Lynn Allen

What I see people being concerned with is a
hypothetical newbie-or-potential unschooler coming to
the list (or another list, or an unschooling group
support meeting) with the urgent question, "But how on
earth do they learn geography (science, history,
etc.)?" -- which we all know happens all the time. And
then not reading very closely, or listening very hard,
and staying around for about five minutes, and somehow
just remembering vaguely that someone said something
about putting up a map or getting a microscope. And
then deciding that that's what unschooling is -- you
"teach" geography by putting up a map, which magically
results in your child being able to identify the major
rivers of the world and the imports and exports of
Brazil. And then putting up a map, leaving it there
and saying nothing about it, not using it herself, and
a month later realizing indignantly that not only do
the kids appear not to have noticed it, they still
can't find their own state on the map and don't know
what hemisphere Asia is in. Which means unschooling
has failed and they need a curriculum, or at least a
lot more "structure." And they go all over ridiculing
unschooling and telling everyone that unschoolers
don't know what they're talking about and their kids
are all ignoramuses.

Do I think this is a ridiculous fear and that this
could never happen? No, of course not. I think it
happens all the time. Most people don't get
unschooling
even if they try, or think they've tried. Most people
don't think very hard, or read very carefully. In my
opinion. They fall back on convention and popular
opinion because it's the easiest thing to do and it
makes their brain hurt to think anything too out of
the ordinary.

I know. I've done it.

So I do understand the concerns, because I think we
encounter people like this all the time -- the people
who say, "Well, my son never asked me to teach him
analytic geometry, no matter how many pattern blocks I
left on the coffee table, so I decided to stop
unschooling" or "We could never be unschoolers because
the kids never want to learn anything -- they just
have fun all day" (auugghhhh!). The thing is, I don't
think you can blame strewing, or the people who
advocate strewing, for the misunderstanding of all
those people. Certainly on this list, I can't imagine
how anyone who reads with their brain engaged for more
than a few days could actually come away with the
impression that unschooling was just about changing
your "teaching style" (i.e., throwing away the
mandatory geography workbooks and putting up maps)
rather than your whole attitude toward education
(i.e., geography is just part of life and the world,
and in a rich, supportive environment kids will
naturally and easily learn all they need or want to
know about it). And if they do come away with that
impression (I'm absolutely positive there are people
who do) they would have anyway, whether anyone talked
about strewing or not.

Strewing is about *creating* that rich, supportive
environment that makes learning fun and effortless,
not about being a new and improved technique for
inserting unwanted information into the brains of the
unwilling.

That there are people who may misinterpret the term
doesn't make it any less valuable to do it, just as
the fact that there are people who read the word
"unschooling" as meaning "neglect" doesn't mean we
should abandon the term, or the lifestyle.

having said all that . . .

> Having spent many years helping people lose the
> schoolish agenda, it baffled
> me to be accused hard and fast of all kinds of
> manipulative evil. At this
> point it's just an "Oh huh," and "I know you are,
> but what am I" mass of
> nonsense. Or maybe that's how it started out.

This is just weird. I haven't seen any accusations or
name-calling or rudeness or anything except honest,
abstract discussions of a very interesting issue. I
happen to think the qualms about strewing are
misguided too, but I think they're well-intentioned
and not personal at all.

Lynn

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

averyschmidt

> So I do understand the concerns, because I think we
> encounter people like this all the time -- the people
> who say, "Well, my son never asked me to teach him
> analytic geometry, no matter how many pattern blocks I
> left on the coffee table, so I decided to stop
> unschooling" or "We could never be unschoolers because
> the kids never want to learn anything -- they just
> have fun all day"

Yes. I truly believe that the people who will succeed at
understanding unschooling are the people who for whatever reason
really *want* to understand it. I have a friend, a former
homeschooler, who "tried" unschooling briefly. The only problem was
that she fully expected her kids to just naturally keep up to grade
level of their own volition. I also remember her bringing the kids
to the library so they could pick their own topics to *study* and
being almost insulted that they didn't want to study *anything*.
When I tried to talk to her more about the philosophy behind it her
eyes would practically glaze over. The fact was she didn't really
*want* to get it, she just wanted to take an easier road to the same
destination (grade level). When she realized that no such road
existed and she had to change her goals as well for unschooling to
work, she went back to school at home, and then shortly after that
put her kids back in school.

I truly believe that the people who will succeed at understanding
unschooling are the people who for whatever reason really *want* to
understand it. And those people will continue reading and thinking
well past the point where they could possibly have the idea
that "learning as a by-product of a busy joyful life" means that
parents need not do anything but watch soap operas.

