rumpleteasermom

I think the TV issue is a touchy one. What you have to remember is
that given unlimited Television as one option in a houseful of
options, many kids will watch a lot and get bored with it and move on
to other things. That is exactly what happened with my girls. My son
however, has a problem with it. (Well, it's one of many problems for
him.) He will sit and do nothing else for hours on end and no, it is
not all educational television. And some of it is stuff he knows
byheart he has seen it so much. With him, it became a health issue in
more than one way so we stepped in and did something. We worked out
exactly which shows he REALLY wanted to watch and which times he would
go do something else. Now his life revolves around the TV schedule
but at least he gets a little exercise from time to time now.

But it souds to me like you think all children would be like Wyndham.
That's not true. I know many children who have self-regulated and
now watch very little TV (my girls included.) I think there are a lot
of kids out there like Wyndham, but it is important to be certain that
the child has a real problem before you take action.

I think I understand why you disagree with the TV thing as presented
here, but please give it a little thought. Maybe yours just need a
little time to come to terms with it on there own.

Bridget


In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., "Betty Holder" <ninnyridge03@p...> wrote:

>
> I also have to disagree with the TV watching. NO CHILD,
unschooled, homeschooled, public schooled, or anything else can
benefit from watching ALL the TV they want!! Sorry folks, but that's
just my opinion. There's far too much GARBAGE on TV to have a
positive influence. THere is no requirement of thinking for a child
when they watch hours of TV. I don't care how *Good* the programs
are. Children develop mentally by THINKING, using their imagination,
creativity!!!!!!!
> How can people think that PS is a bad influence but then can let
the child sit in front of the TV hours on end??? And I don't believe
they are watching *EDUCATIONAL* programs all this time. Children
learn from TV good and bad. Are these parents who allow unlimited TV
being selective about what they watch?
>

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/13/02 6:12:48 AM, ninnyridge03@... writes:

<< Is there any *graduates* of unschooling with success stories to tell?? >>

There used to be lots of such stories in Growing Without Schooling, and back
issues of that are still available. HEM has a column by/about grown
homeschoolers (leans toward unschooling usually). I know several grown and
late-teens unschoolers myself.

<<You see I still have this FEAR that my child is missing something from this
that I will regret years down the road.>>

Nobody learns everything.
Honors students in the best schools don't even get everything that school
offered.

Try to think what your child is missing getting in school that, if he had
gotten that you would regret THAT for years and years. (Think shame,
bullying, pressure, nonsense, friends you would never have met who might not
be good friends in some dangerous ways--think all the worst things you know
about school, and be glad they're missing THAT.)

Think of what you yourself missed. (I don't know what it might be, but I bet
there's some "school thing" you never understood as a kid, or you were just
sick and missed it, or your teachers all happened to skip it, while another
friend in the same school with different teachers had it presented three
times over the years.) When you DID come across a need to know, or the
information suddenly appeared and clicked, how long did it take you to learn
it?

What it takes a seven year old a year to learn will take a fifteen year old
half an hour or so. Waiting can save LOTS of time and frustration.

<< NO CHILD, unschooled, homeschooled, public schooled, or anything else can
benefit from watching ALL the TV they want!! Sorry folks, but that's just my
opinion. There's far too much GARBAGE on TV to have a positive influence. >>

Who will decide what they should watch? My parents liked what they liked,
and had not one clue about what they had never seen. My mom used to turn off
PBS stuff because she didn't want to hear "that noise" (music usually), but
loved dramas about the WWII, and westerns. Her decisions were bad for what
I needed to see and hear. Our tastes and our needs were different.

<<THere is no requirement of thinking for a child when they watch hours of
TV. I don't care how *Good* the programs are. Children develop mentally by
THINKING, using their imagination, creativity!!!!!!!>>

Children think when they watch moments of TV. I don't care how bad the
programs are, they think. But then my kids don't choose to watch bad TV when
there's anything in the world better to do, and I'm sure yours wouldn't
either. They'll turn off GREAT TV if there's something better to do. And
video is the simplest of all to turn off, because they can pick it up again
later.

<<Children develop mentally by THINKING>>

Children think all the time. Children develop mentally by incorporating new
information into what they already know.

<< How can people think that PS is a bad influence but then can let the
child sit in front of the TV hours on end???>>

There are some homeschoolers (Christian homeschooling writings lean heavily
on this) who don't like school because their children will be exposed to
unGodly people and to "humanist lies" and to multiculturalism which they
consider non Biblical. Others just don't think the school's methods lead to
longterm, useful, happy learning. Many of school's methods harm children's
abilities and desires to learn naturally.

From unschoolers, I hear them say that when removed from the school
environment, children can learn in their own best ways, at their own natural
pace, from things that really interest them.

<<And I don't believe they are watching *EDUCATIONAL* programs all this time.
>>

If you divide the world into "educational" and "not educational," unschooling
will be defeated. An "educational" program will not reach someone who
doesn't care, already fully knows, isn't paying attention, or whatever.
Children learn from what sparks their curiosity, from new phrases and
accents, from mysteries and watching Jeopardy, from old Twilight Zone or
Gilligan's Island shows, if they find the material interesting and there's
something they had never thought of before. I wouldn't "assign" or press
ANY of that on anyone, but neither would I snatch it away.

Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/13/02 8:47:47 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:


> Who will decide what they should watch?

I decide that I have to draw the line somewhere. I "censor" all the programs
in my home, including what I'll watch. I hardly ever watch anything that I
wouldn't want my daughter walking in on. I don't get much out of programming
that is supposedly for adults, but seems increasingly luring to younger and
younger audiences. I despise and will not permit in my home:

-Jerry Springer and other garbage talk shows
-Professional Wrestling
-most soap operas
-the Clairol Herbal Essence commercials and similar commercials irritate me
also, so I avoid channels/airtimes that they constanly air on.


