rabbits3arewe

I have just read "Einstein Never Used Flash Cards,"
http://www.amazon.com/Einstein-Never-Used-Flash-Cards/dp/1579546951

Wonderful book that says the most important things you can do for/with
your birth to 5 child is 1. talk to them 2. read to them. 3. Let them
play and play with them.

What I liked about the book is it was filled with LOTS of scientific
research to back up all its statements and examples of really
interesting studies on how children learn. It is well written and easy
to read.

I'd like to find a similar book for grade school and even high school
learning. Does anyone know of such books?

Thanks

Pamela Sorooshian

"The Book of Learning and Forgetting" by Frank Smith.

-pam


On Apr 17, 2008, at 1:25 PM, rabbits3arewe wrote:

>
> I'd like to find a similar book for grade school and even high school
> learning. Does anyone know of such books?



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Jodi Bezzola

Scott Noelle's Daily Groove is amazing for those of you that don't yet subscribe. I have to copy my favourite one yet:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mother Nature doesn't aim for mediocre. She imbues
every child with HUGE creative potential.

Children are born *knowing* they're supposed to be
BIG -- innately powerful, free, and continuously
expanding to new horizons.

Today, no matter how physically small your child
may be, notice and appreciate his or her BIGness in
spirit. That spirit is easy to see when your child
is expressing pure Love and Joy. But it's no less
present when s/he's "misbehaving." In those trying
times, remember...

Our children are always doing the best they
can to stay connected to their BIGness --
in a world that expects them to be small.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So beautiful. I can't help but think what a different world we would be living in if ALL children were regarded this way.

Jodi




---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dina

i will be picking up this book asap as i'm needing reassurance about unschooling today.
although my son isn't even close to "school age" yet (he's 20 months old) i see a lot of kids
similar ages who do things completely different than my son. i'm trying not to worry about
him and focus on the things he seems to love to do right now (having books read to him,
playing with anything with wheels, pointing out things in the environment). i keep telling
myself, "he's learning all the time no matter what he's doing". hard to remember
sometimes in a society that focuses so much on teaching, teaching, teaching.

thanks!
dina

--- In [email protected], "rabbits3arewe" <rabbits3arewe@...> wrote:
>
> I have just read "Einstein Never Used Flash Cards,"
> http://www.amazon.com/Einstein-Never-Used-Flash-Cards/dp/1579546951
>
> Wonderful book that says the most important things you can do for/with
> your birth to 5 child is 1. talk to them 2. read to them. 3. Let them
> play and play with them.
>
> What I liked about the book is it was filled with LOTS of scientific
> research to back up all its statements and examples of really
> interesting studies on how children learn. It is well written and easy
> to read.
>
> I'd like to find a similar book for grade school and even high school
> learning. Does anyone know of such books?
>
> Thanks
>

rabbits3arewe

The Einstein book has several examples of children that go to academic
preschools versus kids who go to play based preschools. By
kindergarten, the only differences are that the academically trained
kids have more anxiety and are not as creative.

If you're concerned that your child has actual delays (my son had a
speech delay that we picked up at 8 months,) you can do a ages and
stages questionnaire. http://asq.uoregon.edu/ It only takes a couple
minutes, is free, and uses the standard milestones for your child's age.

We will unschool as well. Our son is 28 months. I am so excited to be
going down this path. I think you'll love the Einstein book.


Pam

--- In [email protected], "Dina" <dapsign@...> wrote:
>
> i will be picking up this book asap as i'm needing reassurance about
unschooling today.
> although my son isn't even close to "school age" yet (he's 20 months
old) i see a lot of kids
> similar ages who do things completely different than my son. i'm
trying not to worry about
> him and focus on the things he seems to love to do right now (having
books read to him,
> playing with anything with wheels, pointing out things in the
environment). i keep telling
> myself, "he's learning all the time no matter what he's doing".
hard to remember
> sometimes in a society that focuses so much on teaching, teaching,
teaching.
>
> thanks!
> dina
>
> --- In [email protected], "rabbits3arewe"
<rabbits3arewe@> wrote:
> >
> > I have just read "Einstein Never Used Flash Cards,"
> > http://www.amazon.com/Einstein-Never-Used-Flash-Cards/dp/1579546951
> >
> > Wonderful book that says the most important things you can do for/with
> > your birth to 5 child is 1. talk to them 2. read to them. 3. Let them
> > play and play with them.
> >
> > What I liked about the book is it was filled with LOTS of scientific
> > research to back up all its statements and examples of really
> > interesting studies on how children learn. It is well written and easy
> > to read.
> >
> > I'd like to find a similar book for grade school and even high school
> > learning. Does anyone know of such books?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>

Ren Allen

~~
If you're concerned that your child has actual delays (my son had a
speech delay that we picked up at 8 months,) ~~

At EIGHT months??? WHat?

People are so very different I don't understand how on earth you could
call ANYTHING "delayed" at eight months of age. Could you explain?

Ren
learninginfreedom.com

rabbits3arewe

There are milestones that are indicative of children with delays.
Because the earlier interventions occur, the easier the delays are to
treat, we opted to start therapy as soon as we found the delay.
Therapy consisted of a speech therapist coming to our house and
showing me different ways to play that taught him the "language"
skills he needed. Early intervention is free, is play based, and is
very effective, especially when started as early as possible. There is
no reason NOT to intervene. Maybe a delay is just a different
development rate that each child has, but maybe it's something bigger.
Also, when a child is considered delayed, what they are doing is
significantly behind the majority of children. Not only was he not
making the sounds he should have been, he'd also stopped making
sounds, like "o" that he'd been making before. Regression is a scary
thing.

So, we're now at 28 months and all is well. He is using 5 to 8 word
sentences. Perhaps he would have gotten here without therapy, but as I
said, it was free and play based, so there was no reason to not do it.

--- In [email protected], "Ren Allen"
<starsuncloud@...> wrote:
>
> ~~
> If you're concerned that your child has actual delays (my son had a
> speech delay that we picked up at 8 months,) ~~
>
> At EIGHT months??? WHat?
>
> People are so very different I don't understand how on earth you could
> call ANYTHING "delayed" at eight months of age. Could you explain?
>
> Ren
> learninginfreedom.com
>

Jodi Bezzola

~~If you're concerned that your child has actual delays (my son had a
speech delay that we picked up at 8 months,) you can do a ages and
stages questionnaire. http://asq.uoregon edu/ It only takes a couple
minutes, is free, and uses the standard milestones for your child's age.~~

Wow, how did you ever pick up a speech "delay" at EIGHT months??? I'm really curious about that! My twin girls didn't say much until after they were 2, and I never thought to even consider that they might be "delayed", I just always knew they were on *their own* track.

So to me this is really dangerous thinking for our kids! Delayed according to what, according to whom?? How on earth can an average eight month old baby be behind???

