Kim Watson

In response to the late reader thread, my almost 11 yo ds didn't want to read until just about 8 years old...we did the "Teach your child to read in 100 easy lessons" thing, probably too early, but it did give him a base when he decided he wanted to go whole hog. In retrospect I would totally wait on him now.

But, the GOOD news for those parents who are fidgeting about this, my son started reading when he discovered he could "get" something for it, ie, he could read the instructions about installing and using his favorite computer programs WITHOUT waiting for mom or dad to "finish up" whatever they were working on at the time! He found a use for reading, and now he reads well above "grade level" (whatever that is).

Speaking of...he is curious as to his own "standing" on "grade level" and would like to check out a vocabulary test. I know there are several on the Net, but can't remember where. Anyone have a URL?

Just one of those progressive word lists that they read until they have a real problem with pronunciation.

Thanks!

Kim W
Florida

[email protected]

Yes, the emphasis is on early reading at the expense of many other
skills. Too bad the schools can't ignore the whole reading issue until
at least third or fourth grade. Some kids will still learn to read
before then, but at least those who don't won't have to feel stupid.
Mary Ellen
Neglect Not The Gift That Is In Thee

>>> The son who could not read until late has built the whole star wars
fleet
with cardboard and tape. These ships are impressive. He can draw and
build
most anything. I'm not saying any of this to brag. Only to emphasize that
we
must see all of our kids talents and that they won't always fit into what

society thinks valuable.

Laura>>>
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.

[email protected]

In a message dated 11/3/99 6:07:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, megates@...
writes:

<< Yes, the emphasis is on early reading at the expense of many other
skills. Too bad the schools can't ignore the whole reading issue until
at least third or fourth grade. Some kids will still learn to read
before then, but at least those who don't won't have to feel stupid. >>

I was wondering how schools might fare if all they did was play and read
to kids through at least third grade? I worry at times that my 8 yro is not
doing enough. I am reading to him total about 2hrs a day. My feeling is that
he is getting much more across the spectrum of learning than he did sitting
in school all day and doing busy work phonics papers.
He doesn't want to write much and really doesn't write well yet. He reads
but is still in the learning to read as opposed to reading for content stage.
I feel this is OK because he's only 8 but when I look at some of the 2nd -3rd
grade workbooks I have I realize that there is much in them that he is not
yet capable of doing. In fact I use some of these pages for my 11yro. He
tends to whip through them but it gives me an idea of what he knows.
I keep telling myself to keep reading to him and in the long run this
will really pay off. He is pretty good so far in basic math. He can
add,subtract,carry, we haven't borrowed yet. He loves to mess with stuff,
especially water. I am amazed to watch him since he's been home awhile. I
never realized what a little experimenter he was.
Does anyone else have any thoughts on this. I do think we're ok but worry.
Sorry to ramble.

Laura

[email protected]

I think in the front of the set of the 3 How to teach books by Ruth Beechick,
I know its in one of her books.......they took 2 classes of kids, with one
they didnt push reading, they did science experiments, field trips....didnt
push schooly things....
The other class they did the pushing of the phonics, reading, spelling,
normal school stuff.........at the end of third grade, the first class had a
higher reading scale, bigger vocabulary and much bigger comprehension and
spelling ability.
Tells ya something doesnt it?

Joel Hawthorne

No offense intended and this is addressed to the entire world.

Unschooling! Unschooling! Unschooling!
Down with imposed curriculums!
Freedom of Choice for Children!
Self-Direction = Self-Confidence!
Down with pernicious School mentality!
Children emerge through play not academics.
Curriculum content of K-12 in 6 months of motivated learning by motivated
learners!
Children grow by nature, nurture nature and let them grow.

Down with adult imposed agendas!

There I haven't done that since 1967 and I feel much, much better now!