We used to have the TV on a lot for background noise, not as a choice, just a
mindless habit. That hardly occurs anymore, especially now that we are
unschooling. I prefer that if my daughter wants to watch something, she come
and ask me, not just sit and surf. Mostly she enjoys the Game Show Channel,
channels like History, Discovery, Food TV, PBS, etc. I am easily annoyed by
the Cartoon Network and most Nickelodean programming, but I still allow her
to watch it occasionally. We keep the computer and televisions in family
rooms only. I don't believe in TVs and VCRs in childrens' rooms, or
unsupervised internet access. I have a TV in my bedroom, and would leave it
on all night like a night light for years (my husband's preference more than
mine), but in the past few months of not bothering to find the remote
control, I have enjoyed not using the TV much at all anymore. I find I have
more time to read, get projects done, and my time doesn't evaporate as
quickly as it used to. My quality of life has improved, and I assume it has
for my kids as well. TV time has become more of a treat, when we plan and pop
popcorn it becomes special time to reflect together, not just a big 'ole
distraction. That's my experience!


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

[email protected]

I am not selective about what my children watch on TV. They don't watch
things they don't understand (sex) or feel scared by (excessive violence). I
simply trust them to choose quality. Which they DO.
One man's garbage is another man's gold.
:o)
~Elissa Cleaveland
"It is nothing short of a miracle that the modern methods of instruction
have
not yet entirely strangled the holy curiosity of inquiry." A. Einstein

susan marie

Hi,

two things here I'd like to respond to--

first, re television. I let them watch what they want, but, we discuss
what they watch A LOT. This is sort of like the book discussion thing.
We realized, in our discussing, that we watch tv two ways - sometimes we
sit and watch the show, and sometimes we just want the background noise
while we are doing something else, like ironing or folding laundry or
cleaning our room or cooking or whatever. My 8 yo dd complained that
during a certain time when she like the tv on for background noise,
there was nothing on worth watching (inc. pbs, nick, cartoon, etc.) I
suggested History, Discovery, or Animal Planet. As an example, we put on
History channel to see what was on, and there was one of those
archaeology type programs and they were trying to find some ancient
civilization. She found that very interesting. My other dd will
generally go with animal planet. Yeah, there's junk on tv, but there's
an awful lot of good stuff too. First, you have to know where it is, and
second, discuss with them how to discern what is and isn't good tv. The
girls got in a discussion one time about some show or other, and they
were disagreeing whether or not it was a worthwhile show. They
eventually concluded that the show glorified the type of girl-cliques in
schools that decide who is in and who is not. So they chose not to watch
it anymore. I just listened, and was not involved in the discussion at
all. For myself, A&E or CNN are my "noise" channels, and as for other
stuff, we tape what interests us and watch it later. We are currently
watching shows from Feb. We only watch one at night, if that, so it
takes a while to see the ones that interest us.

An ongoing discussion we have is to find "pro-homeschooling" kid shows.
This began when older dd complained that there were never any
homeschoolers on tv. So we have started an informal list of shows and
movies that are homeschool-friendly. So far we have the Wild
Thornberrys, Chitty-Chitty Bang Bang (his kids do go to school, when
they feel like it, and this is just fine with him). There's any show
that takes place before the advent of public schools, Swiss Family
Robinson, and others (can't think of them just now, but you get the
idea).

second, although I went to ps, I think I've always been an unschooler at
heart. In second grade, I was allowed to read ahead, read tons on my
own, was reading Nancy Drew books by then. I spent a lot of time in the
woods near our home investigating and learning. My grades almost always
reflected my level of interest - I never could do busy work, and tended
to ignore stuff that was a waste of my time (this drove mom and many
teachers nuts). I remember reading John Holt in college and thinking it
was good stuff. As a teacher, I had a very student-centered, busy, noisy
classroom - this drove other teachers nuts - and this was math and
computer courses in high school. In college I took classes that
interested me, sometimes taking senior level classes to meet group
requirements instead of the easy entry level ones. I know that the stuff
from my education/unedcuation that was worthwhile was not the
workbook/tests/follow the herd stuff, but the unschooling kind of things.

I would think that many of us who are unschooler parents would have
similar stories and experiences of never quite buying into the whole ps
follow the herd, do what you're told, think what you're told. Now we
just get to do it. :-)

peace,
Susan Marie


On Monday, May 13, 2002, at 11:10 AM, Betty Holder wrote:

>
>   -----
>
>
>
>   >Unschooling is way outside of school.<
>
>   Sandra
>
>   I was wondering, were any of the parents who are on this list
> unschooled as children??  I myself am from the *old school* of PS.  I
> was just curious about kids who  have been unschooled and then went on
> to college or whatever afterward.  I'm only hearing about present day
> kids being unschooled and parent's recent dscision to do it.  Is there
> any *graduates* of unschooling with success stories to tell?? You see I
> still have this FEAR that my child is missing something from this that
> I will regret years down the road. Unschooling sounds good and seems to
> work as far as keeping my son happy with learning.  But I'm having
> serious doubts that HE is learning all he will need later.
>
>   I also have to disagree with the TV watching.  NO CHILD, unschooled,
> homeschooled, public schooled, or anything else can benefit from
> watching ALL the TV they want!!  Sorry folks, but that's just my
> opinion.  There's far too much GARBAGE on TV to have a positive
> influence.  THere is no requirement of thinking for a child when they
> watch hours of TV.  I don't care how *Good* the programs are.  Children
> develop mentally by THINKING, using their imagination, creativity!!!!!!!
>   How can people think  that PS is a bad influence but then can let the
> child sit in front of the TV hours on end???  And I don't believe they
> are watching *EDUCATIONAL* programs all this time.  Children learn from
> TV good and bad.  Are these parents who allow unlimited TV being
> selective about what they watch?
>
>   I hope my opinion will not cause anyone to feel I'm being hostile. 
> I'm just disagreeing.  I really glean some good stuff from this list. 
> I cull alot,  too <g> as I'm sure the reat of you do.
>
>   Betty
>
>         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>               ADVERTISEMENT
>             
>       
>       
>
>   ~~~ Don't forget! If you change the topic, change the subject
> line! ~~~
>
>   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>   [email protected]
>
>   Visit the Unschooling website:
>   http://www.unschooling.com
>
>
>
>   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