Patti

pam sorooshian

On Jan 3, 2005, at 3:06 PM, Lynn Allen wrote:

> having said all that . . .
>
>> Having spent many years helping people lose the
>> schoolish agenda, it baffled
>> me to be accused hard and fast of all kinds of
>> manipulative evil. At this
>> point it's just an "Oh huh," and "I know you are,
>> but what am I" mass of
>> nonsense. Or maybe that's how it started out.
>
> This is just weird. I haven't seen any accusations or
> name-calling or rudeness or anything except honest,
> abstract discussions of a very interesting issue. I
> happen to think the qualms about strewing are
> misguided too, but I think they're well-intentioned
> and not personal at all.

"All this seems so contrived to me."

" I'd feel I was being disrespectful and I wouldn't be surprised if my
kids chose to have no interest in such an underhanded affair."

"To me, it's contrived, manipulating and disrespectful- all
antithetical to unschooling.

"And that seems manipulative to me."

"How is this not trying to manipulate a child?"

"I don't think I'd fault anyone, but I wouldn't consider it
unschooling, either."
".. it isn't very unschool-ish either because it underhanded and
manipulative."


--pam

[email protected]

So it's rude or "personal" to say that doing something seems contrived or
manipulative or disrespectful or not-unschooling? It's rude to give
someone honest feedback?

How can we discuss unschooling if we're not supposed to give honest
opinions of various actions and activities? Would it be better of we all
just nod and agree? If people are truly here to learn about unschooling,
why are they unwilling to examine their ideas and actions?

And it's interesting how you don't consider it rude or personal to say
that certain ideas make you think of the thought police, or are "utterly
ridiculous" or the oh-so-polite "Wow. Amazing how that works both ways."?
I would much prefer to have someone honestly tell me that something I'm
doing seems disrespectful or contrived - that gives me the opportunity to
look at what I'm doing and maybe even grow a bit...

Pot and kettle and all...

Dar
On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 19:46:50 -0800 pam sorooshian <pamsoroosh@...>
writes:
>
>
> On Jan 3, 2005, at 3:06 PM, Lynn Allen wrote:
>
> > having said all that . . .
> >
> >> Having spent many years helping people lose the
> >> schoolish agenda, it baffled
> >> me to be accused hard and fast of all kinds of
> >> manipulative evil. At this
> >> point it's just an "Oh huh," and "I know you are,
> >> but what am I" mass of
> >> nonsense. Or maybe that's how it started out.
> >
> > This is just weird. I haven't seen any accusations or
> > name-calling or rudeness or anything except honest,
> > abstract discussions of a very interesting issue. I
> > happen to think the qualms about strewing are
> > misguided too, but I think they're well-intentioned
> > and not personal at all.
>
> "All this seems so contrived to me."
>
> " I'd feel I was being disrespectful and I wouldn't be surprised if
> my
> kids chose to have no interest in such an underhanded affair."
>
> "To me, it's contrived, manipulating and disrespectful- all
> antithetical to unschooling.
>
> "And that seems manipulative to me."
>
> "How is this not trying to manipulate a child?"
>
> "I don't think I'd fault anyone, but I wouldn't consider it
> unschooling, either."
> ".. it isn't very unschool-ish either because it underhanded and
> manipulative."
>
>
> --pam
>
>
>
> "List Posting Policies" are provided in the files area of this
> group.
>
> Visit the Unschooling website and message boards:
> http://www.unschooling.com
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
freeform@...
http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=freeformlife
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

pam sorooshian

On Jan 3, 2005, at 9:07 PM, freeform@... wrote:

> So it's rude or "personal" to say that doing something seems contrived
> or
> manipulative or disrespectful or not-unschooling?

You forgot "underhanded."

Just pointing out that some of us have now been told that something we
do and recommend is contrived, manipulative, disrespectful, and
underhanded. Your definition of insulting must be very different than
mine if these don't qualify.

>>>And it's interesting how you don't consider it rude or personal to
say
that certain ideas make you think of the thought police,<<<

I said that I am right now in the middle of reading "1984" and the
concern with what people are "thinking" made me think of the "Thought
Police" in that book. Just an interesting connection to something else
- just one idea leading to another - not accusing anybody of being
"Thought Police."

-pam

Danielle Conger

== So it's rude or "personal" to say that doing something seems
contrived or manipulative or disrespectful or not-unschooling? It's rude
to give someone honest feedback? ===

How is it that negative words like "manipulative," "disrespectful, "
"underhanded affair," "contrived," and "stupid" are merely honest
feedback while a plain, simple "Wow. Amazing how that works both ways."
that was honestly pointing out without negative words or punctuation
that the exact same thing that was being accused was also being
perpetrated by the accuser in that exact same post: "Maybe including the
full quote will help, rather than just a snippet taken out of context:"?