Jodi




---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Ren Allen

~~ Early intervention is free, is play based, and is
> very effective, especially when started as early as possible. There
is no reason NOT to intervene.~~

I disagree.
I believe that most "therapy" is less effective than parents being
connected and interacting with their child. ESPECIALLY at such a young
age.

My youngest did not speak more than some grunts and garbled words
until he was close to three years of age. You wouldn't be able to tell
him apart from the average seven year old today. No therapy, no
intervention. I think unschooling will blossom best in an atmosphere
of trust and labeling children as "delayed" is NOT going to help that
at all.


~~ Also, when a child is considered delayed, what they are doing is
> significantly behind the majority of children. ~~

And why would that matter? I don't compare my children to other
children. They are each developing in their own way and time.

~~ Perhaps he would have gotten here without therapy, but as I
> said, it was free and play based, so there was no reason to not do it.~~

It doesn't help parents trust. It makes them think their children
won't be ok without therapy and intervention. It labels a child as
"delayed" when they're simply unfolding in their own way and time. And
yes, "regression" is normal and natural. Even with things like peeing
in a toilet and other developmental skills.


If the "therapy" is just play,then parents can do that just fine
without being fearful or deciding their child is delayed. Unschooling
needs trust to work out well. Trust in each individual's ability and
time table especially. If you can't trust an eight month old to
develop language later than some other children, how can you trust a 9
or 10 or 13 year old to read in their own time?

Ren
learninginfreedom.com

Ren Allen

~~
So to me this is really dangerous thinking for our kids! Delayed
according to
what, according to whom?? How on earth can an average eight month old
baby be
behind???~~

Exactly.

And if a parent is looking for "delays" at the baby stage, how will
trust unfold when that child is maybe struggling with something like
reading at 12 years old? Where will the trust be? Will there be more
therapy?

Ren
learninginfreedom.com

Jolene

So, I can see the point of not labeling a child, especially if it is
a label with such negative connotations like "delayed."

However, I also see no problem with the parent using the resource to
learn more ways to play with her child. Not all aspects of parenting
come naturally to everyone, and I think that a lot of people who make
a career out of child development have some cool, fun ideas about
playing. As long as the parent takes what seems to be good for her
and her child and leaves the rest (the label "delay"), I think
there's nothing wrong with the "therapy."

I think that the unschooling groups and parents I've spoken to have
had some cool ideas about how I can better interact with my son and
I'm SOOOO glad I haven't stayed away from this "therapy."

Warmly,
Jolene =)

--- In [email protected], "Ren Allen"
<starsuncloud@...> wrote:
>
> ~~
> So to me this is really dangerous thinking for our kids! Delayed
> according to
> what, according to whom?? How on earth can an average eight month
old
> baby be
> behind???~~
>
> Exactly.
>
> And if a parent is looking for "delays" at the baby stage, how will
> trust unfold when that child is maybe struggling with something like
> reading at 12 years old? Where will the trust be? Will there be more
> therapy?
>
> Ren
> learninginfreedom.com
>

Ren Allen

~~ However, I also see no problem with the parent using the resource
to learn more ways to play with her child. Not all aspects of
parenting come naturally to everyone~~

Absolutely.
A lot of us have learned many new ways of interacting with our
children and better supporting their needs. That has nothing to do
with comparing a child's ability to other children. There are reasons
to be concerned but a non-talking 8 month old is not one of them in my
book.


~~I think that the unschooling groups and parents I've spoken to have
> had some cool ideas about how I can better interact with my son and
> I'm SOOOO glad I haven't stayed away from this "therapy."~~

Learning from each other, utilizing resources to better support our
families and understand each other are great things to do! I have no
issue with people figuring out how to nourish their child whether that
child seems "delayed" or not.

I researched the heck out of sensory integration disorder and many
other traits in order to understand what might help or hinder Jalen. I
chose to never see and of it as a "disorder" (ick) or "delay" because
that is saying the person is somehow "less than" rather than
THEMSELVES. There are times we need a diagnoses. I have met Melissa's
children and there is no way I would say she should avoid a diagnoses
when severe autism is present!

Sometimes a thing is beyond our scope of capability. Nothing wrong
with gaining some help or understanding.

I still don't see how a non-speaking (or even regressing) BABY needs
any kind of "therapy" or diagnoses for language. Again, if unschooling
is to work long-term for a family, I think there needs to be a HUGE
amount of trust in each individual's time table. There also needs to
be a HUGE amount of trust that a loving, nurturing and aware family
can provide what the child needs, even if utilizing outside resources.

If the first course of action for a non-speaking 8 month old is
diagnoses, "delayed" labels and therapy, what is that family going to
do when faced with other comparisons at a much older age?

Ren
learninginfreedom.com
>
> Warmly,
> Jolene =)
>
> --- In [email protected], "Ren Allen"
> <starsuncloud@> wrote:
> >
> > ~~
> > So to me this is really dangerous thinking for our kids! Delayed
> > according to
> > what, according to whom?? How on earth can an average eight month
> old
> > baby be
> > behind???~~
> >
> > Exactly.
> >
> > And if a parent is looking for "delays" at the baby stage, how will
> > trust unfold when that child is maybe struggling with something like
> > reading at 12 years old? Where will the trust be? Will there be more
> > therapy?
> >
> > Ren
> > learninginfreedom.com
> >
>

rabbits3arewe

I had replied to the prior poster, but the reply never came through.

There are many developmental delays that can become more and more
serious as children get older. Every child has a different schedule,
but some schedules are problematic. Some schedules indicate serious
problems. I am a proactive parent and I educate myself on the
difference. I have worked with developmentally delayed children and I
have seen the full spectrum of parental involvement. I have seen
parents whose lack of involvement meant the child would not get the
help they need and they would have lifelong problems.

I see unschooling like a grocery store. Some parents would say, "Eat
what you want." That is their style. I do not want my child to eat
Twinkies, so I say, "You can eat anything in the produce department."

I want my children to trust in me. I want them to know I am proactive
in helping them. Sometimes that means I sit back and let them figure
it out on their own. Sometimes that means I take a more proactive
approach. The needs of the child and my knowledge will help me choose
where on the spectrum I need to be at any given time.

If my children were 12 years old and having difficulty reading, they
would know that I would be doing as much as possible to help them
overcome their difficulties.

I would love to have a discussion about this that is not judgmental or
close-minded.