>
>
> ~~~ Don't forget! If you change the topic, change the subject line! ~~~
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Visit the Unschooling website:
> http://www.unschooling.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Peace,
Susan

There is nothing so secular that it cannot be sacred, and that is one of
the deepest messages of the Incarnation. -- Madeleine L'Engle





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

Tim Traaseth

Hello, I'm new to the list, have been reading through it for a few weeks,
I'm also struggling with the TV issue, my son, 9 yr old, who I just pulled
from ps, would watch TV for days. We just got cable with 100plus channels
and we have never had that, so I am hoping its a novelty thing and it will
wear off. Any one else go through this? I love some of the cable channels
Discovery, CNN, History and etc, but he is choosing Cartoon and Nick? Of
course, when I suggest something its not as cool to him. I guess we will
see how it unravels as the weather outside gets better, we live in
Minnesota and its really hard to say go outside in the 30 below weather!
Thank you all for your opinions and advice, Kelli
----- Original Message -----
From: "susan marie" <scribblers2@...>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2002 9:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-dotcom] Question & disagreement


> Hi,
>
> two things here I'd like to respond to--
>
> first, re television. I let them watch what they want, but, we discuss
> what they watch A LOT. This is sort of like the book discussion thing.
> We realized, in our discussing, that we watch tv two ways - sometimes we
> sit and watch the show, and sometimes we just want the background noise
> while we are doing something else, like ironing or folding laundry or
> cleaning our room or cooking or whatever. My 8 yo dd complained that
> during a certain time when she like the tv on for background noise,
> there was nothing on worth watching (inc. pbs, nick, cartoon, etc.) I
> suggested History, Discovery, or Animal Planet. As an example, we put on
> History channel to see what was on, and there was one of those
> archaeology type programs and they were trying to find some ancient
> civilization. She found that very interesting. My other dd will
> generally go with animal planet. Yeah, there's junk on tv, but there's
> an awful lot of good stuff too. First, you have to know where it is, and
> second, discuss with them how to discern what is and isn't good tv. The
> girls got in a discussion one time about some show or other, and they
> were disagreeing whether or not it was a worthwhile show. They
> eventually concluded that the show glorified the type of girl-cliques in
> schools that decide who is in and who is not. So they chose not to watch
> it anymore. I just listened, and was not involved in the discussion at
> all. For myself, A&E or CNN are my "noise" channels, and as for other
> stuff, we tape what interests us and watch it later. We are currently
> watching shows from Feb. We only watch one at night, if that, so it
> takes a while to see the ones that interest us.
>
> An ongoing discussion we have is to find "pro-homeschooling" kid shows.
> This began when older dd complained that there were never any
> homeschoolers on tv. So we have started an informal list of shows and
> movies that are homeschool-friendly. So far we have the Wild
> Thornberrys, Chitty-Chitty Bang Bang (his kids do go to school, when
> they feel like it, and this is just fine with him). There's any show
> that takes place before the advent of public schools, Swiss Family
> Robinson, and others (can't think of them just now, but you get the
> idea).
>
> second, although I went to ps, I think I've always been an unschooler at
> heart. In second grade, I was allowed to read ahead, read tons on my
> own, was reading Nancy Drew books by then. I spent a lot of time in the
> woods near our home investigating and learning. My grades almost always
> reflected my level of interest - I never could do busy work, and tended
> to ignore stuff that was a waste of my time (this drove mom and many
> teachers nuts). I remember reading John Holt in college and thinking it
> was good stuff. As a teacher, I had a very student-centered, busy, noisy
> classroom - this drove other teachers nuts - and this was math and
> computer courses in high school. In college I took classes that
> interested me, sometimes taking senior level classes to meet group
> requirements instead of the easy entry level ones. I know that the stuff
> from my education/unedcuation that was worthwhile was not the
> workbook/tests/follow the herd stuff, but the unschooling kind of things.
>
> I would think that many of us who are unschooler parents would have
> similar stories and experiences of never quite buying into the whole ps
> follow the herd, do what you're told, think what you're told. Now we
> just get to do it. :-)
>
> peace,
> Susan Marie
>
>
> On Monday, May 13, 2002, at 11:10 AM, Betty Holder wrote:
>
> >
> > -----
> >
> >
> >
> > >Unschooling is way outside of school.<
> >
> > Sandra
> >
> > I was wondering, were any of the parents who are on this list
> > unschooled as children?? I myself am from the *old school* of PS. I
> > was just curious about kids who have been unschooled and then went on
> > to college or whatever afterward. I'm only hearing about present day
> > kids being unschooled and parent's recent dscision to do it. Is there
> > any *graduates* of unschooling with success stories to tell?? You see I
> > still have this FEAR that my child is missing something from this that
> > I will regret years down the road. Unschooling sounds good and seems to
> > work as far as keeping my son happy with learning. But I'm having
> > serious doubts that HE is learning all he will need later.
> >
> > I also have to disagree with the TV watching. NO CHILD, unschooled,
> > homeschooled, public schooled, or anything else can benefit from
> > watching ALL the TV they want!! Sorry folks, but that's just my
> > opinion. There's far too much GARBAGE on TV to have a positive
> > influence. THere is no requirement of thinking for a child when they
> > watch hours of TV. I don't care how *Good* the programs are. Children
> > develop mentally by THINKING, using their imagination, creativity!!!!!!!
> > How can people think that PS is a bad influence but then can let the
> > child sit in front of the TV hours on end??? And I don't believe they
> > are watching *EDUCATIONAL* programs all this time. Children learn from
> > TV good and bad. Are these parents who allow unlimited TV being
> > selective about what they watch?
> >
> > I hope my opinion will not cause anyone to feel I'm being hostile.
> > I'm just disagreeing. I really glean some good stuff from this list.
> > I cull alot, too <g> as I'm sure the reat of you do.
> >
> > Betty
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ~~~ Don't forget! If you change the topic, change the subject
> > line! ~~~
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > [email protected]
> >
> > Visit the Unschooling website:
> > http://www.unschooling.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
>
> >
> >
> > ~~~ Don't forget! If you change the topic, change the subject line! ~~~
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> > [email protected]
> >
> > Visit the Unschooling website:
> > http://www.unschooling.com
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
> Peace,
> Susan
>
> There is nothing so secular that it cannot be sacred, and that is one of
> the deepest messages of the Incarnation. -- Madeleine L'Engle
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ~~~ Don't forget! If you change the topic, change the subject line! ~~~
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> [email protected]
>
> Visit the Unschooling website:
> http://www.unschooling.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>

