with others according to the rules of the experiment" and that seems like a whole different experiment! That is in no way testing how teens respond to lack of technology, but lack of connection. I like alone time, but probably not eight hours where I am forbidden from talking to the people I love and care about.
From: "Sandra Dodd Sandra@... [AlwaysLearning]" <[email protected]>
To: Always Learning <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2016 2:40 PM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] a side trip into "science" and critical thought
Don’t believe everything you read.
Don’t believe ANYthing you read, unless it seems true and there is some back-up corroboration, evidence, sense to it.
I read something and it smelled like… bullshit.
And I read it again and saw that it had been written in a very leading (misleading) way, but with joy and enthusiasm.
So I’m looking up above and see that it could apply to my whole website.
And I agree. And I’ve said “Don’t do anything you don’t understand” a fair number of times!
And I've said “Read a little, try a little, wait a while, watch” a hundred dozen times.
But this will come into your life: Your relatives, and friends, and detractors are going to bring you articles and say “LOOK! Scientists know that…” and in the chessgame that conversations are, it’s going to be your move. Now what?
I have a “field trip” for people with some extra time and curiosity. It’s not about unschooling, but it IS the sort of information that can cause backstage confusion in an unschooling life. Skip it if you’re busy or don’t care. No problem.
I have a small set of internet writings (I won’t say “articles,” because the line between “article” and “blogpost” and “comment” has gone all blurry recently) you can practice on. I want to comment on them, but I’m going to leave the links and wait a while to see what others discover. It’s a group project. It’s a test some could fail, so don’t jump in and comment easily, nor even at all, if you don’t have time to read thoughtfully and carefully.
In the first one, the writing itself is the subject of the rest.
The first comment (there aren’t many) has a Big Clue about how it’s being read, and (perhaps) what kind of people are excited about it. Extra points for finding what I rolled my eyes about when I saw the first comment.
But before I saw that comment, I went to look for the cited psychologist. Found one (1) page/mention. But she’s Russian, so the rest might not be accessible to me. Okay.
Found the second piece of writing. Read comments (there are very few) and I commented.
I’ll be back here to write some more. MAYBE I can wait until tomorrow. POSSIBLY I can wait eight hours. It kind of depends on how I feel and whether other people post and whether other more interesting things come into my day. :-)
If you go, I hope you have fun. :-)
http://brightside.me/article/a-thought-provoking-experiment-showed-what-happens-when-children-dont-have-the-internet-for-a-whole-day-42855/
http://tinyurl.com/jpm35h2
(one comment there has the link to the page on the author that I mentioned above)
Sandra
(P.S. I had not used the site tinyurl.com for YEARS, since the time came that webpages weren’t counting characters! It might be worth people on twitter knowing it exists. I shortened the second link because the URL had the title and I don’t want to spoil the path.)
------------------------------------
Posted by: Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...>
------------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yahoo Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AlwaysLearning/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo Groups is subject to:
https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
Sarah Thompson
Connecting to peers is both primary and critical to teens. This experiment is the equivalent of depriving an infant or toddler of their parent (or loving and familiar caregiver) for 8 hours and then being horrified that they experienced emotional distress.
Sarah
Deb Lewis
Those kids were bored. They weren't distressed because they didn't have
access to technology, but because they didn't have access to things they
found interesting. I could put the researcher in a room for eight hours with
some tofu and buttons and she'd probably feel like throwing herself into a
sack of porcupines. It wouldn't prove she's addicted to science.
Deb
access to technology, but because they didn't have access to things they
found interesting. I could put the researcher in a room for eight hours with
some tofu and buttons and she'd probably feel like throwing herself into a
sack of porcupines. It wouldn't prove she's addicted to science.
Deb
LEAH ROSE
I noted that the very first thing that 42 out of the 63 people did when they stopped the experiment was to seek out other people via social media, cell phone, or in person. And the other 1/3 either turned on the TV (which many people do when they're alone, as a way of feeling not so alone) or got immersed in a video game, which is generally an extremely social environment. Clearly this was an experiment about social isolation, not about technology deprivation. But because in most cases they used technology to reconnect with people, that was taken as proof that they were missing the technology, not the people. Duh.
