Kolleen

>>on 1/26/02 8:45 PM, Kolleen at Kolleen@... wrote:
>> Would you whack a child upside the head with words so they *get* the gist
>> of what you're saying? It would prolly 'stab them in the gut' if a parent
>> or respected elder did this.
>
>Joyce wrote:
>That's taking the analogy a bit far! Even adults who say they like a whack
>up side the head don't litterally want a whack up side the head ;-) What
>they are seeking is what they feel they need.

The words I used was 'whack upside the head with words'. I meant with
words, not literally.

So if a child asked you for the twentieth time 'why is the sky blue',
would you say 'it reflects from the sky/atmosphere, but you KNEW that' or
would you just answer the question yet again.

I know I would answer the question again, because sometimes the reason
why the kid is asking again isn't as aparent as the answer they are
seeking.


>We *can't* expect a group to be what we need. The most productive groups are
>specialized. (As a mother is specialized to her child.) So our
>responsibility isn't to demand that the group change when a group is meeting
>it's own internal needs and not ours but to find a group that already meets
>our own specialized needs.

So do you suggest that this list splits into the 'bluntunschooling.com'
and to the 'politeunschooling.com'?

*disclaimer* I'm not saying that blunt isn't polite, but I'm at a loss
for words right now.

Would that then specialize the two different POV the group has?

Or do you suggest that the different people just keep posting with their
posting style and the smaller or more timid voices don't chime in?

I'm just trying to think this through outloud in regards to the whole
situation. Maybe if you outline how you think it should be I can put it
all in perspective?

>
>If we expect any group to be other than what it is trying to be, who's at
>fault, us or the group?

I've been involved with a group of parents here in my area that are
trying to get a democratic school going. We had a three day trial last
week and it was a great success. 12 kids and various parents and
'teachers'. What was interesting was the time when one of the kids said
they hated the meetings and wanted everyone to just say their piece. One
of the adults pointed out about how then only the people who are more
assertive get heard, and the quiet ones will naturally tend to not speak
up. The democratic process allowed even the 4 year olds with the shyest
personalitys get their voice out there.

It was amazing to see how some of the little ones or very shy ones were
so involved by the 2nd day and they were out their with their ideas by
the 3rd. Some of the ideas were awesome and from an fresh POV.

Imagine how it would of been if we just let the loud voices talk with
their already solidified viewpoints?


>If someone's goal is to provide a place where specialized needs are met,
>should they compromise meeting those needs for the sake of meeting the needs
>of more people *just* because people arrive expecting their own needs to be
>met?

Good question Joyce. Maybe the list owner/ originator would jump in on
this and let us know what vision she had. Then maybe we can keep that in
mind when issues arise and it will keep in more in perspective.

If she had a clearcut vision of how it runs then we can all benefit.

If she wanted a place for the experienced ones to talk about unschooling
and the newbies to like it or leave it, then it has strayed from that
vision.

If she saw an organic type of list that evolves according to the members
at the moment, then it sounds like its humming along fine.

This is definately a subject that I defer to the owner on and respect the
wishes of their vision.

>I think it's our expectations of everything being for everyone that are at
>fault not what one particular list or person provides. Even this list where
>parenting and unschooling ideas are examined isn't for everyone. Some people
>*are* just looking for support and "good job" pats on the back for how far
>they're progressing. They want to share without it being held up to public
>scrutiny.

And I haven't seen just pats on the back here, have you? I've seen
members jump in and put everything up for scrutiny. Some people pat, some
people scrutinize. Some people ask a lot of questions to the poster so
they get their juices flowing. Its IS a group from what I see.

Do you feel that since the end of November its turned into just a 'huggy'
commiserating list?

>And if someone wanted help questioning herself and wanted to reach a certain
>point through examining her ideas, how far would she get on a purely
>supportive list that told her she was doing great?

She wouldn't. But she also wouldn't get far if she unsubscribed or didn't
ask because the experts responding were rude and inpatient.

I thought this list evolved into a balance of voices. Not just a
reflection of one voice.


regards,
kolleen

Fetteroll

on 1/27/02 1:15 PM, Kolleen at Kolleen@... wrote:

> So if a child asked you for the twentieth time 'why is the sky blue',
> would you say 'it reflects from the sky/atmosphere, but you KNEW that' or
> would you just answer the question yet again.

What should I do, or what *would* I do? ;-) *If* they're spread out over
many months and she it wasn't the type of thing she'd do as a joke, I'd try
to answer again in a different way.

> Or do you suggest that the different people just keep posting with their
> posting style and the smaller or more timid voices don't chime in?
>
> I'm just trying to think this through outloud in regards to the whole
> situation. Maybe if you outline how you think it should be I can put it
> all in perspective?

If a forum is trying to reach as many as possible then it needs a variety of
approaches because different people learn differently. One way will fall
flat but another ring the bell. Some people need their hand held. Some
people need information.

One problem is sometimes someone expects her hand held and gets upset that
some want her to ask herself some deep questions. (Perhaps the exact
technique that the last new person appreciated!) I don't know that there's a
solution to that except for people learning to be sensitive to the words
they use. But people perceive things so differently so even the most
inoffensive post can rile someone up!

The thing is that I don't think a list can remain about unschooling
*without* asking difficult questions and examining things.

> If she had a clearcut vision of how it runs then we can all benefit.

She's mentioned a number of times over the years that she trusts people to
be adults and work out their differences :-) She was rather bummed out about
having to have moderators. And she likes Sandra's style.

> Do you feel that since the end of November its turned into just a 'huggy'
> commiserating list?

I feel that it has been kinder, but the opportunities to challege that
haven't come along. Until the past few days, that is. The way people
perceived as "difficult" have been reacted to, the list hasn't really come
through the test of gentler and kinder with flying colors. :-/ It's great to
be kinder to newbies, but how we handle disagreements and difficult posts is
a truer test.

Joyce


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

Kolleen

>It's great to
>be kinder to newbies, but how we handle disagreements and difficult posts is
>a truer test.
>Joyce

Yes, the list split in November when one person voluntarily left to start
another list after being exasperated during a challanging time.

Now, with Sarah, it appears to have happened again.


kolleen