Betty Holder

-----



>Unschooling is way outside of school.<

Sandra

I was wondering, were any of the parents who are on this list unschooled as children?? I myself am from the *old school* of PS. I was just curious about kids who have been unschooled and then went on to college or whatever afterward. I'm only hearing about present day kids being unschooled and parent's recent dscision to do it. Is there any *graduates* of unschooling with success stories to tell?? You see I still have this FEAR that my child is missing something from this that I will regret years down the road. Unschooling sounds good and seems to work as far as keeping my son happy with learning. But I'm having serious doubts that HE is learning all he will need later.

I also have to disagree with the TV watching. NO CHILD, unschooled, homeschooled, public schooled, or anything else can benefit from watching ALL the TV they want!! Sorry folks, but that's just my opinion. There's far too much GARBAGE on TV to have a positive influence. THere is no requirement of thinking for a child when they watch hours of TV. I don't care how *Good* the programs are. Children develop mentally by THINKING, using their imagination, creativity!!!!!!!
How can people think that PS is a bad influence but then can let the child sit in front of the TV hours on end??? And I don't believe they are watching *EDUCATIONAL* programs all this time. Children learn from TV good and bad. Are these parents who allow unlimited TV being selective about what they watch?

I hope my opinion will not cause anyone to feel I'm being hostile. I'm just disagreeing. I really glean some good stuff from this list. I cull alot, too <g> as I'm sure the reat of you do.