Robin wrote:
<<I rolled my eyes at this:
~ today’s generation of young people are too often entertained by things not of their making, are incapable of finding ways to keep themselves busy, and are completely unfamiliar with the idea of the world of their imagination ~>>
and Alex wrote:
<<I find that people are even more creative now!!!>>
Yes indeed. In fact, right before I read their responses our 16 yo had been telling me about something he'd just finished creating in Minecraft. Essentially it's a big maze puzzle built as a huge underground tunnel complex that you accidentally fall into when exploring the realm, and it's complete with trap and hidden doors, lots of dead ends and only two ways out that have to be first discovered and then solved. (He made it to entertain a friend who shares the server.)
Prior to that he had showed me a cool music thing he recently constructed on Minecraft where you flip a switch and a Billy Joel song plays, at the correct tempo, using music blocks.
And a few days ago he embedded a mystery story into a castle ruin that he'd built on his friend's server. It's in a huge realm/world so that his friend will have to be exploring to even discover the castle, and once he happens upon it, it's clear that the castle is the long-abandoned scene of some macabre tragedy. As you explore it, you can come across clues, like a trail of blood, hidden journals with cryptic notations, a room with skeletons, that can help you piece together the story of what once happened there. And then, if you happen to find the deed to the property, which is hidden in the ruin, you can purchase the castle if you have the right currency (emeralds and other stuff).
I thought all of it was incredibly cool and showed a level of creativity I do not remember having at his age. I love technology as a platform for the imagination. Minecraft itself might be "not of his own making," but he sure uses it for some really creative purposes of his own.
~ Leah Rose
semajrak@...
From the beginning of the article...
<<Children and teenagers aged between 12 and 18 years voluntarily spent eight hours alone without access to any means of communication>>
<<Children and teenagers aged between 12 and 18 years voluntarily spent eight hours alone without access to any means of communication>>
How voluntary is voluntary if it's an experiment about being restricted to spending time alone without access to specific chosen activities?
We've been going to the beach a lot lately. Ethan can take his tablet in the car for the drive there, but he rarely chooses to. I often remind him of it, but he says he likes to look out the window or chat with Doug and/or me when we drive. He'll spend hours on the beach chopping up washed up logs and branches, hammering them into the sand, pick-axing fallen rocks by the cliffside.
If I said that he *couldn't* communicate with anyone or use his tablet, computer or watch tv, he'd likely feel some stress about those enforced restrictions. Under the conditions purposefully imposed on him by the experiment, he'd likely be thinking about the restrictions vs the possibilities, and that might bring on some anxiety. I think it would for me and I'm a pretty solitary person.
When he's truly choosing to spend his time alone, doing other things, his experience isn't coloured by judgement over what is better or worse, what is available or not. It's just what he chooses to do, and it flows in and around all the other things he chooses to do. That's tricky to try to simulate, I think--this idea of voluntary in this kind of an experiment. Makes me wonder if it isn't a more effective experiment on the consequences of enforced restrictions vs the absence of the internet and/or technology.
When he's truly choosing to spend his time alone, doing other things, his experience isn't coloured by judgement over what is better or worse, what is available or not. It's just what he chooses to do, and it flows in and around all the other things he chooses to do. That's tricky to try to simulate, I think--this idea of voluntary in this kind of an experiment. Makes me wonder if it isn't a more effective experiment on the consequences of enforced restrictions vs the absence of the internet and/or technology.
Karen James
jameshippisley@...
I don't know if anyone commenting has looked at the second link Sandra gave, but it is certainly eye opening. I learned a word which I had not previously heard: "Clickbait". Wikipedia's definition is below. It is ironic that the real purpose of the article is (it seems) to make money by selling advertising via social networks...
Sandra Dodd
-=-I learned a word which I had not previously heard: "Clickbait”.-=-
It wasn’t a good example of the worst of clickbait, though. The article was all on one page! :-)
Very many blog posts in the world, when there are advertisements in the sidebar, are designed to get people in there and keep them there. Many blogposts are cut and pasted from others—not so much people’s personal blogs, I mean, but the “news” and entertainment blogs. Years back a letter I had was put in a blog called “Letters of Note.” Dozens of other blogs wrote something about it, but mostly it was the stealing of two versions of a very short blurb. Cut and paste, change the title.