--- In [email protected], "Jolene" <joyauxjo@...> wrote:
>
> So, I can see the point of not labeling a child, especially if it is
> a label with such negative connotations like "delayed."
>
> However, I also see no problem with the parent using the resource to
> learn more ways to play with her child. Not all aspects of parenting
> come naturally to everyone, and I think that a lot of people who make
> a career out of child development have some cool, fun ideas about
> playing. As long as the parent takes what seems to be good for her
> and her child and leaves the rest (the label "delay"), I think
> there's nothing wrong with the "therapy."
>
> I think that the unschooling groups and parents I've spoken to have
> had some cool ideas about how I can better interact with my son and
> I'm SOOOO glad I haven't stayed away from this "therapy."
>
> Warmly,
> Jolene =)
>
> --- In [email protected], "Ren Allen"
> <starsuncloud@> wrote:
> >
> > ~~
> > So to me this is really dangerous thinking for our kids! Delayed
> > according to
> > what, according to whom?? How on earth can an average eight month
> old
> > baby be
> > behind???~~
> >
> > Exactly.
> >
> > And if a parent is looking for "delays" at the baby stage, how will
> > trust unfold when that child is maybe struggling with something like
> > reading at 12 years old? Where will the trust be? Will there be more
> > therapy?
> >
> > Ren
> > learninginfreedom.com
> >
>

Ren Allen

~~ Every child has a different schedule,
> but some schedules are problematic. Some schedules indicate serious
> problems.~~

How are different "schedules" problematic in an unschooling family?
Why would it matter if a child spoke "early" or "later"...same with
reading, same with everything.

~~ I have seen
> parents whose lack of involvement meant the child would not get the
> help they need and they would have lifelong problems.~~

I'm not advocating a lack of involvement, I'm advocating a lack of
labeling developmental differences and bringing in "experts" at the
drop of a hat.


~~I see unschooling like a grocery store. Some parents would say, "Eat
> what you want." That is their style. I do not want my child to eat
> Twinkies, so I say, "You can eat anything in the produce department."~~

So what happens when they are beyond your control (and believe me it
happens faster than you would believe)and they want a twinkie?


~~I want them to know I am proactive
> in helping them.~~

Help doesn't involve deciding what and when other people need to learn
something.

~~Sometimes that means I sit back and let them figure
> it out on their own. Sometimes that means I take a more proactive
> approach. The needs of the child and my knowledge will help me
choose where on the spectrum I need to be at any given time.~~

I would venture to guess that every parent here feels the same way.


~~If my children were 12 years old and having difficulty reading, they
> would know that I would be doing as much as possible to help them
> overcome their difficulties.~~

But you're still seeing it as a "difficulty". My child learned to read
at the age of 12 with zero difficulties because we never labeled him
as "delayed" nor did we push him to learn anything before he needed it
and was developmentally ready. People will learn without being taught.
Seeing a child that is learning certain skills later than some of
their peers and viewing it as a "difficulty" will hinder unschooling
trust.

~~I would love to have a discussion about this that is not judgmental
or close-minded.~~

We're pretty open minded here. Problem is, most of us have full
awareness of mainstream views. Several here have teaching backgrounds
and know all about child development. I'm pretty aware of Piaget and
other information out there as my Mum was a teacher herself. So there
isn't much about developmental "delays" I'm not already aware
of....very few people out there will discuss avoiding these labels and
finding a totally different lifestyle where children are trusted.

This list is that place.

I hope that my judgment of your choice can be seen as just that.If I
were to place judgement on you as a human being I know very little
about, it would be that you are a very involved, caring and loving parent.

That doesn't mean I will agree that therapy for an eight month old is
necessary or money well-spent.

Ren
learninginfreedom.com
>
>
>
> --- In [email protected], "Jolene" <joyauxjo@> wrote:
> >
> > So, I can see the point of not labeling a child, especially if it is
> > a label with such negative connotations like "delayed."
> >
> > However, I also see no problem with the parent using the resource to
> > learn more ways to play with her child. Not all aspects of parenting
> > come naturally to everyone, and I think that a lot of people who make
> > a career out of child development have some cool, fun ideas about
> > playing. As long as the parent takes what seems to be good for her
> > and her child and leaves the rest (the label "delay"), I think
> > there's nothing wrong with the "therapy."
> >
> > I think that the unschooling groups and parents I've spoken to have
> > had some cool ideas about how I can better interact with my son and
> > I'm SOOOO glad I haven't stayed away from this "therapy."
> >
> > Warmly,
> > Jolene =)
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "Ren Allen"
> > <starsuncloud@> wrote:
> > >
> > > ~~
> > > So to me this is really dangerous thinking for our kids! Delayed
> > > according to
> > > what, according to whom?? How on earth can an average eight month
> > old
> > > baby be
> > > behind???~~
> > >
> > > Exactly.
> > >
> > > And if a parent is looking for "delays" at the baby stage, how will
> > > trust unfold when that child is maybe struggling with something like
> > > reading at 12 years old? Where will the trust be? Will there be more
> > > therapy?
> > >
> > > Ren
> > > learninginfreedom.com
> > >
> >
>

wisdomalways5

--- In [email protected], "rabbits3arewe"
<rabbits3arewe@...> wrote:
>
> There are many developmental delays that can become more and more
> serious as children get older. Every child has a different
schedule,
> but some schedules are problematic.

how do you KNOW they are problematic- if you did not decide it was
a "delay" and let it happen in their own time how much at trusting
would that be



Some schedules indicate serious
> problems.

this is probably true in scholed children but not so much in free
kids who can develop at their own pace-


I am a proactive parent and I educate myself on the
> difference. I have worked with developmentally delayed children
and I
> have seen the full spectrum of parental involvement. I have seen
> parents whose lack of involvement meant the child would not get the
> help they need and they would have lifelong problems.

again probably only a problem in schooled kids


>
> I see unschooling like a grocery store. Some parents would
say, "Eat
> what you want." That is their style. I do not want my child to eat
> Twinkies, so I say, "You can eat anything in the produce
department."

what if they WANT twinkies- are you going to hide the fact htat
twinkies exist and then what happens when they find out twinkies do
exist and that you hide them and lie about them- how will they trust
anything you have to say


The needs of the child and my knowledge will help me choose
> where on the spectrum I need to be at any given time.

Their needs or the needs you think they should have- how would you
know what their needs are if you are basing them off of the mythical
agverage child



>
> If my children were 12 years old and having difficulty reading,
they
> would know that I would be doing as much as possible to help them
> overcome their difficulties.
>
> I would love to have a discussion about this that is not
judgmental or
> close-minded.

>

Karen Swanay

I have been unwell of late and haven't followed this thread from the
beginning, but I've read enough to want to post this.

My daughter Morgan is almost 4 yrs old. She was adopted from China
and we brought her home in January. She had neither English nor
Chinese language. The SWI called her "sweet and quiet but very
disobedient" They told us when they brought her to us that she could
not feed herself nor was she potty trained. They did not admit she
had no language...they told us she "would refuse to listen". (Now
keep in mind this is translated so it sounds harsh but much could have
been lost in the translation.)