Betty

Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




~~~ Don't forget! If you change the topic, change the subject line! ~~~

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

Visit the Unschooling website:
http://www.unschooling.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



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

Fetteroll

on 5/13/02 11:10 AM, Betty Holder at ninnyridge03@... wrote:

> Is there any *graduates* of unschooling with success stories to tell??

They are out there. It's just tough to find the people and their stories
because when people are living contented lives, they generally don't have a
burning need to go out and tell everyone how they did it. Whereas if they
have complaints, then they have a powerful need to vent to whoever will
listen ;-)

Peter Kowalke is one grown unschooler. He has a webpage at
http://www.peterkowalke.com/

Grace Llewellyn runs the Not Back to School Camp (http://www.nbtsc.org) and
they have a message board. I'd bet many of the kids keep in touch after
they've moved on.

> You see I still have this FEAR that my child is missing something from this
> that I will regret years down the road.

It helps if you can try to identify what exactly you're afraid he'll miss.
Too often we end up choosing the path laid out by "experts" because we're
certain there are things we'd never think to ask about but that the experts
have already asked all possible questions and found answers to them.

School-type learning (eg, making sure they cover "the essentials") is *one*
solution. But it's a solution with it's own flaws. Learning "because it's
important to your future" is hard and time consuming and is designed more to
provide feedback that the things were taught not that they were learned.

So what is it you're afraid he'll miss? If you can pinpoint your worries,
they can be dealt with.

> Unschooling sounds good and seems to
> work as far as keeping my son happy with learning. But I'm having serious
> doubts that HE is learning all he will need later.

If we assume there's a body of learning that is unconnected to what it would
be used for, then that's a legitimate worry.

Unfortunately school gives us the impression that there's a *huge* body of
knowledge that's unconnected to its use. Mainly because schools teach it
that way: isolated and out of context. The only way to learn math seems to
be to do a gazillion math problems. The only way to learn science seems to
be to memorize all the answers scientists have discovered. The only way to
learn history is to start at the beginning and go through all the
"important" events to present day.

But when we learn by living life, all that stuff becomes tools that we pick
up and use for the purpose intended. There's no reason not to use (and learn
as a side effect) math when there are games and stuff to spend allowance on
and things to figure out. There's no reason not to use science when the
world is full of wonderous things and a child is filled with curiosity. (It
won't look like school science. It will look like -- and *be* -- real
science: observing and asking questions and theorizing what could be the
cause.) There's no reason to not use history when the past is full of
stories of interesting people and places and events.

> I also have to disagree with the TV watching. NO CHILD, unschooled,
> homeschooled, public schooled, or anything else can benefit from watching ALL
> the TV they want!!

What if you said "NO CHILD can benefit from reading ALL the books they
want!!" or "NO CHILD can benefit from playing ALL the games they want!!"

It's assuming (or extrapolating from some different situation) that when
children are allowed all the TV they want, they'll do little else, that
they'll spend years watching indescriminately.

Why would they?

*If* TV is controlled and doled out like a prize, then they'll watch garbage
just because TV is so precious. *If* they are in school, they'll often watch
TV as a way of depressurizing after school.

Unschooled kids, given free access to TV have neither of those reasons for
watching TV.

> Sorry folks, but that's just my opinion.

But are you basing what you say on your opinion of what will happen or on
personal knowledge of allowing your kids for many months to watch as much TV
as they want?

> There's far too much GARBAGE on TV to have a positive influence.

Why do you think children would choose deliberately to watch garbage? Do our
tastes need to be molded by experts in what is good in order to choose what
is good? Or can our kids develop their own sense of what is good and bad by
experiencing good and bad and deciding from their experience what is useful
to them and what is not?

Or are children such slaves to a need to be entertained that they'd choose
garbge over going somewhere or doing something they enjoy with mom?

> THere is no requirement of
> thinking for a child when they watch hours of TV.

Maybe if children feel overloaded and are choosing TV as a way to turn off
the pressures they have no control over. (As schooled kids might.)

But since my daughter absorbes tons of stuff -- things that relate to her
world as well as the adult world -- then I'd say she's doing a great deal of
thinking.

> I don't care how *Good* the
> programs are. Children develop mentally by THINKING, using their imagination,
> creativity!!!!!!!

And many children find TV a great fodder for thinking, imagination and
creativity. Pokemon has branched off into a huge number of things that
relate to adult knowledge and adult skills.

But I think we also need to recognize the value of their needs as the people
they are right now. Memorizing all 251 Pokemon isn't something she'll use
much as an adult -- though it exercises skills she'll use as an adult -- but
it's something that's important to the person she is right now. And feeding
what's important to her right now is what will help her become the person
she will be.

> How can people think that PS is a bad influence but then can let the child
> sit in front of the TV hours on end???

Because there's more than passively watching involved in PS. There's being
there by force, listening to and doing something they don't care to learn.

A child watching TV is choosing what appeals to him, what *he* finds useful.

> And I don't believe they are watching
> *EDUCATIONAL* programs all this time. Children learn from TV good and bad.
> Are these parents who allow unlimited TV being selective about what they
> watch?

There isn't a need to. Children are self-selective. My daughter may choose
things that I wouldn't choose for her, but she has needs that are different
than mine. I'm not sure what she's getting out of Squarebob Spongepants, but
the enthusiasm with which she watches it and then replays verbally for me
all the episodes, means there's something important to her.

She won't watch anything that's scary or sexual any more than she'd watch a
political talk show. Her world is divided into useful to her and not useful
to her rather than good and forbidden.

I am selective about what *I* watch. There are R movies that we choose to
watch when she isn't there or has other things to occupy her. We don't force
her to choose between watching an adult movie with us vs being alone. But
given full freedom to choose anything she wants, she doesn't choose the
things I would protect her from anyway.

Joyce

[email protected]

<< Memorizing all 251 Pokemon isn't something she'll use
much as an adult -- though it exercises skills she'll use as an adult -- but
it's something that's important to the person she is right now. >>

She might win cash and valuable prizes when Jeopardy has a Pokemon category!

<<The only way to learn science seems to