In the case of the first article, as I was reading it I was thinking “When? Where was this study?” There was no mention of a year, or a university, or a city, or a journal in which it might’ve been published. Nor was there a researcher named. The article seemed to imply that the named author was the researcher, but it didn’t state it.
Their description might have been based on an already-vague description, but I had hoped to be able to find other reports of the study to find out:
—what were the participants given as compensation to be a part of the study, if anything
—Was it school vacation/holiday, or a weekend? That would matter, for teens. [Schoolwork was mentioned, but was it over spring break where there were several days left, or was this taking a Saturday from a school kid?]
—were they in their own homes, or in an apartment owned by the researcher? Did they have their own stuff, or a stranger’s stuff?
All in all, though, it seemed fishy to me. And then to read what some of the kids did (one went to an amusement park?), they WERE in contact with others. So I really wanted to see the original “contract,” because it seemed the experiment was worthlessly set up.
But I couldn’t find anything, and in looking found that second piece of writing by someone who also thought it sounded wrong and had also gone looking.
But back to the first link—it was presented in a subtly snarky way.
-=-Others turned on the TV or plunged into playing computer games. In addition, almost all of them soon thrust their headphones into their ears.-=-
THRUST and PLUNGED ?
Yikes.
This, because of the way it is worded, becomes a flat-out lie:
-=-All of them, without any exceptions, said that they were extremely surprised by the thoughts that were crossing their minds during the experiment, but they were unable to examine them rationally because of the overall deterioration of their psychological state.-=-
NONE of them said “I was unable to examine my thoughts rationally because of the overall deterioration of my psychological state.” The sentence as written says that without exception, each participant (even those who quit early?) said they were shocked but didn’t have the means to examine their own thoughts?
And this is the biggest lie of all, but that is increasingly true of “journalism”—the headline.
"A thought-provoking experiment showed what happens when children don’t have the internet for a whole day”
Considering, now, the writing itself and the lack of any documentation, I will not be surprised if this is tracked down and the study pre-dates the internet altogether. Seriously. It was NOT about the internet. It was about deprivation of human contact.
-=-They were allowed to describe how they felt at the time of the experiment, and keep a record their actions and thoughts. In the case of excessive anxiety, discomfort or stress the project leaders would recommend stopping the experiment immediately, recording the time and the reason for its termination.-=-
Where WERE these “project leaders”? Were the kids being observed?
Again, the account has internal contradictions.
I have other thoughts. I’ll wait.
Sandra
It wasn’t a good example of the worst of clickbait, though. The article was all on one page! :-)
Very many blog posts in the world, when there are advertisements in the sidebar, are designed to get people in there and keep them there. Many blogposts are cut and pasted from others—not so much people’s personal blogs, I mean, but the “news” and entertainment blogs. Years back a letter I had was put in a blog called “Letters of Note.” Dozens of other blogs wrote something about it, but mostly it was the stealing of two versions of a very short blurb. Cut and paste, change the title.
In the case of the first article, as I was reading it I was thinking “When? Where was this study?” There was no mention of a year, or a university, or a city, or a journal in which it might’ve been published. Nor was there a researcher named. The article seemed to imply that the named author was the researcher, but it didn’t state it.
Their description might have been based on an already-vague description, but I had hoped to be able to find other reports of the study to find out:
—what were the participants given as compensation to be a part of the study, if anything
—Was it school vacation/holiday, or a weekend? That would matter, for teens. [Schoolwork was mentioned, but was it over spring break where there were several days left, or was this taking a Saturday from a school kid?]
—were they in their own homes, or in an apartment owned by the researcher? Did they have their own stuff, or a stranger’s stuff?
All in all, though, it seemed fishy to me. And then to read what some of the kids did (one went to an amusement park?), they WERE in contact with others. So I really wanted to see the original “contract,” because it seemed the experiment was worthlessly set up.
But I couldn’t find anything, and in looking found that second piece of writing by someone who also thought it sounded wrong and had also gone looking.
But back to the first link—it was presented in a subtly snarky way.
-=-Others turned on the TV or plunged into playing computer games. In addition, almost all of them soon thrust their headphones into their ears.-=-
THRUST and PLUNGED ?
Yikes.