But here's the deal...Morgan has some 2 dozen words now but
understands much more. I can say "Go put this in the trash" and she
can do that but she can't/won't say "trash" nor will she point to the
trash can if I ask her where it is. (Which I have done only to gauge
the depth of her understanding.) Anyway, everyone that knows us,
knows that Morgan was labelled as having autism and everyone is
pushing us to get her evaluated *RIGHT NOW* before....(insert here a
list of tragedies if it's not done now)...we have chosen to do
nothing. The five of us do just fine. Morgan gets fed, makes her
wants and needs understood and gets them met. She uses the words she
thinks are most important like "more"...she saw the need to use a word
to get what she wanted and she uses it. If she can say "more" she
COULD say other things. Is she refusing? Don't know...but I don't
care, I shamelessly steal the words of Mrs Turtle on the cartoon
Franklin and use them for myself when I say "Morgan will talk when
she's ready and not before."

Does this mean she will be 17 and still not speaking? I suppose so,
but if that's the case, we'll figure it out. People have advised
teaching her signing, and the use of graphic pictures etc so she can
make her needs known but she refuses/can't/declines to use them.
She'd rather we do what we do now. It's comfortable for her. I could
*make* her I guess, by putting her on the NFF (Nothing is For Free)
program, which I've been prompted to do by several "specialists"
giving me unsolicited advice. That would be say dangling her sippee
over her head and not giving it to her until she makes the attempt at
speaking. I choose not to do that.

To the OP, your 8 month old child might have issues, I didn't see the
original post. But if your child can suck, swallow, stick her/his
tongue out etc...then you know all the muscles work. If your baby can
cry you know the voice box works. If your baby turns toward you or
noises then you know the ears work. I gently suggest that you rejoice
in these things and not worry so much about not having language. Your
baby will talk when she's ready and not before. Personally I would
seek help if the child can't swallow or other such physical issues.
But if the body works, then give the baby room to be her. She might
be an active listener with nothing much to say.

I guess I see it as less an issue of trust as has been suggested by
others and more of an issue of acceptance of your child as she was
made and chooses to be. I know it's scary. I sometimes look at
Morgan and wonder if by not getting her seen and forcing all kinds of
reparitive therapies on her if I'm dooming her to a life of "less
than" but then I take a deep breath and remind myself that Morgan IS.
She is potential but it's her potential...not mine. And she's a happy
kid. If your baby seems pretty happy I'd let it go. I had a
precocious talker who was using full sentences by age 12 months. My
second child was much less chatty. And now my third talks when she
wants and says what she needs to say. (Don't DO DAT!!) I don't need
her to be able to tell me stories to think she's OK. She's pretty
darn terrific just as she is.

hth
Karen

Meredith

--- In [email protected], "rabbits3arewe"
<rabbits3arewe@...> wrote:
>> I want my children to trust in me. I want them to know I am
proactive
> in helping them. Sometimes that means I sit back and let them
figure
> it out on their own. Sometimes that means I take a more proactive
> approach. The needs of the child and my knowledge will help me
choose
> where on the spectrum I need to be at any given time.

I don't think anyone's saying its never appropriate to be proactive!
The question is more in terms of *how*. From an unschooling
standpoint, being proactive in ways that build trust and foster
connections is really important. Calling on an "expert" early on
doesn't build trust or foster connections between a parent and
child. It doesn't lead a parent to trust her own judgement more or
work on connecting with her child more. At best, it builds trust in
and fosters connections with a stranger.

That's not to say that calling on trained professionals is never an
option for unschoolers! Its not a great place to start, though.

> I have worked with developmentally delayed children and I
> have seen the full spectrum of parental involvement. I have seen
> parents whose lack of involvement meant the child would not get the
> help they need and they would have lifelong problems.

Its reasonable to assume that radical unschoolers will be more on
the "involved" end of the spectrum, sort of by definition ;) Perhaps
you could offer some links to online resources for any parents who
are concerned about this issue so that they can do some more
research for themselves?

---Meredith (Mo 6, Ray 14)

rabbits3arewe

I am new to this list. I posted with a book recommendation that I
think is very supportive of unschooling philosophies and asked for
other books to read. A mom responded and expressed concerns for her
child. I gave her a suggestion based on what we did that was
successful. Suddenly things are snowballing.

I have been told that what I did for my child was dangerous and that
my kids won't trust me because I'm not going to let them binge on
Twinkies. Is this how people on this list normally treat each other?


--- In [email protected], "wisdomalways5"
<wisdom1133@...> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "rabbits3arewe"
> <rabbits3arewe@> wrote:
> >
> > There are many developmental delays that can become more and more
> > serious as children get older. Every child has a different
> schedule,
> > but some schedules are problematic.
>
> how do you KNOW they are problematic- if you did not decide it was
> a "delay" and let it happen in their own time how much at trusting
> would that be
>
>
>
> Some schedules indicate serious
> > problems.
>
> this is probably true in scholed children but not so much in free
> kids who can develop at their own pace-
>
>
> I am a proactive parent and I educate myself on the
> > difference. I have worked with developmentally delayed children
> and I
> > have seen the full spectrum of parental involvement. I have seen
> > parents whose lack of involvement meant the child would not get the
> > help they need and they would have lifelong problems.
>
> again probably only a problem in schooled kids
>
>
> >
> > I see unschooling like a grocery store. Some parents would
> say, "Eat
> > what you want." That is their style. I do not want my child to eat
> > Twinkies, so I say, "You can eat anything in the produce
> department."
>
> what if they WANT twinkies- are you going to hide the fact htat
> twinkies exist and then what happens when they find out twinkies do
> exist and that you hide them and lie about them- how will they trust
> anything you have to say
>
>
> The needs of the child and my knowledge will help me choose
> > where on the spectrum I need to be at any given time.
>
> Their needs or the needs you think they should have- how would you
> know what their needs are if you are basing them off of the mythical
> agverage child
>
>
>
> >
> > If my children were 12 years old and having difficulty reading,
> they
> > would know that I would be doing as much as possible to help them
> > overcome their difficulties.
> >
> > I would love to have a discussion about this that is not
> judgmental or
> > close-minded.
>
> >
>

Ren Allen

~~I gave her a suggestion based on what we did that was
successful. Suddenly things are snowballing.~~

Nothing is snowballing. Truly.
It's a discussion list. If you post things that aren't helpful to
unschooling then it will get a lot of attention and discussion, that's
all.

There are going to be certain topics that will garner more interest
and more posts. It's not about the person posting them, it's about the
ideas presented. We tend to discuss some things in depth and question
certain ideas pretty intensely.

If you're comfortable with that kind of discussion you'll be fine. If
not, I suggest reading for a while to get a "feel" for the list and
the tone in order to decide if it will be a useful resource.

Topics that tend to get discussed heavily are food restrictions on
kids, chores, the idea of "experts"/therapy and punishments/rewards.

Ren
learninginfreedom.com

Barbara Perez

So let's continue the discussion then.