Bonknit@... wrote:

> In a message dated 11/3/99 6:07:20 PM Eastern Standard Time, megates@...
> writes:
>
> << Yes, the emphasis is on early reading at the expense of many other
> skills. Too bad the schools can't ignore the whole reading issue until
> at least third or fourth grade. Some kids will still learn to read
> before then, but at least those who don't won't have to feel stupid. >>
>
> I was wondering how schools might fare if all they did was play and read
> to kids through at least third grade? I worry at times that my 8 yro is not
> doing enough. I am reading to him total about 2hrs a day. My feeling is that
> he is getting much more across the spectrum of learning than he did sitting
> in school all day and doing busy work phonics papers.
> He doesn't want to write much and really doesn't write well yet. He reads
> but is still in the learning to read as opposed to reading for content stage.
> I feel this is OK because he's only 8 but when I look at some of the 2nd -3rd
> grade workbooks I have I realize that there is much in them that he is not
> yet capable of doing. In fact I use some of these pages for my 11yro. He
> tends to whip through them but it gives me an idea of what he knows.
> I keep telling myself to keep reading to him and in the long run this
> will really pay off. He is pretty good so far in basic math. He can
> add,subtract,carry, we haven't borrowed yet. He loves to mess with stuff,
> especially water. I am amazed to watch him since he's been home awhile. I
> never realized what a little experimenter he was.
> Does anyone else have any thoughts on this. I do think we're ok but worry.
> Sorry to ramble.
>
> Laura
>
> > Check it out!
> http://www.unschooling.com

--
best wishes
Joel

For a wonderful gift possibility and to support a great cause check out:
http://www.naturalchild.com/calendar_pictures.html

All children behave as well as they are treated. The Natural Child
Project http://naturalchild.com/home/

Lisa Bugg

> From: Joel Hawthorne <jhawthorne@...>
>
> No offense intended and this is addressed to the entire world.
>
> Unschooling! Unschooling! Unschooling!
> Down with imposed curriculums!
> Freedom of Choice for Children!
> Self-Direction = Self-Confidence!
> Down with pernicious School mentality!
> Children emerge through play not academics.
> Curriculum content of K-12 in 6 months of motivated learning by motivated
> learners!
> Children grow by nature, nurture nature and let them grow.
>
> Down with adult imposed agendas!
>
> There I haven't done that since 1967 and I feel much, much better now!>>


Well, Joel, I do believe it's time we start talking about how to send this
message to a wider audience. Should we picket something.. or have a
sit-in? Or sit-out?

Lisa
> Bonknit@... wrote
>
> > In a message dated 11/3/99 6:07:20 PM Eastern Standard Time,
megates@...
> > writes:
> >
> > << Yes, the emphasis is on early reading at the expense of many other
> > skills. Too bad the schools can't ignore the whole reading issue until
> > at least third or fourth grade. Some kids will still learn to read
> > before then, but at least those who don't won't have to feel stupid. >>
> >
> > I was wondering how schools might fare if all they did was play and
read
> > to kids through at least third grade? I worry at times that my 8 yro is
not
> > doing enough. I am reading to him total about 2hrs a day. My feeling is
that
> > he is getting much more across the spectrum of learning than he did
sitting
> > in school all day and doing busy work phonics papers.
> > He doesn't want to write much and really doesn't write well yet. He
reads
> > but is still in the learning to read as opposed to reading for content
stage.
> > I feel this is OK because he's only 8 but when I look at some of the
2nd -3rd
> > grade workbooks I have I realize that there is much in them that he is
not
> > yet capable of doing. In fact I use some of these pages for my 11yro. He
> > tends to whip through them but it gives me an idea of what he knows.
> > I keep telling myself to keep reading to him and in the long run
this
> > will really pay off. He is pretty good so far in basic math. He can
> > add,subtract,carry, we haven't borrowed yet. He loves to mess with
stuff,
> > especially water. I am amazed to watch him since he's been home awhile.
I
> > never realized what a little experimenter he was.
> > Does anyone else have any thoughts on this. I do think we're ok but
worry.
> > Sorry to ramble.
> >
> > Laura
> >
> > > Check it out!
> > http://www.unschooling.com
>
> --
> best wishes
> Joel
>
> For a wonderful gift possibility and to support a great cause check out:
> http://www.naturalchild.com/calendar_pictures.html
>
> All children behave as well as they are treated. The Natural Child
> Project http://naturalchild.com/home/
>
> > Check it out!
> http://www.unschooling.com
>
>