This, because of the way it is worded, becomes a flat-out lie:
-=-All of them, without any exceptions, said that they were extremely surprised by the thoughts that were crossing their minds during the experiment, but they were unable to examine them rationally because of the overall deterioration of their psychological state.-=-
NONE of them said “I was unable to examine my thoughts rationally because of the overall deterioration of my psychological state.” The sentence as written says that without exception, each participant (even those who quit early?) said they were shocked but didn’t have the means to examine their own thoughts?
And this is the biggest lie of all, but that is increasingly true of “journalism”—the headline.
"A thought-provoking experiment showed what happens when children don’t have the internet for a whole day”
Considering, now, the writing itself and the lack of any documentation, I will not be surprised if this is tracked down and the study pre-dates the internet altogether. Seriously. It was NOT about the internet. It was about deprivation of human contact.
-=-They were allowed to describe how they felt at the time of the experiment, and keep a record their actions and thoughts. In the case of excessive anxiety, discomfort or stress the project leaders would recommend stopping the experiment immediately, recording the time and the reason for its termination.-=-
Where WERE these “project leaders”? Were the kids being observed?
Again, the account has internal contradictions.
I have other thoughts. I’ll wait.
Sandra
jameshippisley@...
Just to present the way this works (as I understand it) a bit more directly:
You put a "story"/"article" on your "blog"/"site".
You then spend some money advertising the "article" in appropriate locations - in this case, parenting blogs/web sites.
For every click through to your site, you earn a little money from the advertising views on your site.
The real money comes if the people viewing your article repost it via Facebook etc. so that their friends come and look (and re-post it) too.
The writer of Sandra's second link estimates this story would have generated ~$100,000s.
Sad if the "article" is actually made up, and stands to have a destructive impact on peoples lives.
James
Sandra Dodd
-=-The writer of Sandra's second link estimates this story would have generated ~$100,000s.-=-
Very unlikely that it did, though. Those operate is parts of pennies.
-=-Sad if the "article" is actually made up, and stands to have a destructive impact on peoples lives.-=-
Well here’s where critical thinking is really important.
When someone reads something (from following an interesting-looking link, or because it’s used as defense of an argument, or because someone’s mom or sister or friend says “READ THIS—this is why I don’t think you should be unschooling [or whatever]”…. it’ good to have a mental framework, or checklist, or stance that will help you judge how seriously to take the information.
Is the site full of advertisements and is the title of the article irresponsible?
That’s not a crime. Honestly, these days that’s happening with Psychology Today and Smithsonian, both of which used to be nice print magaznes with very few, very tasteful, very in-the-back-of-the-magazine, small ads.
So it’s not, by itself, a reason to disregard the article.
But it might be worth asking the relative who sent it to you to track down the original story. Let THEM do the work to prove or disprove the article, maybe.
And ALL articles are “made up” to the extent that reading a summary of a report is not “the report.” And “The report” of research is not itself the research.
Reading the summary of a study is still a summary.
Partly I’m saying “relax.”
Partly I’m saying be alert and vigilant.
Mostly, then, I’m saying learn to be calm but intelligent when you read things. :-)
Lots of things are worth reading and forgetting.
-=--=-Sad if the "article" is actually made up, and stands to have a destructive impact on peoples lives.-=—=-
Misleading and half-assed, more than “made up,” I think.
There is a whole lot of irresponsible writing on the internet that could have a harmful affect on readers.
Truth and good ideas are mixed up with nonsense. Rejecting all of it is as bad as believing all of it.
Sandra
Very unlikely that it did, though. Those operate is parts of pennies.
-=-Sad if the "article" is actually made up, and stands to have a destructive impact on peoples lives.-=-
Well here’s where critical thinking is really important.
When someone reads something (from following an interesting-looking link, or because it’s used as defense of an argument, or because someone’s mom or sister or friend says “READ THIS—this is why I don’t think you should be unschooling [or whatever]”…. it’ good to have a mental framework, or checklist, or stance that will help you judge how seriously to take the information.
Is the site full of advertisements and is the title of the article irresponsible?
That’s not a crime. Honestly, these days that’s happening with Psychology Today and Smithsonian, both of which used to be nice print magaznes with very few, very tasteful, very in-the-back-of-the-magazine, small ads.