>Help doesn't involve deciding what and when other people need to learn
something.<

I disagree. As a parent, when a child that doesn't know better wants
something that I know will be harmful to them, I think that is a terrific
time for them to learn about moderation, and discernment, and that not all
foods/activities/etc in our big happy world are created equal.

I believe that's the point the original poster was trying to make. Yes it's
great to be positive and enthusiastic about the produce and the cheese and
the different kinds of bread. And no, I don't believe it's necessary for a
good unschooler to say "yes" unquestioningly to EVERYTHING the child
suddenly wants. You can be an unschooler that presents the aspects of those
choices that the child may not have thought about, deciding for them not
when they'll learn it, but when they'll be exposed to a valuable fact or
opinion that they might not have otherwise been exposed to. Something as
simple as a true story: "I once ate X Twinkies and then threw up, didn't
want to see one or smell one for months!" That's something a child will
decide what to do with in their mind. Whether they'll still want to try it,
or whether to learn vicariously from someone else's experience. That is
their choice. The choice to expose the kid to that idea, and when, is the
parent's.

So back to the 8 month old. If the parent decided that the play therapy was
a positive thing for the reasons she explained, I don't see how it's
"against unschooling" for her to have done so.


On Sun, Apr 20, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Ren Allen <starsuncloud@...> wrote:

> ~~I gave her a suggestion based on what we did that was
> successful. Suddenly things are snowballing.~~
>
> Nothing is snowballing. Truly.
> It's a discussion list. If you post things that aren't helpful to
> unschooling then it will get a lot of attention and discussion, that's
> all.
>
> There are going to be certain topics that will garner more interest
> and more posts. It's not about the person posting them, it's about the
> ideas presented. We tend to discuss some things in depth and question
> certain ideas pretty intensely.
>
> If you're comfortable with that kind of discussion you'll be fine. If
> not, I suggest reading for a while to get a "feel" for the list and
> the tone in order to decide if it will be a useful resource.
>
> Topics that tend to get discussed heavily are food restrictions on
> kids, chores, the idea of "experts"/therapy and punishments/rewards.
>
> Ren
> learninginfreedom.com
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

keetry

--- In [email protected], "rabbits3arewe"
<rabbits3arewe@...> wrote:
>
> There is
> no reason NOT to intervene.

Except that it sends a message to the child that they are somehow
defective.

> Also, when a child is considered delayed, what they are doing is
> significantly behind the majority of children.

I don't see how this matters. Norms and averages don't really mean
much in the unschooling world.

Not only was he not
> making the sounds he should have been, he'd also stopped making
> sounds, like "o" that he'd been making before. Regression is a
scary
> thing.

Regression can be a scary thing if you let it. My 4yo decided he
wanted to wear diapers again. My husband started to get freaked
about it. Why would a 4yo who's been using the toilet for about 8
months all of a sudden want to wear a diaper again? I asked him if
he'd ever heard of regression. It's quite normal for short periods
of time at any age and nothing to be concerned about. My ds wore a
diaper for a couple of hours one day.

An 8 month old is barely verbalizing. I can't imagine how a speech
delay could be noticed at that time. My 10 month old makes various
noises and then stops for periods of time. Then he will start up
again and maybe make new noises. It's all normal.

Alysia

keetry

--- In [email protected], "Ren Allen"
<starsuncloud@...> wrote:
>
> And if a parent is looking for "delays" at the baby stage, how
will
> trust unfold when that child is maybe struggling with something
like
> reading at 12 years old? Where will the trust be? Will there be
more
> therapy?

I think this is a serious problem that stems from the early
intervention stuff from schools. The government provides funds to
states, counties, cities, schools based on the number of children
they have in their districts who need early intervention. Therefore,
it's beneficial to the district...to find as many children as
possible who need early intervention. It's difficult for new parents
to trust themselves and trust their children when they see, hear and
read all about all of this stuff everywhere.

People are born to development normally, to survive, to thrive. We
don't need all this intervention and special treatment. If we did,
humans would not populate the planet.

Alysia

Joyce Fetteroll

On Apr 20, 2008, at 9:00 PM, Barbara Perez wrote:

> As a parent, when a child that doesn't know better wants
> something that I know will be harmful to them,

Kids want us to protect them from harm. It would be a betrayal of
their trust if we stood by and let them get hurt. If my husband stood
by while I cut my finger off with a chain saw, I'd be pretty pissed!

The issue is what the definition of "harmful" is. Some parents draw
the harmful line at Twinkies and TV and "too much" computer and R-
rated movies and advertising and sugar and meat and more than one
cookie ...

A good question to ask, not as a hand tying rule but as an aid as
someone is making the transition from no to yes, is, "Who's going to
die?"

So, what harm are you talking about? Real life examples are more
useful than vagueness.

> I think that is a terrific
> time for them to learn about moderation, and discernment, and that
> not all
> foods/activities/etc in our big happy world are created equal.

We should be discussing the world as we go along in life not grasping
at teachable moments. Too often "teachable moments" is a parent
internally saying "You're wrong. I'm right. I need you to see the
right way."

If my daughter comes for a second bowl of ice cream she'd appreciate
me saying "We're eating in 15 minutes." Then she can use the
information to make a more informed choice. As part of her decision
making, she might ask what we're having. :-) The right answer is
whatever she decides, not what I think she should do. Part of living
together, she will have gathered the nutritional value of food but
even if she decides she'd rather have more ice cream than dinner,
it's not a forever decision where this one experience will kill her
or where forever after she'll decide to have ice cream instead of
dinner. She can use the freedom and experience to assess when it's
right for *her* to have something other than dinner.

We learn best with the freedom to explore. Part of that freedom is
trying things out to see what happens *to us*. Part of that freedom
is the freedom to put up with the bad parts of something for a while
to get the good parts.

If child is unhappy and feels stuck in a place better than saying no
to what they're doing is to expand their world so there is more to
choose from. Help them find something else rather than make them do
something else.

But, again, without a specific example, that's only vaguely helpful.

Joyce

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Joyce Fetteroll

On Apr 20, 2008, at 3:23 PM, rabbits3arewe wrote:

> I would love to have a discussion about this that is not judgmental or
> close-minded.

By "this" do you mean 12 yos struggling with reading? We can discuss
real 12 yos but not made up ones. Made up ones have problems that
seem probable but don't necessarily happen in real life.

> I see unschooling like a grocery store. Some parents would say, "Eat
> what you want." That is their style. I do not want my child to eat
> Twinkies, so I say, "You can eat anything in the produce department."