[email protected]

Laura,
have you read better late than early or any of the Moore books?
Erin

[email protected]

In a message dated 11/5/99 1:34:58 AM Eastern Standard Time, MORELFAM@...
writes:

<< have you read better late than early or any of the Moore books? >>

Yes I have and also all of John Holts.

Laura

Cheryl

I thought I'd share as well.
Unfortunately for my dd, we tried "teaching" her how to read and she struggled and we had tears, etc.  You know the gamut. (We were worried because at age 8 you have to start reporting to the sd and turning in portfolios, testing, etc.)  Well, we finally came to our sensed again and stopped pushing.  At age 11 she blossomed!  She is now a voracious reader and not that testing means much but she has been post high school in her reading scores since sixth grade.
My ds is 11 1/2.  At 11 he got interested in reading "his books" and is only beginning to read.  He prefers to decode our language on his own.  My girlfriend made him feel really good when she said that every language has a Secret code.  And when you get interested enough, you can figure it out, just like detectives.
Hope this helps.
In HIS service,
Cheryl (No longer worried)

Kathy Sullivan wrote:

--- "John O. Andersen" <andersen@...> wrote:
> Amalia,
>
> > All of my
> > kids learned to read in a mostly organic way; the
> oldest one at 4 and the
> > other two at around 8 or 9 years old.
>
> Thanks.  I need to hear this right now because our
> son who will be 8 this
> week, is only just starting to read.
>
> John Andersen
> Unconventional Ideas at http://unconventional.go.to

Hi,
 I am new to this list and had to jump in here. I am
SO glad to know that I am not the only one with a late
reader. My middle son will be 8 in Dec. and is still
struggling to read. He can read the first couple Bob
books and that is about it.
 Today he knows his alphabet and sounds, tomorrow he
doesn't. It is so fustrating because he is so advanced
in just about everything he does except reading.

Kathy Sullivan

Thank you Cheryl for sharing that. That is great! And
it gives me such hope for my son.

Kathy

--- Cheryl <jcjjlw@...> wrote:
> I thought I'd share as well.
> Unfortunately for my dd, we tried "teaching" her how
> to read and she struggled and we had tears, etc.
> You
> know the gamut. (We were worried because at age 8
> you have to start reporting to the sd and turning in
> portfolios, testing, etc.) Well, we finally came to
> our sensed again and stopped pushing. At age 11 she
> blossomed! She is now a voracious reader and not
> that testing means much but she has been post high
> school
> in her reading scores since sixth grade.
> My ds is 11 1/2. At 11 he got interested in reading
> "his books" and is only beginning to read. He
> prefers
> to decode our language on his own. My girlfriend
> made him feel really good when she said that every
> language has a Secret code. And when you get
> interested enough, you can figure it out, just like
> detectives.
> Hope this helps.
> In HIS service,
> Cheryl (No longer worried)
>
> Kathy Sullivan wrote:
>
> > --- "John O. Andersen" <andersen@...>
> wrote:
> > > Amalia,
> > >
> > > > All of my
> > > > kids learned to read in a mostly organic way;
> the
> > > oldest one at 4 and the
> > > > other two at around 8 or 9 years old.
> > >
> > > Thanks. I need to hear this right now because
> our
> > > son who will be 8 this
> > > week, is only just starting to read.
> > >
> > > John Andersen
> > > Unconventional Ideas at
> http://unconventional.go.to
> >
> > Hi,
> > I am new to this list and had to jump in here. I
> am
> > SO glad to know that I am not the only one with a
> late
> > reader. My middle son will be 8 in Dec. and is
> still
> > struggling to read. He can read the first couple
> Bob
> > books and that is about it.
> > Today he knows his alphabet and sounds, tomorrow
> he
> > doesn't. It is so fustrating because he is so
> advanced
> > in just about everything he does except reading.
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/

Pam Hartley

> What about adult illiteracy? Not so much of the ones who've been to school
> and just didn't "learn" to read. What about the older people who worked on
> farms and were never really sent to school much and their parents didn't have
> time/energy/thought to actually teach them to read. I know that some of
course
> did learn to read and are very educated. BUT there are some grown elderly men
> of several generations ago that could NOT read.