So it’s not, by itself, a reason to disregard the article.
But it might be worth asking the relative who sent it to you to track down the original story. Let THEM do the work to prove or disprove the article, maybe.
And ALL articles are “made up” to the extent that reading a summary of a report is not “the report.” And “The report” of research is not itself the research.
Reading the summary of a study is still a summary.
Partly I’m saying “relax.”
Partly I’m saying be alert and vigilant.
Mostly, then, I’m saying learn to be calm but intelligent when you read things. :-)
Lots of things are worth reading and forgetting.
-=--=-Sad if the "article" is actually made up, and stands to have a destructive impact on peoples lives.-=—=-
Misleading and half-assed, more than “made up,” I think.
There is a whole lot of irresponsible writing on the internet that could have a harmful affect on readers.
Truth and good ideas are mixed up with nonsense. Rejecting all of it is as bad as believing all of it.
Sandra
Tam Palmer
Sandra wrote:
And this is the biggest lie of all, but that is increasingly true of “journalism”—the headline.
"A thought-provoking experiment showed what happens when children don’t have the internet for a whole day”
Considering, now, the writing itself and the lack of any documentation, I will not be surprised if this is tracked down and the study pre-dates the internet altogether. Seriously. It was NOT about the internet. It was about deprivation of human contact.It reminded me of this article from a few years back, written in a respectable broadsheet.It was shared a lot on Facebook at that time. It starts with the sentence,Children are growing up unable to throw and catch a ball because they spend too much time in front of a screen, research suggests."
When I looked at the actual research, here http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajhb.22310/full , the research doesn't even measure or record time spent playing video games. Nor actually any other time "in front of a screen". What was actually measured was sedentary time, ie time that could incorporate time sitting behind a school desk, reading, sitting up a tree, etcThe scientists there seem to have decided that because another scientist has previously found that sedentary time could include watching TV and playing video games, then they must do. The journalist has then extrapolated this to mean 100% of this time would have been "watching TV or playing video games". Even the time at school.The participants were Portuguese school children, and the minimum time covered per child in the research was ten hours per day over two weekdays and one weekend day. And of that 30 hours, likely 11.5 of them were spent at school. taking out time for PE and lunch breaks, after ironically having to sit at a desk for lessons, that would leave, say two hours on each of the school nights and about 7 on the weekend day to do things that they maybe chose.And then finally, the research doesn't even look at their ability to throw or catch. That's completely made up.All the research actually shows is that a significant number of the observed schoolchildren can't balance well on a beam, and it is unknown whether they play video games!Tam
Sandra Dodd
-=-
that would leave, say two hours on each of the school nights and about 7 on the weekend day to do things that they maybe chose.
And then finally, the research doesn't even look at their ability to throw or catch. That's completely made up.
All the research actually shows is that a significant number of the observed schoolchildren can't balance well on a beam, and it is unknown whether they play video games!-=-
Just as bad as this new example, huh?
That was another one of my irritations with the article and those who would applaud it.
The very first comment there (which isn’t the first comment anymore and now I can’t find it—doh! sorry) said “a whole day” and another comment said “12 hours.” But the article said 8 hours.
Today, there are more comments showing, and lots of them said the same things people have written here, so I feel better. Yesterday it looked like the comments were supportive, grateful relieved.
The article said "The author of the experiment, a family psychologist, wanted to prove her working hypothesis that the today’s generation of young people are too often entertained by things not of their making, are incapable of finding ways to keep themselves busy, and are completely unfamiliar with the idea of the world of their imagination. “
It’s not well written, first. But assuming it has any validity, I question these things:
-=- today’s generation of young people are too often entertained by things not of their making-=-
-=-incapable of finding ways to keep themselves busy-=-
-=-completely unfamiliar with the idea of the world of their imagination-=-
As opposed to when, and who, and what generation?
There has not, as far as I know, been a time in ANY culture in the history of the world when young people were not being TOLD what to do, and were entertained by things of OTHER people’s making (perhaps their own, but there's been plenty of art, music, stories, games, jokes, tricks, toys and discussions available in most or all cultures.
As to whether they were familiar with their imaginations or not….. what was written was that they were
COMPLETELY
unfamiliar
with the idea of
the world of
their imagination.
That’s a PILE of words used to insult those kids.