be to memorize all the answers scientists have discovered.>>

Only the easy ones, at reading level. Second grade science isn't the coolest
science second graders could possibly understand, but is stuff they can read
about in very short words and very short sentences. That's why they read
about bugs and trees, because the words are small. "In fall the leaves turn
red and brown." That's about as long a sentence as a first or second grade
science book might have. They might teach them "photosynthesis" and then
rest for a week from the effort of so huge a concept! Meanwhile, unschooled
kids who can't read don't even notice the lengths of words or the
"difficulty" of concepts because each kid is at his own cutting edge.

And for high school science, unless the school can afford subscriptions to
Science News or some Scholastic newsletter (which will be weeks old by the
time it arrives), they'll be dependent on texbooks. IF the're brand new,
they're probably two or three years old in content. If they're not new to
the school, that's however many years (up to five or six) the school has
owned them plus that two or three years of writing, editorial, sales,
publication, deliver. Seven year old science "news" is not uncommon in
schools.

<<The only way to
learn history is to start at the beginning and go through all the
"important" events to present day.>>

"Present day" meaning, often, t. Understandings and interpretations change.
Public sentiment and political correctness change. The version of the
Vietnamese war told to kids in school now will not match what was learned
twenty years ago. But parents sometimes have a simplified idea that there IS
a static, simple, chronological body of knowledge and there isn't.

At home with movies, video, magazines, TV and the internet your kids can
learn more about ANY period of history or any historical figure than they
would ever be taught in school.

Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/13/2002 5:13:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
ninnyridge03@... writes:

To your first question -- I have a 17 yo unschooled kid who has already
finished her first two years of college with nearly an A average. And I know
a LOT of other unschooled kids who are in universities now - they're not
uncommon anymore at all.

>
>
> I also have to disagree with the TV watching. NO CHILD, unschooled,
> homeschooled, public schooled, or anything else can benefit from watching
> ALL the TV they want!! Sorry folks, but that's just my opinion. There's
> far too much GARBAGE on TV to have a positive influence.

My kids benefit from watching exactly that: "All the TV they want."

You must be assuming that "all the TV they want" is always excessive amounts
AND that kids always choose to watch garbage.

Seems like such an odd assumption.

My kids have too many other things going on in their lives to want to spend
excessive time watching garbage tv shows. They have unlimited access to tv,
but they don't normally sit and watch it for hours and hours - they turn it
on and off selectively, watching programming that they choose for their own
reasons, even if it is not always immediately apparent to me why they choose
what they choose.

People often assume that kids with no tv limits will watch excessive amounts
and will watch inappropriate stuff or garbage -- but it is not at all my
experience. If I put limits - if I said, "Two hours per day is your limit and
you can't watch anything on Channel 11," for example, then they'd probably a
lways make sure to WATCH their two hours a day whether they really wanted to
or not and they'd be real real interested in what was on Channel 11.

--pamS
Some of what is said here may challenge you, shock you, disturb you, or seem
harsh. But remember that people are offering it to be helpful and what feels
uncomfortable to you might be just what someone else needed to hear.



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

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/13/2002 6:27:45 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
megamom08@... writes:


> -Jerry Springer and other garbage talk shows
> -Professional Wrestling
> -most soap operas
> -the Clairol Herbal Essence commercials and similar commercials irritate me
>
> also, so I avoid channels/airtimes that they constanly air on.

None of my kids nor myself has ever wanted to watch any of that (well I have
no idea about the commercials, never seen them). If they did (or if I did)
I'd sure want to know why it was of interest.

I've never found any reason to limit tv. I'm not concerned about such things
because I KNOW that my kids have better taste than that.

--pamS



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

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/13/2002 6:27:45 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
megamom08@... writes:


> but in the past few months of not bothering to find the remote
> control, I have enjoyed not using the TV much at all anymore. I find I have
>
> more time to read, get projects done, and my time doesn't evaporate as
> quickly as it used to. My quality of life has improved, and I assume it has
>
> for my kids as well

Did someone come in and LIMIT your tv or did you do this to yourself? You
self-regulated because you found that there were other things you'd rather
do? And, you decide what to watch, too, based on getting the most value from
the time you do spend watching?

My kids do that too. Themselves. Just like you.

My kids also always ask, "Is it okay if I turn on the tv?" because it is in
the main room of our house where we all are, most of the time, and they're
asking to be courteous, not because they need permission.

We have two pairs of infrared headphones, so that people can watch tv without
the rest of us hearing the sound. We also have headphones on the computer
which is in the same room, so the person on the computer can have the sound
up without the rest of us having to hear it.

--pamS


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

Jon and Rue Kream

>>>> Squarebob Spongepants

Now, now, Joyce, I'm sure you mean Spongebob Squarepants! :0) The sound of
that show irritated me at first. The kids told me it was good so I watched
it, and it can be quite funny. There are always a few levels of humor going
on, which I like now and remember liking as a kid when I watched Rocky and
Bullwinkle. They, of course, are thrilled that I valued their opinions
enough to give it a try, and that I ended up liking it. ~Rue


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

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/13/02 10:19:47 AM, PSoroosh@... writes:

<< None of my kids nor myself has ever wanted to watch any of that >>

Pam has boys.
My husband sometimes watches the wrestling shows. The boys used to, but they
lost interest when they got older.

Because my husband does now and has in the past participated in pretty
physical sports (now SCA rattan-sword-fighting, which involves hitting and
getting hit pretty hard sometimes; in the past, rugby and football, and he's
done some wrestling as an adult in medieval contexts--years ago), and he has
knowledge and interest in such things which I don't have and don't
understand. I do know from passing through the room and asking "What!?"
that there is a large overlay of comic soap opera to the whole thing which
viewers also find amusing. I've never known anyone who took it seriously.

Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/13/2002 8:19:03 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
fetteroll@... writes:


> Grace Llewellyn runs the Not Back to School Camp (http://www.nbtsc.org) and
> they have a message board. I'd bet many of the kids keep in touch after