I'm not teaching my daughters to read, so I'm just like the farm families.
Except of course I'm not just like the farm families.

Generational non-readers living on isolated farms with other non-readers are
a far cry from an unschooling household with books everywhere, video games
and board games that need reading, etc.

If my daughters grew up on a farm where nobody ever spoke, probably they
would have speaking difficulties, too. Would that mean they were unable to
learn naturally if given the opportunity?

> Your post on it being a natural thing that would come in time just made me
> really think.

I hope so, as it's a basic of unschooling that learning IS natural
(including reading) and WILL come in time if the child has any need or
desire to learn it at all.

> At one time there were a LOT of non readers.

There are some figures that dispute this, if "at one time" you're not
talking about cave-men but about pre-public school days. Was it John Taylor
Gatto who had the stats on early 1900s literacy rates versus now, with
compulsory attendance?

> Oh, the gentleman above, he lived to be 79 and never learned to read and was
> very ashamed of that fact.

How terrible for him. I don't know how to draw, and admire those who can,
but I try not to be ashamed. I wish I had known him.

Pam

Mary

It seems to me that the discussion on reading being natural as *we* know it
and older generations not reading are two different things. The
circumstances of past generations and how we all unschool is totally
different. Sending children out in the fields to work because that was more
important and not having hardly any kind of reading materials available is
certainly not how we talk about out children growing up. It wasn't something
that happened because a lot of people then didn't do it. Because there
weren't available resources like there are now. And later on, schools and
people would make fun of others who couldn't read, which would in turn
squash any kind of spark in that person to want to. Someone here said they
knew someone who was actually embarrassed to have someone know they couldn't
read. If there was no taboo about not being able to read no matter what the
age, I really have no doubt that even 70 year old people would learn to do
it. I do know of stories, not personally, where older individuals did learn
on their own. Think of a 14 year old child in a loving home looking at a Pat
the Cat book trying to read it. Now think of that same child out in the park
or at school around other kids and adults who read and think about what
would be said to him. Makes a big difference in how that child would feel
about his ability.

Mary B.
http://www.homeschoolingtshirts.com

[email protected]

In a message dated 8/13/2003 12:10:46 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
pamhartley@... writes:

> I'm not teaching my daughters to read, so I'm just like the farm families.
> Except of course I'm not just like the farm families.
>
> Generational non-readers living on isolated farms with other non-readers are
> a far cry from an unschooling household with books everywhere, video games
> and board games that need reading, etc.
>

Pam,

Great post. So while children today have so many more opportunities than in
past generations (the computer alone is amazing) that would lean a person to
think that reading IS natural if one has enough materials to encourage or tempt
the child with?

Maybe in the past there simply wasn't time to sit and try to read something
as a child? Too many chores or not enough daylight or probably a hundred other
reasons. So there were lots of reasons NOT to do something that really comes
naturally?

Hmmm... this is beginning to sound like which came first, the chicken or the
egg...

So if one is exposed to plenty of things to encourage the natural ability to
read it will inertly happen. But if one is deprived on many opportunities it
might not?

Sorta like maybe someone is really talented golf player but has no clubs or
no course to practice so they might never reach their potential? Or one might
argue they can't be a gifted golfer BECAUSE they do not play often or have the
right clubs or course?

Either way, I also don't remember NOT reading, even before I went to school
so this is very interesting to me on many levels.