Seriously. This is the second time you've expressed your ire over my
words, yet I didn't say "duh" or "stupid" or "underhanded" or "utterly
ridiculous" or any of the other things that have been said. I expressed
genuine suprise and amazement that someone could accuse another poster
of not using the whole quote, and then proceed actually to do that very
same thing in that very same post without thinking anything wrong with it.

== And it's interesting how you don't consider it rude or personal to
say that certain ideas make you think of the thought police, or are
"utterly ridiculous" or the oh-so-polite "Wow. Amazing how that works
both ways."? I would much prefer to have someone honestly tell me that
something I'm doing seems disrespectful or contrived - that gives me the
opportunity to look at what I'm doing and maybe even grow a bit... ===

I was, in fact, honestly telling you that I was surprised at the
discrepency in your post and that you had applied rules of engagement
to others that apparently did not apply to you.

--Danielle

http://www.danielleconger.com/Homeschool/Welcomehome.html

>
>

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/3/05 5:47:36 PM, nnylnell@... writes:

<< And
then deciding that that's what unschooling is -- you
"teach" geography by putting up a map, which magically
results in your child being able to identify the major
rivers of the world and the imports and exports of
Brazil. >>

No, I don't think so, because "it's not teaching" is core and central.

And anyone could hear a little bit of ANYthing and go off and screw it up.
"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." But this list has rarely stopped
with "a little bit" of anything! <g>

-=-And then putting up a map, leaving it there
and saying nothing about it, not using it herself, and
a month later realizing indignantly that not only do
the kids appear not to have noticed it, they still
can't find their own state on the map and don't know
what hemisphere Asia is in. Which means unschooling
has failed and they need a curriculum, or at least a
lot more "structure."-=-

The problem would be not doing, though.
And we always encourage do, Do, DO!

-=-And they go all over ridiculing
unschooling and telling everyone that unschoolers
don't know what they're talking about and their kids
are all ignoramuses.-=-

Wouldn't that be "ignorami"?

-=-Most people don't get
unschooling
even if they try, or think they've tried.-=-

It's not that easy to understand.
People do it for a year or two and still get new epiphanies and go up another
level.

Strewing is not an evil practice, nor is it likely to stall someone out.
Fear of strewing could stall someone out, and this discussion could make
people hesitant, which is a bad thing.

-=-So I do understand the concerns, because I think we
encounter people like this all the time -- the people
who say, "Well, my son never asked me to teach him
analytic geometry, no matter how many pattern blocks I
left on the coffee table, so I decided to stop
unschooling" -=-

Better with the blocks than without. Maybe while the mom wasn't learning
about natural learning, the kid was learning about geometry (without the mathem
atical notations, just in English or in visual and kinesthetic ways) and
patterns. The point is he was still learning even if the mother wasn't.

-=-Strewing is about *creating* that rich, supportive
environment that makes learning fun and effortless,
not about being a new and improved technique for
inserting unwanted information into the brains of the
unwilling.-=-

Yep!

Sandra

averyschmidt

> Strewing is not an evil practice, nor is it likely to stall
someone out.
> Fear of strewing could stall someone out, and this discussion
could make
> people hesitant, which is a bad thing.

I don't think strewing (as in creating a rich environment) has been
said even one time by anyone to be an evil practice. On the
contrary, I see agreement that it's an important part of unschooling.
I'm not sure what you mean by hesitant... hesistant to unschool?
Hesitant to act on their own fears and insecurities without
examining them more closely?
Those handwriting workbooks I told about in another post... I was a
twinge disappointed when they lost interest. It was about me, not
about them. Now and then I want to pull them out and
suggest/encourage their use, thereby making them More Important than
whatever else they're spending time on. I don't think it's a bad
thing that I'm hesitant to do that.

Sometimes my old fears about too much tv re-surface (like on a day
that it's on more than usual) and I have an urge to just turn it
off. I don't think it's a bad thing that I'm hesitant to do that.
Sometimes hesitating gives us the space to reflect and make a better
decision.

Patti

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/3/05 10:13:10 PM, freeform@... writes:

<< I would much prefer to have someone honestly tell me that something I'm
doing seems disrespectful or contrived - that gives me the opportunity to
look at what I'm doing and maybe even grow a bit...
>>

I don't want to grow out of advising people that strewing is a good idea.
I would prefer for others to grow into seeing what it can and has
accomplished in many lives, and not insult it gratuitously.