I don’t think there is any such thing as “the world of my imagination.” I”m wondering I’m I’m familiar with the idea of the world my imagination. :-)
I’m pretty sure that a request for me to give up eight hours of my life to help someone else prove a made-up point would be an unreasonable imposition of HER imagination on MY potential to live with other people. :-)
When I’ve had a whole day by myself in my home, in the days before e-mail and such, I usually left at some point to eat in public or with friends. Eight hours is too long for me to be alone. It doesn’t feel as good to me as checking on my friends and relatives does, or as making sure someone knows that I’m alive and safe at home feels.
But the “whole day” phrase that kept coming up…. is eight hours “a whole day” for unschoolers? :-) SO MUCH can be done, seen, heard, said, thought about and experienced in eight hours of having options and adult partners that I’m glad to hear that most of the volunteers in that experiment decided to quit before wasting more of their time in semi-isolation.
Sandra
that would leave, say two hours on each of the school nights and about 7 on the weekend day to do things that they maybe chose.
And then finally, the research doesn't even look at their ability to throw or catch. That's completely made up.
All the research actually shows is that a significant number of the observed schoolchildren can't balance well on a beam, and it is unknown whether they play video games!-=-
Just as bad as this new example, huh?
That was another one of my irritations with the article and those who would applaud it.
The very first comment there (which isn’t the first comment anymore and now I can’t find it—doh! sorry) said “a whole day” and another comment said “12 hours.” But the article said 8 hours.
Today, there are more comments showing, and lots of them said the same things people have written here, so I feel better. Yesterday it looked like the comments were supportive, grateful relieved.
The article said "The author of the experiment, a family psychologist, wanted to prove her working hypothesis that the today’s generation of young people are too often entertained by things not of their making, are incapable of finding ways to keep themselves busy, and are completely unfamiliar with the idea of the world of their imagination. “
It’s not well written, first. But assuming it has any validity, I question these things:
-=- today’s generation of young people are too often entertained by things not of their making-=-
-=-incapable of finding ways to keep themselves busy-=-
-=-completely unfamiliar with the idea of the world of their imagination-=-
As opposed to when, and who, and what generation?
There has not, as far as I know, been a time in ANY culture in the history of the world when young people were not being TOLD what to do, and were entertained by things of OTHER people’s making (perhaps their own, but there's been plenty of art, music, stories, games, jokes, tricks, toys and discussions available in most or all cultures.
As to whether they were familiar with their imaginations or not….. what was written was that they were
COMPLETELY
unfamiliar
with the idea of
the world of
their imagination.
That’s a PILE of words used to insult those kids.
I don’t think there is any such thing as “the world of my imagination.” I”m wondering I’m I’m familiar with the idea of the world my imagination. :-)
I’m pretty sure that a request for me to give up eight hours of my life to help someone else prove a made-up point would be an unreasonable imposition of HER imagination on MY potential to live with other people. :-)
When I’ve had a whole day by myself in my home, in the days before e-mail and such, I usually left at some point to eat in public or with friends. Eight hours is too long for me to be alone. It doesn’t feel as good to me as checking on my friends and relatives does, or as making sure someone knows that I’m alive and safe at home feels.
But the “whole day” phrase that kept coming up…. is eight hours “a whole day” for unschoolers? :-) SO MUCH can be done, seen, heard, said, thought about and experienced in eight hours of having options and adult partners that I’m glad to hear that most of the volunteers in that experiment decided to quit before wasting more of their time in semi-isolation.
Sandra
Alex & Brian Polikowsky
The world of your imagination!
Alex P
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 26, 2016, at 11:46 AM, Sandra Dodd Sandra@... [AlwaysLearning] <[email protected]> wrote:
-=-
that would leave, say two hours on each of the school nights and about 7 on the weekend day to do things that they maybe chose.
And then finally, the research doesn't even look at their ability to throw or catch. That's completely made up.
All the research actually shows is that a significant number of the observed schoolchildren can't balance well on a beam, and it is unknown whether they play video games!-=-
Just as bad as this new example, huh?
That was another one of my irritations with the article and those who would applaud it.
The very first comment there (which isn’t the first comment anymore and now I can’t find it—doh! sorry) said “a whole day” and another comment said “12 hours.” But the article said 8 hours.