Thank for sharing your thoughts.

glena


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

Ren

The way I see the natural vs. not natural issue is this:

It is NATURAL for human beings to learn the things they are surrounded by day after day.
It is natural for human beings to learn how to read when surrounded by opportunities and reasons to do so.
Whether it is natural to learn to read when not surrounded by those things is a mute point at an unschooling list.
Even those children that struggle and have a more difficult time with printed symbols...it is still a natural process, not forced, in the unschooling lifestyle.

We learn what surrounds us. Even if a child has no interest in the thing they are surrounded by day after day, they are going to pick up a lot of it naturally. That's what is important in this discussion, not whether it happens by magic in other environments. I guarantee that every illiterate adult alive today, either had really rotten experiences that shut them down to learning or had NO adults really interested in them and what they were doing.
It isn't natural to learn to read in a non-reading environment. We all know that. I thought we were discussing whether it was natural to learn to read in a bubbly, happy unschooling environment. ??

Ren

[email protected]

In a message dated 8/13/2003 2:51:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
starsuncloud@... writes:

> We all know that. I thought we were discussing whether it was natural to
> learn to read in a bubbly, happy unschooling environment. ??
>
> Ren
>

But "natural" in of itself conjures up the idea that no outside influences
were needed to produce the resulting behaviour or in this case reading.

But are you saying that because unschooling children are in a bubbly, happy
atmosphere and at some point DO learn to read, then is it safe to conclude it
is not entirely natural if it takes certain things to make it happen
"naturally"?

Do you think if a child were surrounded with written materials, access to a
computer, games, all the books you can imagine but never were read to or never
introduced to or helped sound out words or recognize letters they would still
be able to read those books at some point?

It does take someone else I think to at the very least "help" them recognize
the letter A is an A and so on. Whether you call it teaching or whatever term
you attach to it, it still takes interaction with someone else to make this
learning happen. So can we really call it a natural thing? Maybe, I don't
think there is anything UN natural about a parent introducing words, letters,
sounds and to read read and read some more to their children. But it doesn't
happen in all homes and I guess some people learn to read in spite of not having
the advantages of a loving unschooling environment, for many reasons I
suppose.

What if, and this is unlikely in the civilized world, but if a child were
born to deaf mutes and had very little if any interaction with the speaking world
but had all the normal functions, would they indeed develop language?
Without hearing it, practicing it, interacting with others?

I would think they would be verbal in some context wouldn't they? Even if no
one were around to hear it?

I've seen toddlers with very little language skills. The ones I've known
were for the most part foster children that hadn't really had interaction with
adults much or their needs didn't matter so there was really not much need to
try to communicate them to others.

I am glad that I live in the current time with all the advantages it can
offer my children, so much to choose from!

glena





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

Pam Hartley

> What about if there IS printed material around, some books, a Bible,
> newspapers? I know that this elderly gentleman that I referred to had daily
> newspapers as an adult and lots of books around.

My husband lives in a house & barn full of show rabbits and genetics books
and magazines about rabbits. He can't tell you what the color possibilities
are if you breed an opal to a blue otter, but my 8 year old can.

Need and interest matter.

A child growing up in a reading household, without being shamed or
pressured, will learn to read because both need and interest will be there.
An adult who has learned enough tricks to get by, who is both ashamed he
cannot read and probably has convinced himself he cannot, is a different
matter. He's met need in a different way, and interest has been replaced by
secrecy and shame.

> I'm not making any argument at all, I merely asked what others thought of
> this and what experiences they might have encountered in their lives. I
haven't
> made a decision yet on whether I think every single person can/will read.
> That's why I was asking for others experiences.

I may have missed past conversations and I apologize in advance if this is
old ground, but... Are you trying to unschool your children? Or are you just
here looking for information to make a decision on whether to unschool?
Unschooling is based on the tenet that a child will learn anything they want
and need to, if given the chance to do so. Not almost anything. Not anything
except for reading. Anything.