Sandra

nnylnell

> >> Having spent many years helping people lose the
> >> schoolish agenda, it baffled
> >> me to be accused hard and fast of all kinds of
> >> manipulative evil. At this
> >> point it's just an "Oh huh," and "I know you are,
> >> but what am I" mass of
> >> nonsense. Or maybe that's how it started out.
> >
> > This is just weird. I haven't seen any accusations or
> > name-calling or rudeness or anything except honest,
> > abstract discussions of a very interesting issue. I
> > happen to think the qualms about strewing are
> > misguided too, but I think they're well-intentioned
> > and not personal at all.
>
> "All this seems so contrived to me."
>
> " I'd feel I was being disrespectful and I wouldn't be surprised if my
> kids chose to have no interest in such an underhanded affair."
>
> "To me, it's contrived, manipulating and disrespectful- all
> antithetical to unschooling.
>
> "And that seems manipulative to me."
>
> "How is this not trying to manipulate a child?"
>
> "I don't think I'd fault anyone, but I wouldn't consider it
> unschooling, either."
> ".. it isn't very unschool-ish either because it underhanded and
> manipulative."

I don't think people were saying that strewing *as it is practiced by
the people participating in this discussion* is manipulative,
underhanded, disrespectful, etc. I.e., it wasn't a personal attack. It
was a warning, or maybe just a question, about how it could be
unfortunate *if* someone who was new to unschooling or didn't
understand it very well saw strewing as a way to achieve specific
academic goals and got all anxious and pressured their kids if they
didn't see that specific academic learning taking place.

I was saying that I think they're right that that could and does
happen, but it isn't the fault of anyone on this list and we shouldn't
worry about it.

Lynn

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/4/05 3:54:13 AM, patti.schmidt2@... writes:

<< Yes. I truly believe that the people who will succeed at

understanding unschooling are the people who for whatever reason

really *want* to understand it. >>

Naturally, because they had a reason to need to do it?
<g>

The people who learn how unschooling works will be those who had a reason to
want to learn it, and found information on their own, and applied it on their
own.

And it might be worth reminding *them* sometimes that they learned about
unschooling the same way their kids can learn about something they need to know
someday.

-=-The fact was she didn't really

*want* to get it, she just wanted to take an easier road to the same

destination (grade level). When she realized that no such road

existed and she had to change her goals as well for unschooling to

work, she went back to school at home, and then shortly after that

put her kids back in school.

-=-

Those stories are sad.
Bummer you couldn't have at least gotten her to try strewing for a while.
She might've found them picking things up naturally. But probably not without
months of deschooling, since their days at home were not time off school.

I wonder (changing the subject, I think) whether families that severely
school at home would require MORE than a month per year prescription to recover?
Those poor kids probably didn't even have summers off. If a school year
(U.S. typical) is 180 days with 185 days of holiday and weekends, do school at
home kids really get 185 days out of school? Where do they go?

Poor kids.

Sandra

nnylnell

> << And
> then deciding that that's what unschooling is -- you
> "teach" geography by putting up a map, which magically
> results in your child being able to identify the major
> rivers of the world and the imports and exports of
> Brazil. >>
>
> No, I don't think so, because "it's not teaching" is core and central.
>
> And anyone could hear a little bit of ANYthing and go off and screw
it up.
> "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." But this list has rarely
stopped
> with "a little bit" of anything! <g>


Yes, that was my point exactly. Lots of people will misinterpret
advice given on this list. Lots of people will come here and leave not
having understood unschooling. It's not our fault. It's the fault of
the fact that unschooling is hard to understand and most people don't
want to understand it.

> -=-And they go all over ridiculing
> unschooling and telling everyone that unschoolers
> don't know what they're talking about and their kids
> are all ignoramuses.-=-
>
> Wouldn't that be "ignorami"?

lol . . . depends on whether it's a Latin or Greek root I guess . . .

> -=-Most people don't get
> unschooling
> even if they try, or think they've tried.-=-
>
> It's not that easy to understand.
> People do it for a year or two and still get new epiphanies and go
up another
> level.

Yes, that's true.

> Strewing is not an evil practice, nor is it likely to stall someone out.
> Fear of strewing could stall someone out, and this discussion could
make
> people hesitant, which is a bad thing.

Actually, I believe we've now heard from a number of people about how
helpful this discussion has been and how they now understand strewing
better and feel better about unschooling.

