Re: 2226 - Free People, or not?
Luz Shosie and Ned Vare
on 8/10/02 3:29 PM, [email protected] at
[email protected] wrote:
I said, "some homeschoolers." I didn't say anything about you. (but I might)
My point seemed logical since many people in this unschoolers' e-list do
not, by definition, use or follow "plans" or curricula. As DeWes has been
happy to admit, telling the state what it wants to hear, even if it is
false, is his/her practice. Therefore, "some" if not most unschoolers in MA
lie when they profess to the government that they follow a "plan."
I think it's fair to conclude that if you tell the state that you follow a
curriculum or that your homeschooling follows a plan, and if that's the
truth, then you're not an UNschooler -- not that there's anything wrong
with that.......
Joyce, again -- putting words in my mouth:
Later, Joyce says:
Good, but
What can be more politically active than doing exactly what the Bryants did?
They were, in fact, "quiet ones" just like everybody else, until they were
faced with the need to lie IN WRITING to the state simply in order to keep
to their practice. Their crime, according to the homeschool mafia, is
refusing to lie.
(does anyone know what catagory of crime LYING TO THE STATE is? --
Misdemeanor? Felony? --What happens to people who are caught?)
Anyway, for the Bryants, being dishonest was more than they were willing to
suffer. Hey, what if they were discovered by some snooping neighbor or an
ambitious social worker looking to score some points by uncovering
"Educational Malpractice" or "Pedagogical Skullduggery" or, worst of all --
the oxymoronic "Homeschooling Non-Conformity" in the home of the Bryants,
all on a tip from one of the semi-literate clerks in the local
superintendent's office.
And what are all those other "quiet ones" doing to help change the laws of
MA, and how are they helping the Bryants? People in every state need to know
because lots of us want to make things better. This is the most ON TOPIC
thing I know.
Joyce, I asked you to explain your displeasure/annoyance about the Bryants
here. What you've done is continue to complain about them without telling
what you believe they did wrong. What gives? Other people seem to think this
is relevant to unschooling, as do I. Tell me (us) why it's not.
Joyce: Why shouldn't homeschoolers in other states do exactly what the
Bryants have done under such circumstances? Or is this about me?
Ned Vare
Obedience is the great multiplier of evil.
also,
Fear the man who feels himself a slave. He'll want to make a slave of you.
- anon
[email protected] wrote:
> Message: 1Then Joyce claimed this:
> Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 11:55:04 -0400
> From: Fetteroll <fetteroll@...>
> Subject: Re: Re: 2222 -- Free People, or not Free?
>
> on 8/10/02 10:11 AM, Ned Vare wrote:
>> ...MA puts requirements on homeschoolers
>> that some homeschoolers fulfill by lying about their plans.<<
> You imply I lie when I send in my ed plan.Ned defends himself:
I said, "some homeschoolers." I didn't say anything about you. (but I might)
My point seemed logical since many people in this unschoolers' e-list do
not, by definition, use or follow "plans" or curricula. As DeWes has been
happy to admit, telling the state what it wants to hear, even if it is
false, is his/her practice. Therefore, "some" if not most unschoolers in MA
lie when they profess to the government that they follow a "plan."
I think it's fair to conclude that if you tell the state that you follow a
curriculum or that your homeschooling follows a plan, and if that's the
truth, then you're not an UNschooler -- not that there's anything wrong
with that.......
Joyce, again -- putting words in my mouth:
>>You're basically saying the homeschoolers of MA are too blind, ignorant andGosh, did I say all that? Wow.
>>like scared sheep to be able to understand the smoke that's in their own
>>state. That you who see so much clearer know that every puff of smoke is
>>hiding a ranging inferno about to burst free. That insults every politically
>>active homeschooler in MA.<<
Later, Joyce says:
>>I do cheer for the quiet ones in the state group who are politcally active forNed expresses himself again:
>>homeschooling.
Good, but
What can be more politically active than doing exactly what the Bryants did?
They were, in fact, "quiet ones" just like everybody else, until they were
faced with the need to lie IN WRITING to the state simply in order to keep
to their practice. Their crime, according to the homeschool mafia, is
refusing to lie.
(does anyone know what catagory of crime LYING TO THE STATE is? --
Misdemeanor? Felony? --What happens to people who are caught?)