Pam

Pam Hartley

----------
>From: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: [Unschooling-Discussion] Digest Number 3916
>Date: Wed, Aug 13, 2003, 11:03 AM
>

> Here is a good question to ponder.. I may do some research on it. If someone
> does not attain a "good level" of reading skills ( I would say, for a frame
> of reference, about a typical 5th-6th grade level) by the time they are ..
> say.. 18, or an adult, will it be difficult for them to improve thier reading
> skills as adults?


There's an assumption that children learn better than adults do. It may be
based on fact (haven't cared enough to look up the double-blind studies
<g>), but it remains that humans can and do learn their whole lives long.

My husband reads more now than he did when we were first married. More, more
quickly, more fluidly. When he read out loud to our first child in her
cradle, he was not as fluent or easy with it as reading to our 8 and 5 year
olds now.

Adults are people, too. ;) People learn.

Pam

[email protected]

In a message dated 8/13/03 1:16:53 PM, rubyprincesstsg@... writes:

<< But "natural" in of itself conjures up the idea that no outside influences
were needed to produce the resulting behaviour or in this case reading. >>

No.
If that were the case, then speech and language wouldn't be natural.
If a child is born and then grows in the total absence of other living,
speaking humans, no language will come.

Tarzan could NOT really have learned to read from finding an alphabet book in
his parents' old hut, because he had no model for the words, what they
sounded like, or what pictures even were. He needed human contact. (He was
fictional, but still...)


<<But are you saying that because unschooling children are in a bubbly, happy
atmosphere and at some point DO learn to read, then is it safe to conclude it
is not entirely natural if it takes certain things to make it happen
"naturally"?>>

It's a cultural thing. Children in Asian countries learn to eat with
chopsticks. It's natural for them to do so. Children here can learn to use a spoon
naturally, by trying it, playing with it and watching others do it. There are
humans who live where the people around them use neither spoons nor
chopsticks. They can't learn naturally to use what they've never seen. If one of us
went there, we wouldn't know how to eat--we would need to watch others and
copy their methods. It could be something kind of complicated, and it would take
practice, or it might be something similar to something we already do.

It is natural for children to learn their cultures.

<<Do you think if a child were surrounded with written materials, access to a
computer, games, all the books you can imagine but never were read to or
never
introduced to or helped sound out words or recognize letters they would still
be able to read those books at some point?>>

There you come into whether the deaf can learn to read. They do it all the
time. It has nothing to do with "sounding out," it's associating a pattern
with an object or idea. Some kids are talented with patterns, and could probably
figure out a LOT! How else could antiquarians figure out how to read
Egyption or Babylonian, if it can't be figured out from the patterns themselves?
(With Babylonian, they had a good starter clue, with the Rosetta Stone, I think.)

<<It does take someone else I think to at the very least "help" them
recognize
the letter A is an A and so on.>>

If you care whether they call "A" that. The same symbol is not pronounced
the same way by people who speak different languages right now. If you know the
alphabet in German or Spanish or French, you'll know that the same letters
don't sound the same in all, and it's not even the same SET of letters in all.

<Whether you call it teaching or whatever term
you attach to it, it still takes interaction with someone else to make this
learning happen. So can we really call it a natural thing? >>

Sex is natural, but it takes interaction.

<<Maybe, I don't
think there is anything UN natural about a parent introducing words, letters,
sounds and to read read and read some more to their children.>>

By "Maybe" I don't know whether you meant for it to apply to the sentence
before, or whether you're saying "Maybe you don't think..." the matter of that
sentence.

Sandra

Deniz Martinez

--- In [email protected], SandraDodd@a... wrote:

> No.
> If that were the case, then speech and language wouldn't be natural.
> If a child is born and then grows in the total absence of other
> living, speaking humans, no language will come.

That's not quite true. Even when human babies are not spoken to, they
still instinctually make babbling noises in an attempt to
communicate. Even deaf babies go through a babbling stage. It is true
that if there continues to be no exposure to spoken language, then
the babbling stops and no spoken language is learned. But the point
is that all humans have a deep INSTINCT to want to verbally
communicate. There is no similar inborn instinct to "graphically"
communicate--that is a learned behavior.