Today, there are more comments showing, and lots of them said the same things people have written here, so I feel better. Yesterday it looked like the comments were supportive, grateful relieved.
The article said "The author of the experiment, a family psychologist, wanted to prove her working hypothesis that the today’s generation of young people are too often entertained by things not of their making, are incapable of finding ways to keep themselves busy, and are completely unfamiliar with the idea of the world of their imagination. “
It’s not well written, first. But assuming it has any validity, I question these things:
-=- today’s generation of young people are too often entertained by things not of their making-=-
-=-incapable of finding ways to keep themselves busy-=-
-=-completely unfamiliar with the idea of the world of their imagination-=-
As opposed to when, and who, and what generation?
There has not, as far as I know, been a time in ANY culture in the history of the world when young people were not being TOLD what to do, and were entertained by things of OTHER people’s making (perhaps their own, but there's been plenty of art, music, stories, games, jokes, tricks, toys and discussions available in most or all cultures.
As to whether they were familiar with their imaginations or not….. what was written was that they were
COMPLETELY
unfamiliar
with the idea of
the world of
their imagination.
That’s a PILE of words used to insult those kids.
I don’t think there is any such thing as “the world of my imagination.” I”m wondering I’m I’m familiar with the idea of the world my imagination. :-)
I’m pretty sure that a request for me to give up eight hours of my life to help someone else prove a made-up point would be an unreasonable imposition of HER imagination on MY potential to live with other people. :-)
When I’ve had a whole day by myself in my home, in the days before e-mail and such, I usually left at some point to eat in public or with friends. Eight hours is too long for me to be alone. It doesn’t feel as good to me as checking on my friends and relatives does, or as making sure someone knows that I’m alive and safe at home feels.
But the “whole day” phrase that kept coming up…. is eight hours “a whole day” for unschoolers? :-) SO MUCH can be done, seen, heard, said, thought about and experienced in eight hours of having options and adult partners that I’m glad to hear that most of the volunteers in that experiment decided to quit before wasting more of their time in semi-isolation.
Sandra
Sandra Dodd
-=-The world of your imagination! -=-
That (the Willie Wonka video) is not MY imagination. :-)
Watching videos was against the rules of the “study” / game, right?
The lyrics to that song from Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory are:
Come with me and you'll be
In a world of pure imagination
Take a look and you'll see
Into your imagination
We'll begin with a spin
Traveling in the world of my creation
What we'll see
Will defy explanation
If you want to view paradise
Simply look around and view it
Anything you want to, do it
Wanna change the world?
There's nothing to it
There is no life I know
To compare with pure imagination
Living there, you'll be free
If you truly wish to be
There is no life I know
To compare with pure imagination
Living there, you'll be free
If you truly wish to be
__________________________
Escapism and fantasy? Sometimes it’s fun.
But honestly, I think a great unscooling life is better than most people could have imagined. I’m serious. It’s not plasticine flowers and rivers of chocolate. But there can be flowers and chocolate. :-) And unlike fantasy trips through candy factories where children are magically punished and shamed (that Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is really not very child-friendly and the book shames television viewing, too)… unschooling can make lots of lives better.
Sandra
That (the Willie Wonka video) is not MY imagination. :-)
Watching videos was against the rules of the “study” / game, right?
The lyrics to that song from Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory are:
Come with me and you'll be
In a world of pure imagination
Take a look and you'll see
Into your imagination
We'll begin with a spin
Traveling in the world of my creation
What we'll see
Will defy explanation
If you want to view paradise
Simply look around and view it
Anything you want to, do it
Wanna change the world?
There's nothing to it
There is no life I know
To compare with pure imagination
Living there, you'll be free
If you truly wish to be
There is no life I know
To compare with pure imagination
Living there, you'll be free
If you truly wish to be
__________________________
Escapism and fantasy? Sometimes it’s fun.
But honestly, I think a great unscooling life is better than most people could have imagined. I’m serious. It’s not plasticine flowers and rivers of chocolate. But there can be flowers and chocolate. :-) And unlike fantasy trips through candy factories where children are magically punished and shamed (that Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is really not very child-friendly and the book shames television viewing, too)… unschooling can make lots of lives better.
Sandra