Anyway, for the Bryants, being dishonest was more than they were willing to
suffer. Hey, what if they were discovered by some snooping neighbor or an
ambitious social worker looking to score some points by uncovering
"Educational Malpractice" or "Pedagogical Skullduggery" or, worst of all --
the oxymoronic "Homeschooling Non-Conformity" in the home of the Bryants,
all on a tip from one of the semi-literate clerks in the local
superintendent's office.
And what are all those other "quiet ones" doing to help change the laws of
MA, and how are they helping the Bryants? People in every state need to know
because lots of us want to make things better. This is the most ON TOPIC
thing I know.
Joyce, I asked you to explain your displeasure/annoyance about the Bryants
here. What you've done is continue to complain about them without telling
what you believe they did wrong. What gives? Other people seem to think this
is relevant to unschooling, as do I. Tell me (us) why it's not.
Joyce: Why shouldn't homeschoolers in other states do exactly what the
Bryants have done under such circumstances? Or is this about me?
Ned Vare
Obedience is the great multiplier of evil.
also,
Fear the man who feels himself a slave. He'll want to make a slave of you.
- anon
[email protected]
In a message dated 8/11/02 1:52:07 PM, nedvare@... writes:
<< As DeWes has been
happy to admit, telling the state what it wants to hear, even if it is
false, is his/her practice. >>
This is personal insult.
<<I said, "some homeschoolers." I didn't say anything about you. (but I might)
<<I think it's fair to conclude that if you tell the state that you follow a
curriculum or that your homeschooling follows a plan, and if that's the
truth, then you're not an UNschooler -- >>
I think it is NOT fair.
If you haven't looked at what Carol Narigon wrote, please do so before you
further insult those in several states who are successfully and HONESTLY
using her style of description of unschooling.
http://sandradodd.com/unschoolingcurriculum
I have a DEFINITE plan for my kids. It doesn't look like a curriculum and it
doesn't lead to "graduation" at 17 or any of those things, but I'm not
listlessly out in the midst of years of vague childrearing, either. The plan
includes NOT ruining their confidence with school-style nonsense, and I'm
vigilant about that.
I don't have to turn in diddly in New Mexico, but if I did I could describe
what we do honestly and make it sound way better than the education
objectives and measures the public school is using this year or any year.
<<Joyce, again -- putting words in my mouth:...
Gosh, did I say all that? Wow.>>
Will the insults ever stop?
You won't answer that. You haven't answered any direct questions that I can
remember.
<Their crime, according to the homeschool mafia, is
refusing to lie.>>
What "homeschool mafia" do you mean?
And will you stick to your claim that nobody can comply with that law without
lying no matter what else people here say, the way you stuck so doggedly with
your phonics claim against a sea of evidence?
<<This is the most ON TOPIC thing I know.>>
No, it's about politics. It's not about how people learn.
And it's not as honest as it needs to be, and will NOT be honest until you
see that it is possible to write up a description of unschooling in
educational jargon and be telling the truth about a family's intent.
<<Joyce, I asked you to explain your displeasure/annoyance about the Bryants
here. What you've done is continue to complain about them without telling
what you believe they did wrong.>>
Joyce and one or two others HAVE listed their objections very clearly.
<<What gives? Other people seem to think this
is relevant to unschooling, as do I. Tell me (us) why it's not.>>
That would be repetitive all over again, and redundant. It's been said.
It's been told.
Please read the description Carol Narigon wrote before continuing to say
"lying" and "dishonest" about people in those states who have filed as
unschoolers, aboveboard and honestly.
Sandra
Sandra
<< As DeWes has been
happy to admit, telling the state what it wants to hear, even if it is
false, is his/her practice. >>
This is personal insult.
<<I said, "some homeschoolers." I didn't say anything about you. (but I might)
>>A threat of insult?
<<I think it's fair to conclude that if you tell the state that you follow a
curriculum or that your homeschooling follows a plan, and if that's the
truth, then you're not an UNschooler -- >>
I think it is NOT fair.
If you haven't looked at what Carol Narigon wrote, please do so before you
further insult those in several states who are successfully and HONESTLY
using her style of description of unschooling.
http://sandradodd.com/unschoolingcurriculum
I have a DEFINITE plan for my kids. It doesn't look like a curriculum and it
doesn't lead to "graduation" at 17 or any of those things, but I'm not
listlessly out in the midst of years of vague childrearing, either. The plan
includes NOT ruining their confidence with school-style nonsense, and I'm
vigilant about that.