> they've moved on.
>

They're even starting their OWN camp - for those who have/are moving on.

--pamS


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

Tia Leschke

>
>And for high school science, unless the school can afford subscriptions to
>Science News or some Scholastic newsletter (which will be weeks old by the
>time it arrives), they'll be dependent on texbooks. IF the're brand new,
>they're probably two or three years old in content. If they're not new to
>the school, that's however many years (up to five or six) the school has
>owned them plus that two or three years of writing, editorial, sales,
>publication, deliver. Seven year old science "news" is not uncommon in
>schools.

And then read Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynmann to see how textbooks
*really* get selected.
Tia

No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.
Eleanor Roosevelt
*********************************************
Tia Leschke
leschke@...
On Vancouver Island

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/13/2002 9:45:06 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:


> Pam has boys.
> My husband sometimes watches the wrestling shows. The boys used to, but
> they
> lost interest when they got older.

Pam has boys around who are friends and because she has teenage GIRLS <BEG>.

So - Sandra's right. The girls watch some stuff, too, that her BOYS might
well consider "tasteless." <G>

Rosie has started watching the "SaddleClub" series. It is not "great" tv. But
she loves horses - so that's the draw. The stories are sort of weak -- not
much to them. But they do deal with relationships and that's of interest to
my 11 yo girl. She seems especially interested in the way the adults treat
the kids at the school. I can see why that would be interesting. She also is
interested in the accents.

--pamS



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

Tia Leschke

>
> I was wondering, were any of the parents who are on this list
> unschooled as children??

From what she's written here, it sounds like our list owner, Helen
Hegener, was unschooled much of the time.
Tia

No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.
Eleanor Roosevelt
*********************************************
Tia Leschke
leschke@...
On Vancouver Island

Fetteroll

on 5/13/02 12:27 PM, Jon and Rue Kream at skreams@... wrote:

> Now, now, Joyce, I'm sure you mean Spongebob Squarepants! :0)

Ack! Squarebob Spongepants is one of my many joke names for it. They're all
equally familiar so I have to stop and consciously work to figure out which
version is right ;-)

Joyce

[email protected]

<<Ack! Squarebob Spongepants is one of my many joke names for it. They're
all
equally familiar so I have to stop and consciously work to figure out
which
version is right ;-)

Joyce>>

I gently tease my 4 year old with this. I call him Squarebob
Spongepants, Jonathan giggles and then corrects me. We watch it together
and Jonathan gives me many quizzing looks when I laugh at moments he
doesn't think are funny.

Kris

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/13/2002 9:29:18 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
skreams@... writes:


> Spongebob Squarepants! :0) The sound of
> that show irritated me at first. The kids told me it was good so I watched
> it, and it can be quite funny. There are always a few levels of humor going
> on, which I like now and remember liking as a kid

I agree. I heard the noise of Spongebob for months in the background. Then
one day I noticed something really obnoxious; but it was a brilliant
obnoxiousness -- really well thought out, much like the Daffy Duck stuff,
which was genius. So I watched and was pleased with the ludicrous aspect of
it, which is what cartoons should be all about.

Bob Sale


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

Elizabeth Hill

**Children think when they watch moments of TV. I don't care how bad
the
programs are, they think. But then my kids don't choose to watch bad TV
when
there's anything in the world better to do, and I'm sure yours wouldn't
either. They'll turn off GREAT TV if there's something better to do.
And
video is the simplest of all to turn off, because they can pick it up
again
later. **

Hi, Sandra --

Do you think this is true of timid children? I sometimes think my son
clings to TV like a large, blocky, not-portable security blanket. He's
turned down offers to go swimming and to the park in order to continue
watching TV. Television is really a risk-free activity.

He doesn't watch every single hour that he's awake, as some people
fear. He intersperses TV watching with other play. However, when we
*purchased* Rush Hour II, he did watch it three times in one day.
(Maybe he was thinking that he had a limited time with it, even though
that wasn't true.) He does try to be near the TV every afternoon for
Pokemon and Jackie Chan adventures. (I tape it for him on park days.)

How many hours of TV per day or per week would people find alarming?
Anyone want to quantify? I don't limit TV viewing here, and I'm not
completely comfortable with the amount we have. (Which I would have to
guess at, but I'll bet it averages close to 3 hours, out of the 14 he is
awake.)

Betsy

[email protected]

joyce,
that's what i call him. my daughter and husband just love him
and i must admit i've found myself laughing from time to time.
tina


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

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/13/2002 1:55:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
ecsamhill@... writes:


> How many hours of TV per day or per week would people find alarming?
> Anyone want to quantify? I don't limit TV viewing here, and I'm not
> completely comfortable with the amount we have. (Which I would have to
> guess at, but I'll bet it averages close to 3 hours, out of the 14 he is
> awake.)

I'd be perfectly comfortable with that - especially for a fairly introverted
person and one who IS getting out and doing other stuff.

I'd be perfectly comfortable with watching the video three times in a row --
it is called: "STUDYING" <BEG>.

I'd be comfortable with the wanting to be there to see "his shows" too. They
seem sort of "trivial" by adult standards - but they are a BIG DEAL to him.

I want you to know that I honored my three daughters' obsession with Sailor
Moon for months, maybe years. Life seemed to revolve around making sure we
didn't miss recording any episodes. I think the show is pretty stinky - I get
NOTHING out of it at all, really. Just annoyed <G>. But I totally supported
it and encouraged it -- first, I KNEW there was stuff they were getting out
of it that I didn't understand (my limitation - not their fault) and second,
it WAS bringing three sisters together, bonding around a common interest.
They've lost interest. But there are a lot of nice memories for them and a
special interest in Japanese has perservered - encouraged also by Pokeman.

--pamS


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

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/13/02 11:34:48 AM, leschke@... writes:

<< And then read Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynmann to see how textbooks
*really* get selected. >>

I haven't read that, but when I was in high school I heard rumor that one
company had been chosen over another because the superintendent had been
offered an RV if he chose that one.

My friend's dad was superintendent.

They got an RV. I have never asked whether it was a gift from a textbook
publisher. I was afraid to know.

It could have just been a snarky rumor.

I was once on an advisory/review committee (for language arts texts, which I
never used anyway when I was teaching), but I think unless the commentary and