This list is for people who want to find ways to keep their kids safe
without controlling them, not for advice on how to limit them. Yes,
it can be a lot more work to find ways to safely help kids explore
the world than to just say no! We often have to pull our fears out
and scrutinize them. That's uncomfortable work for many people. It's
*much* easier to go with the fear and do something "just incase". But
this list isn't for promoting ideas to mollify fears. It's for
dragging fears out kicking and screaming into the light of day ;-)

My daughter at 16 had a Twinkie recently given by a friend and she
said they sampled it and discussed it and tore it apart. It was her
first Twinkie. (She's known about them for years since they're part
of our culture.) I never bought Twinkies since I don't like them, but
I also never pointed to them and said "You can have anything but
that." I could bet good money she would have been begging to have
some! And the more I said no, the stronger the desire.

Part of her growing up has been talking about food as we cook, as we
eat, as we look for packages that don't have unpronounceable words on
them ;-) It's general conversation about food, not unsolicited
information given when she's asked, "Can we try that?" (Though she'd
appreciate me giving useful information she may not have noticed like
"That one's licorice flavor. The other is mango that you might like
better." Or, "There's a smaller package incase you don't like them.")

As an unrelated example, it was *much* more effective to discuss how
advertisers use ploys to get us to want to try their product on ads
for things she didn't want, toys that didn't interest her or adult
products. WIthout the agenda they were interesting observations and
discussions rather than a disguised way of saying "I don't want you
to have that and I need to persuade you to my way of thinking because
yours is wrong."

Joyce

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

beensclan

>
> I think this is a serious problem that stems from the early
> intervention stuff from schools. The government provides funds to
> states, counties, cities, schools based on the number of children
> they have in their districts who need early intervention. Therefore,
> it's beneficial to the district...to find as many children as
> possible who need early intervention. It's difficult for new parents
> to trust themselves and trust their children when they see, hear and
> read all about all of this stuff everywhere.
>
> People are born to development normally, to survive, to thrive. We
> don't need all this intervention and special treatment. If we did,
> humans would not populate the planet.
>
> Alysia
>

I agree with what Alysia wrote here and know it for a fact. I used to
work in the Special Needs classrooms. Around the time I began to become
very disenchanted with the system was when one of the mums decided that
she would like here son to try attending a mainstream Grade 2 class in
hopes that his behaviour issues would lessen. I had to sit at a meeting
with teachers and an administration personel as they all agreed that
they would not let this student go mainstream. We all knew that if our
Special Needs class-size dropped to below ten students, we would be
affected funding-wise. The mother's request to move her son was denied.
The mother ended up taking this to the top and eventually (this makes me
cringe...) won the right to move her son to mainstream.

After my experience with the schools and students with Special Needs I
knew to never let my son near that system. I'm pretty sure that if my
son entered the system, a label would be put on him. It would probably
be some form of sensory integration problem. Something that I see his
body working out year after year to the point now where he seems
"normal". Now he's free to learn, live and love with every confidence
that he is whole and wonderfully made.

Barbara Perez

Joyce,
I appreciate your statements about protecting children, and about a single
experience not being "deadly" to anyone, and especially about using specific
examples rather than vague ones.
So maybe the difference in where I'm coming from is my experience with
children who had not only not been unschooled from birth, but who had been
through VERY different parenting before coming to me as foster children. Had
I been able to unschool them right away (I obviously wasn't, since the state
legally had custody, they even had to attend public school, and my hands
were clearly tied by the agency as to what would have been considered
appropriate parenting regarding many issues) I *may* have been able to take
the absolutely scary but infinitely freeing plunge of providing them with
everything they hadn't been provided in terms of safety and guidance, while
at the same time supporting them making their own decisions on everything
from eating to how to spend their time to every other decision in their
lives. Clearly I didn't have that choice, so my goal was to get there very
very gradually instead. But in the course of doing that, and in hindsight, I
came doubt that the "radical" approach that you and others on this board
advocate would have been in their best interest. In fact, I came to
understand and believe that a gradual approach to independence and freedom
as the child gets older and learns things, COULD be the most sensible
option, if not for "all" children (because I don't tend to make
pronouncements like that) at least for "my" children and possibly for some
others. After all, many children develop negative habits on their own, for
whatever set of circumstances, including simply the parents not having
discovered unschooling from the start. And that brings me to my point about
habits. I do believe there is such things as unhealthy habits, and healthy
ones - do you? And I also believe that we as humans can be creatures of
habit and that once those behavioral patterns are established, it takes more
than freedom and information to change them, otherwise why would it be so
hard for millions of well-informed, clearly free adults to quit smoking,
overeating, depriving themselves of sleep, and so many other
self-destructive behaviors that plague our society? To oversimplify (and I
do realize it's more complex than that, but bear with me) I believe this is
because established habits die hard. So, back to parenting, directly related
to protecting my child from harm, besides the short-term "who's going to die
from this?" question, which I agree with you is useful, I believe another
useful question to ask on a regular basis is "what sort of habits do I want
them to form?" because children have the luxury of being at a stage where
habits in many areas of their lives are just being formed for the same
time. See, I'm NOT saying that a child that grew up eating boxed macaroni
and cheese to the exclusion of anything else (in one case) or scavenging
from the trash or shop-lifting groceries to survive (in another) will not be
able to outgrow those behaviors (now we're getting to those specific
examples you were asking for), but I do believe that children need the
guidance of a parent to lead them away from those negative habits, and
leading them away sometimes might take a bit more than just providing
alternatives. Yes, mine are extreme cases, but I point them out because I've
heard some people on this and another board say "that just doesn't happen"
in real life, when I actually have seen specific kids in not even as extreme
cases as mine, but simply in permissive parenting situations (not from
unschoolers at all, on the contrary, permissive in the sense that were
bordering on neglect) developing what I consider to be very unhealthy habits
in terms of their basic physical needs. I've seen kids become obese at a
young age clearly not because of some genetic problem but due to the
availability of highly processed high calory foods in the house and nothing
else, combined with the availability of sedentary activity and nothing else.
This is a pet peeve of mine probably because, while my temperament was such
at a young age that I probably would have been much happier to munch away on
high-carb foods while reading book after book on the couch, I did get
enticed/pushed/encouraged by my parents towards some sort of physical
activity (which is probably why we went camping every summer even though my
mom wasn't keen on it) and why there were definitely rules about mealtimes
and limits on snacks, etc. I have seen the argument about that kind of
"infringement on a child's freedom" actually causing problems later in life,
and speaking of theory vs. specifics, I can agree with it in theory...but
what I see in my own life is the opposite: When I think of how hard my
parents worked on trying to teach me healthy habits, to me as an adult that
is more of a motivator, not less, to try and lead a healthy life. Is there
anyone out there not with me on this? Are there no adults on this board who
can say they "turned out alright" in some area of their lives, not in spite
of the way they were parented (if they were parented with SOME degree of
rules, as most of my generation were) but because of it?
Again, I do believe in unschooling principles and I'm definitely not
advocating excessive and uncalled for regulation of a child life. I'm
playing devil's advocate so to speak, only when I see "all or nothing"
reasoning about parenting (vs proactive, careful, balanced reasoning),
which just makes me shrug in an "oh my, the pendulum doeth swing" kind of
way -kwim?