I don't have to turn in diddly in New Mexico, but if I did I could describe
what we do honestly and make it sound way better than the education
objectives and measures the public school is using this year or any year.
<<Joyce, again -- putting words in my mouth:...
Gosh, did I say all that? Wow.>>
Will the insults ever stop?
You won't answer that. You haven't answered any direct questions that I can
remember.
<Their crime, according to the homeschool mafia, is
refusing to lie.>>
What "homeschool mafia" do you mean?
And will you stick to your claim that nobody can comply with that law without
lying no matter what else people here say, the way you stuck so doggedly with
your phonics claim against a sea of evidence?
<<This is the most ON TOPIC thing I know.>>
No, it's about politics. It's not about how people learn.
And it's not as honest as it needs to be, and will NOT be honest until you
see that it is possible to write up a description of unschooling in
educational jargon and be telling the truth about a family's intent.
<<Joyce, I asked you to explain your displeasure/annoyance about the Bryants
here. What you've done is continue to complain about them without telling
what you believe they did wrong.>>
Joyce and one or two others HAVE listed their objections very clearly.
<<What gives? Other people seem to think this
is relevant to unschooling, as do I. Tell me (us) why it's not.>>
That would be repetitive all over again, and redundant. It's been said.
It's been told.
Please read the description Carol Narigon wrote before continuing to say
"lying" and "dishonest" about people in those states who have filed as
unschoolers, aboveboard and honestly.
Sandra
Sandra
Fetteroll
on 8/11/02 1:58 PM, Luz Shosie and Ned Vare at nedvare@... wrote:
in my ed plan without lying to the superintendent. You're saying the Bryants
needed to lie because they're unschoolers and found it too odious to lie so
chose to take a stand. The logic doesn't quite flow there.
Besides, that's just your *guess* why the Bryants did what they did. Have
you read the posts at MAHomeschoolers and MassHomeLearningAssoc? Please give
quotes from the Bryants to tell us what the Bryants did and why.
sounds pretty when creating a heroic figure. But we're not writing a movie
script. Let's just stick with the real people and what really happened, not
the movie of the week version of the Bryants.
actually happened in MA in similar circumstances. Tell me what the Bryants
*actually* feared -- include quotes from them -- not what you believe they
could have feared.
I hope it's clear that I am not complaining or annoyed with the Bryants. I
*am* annoyed that people outside of MA want to insist that the Bryants and
their case was about fighting for the rights of homeschoolers in MA when
nothing I've read from Kim Bryant herself supports that.
Joyce
> They were, in fact, "quiet ones" just like everybody else, until they wereBut Ned, I'm saying I'm an unschooler and I am able to describe unschooling
> faced with the need to lie IN WRITING to the state simply in order to keep
> to their practice.
in my ed plan without lying to the superintendent. You're saying the Bryants
needed to lie because they're unschoolers and found it too odious to lie so
chose to take a stand. The logic doesn't quite flow there.
Besides, that's just your *guess* why the Bryants did what they did. Have
you read the posts at MAHomeschoolers and MassHomeLearningAssoc? Please give
quotes from the Bryants to tell us what the Bryants did and why.
> Anyway, for the Bryants, being dishonest was more than they were willing toCan you supply some quotes where the Bryants said anything like that? It
> suffer.
sounds pretty when creating a heroic figure. But we're not writing a movie
script. Let's just stick with the real people and what really happened, not
the movie of the week version of the Bryants.
> Hey, what if they were discovered by some snooping neighbor or anBoogeymen. If we must discuss it, then let's stick to things that have
> ambitious social worker looking to score some points ...
actually happened in MA in similar circumstances. Tell me what the Bryants
*actually* feared -- include quotes from them -- not what you believe they
could have feared.
> Joyce, I asked you to explain your displeasure/annoyance about the BryantsIf there's anything left unexplained by my Heroes post, then just ask again.
> here. What you've done is continue to complain about them without telling
> what you believe they did wrong.
I hope it's clear that I am not complaining or annoyed with the Bryants. I
*am* annoyed that people outside of MA want to insist that the Bryants and
their case was about fighting for the rights of homeschoolers in MA when
nothing I've read from Kim Bryant herself supports that.
Joyce