Lynn

nnylnell

Ok, had to look it up . . . it *is* "ignoramuses":

http://dictionary.reference.com/wordoftheday/archive/2004/05/08.html

thanks to Sandra for provoking my curiosity . . .

> -=-And they go all over ridiculing
> unschooling and telling everyone that unschoolers
> don't know what they're talking about and their kids
> are all ignoramuses.-=-
>
> Wouldn't that be "ignorami"?

pam sorooshian

On Jan 4, 2005, at 8:18 AM, averyschmidt wrote:

> I don't think strewing (as in creating a rich environment) has been
> said even one time by anyone to be an evil practice.

Patti - maybe you missed this post from Holly? (She didn't say it was
evil, she used "disrespectful" and "underhanded.")

***I think I'm also having a problem with strewing. It seems to me
people are talking about strewing items to catch the interest of a
child so that they might learn something new. If I bring home
anything that would interest a family member, whether it's something
they're interested in now or not, I tell them. If I bring home items
I know they're not interested in but hope that they will be, that's
my issue. I'd feel I was being disrespectful and I wouldn't be
surprised if my kids chose to have no interest in such an underhanded
affair.***

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/4/05 9:42:56 AM, patti.schmidt2@... writes:

<< I don't think strewing (as in creating a rich environment) has been

said even one time by anyone to be an evil practice. >>

I guess you must missed it.

Strewing as leaving something without comment was thrashed needlessly.

Explora, that science museum would not work as it does if each child were
interviewed at the beginning and then assigned to those things in which he had
demonstrated an interest. And if at each table there were detailed instructions
and a thorough explanation of what should happen, and why, and what
particular scientific principle was being demonstrated, it wouldn't be the wonderland
that it is.

-=-I'm not sure what you mean by hesitant... hesistant to unschool?

Hesitant to act on their own fears and insecurities without

examining them more closely? -=-

Hesitant to put a map on the wall because they read one time that it's
manipulative and underhanded. Hesitant to buy a microscope unless or until a child
submits a requisition.
Hesitant to strew because it was insulted roundly.

Sandra

averyschmidt

> Hesitant to put a map on the wall because they read one time that
it's
> manipulative and underhanded. Hesitant to buy a microscope unless
or until a child
> submits a requisition.
> Hesitant to strew because it was insulted roundly.

I honestly don't see how an intelligent person could come away from
this conversation with a misunderstanding that drastic.

Patti

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/4/2005 12:02:20 PM Mountain Standard Time,
patti.schmidt2@... writes:
> Hesitant to put a map on the wall because they read one time that
it's
> manipulative and underhanded. Hesitant to buy a microscope unless
or until a child
> submits a requisition.
> Hesitant to strew because it was insulted roundly.

I honestly don't see how an intelligent person could come away from
this conversation with a misunderstanding that drastic.
=========
Hesitation isn't drastic.
Hesitation is a slowing down of a natural process that could be zipping along
if people were telling what's good about strewing and learning instead of
what the alleged dangers and evils are.

Sandra


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

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/4/2005 2:55:46 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
nnylnell@... writes:

Ok, had to look it up . . . it *is* "ignoramuses":<<<<<

Someone called me a dignoramass last week! <g>

~Kelly





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

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/4/2005 1:04:28 PM Mountain Standard Time,
kbcdlovejo@... writes:
Ok, had to look it up . . . it *is* "ignoramuses":<<<<<
-----------------------
"Cactuses" is okay now too.

I was joking, not trying to be an ingoramus.

Here we refer to the doofi, sometimes. It doesn't matter if the "real"
plural is doofuses. Doofi sounds cool.

Sandra


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

pam sorooshian

On Jan 4, 2005, at 9:52 AM, averyschmidt wrote:

>
>> Hesitant to put a map on the wall because they read one time that
> it's
>> manipulative and underhanded. Hesitant to buy a microscope unless
> or until a child
>> submits a requisition.
>> Hesitant to strew because it was insulted roundly.
>
> I honestly don't see how an intelligent person could come away from
> this conversation with a misunderstanding that drastic.


Lots and lots of reasonably intelligent people have read about
unschooling and concluded that unschooling is just waiting for your
child to initiate learning. This idea that strewing is manipulative and
underhanded feeds that fallacy.

-pam

[email protected]

<< > I honestly don't see how an intelligent person could come away from
> this conversation with a misunderstanding that drastic.

<<Lots and lots of reasonably intelligent people have read about
unschooling and concluded that unschooling is just waiting for your
child to initiate learning. This idea that strewing is manipulative and
underhanded feeds that fallacy. >>

This is my concern too.
I think opinions have been stated and a bad early premise has been defended
at length.

Sandra