Deniz

Kelly Lenhart

> How else could antiquarians figure out how to read
>Egyption or Babylonian, if it can't be figured out from the patterns
themselves?
>(With Babylonian, they had a good starter clue, with the Rosetta Stone, I
think.)

The Rosetta stone had Greek, a script form of Egyptians heiroglyphs and
regular heiroglyphs on it. All telling the same story.

They translated it by knowing already how to read the Greek and figuring out
that the script form was phonetic. So they had a pretty good rough
translation of that. THEN they noticed that the words inside those little
loops (cartoche) were also phonetic and matched the names of some of the
people in the first two peices. Cleopatra was one of them, I believe.

The big leap was realizing that they heiroglyphs aren't always phonetic.
Sometimes an image is a complete word.

This stuff is SOOOO cool. If anyone is interested, I read a wonderful book
about the race to translate the Rosetta Stone and I can find the
title/author.

Kelly

coyote's corner

I'm interested - I'm interested!!!!
I turned in my career book - back in 1966 - Catholic private school -
in hieroglyphics! It took me almost a year!!

Great fun!! Screwed up the sisters though!!
Janis
----- Original Message -----
From: Kelly Lenhart
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2003 10:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Unschooling-Discussion] late readers


> How else could antiquarians figure out how to read
>Egyption or Babylonian, if it can't be figured out from the patterns
themselves?
>(With Babylonian, they had a good starter clue, with the Rosetta Stone, I
think.)

The Rosetta stone had Greek, a script form of Egyptians heiroglyphs and
regular heiroglyphs on it. All telling the same story.

They translated it by knowing already how to read the Greek and figuring out
that the script form was phonetic. So they had a pretty good rough
translation of that. THEN they noticed that the words inside those little
loops (cartoche) were also phonetic and matched the names of some of the
people in the first two peices. Cleopatra was one of them, I believe.

The big leap was realizing that they heiroglyphs aren't always phonetic.
Sometimes an image is a complete word.

This stuff is SOOOO cool. If anyone is interested, I read a wonderful book
about the race to translate the Rosetta Stone and I can find the
title/author.

Kelly


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




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

If you have questions, concerns or problems with this list, please email the moderator, Joyce Fetteroll (fetteroll@...), or the list owner, Helen Hegener (HEM-Editor@...).

To unsubscribe from this group, click on the following link or address 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]

Ren

"well all of your proffessional unschoolers let me ask you this -
How do you know if your child has a problem or if he will end up
being just a late reader."

Well, I'm not a professional unschooler, since I don't make money at this! But I assume you are jokingly referring to those of us that truly, deeply understand and apply the philosophy.:)

First of all, if my child has some real, physical problem that would actually prevent him/her from reading, how is pressuring or pushing going to help? I accept that my children are each unique individuals...with or without real disabilities (I'm coming to hate that word) I am going to honor them for who they are, right now, today.

My awareness of their needs might make me research specific traits, especially if it were causing them frustration or discomfort. Understanding those traits might help me give that child what they need, but labeling them, or pushing them to learn something that may be difficult for that child, would never be the answer.
Have you read Anne Ohman's account of her child? "I am what I am" is a beautifully written article, that sums up exactly why I feel disability labels are not only unecessary in unschooling, but harmful.

You can google it, or there's a link at Sandra's site.

Some people are going to have real life disabilities that keep them from reading well, or even at all. How would pushing something they can't do ever help? People can be whole and happy, leading productive lives without reading well!! Truly.
It would have to be a very real and serious problem to prevent them from reading entirely. In that case, focus on the things the child CAN do well.

I am amazed at how focused our society is on weaknesses or "disabilities". WHY can't we see the good things in each other? why, oh why, can't parents FOCUS on the traits that are wonderful in their children. If we spend a huge majority of time focusing on what incredible human beings they are, don't you think they'll feel empowered enough to follow their dreams, to believe they have the power to change their lives at ANY time, to trust that their passions are worth following?
The greatest gift you can give your child is a sense of wonder...curiosity, the second greatest gift is the ability to TRUST themselves and believe they are whole, wonderful beings, capable of creating an amazing life for themselves.
Schools would have you believe that reading and math are the keys to success....well I'm here to tell you otherwise!!