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 2:26 AM, Joyce Fetteroll <jfetteroll@...>
wrote:

>
> On Apr 20, 2008, at 9:00 PM, Barbara Perez wrote:
>
> > As a parent, when a child that doesn't know better wants
> > something that I know will be harmful to them,
>
> Kids want us to protect them from harm. It would be a betrayal of
> their trust if we stood by and let them get hurt. If my husband stood
> by while I cut my finger off with a chain saw, I'd be pretty pissed!
>
> The issue is what the definition of "harmful" is. Some parents draw
> the harmful line at Twinkies and TV and "too much" computer and R-
> rated movies and advertising and sugar and meat and more than one
> cookie ...
>
> A good question to ask, not as a hand tying rule but as an aid as
> someone is making the transition from no to yes, is, "Who's going to
> die?"
>
> So, what harm are you talking about? Real life examples are more
> useful than vagueness.
>
> > I think that is a terrific
> > time for them to learn about moderation, and discernment, and that
> > not all
> > foods/activities/etc in our big happy world are created equal.
>
> We should be discussing the world as we go along in life not grasping
> at teachable moments. Too often "teachable moments" is a parent
> internally saying "You're wrong. I'm right. I need you to see the
> right way."
>
> If my daughter comes for a second bowl of ice cream she'd appreciate
> me saying "We're eating in 15 minutes." Then she can use the
> information to make a more informed choice. As part of her decision
> making, she might ask what we're having. :-) The right answer is
> whatever she decides, not what I think she should do. Part of living
> together, she will have gathered the nutritional value of food but
> even if she decides she'd rather have more ice cream than dinner,
> it's not a forever decision where this one experience will kill her
> or where forever after she'll decide to have ice cream instead of
> dinner. She can use the freedom and experience to assess when it's
> right for *her* to have something other than dinner.
>
> We learn best with the freedom to explore. Part of that freedom is
> trying things out to see what happens *to us*. Part of that freedom
> is the freedom to put up with the bad parts of something for a while
> to get the good parts.
>
> If child is unhappy and feels stuck in a place better than saying no
> to what they're doing is to expand their world so there is more to
> choose from. Help them find something else rather than make them do
> something else.
>
> But, again, without a specific example, that's only vaguely helpful.
>
> Joyce
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Barbara Perez

Whew, an addendum to apologize for not having broken up my letany into
paragraphs!
It's late and I pushed "send" too soon!

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 5:31 AM, Barbara Perez <barbara.perez@...>
wrote:

> Joyce,
> I appreciate your statements about protecting children, and about a single
> experience not being "deadly" to anyone, and especially about using specific
> examples rather than vague ones.
> So maybe the difference in where I'm coming from is my experience with
> children who had not only not been unschooled from birth, but who had been
> through VERY different parenting before coming to me as foster children. Had
> I been able to unschool them right away (I obviously wasn't, since the state
> legally had custody, they even had to attend public school, and my hands
> were clearly tied by the agency as to what would have been considered
> appropriate parenting regarding many issues) I *may* have been able to take
> the absolutely scary but infinitely freeing plunge of providing them with
> everything they hadn't been provided in terms of safety and guidance, while
> at the same time supporting them making their own decisions on everything
> from eating to how to spend their time to every other decision in their
> lives. Clearly I didn't have that choice, so my goal was to get there very
> very gradually instead. But in the course of doing that, and in hindsight, I
> came doubt that the "radical" approach that you and others on this board
> advocate would have been in their best interest. In fact, I came to
> understand and believe that a gradual approach to independence and freedom
> as the child gets older and learns things, COULD be the most sensible
> option, if not for "all" children (because I don't tend to make
> pronouncements like that) at least for "my" children and possibly for some
> others. After all, many children develop negative habits on their own, for
> whatever set of circumstances, including simply the parents not having
> discovered unschooling from the start. And that brings me to my point about
> habits. I do believe there is such things as unhealthy habits, and healthy
> ones - do you? And I also believe that we as humans can be creatures of
> habit and that once those behavioral patterns are established, it takes more
> than freedom and information to change them, otherwise why would it be so
> hard for millions of well-informed, clearly free adults to quit smoking,
> overeating, depriving themselves of sleep, and so many other
> self-destructive behaviors that plague our society? To oversimplify (and I
> do realize it's more complex than that, but bear with me) I believe this is
> because established habits die hard. So, back to parenting, directly related
> to protecting my child from harm, besides the short-term "who's going to die
> from this?" question, which I agree with you is useful, I believe another
> useful question to ask on a regular basis is "what sort of habits do I want
> them to form?" because children have the luxury of being at a stage where
> habits in many areas of their lives are just being formed for the same
> time. See, I'm NOT saying that a child that grew up eating boxed macaroni
> and cheese to the exclusion of anything else (in one case) or scavenging
> from the trash or shop-lifting groceries to survive (in another) will not be
> able to outgrow those behaviors (now we're getting to those specific
> examples you were asking for), but I do believe that children need the
> guidance of a parent to lead them away from those negative habits, and
> leading them away sometimes might take a bit more than just providing
> alternatives. Yes, mine are extreme cases, but I point them out because I've
> heard some people on this and another board say "that just doesn't happen"
> in real life, when I actually have seen specific kids in not even as extreme
> cases as mine, but simply in permissive parenting situations (not from
> unschoolers at all, on the contrary, permissive in the sense that were
> bordering on neglect) developing what I consider to be very unhealthy habits
> in terms of their basic physical needs. I've seen kids become obese at a
> young age clearly not because of some genetic problem but due to the
> availability of highly processed high calory foods in the house and nothing
> else, combined with the availability of sedentary activity and nothing else.
> This is a pet peeve of mine probably because, while my temperament was such
> at a young age that I probably would have been much happier to munch away on
> high-carb foods while reading book after book on the couch, I did get
> enticed/pushed/encouraged by my parents towards some sort of physical
> activity (which is probably why we went camping every summer even though my
> mom wasn't keen on it) and why there were definitely rules about mealtimes
> and limits on snacks, etc. I have seen the argument about that kind of
> "infringement on a child's freedom" actually causing problems later in life,
> and speaking of theory vs. specifics, I can agree with it in theory...but
> what I see in my own life is the opposite: When I think of how hard my
> parents worked on trying to teach me healthy habits, to me as an adult that
> is more of a motivator, not less, to try and lead a healthy life. Is there
> anyone out there not with me on this? Are there no adults on this board who
> can say they "turned out alright" in some area of their lives, not in spite
> of the way they were parented (if they were parented with SOME degree of
> rules, as most of my generation were) but because of it?
> Again, I do believe in unschooling principles and I'm definitely not
> advocating excessive and uncalled for regulation of a child life. I'm
> playing devil's advocate so to speak, only when I see "all or nothing"
> reasoning about parenting (vs proactive, careful, balanced reasoning),
> which just makes me shrug in an "oh my, the pendulum doeth swing" kind of
> way -kwim?
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 2:26 AM, Joyce Fetteroll <jfetteroll@...>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Apr 20, 2008, at 9:00 PM, Barbara Perez wrote:
> >
> > > As a parent, when a child that doesn't know better wants
> > > something that I know will be harmful to them,
> >
> > Kids want us to protect them from harm. It would be a betrayal of
> > their trust if we stood by and let them get hurt. If my husband stood
> > by while I cut my finger off with a chain saw, I'd be pretty pissed!
> >
> > The issue is what the definition of "harmful" is. Some parents draw
> > the harmful line at Twinkies and TV and "too much" computer and R-
> > rated movies and advertising and sugar and meat and more than one
> > cookie ...
> >
> > A good question to ask, not as a hand tying rule but as an aid as
> > someone is making the transition from no to yes, is, "Who's going to
> > die?"
> >
> > So, what harm are you talking about? Real life examples are more
> > useful than vagueness.
> >
> > > I think that is a terrific
> > > time for them to learn about moderation, and discernment, and that
> > > not all
> > > foods/activities/etc in our big happy world are created equal.
> >
> > We should be discussing the world as we go along in life not grasping
> > at teachable moments. Too often "teachable moments" is a parent
> > internally saying "You're wrong. I'm right. I need you to see the
> > right way."
> >
> > If my daughter comes for a second bowl of ice cream she'd appreciate
> > me saying "We're eating in 15 minutes." Then she can use the
> > information to make a more informed choice. As part of her decision
> > making, she might ask what we're having. :-) The right answer is
> > whatever she decides, not what I think she should do. Part of living
> > together, she will have gathered the nutritional value of food but
> > even if she decides she'd rather have more ice cream than dinner,
> > it's not a forever decision where this one experience will kill her
> > or where forever after she'll decide to have ice cream instead of
> > dinner. She can use the freedom and experience to assess when it's
> > right for *her* to have something other than dinner.
> >
> > We learn best with the freedom to explore. Part of that freedom is
> > trying things out to see what happens *to us*. Part of that freedom
> > is the freedom to put up with the bad parts of something for a while
> > to get the good parts.
> >
> > If child is unhappy and feels stuck in a place better than saying no
> > to what they're doing is to expand their world so there is more to
> > choose from. Help them find something else rather than make them do
> > something else.
> >
> > But, again, without a specific example, that's only vaguely helpful.
> >
> > Joyce
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
> >
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