opinions are overwhelmingly in favor of one series there are more likely to
be considerations of price than quality.

Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/13/02 2:55:19 PM, ecsamhill@... writes:

<< He's turned down offers to go swimming and to the park in order to continue
watching TV. >>

Then those things aren't better for him.
There are some public things even I don't want to do, and I'm pretty
courageous, socially speaking. But lately my idea of a GREAT day is nothing
on the calendar, nobody drops by unexpectedly, nobody calls with any
traumatic personal problems... because they're rare. If those days were
common I would wish for a big busy day.

Shy people I know have said the pressing of others for them to get out and be
brave only made it worse. Some people just are not nearly as thrilled with
"socialization" or physical activity as others, and might grow out of that,
or might continue to prefer some amount of solitude.

<<However, when we
*purchased* Rush Hour II, he did watch it three times in one day.
(Maybe he was thinking that he had a limited time with it, even though
that wasn't true.) >>

There have been several movies through here in the past which have been wound
back and re-watched immediately. I'm used to it, and sometimes I'm the one
doing the re-watching. It's kind of like stewing in a steam bath to
immerse in something. Henry V, when we first got it, I thought we would wear
out.

<<How many hours of TV per day or per week would people find alarming?
Anyone want to quantify? I don't limit TV viewing here, and I'm not
completely comfortable with the amount we have. (Which I would have to
guess at, but I'll bet it averages close to 3 hours, out of the 14 he is
awake.)>>

That wouldn't alarm me.

If a kid of mine is sick or depressed or has had some traumatic thing happen
lately and theyin a day or two.

Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/13/2002 9:34:05 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:


> but I think unless the commentary and
> opinions are overwhelmingly in favor of one series there are more likely to
>
> be considerations of price than quality.

I think that here in California, which, along with Texas, is where textbooks
for the whole country often get chosen, two of the biggest considerations are
whether or not it covers all the state standards - the specific items that
various state committees have decided have to be included in the course AND
also what supplemental instructional materials are available with the text.
Joy Hakim's wonderful History of US series is not yet an approved textbook
because it doesn't have all the instructor's materials -- test banks,
overhead projector pages, etc.

--pamS


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

rumpleteasermom

Betsy,

Do you have my son? Nope, he's still here. Boy does yours sound like
mine taste-wise anyway. Pokemon, Jacki Chan and now Scoobie are on
the must see list of his.

I can't quantify and amount that I find alarming because that isn't
how I looked at it. During the winter it is not unusual for ME to
watch 8 or more hours a day while I'm crafting. During the summer, I
might watch an average of an hour a day.

The thing that I notice in what you wrote is where you said, "He's
turned down offers to go swimming and to the park in order to continue
watching TV." That would concern me. Does he WANT to go and doesn't
feel safe going? Or is he afraid he'll miss something good on TV?
How old is he BTW?

If he is just afraid of missing something good, use the TV listings
and a VCR to help him overcome that. Having a watch and an
understanding of what was on at what times helped Wyndham some. The
not feeling safe thing is something I am only just starting to
understand.

Wyndham has some serious problems and is seeing a therapist. She
recommended a medical psychiatrist ASAP . . . preferable one who
specializes in Pediatric Neuro-Psych. Currently, we are think ing it
is OCD mixed with Asperger's. But the possibilities of Anxiety
Disorder and Tourettes are still there too.

I'm not going to say your son sounds like mine therefore he must have
those same disorders but I think I can give you a bit of advice about
the TV thing. And the most important piece of advice I can give you
is to follow your heart and instincts not your brain and the research
you've read. You are there with him and are his mother. You will be
the first to notice a problem, but you have to be sure you are looking
at it from your heart and not from some societal norm.

Bridget

--- In Unschooling-dotcom@y..., Elizabeth Hill <ecsamhill@e...> wrote:

>
> Do you think this is true of timid children? I sometimes think my
son
> clings to TV like a large, blocky, not-portable security blanket.
He's
> turned down offers to go swimming and to the park in order to
continue
> watching TV. Television is really a risk-free activity.
>
> He doesn't watch every single hour that he's awake, as some people
> fear. He intersperses TV watching with other play. However, when
we
> *purchased* Rush Hour II, he did watch it three times in one day.
> (Maybe he was thinking that he had a limited time with it, even
though
> that wasn't true.) He does try to be near the TV every afternoon
for
> Pokemon and Jackie Chan adventures. (I tape it for him on park
days.)
>
> How many hours of TV per day or per week would people find alarming?
> Anyone want to quantify? I don't limit TV viewing here, and I'm not
> completely comfortable with the amount we have. (Which I would have
to
> guess at, but I'll bet it averages close to 3 hours, out of the 14
he is
> awake.)
>
> Betsy

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/14/02 12:33:25 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
PSoroosh@... writes:

<< I think that here in California, which, along with Texas, is where
textbooks for the whole country often get chosen, two of the biggest
considerations are whether or not it covers all the state standards - >>

I used to sell textbooks, and if California and/or Texas don't adopt a book
then most likely the book will not be published. Textbooks companies need
the huge enrollments from these two states to make it profitable for them.

I know also that each book must reflect different cultures, sexes etc. There
are people whose job it is to count how many pictures of women, people of
color, disabled, etc., are in each book to make sure the book is well
"balanced."

<<Joy Hakim's wonderful History of US series is not yet an approved textbook
because it doesn't have all the instructor's materials -- test banks,
overhead projector pages, etc.>>

I think her book is too good to be an approved text, it wasn't written with
the idea of having to please various special interest groups.

Believe it or not, the K-12 textbook market is really cutthroat in these two
states!

Rebecca-in California

[email protected]

In a message dated 5/14/02 9:41:54 AM, RDALPAY@... writes:

<< <<Joy Hakim's wonderful History of US series is not yet an approved
textbook
because it doesn't have all the instructor's materials -- test banks,
overhead projector pages, etc.>>

<<I think her book is too good to be an approved text, it wasn't written with
the idea of having to please various special interest groups. >>

Another problem is they're not laid out to correspond to a school year. They
would need to have chapters which were "lesson" length, with matching sets of
questions, and units which would take two weeks to complete. It would help
if each book divided into semesters easily. That would involve stretching
out some time periods and incidents and glossing over others. <g>

They're just altogether too real and good to be textbooks.

Sandra