Ren





"I never teach my pupils; I only attempt to provide the conditions in which they can learn."
Albert Einstein

sonyacurti

--- In [email protected], Ren
<starsuncloud@n...> wrote:
>
> "well all of your proffessional unschoolers let me ask you this -
> How do you know if your child has a problem or if he will end up
> being just a late reader." (first paragraph - by Sonya)
>
> Well, I'm not a professional unschooler, since I don't make money
at this! But I assume you are jokingly referring to those of us that
truly, deeply understand and apply the philosophy.:)(Ren)


Yes Ren,that is how I mean it. I've have been thinking about this a
lot and remembering way back when I first pulled my son out of
Kindergarten. I took tons of books out and read and it was all I
ate, slept and breathed. I was unschoolng before I had a name for
it. I also new that even though the schools labeled my child he was
smart as a whip and he is my child - So I pulled him out. I'm not
sure if I have made the "padigram shift" as of yet but I know I am
not the same person I was two years ago. This list gave me the
strength I needed while I was unschooling in a schooling world and
getting flak from non-believers in homeschooling forget
UNSCHOOLING !! I never announced that I was unschooling but people
probed me for questions including my husband LOL................
Well

I'm here to say good-bye for a little while. As you know I said I
would be going back to work and I will be training for 10 weeks and
the whole process takes about 9 months total(state job). The hard
part is that I don't know when that call will come and I have to be
ready !! I know what it takes because my sister works there now and
has seen over time what it takes. I know this has nothing to do with
unschooling but................I have made the tough choice of
putting my son back in school for this time period. VERY TOUGH
CHOICE ! I visited the school (not public) and asked them what they
could do for "US" not what could we do for them since we are paying
them. I told them my son doesn't read and that I had no ciriculum
and that I did not want him to be pushed. We bought all of his
uniforms and he is dressed to shoes in it right now and he doesn't
even have school today LOL..... I have different eyes now compared
to the older me. I have explained to my son that I want this to be a
fun experience and I do not want him to feel any pressure to perform
because learning is suppose to be FUN. He understands that he is not
where the other children are and he said to the teacher "I don't
read yet". The only thing that comforts me in this whole thing is
that the children are not aloud to tease the other children and they
don't single out children with differences. The school I have chosen
was started by home schoolers so while they may not be "Unschoolers"
@ least they are not mainstream schoolers. We are schedued for
the "Live and Learn" conference and I look forward to being there
and meeting you all. I trust that my son and I will make it through
this unscathed :)
Funny I just looked up the word "unscathed" to make sure my spelling
was correct and guess what word was directly under it "unschooled"
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!
See you all @ the conference :)

Sonya
Attleboro,Mass.

sonyacurti

--- In [email protected], Ren
<starsuncloud@n...> wrote:
>
> "well all of your proffessional unschoolers let me ask you this -
> How do you know if your child has a problem or if he will end up
> being just a late reader." (snip - written by Sonya)
>
> Well, I'm not a professional unschooler, since I don't make money
at this! But I assume you are jokingly referring to those of us that
truly, deeply understand and apply the philosophy.:) (snip - written
by Ren)

Yes ! Ren that is what I meant. I am not totally sure if I would be
considered one of those who have made the "Padigram shift" as of yet.
I thank this list very much for helping me grow and giving me
strength when I needed it. However due to my circumstances I have
put my child back into school (with new eyes of course). I will see
you all @ the "Live and Learn conference" . I have enterd this
situation with my son with new eyes and I trust that we will make it
through this "unscathed". Ironically the word directly under this
(in my dictionary)is unschooled LOL..... Mmmmmmm !

I'll be back - take care and aee you in Aug.

Sonya,
Attleboro, Mass.