melissa_hice

>
> People are born to development normally, to survive, to thrive. We
> don't need all this intervention and special treatment. If we did,
> humans would not populate the planet.
>
> Alysia
>
I haven't posted lately, but this one got me thinking. My dd(9) and I
have been listening to the "Little House" series on cd. What did
people in Laura's days do when their 8 month old had "speech delays"?
Probably nothing. I am thinking back then, nobody knew much about
speech therapy and such and probably just assumed their kid would
eventually talk like everyone else.

Just thinking here!

Melissa

melissa_hice

>
> People are born to development normally, to survive, to thrive. We
> don't need all this intervention and special treatment. If we did,
> humans would not populate the planet.
>
> Alysia
>
I haven't posted lately, but this one got me thinking. My dd(9) and I
have been listening to the "Little House" series on cd. What did
people in Laura's days do when their 8 month old had "speech delays"?
Probably nothing. I am thinking back then, nobody knew much about
speech therapy and such and probably just assumed their kid would
eventually talk like everyone else.

Just thinking here!

Melissa

[email protected]

-----Original Message-----
From: rabbits3arewe <rabbits3arewe@...>

I am new to this list. I posted with a book recommendation that I
think is very supportive of unschooling philosophies and asked for
other books to read. A mom responded and expressed concerns for her
child. I gave her a suggestion based on what we did that was
successful. Suddenly things are snowballing.

-=-=-=-=-=-

That's why we suggest that new members read for a week or two and read
the archives for a while before they post.

It's hard to "get the feel" of a list and its posters in just a few
days.

Anything that is posted that is counter to promoting an open, trusting,
respectful relationship with your child will be questioned.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

I have been told that what I did for my child was dangerous and that
my kids won't trust me because I'm not going to let them binge on
Twinkies.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

I think you are misunderstanding---or putting a weird spin on it.

No one said it was "dangerous." It certainly seems like an
over-reaction. What was written was that speech therapy for an eight
month old is drastic and unnecessary---and could potentially color your
(and others') view of your child (as "damaged" or "faulty" or
"defective"). I've never known of an eight month old who could speak
yet, so why would there need to be an intervention? I know you wrote
that there were early "signs"---but that's like saying a four month old
is delayed in walking because he's not making some certain kind of leg
motions or because he decided to crawl backwards for a while. Or a five
year old is delayed in reading because she's not writing her name yet.

Early intervention *can* be harmful (not dangerous). It can damage the
relationship between parent and child. Not that an eight month old will
know his mom ever even *did* anything about his speech! <g> But in the
mom's mind, she thinks she "fixed" a problem. THAT can snowball!

It's that way with reading: schools think that they "teach" reading
with all their lessons and tricks and pressure, but in reality the
child would have come to reading in just about the same time---withOUT
all that unnecessary drilling. Patience is BIG. HUGE, but unfortunately
an under-appreciated and under-used virtue. <g>

The Twinkie thang---no one said "binge on Twinkies" but you. Forbidding
something---even for their own good---only backfires.

Better is to discuss the pros and cons and let them make decisions (AND
accepting those choices as OK!!!). Even eating *only* Twinkies for a
week won't kill a person or even permanently damage him. But I doubt
that would be the choice anyone would make if given a wide choice of
food options. Some kids seem to thrive on nothing but boxed mac &
cheese and chicken fingers. But not forever---in a healthy home with
lots of choices. *Eventually* he'll branch out---if his eating habits
are accepted and he's given time to explore food in his own time.

-=-=-=-=-=-

Is this how people on this list normally treat each other?

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Meaning....will things posted that are contrary to an open, respectful,
trusting parent/child relationship be questioned? You betcha!

If you are looking for a list that will support early interventions,
I'm afraid this really won't be a good one for you. A LOT of the
problems with schools (and in our society, in general) stem from the
idea that we want everyone doing everything at the same rate as
everyone else---and FASTER/SOONER is BETTER. You won't find unschoolers
promoting that.

Unschooling accepts that everyone grows and learns at different rates.
It's not that we won't ever pursue aid, it's just that we will give a
child more time to develop and accept that he may not be "on time"
developmentally. We use the word "yet" a lot. <g>

~Kelly

Kelly Lovejoy
Conference Coordinator
Live and Learn Unschooling Conference
http://www.LiveandLearnConference.org