[email protected]

In a message dated 1/29/03 8:07:45 AM, bunsofaluminum60@... writes:

<< Back when I first started
posting here, I boldly asserted that the Founding Fathers all had
strict, scheduled courses of learning to follow, as directed by their
parents or tutors. >>

Was that here? I don't remember that.

Gosh. I came in here TRYING to get through the 200+ pieces of mail I haven't
read (on three lits, but it's mostly this one), thinking "I might miss
something!"

And maybe I had missed something already.

Heidi, didn't you just join lately?
If you joined when I was on pain killers and not too mobile, (October and
early November) that might explain why I would have missed your bold
assertion. I'm sure if I had read that I would have said at LEAST "Oh, huh!"



Sandra

Heidi <[email protected]>

Sandra

I joined about two weeks ago. And, in discussing this concept with my
best friend, she brought up the founding fathers' childhoods of
structure, coursework, schedules, etc. So I threw it in the pot here.
I did get feedback, I think from Mary B., that the founding fathers
may have pursued further, even Classic education, but they didn't
embark on their scholarship before about age 12.

Ben Franklin's bio bears that out. He self-educated, beginning about
age 12. The man was a GENIUS, btw. Self-learned three Romance
languages, plus Latin.

Heidi

--- In [email protected], SandraDodd@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 1/29/03 8:07:45 AM, bunsofaluminum60@h... writes:
>
> << Back when I first started
> posting here, I boldly asserted that the Founding Fathers all had
> strict, scheduled courses of learning to follow, as directed by
their
> parents or tutors. >>
>
> Was that here? I don't remember that.
>
> Gosh. I came in here TRYING to get through the 200+ pieces of mail
I haven't
> read (on three lits, but it's mostly this one), thinking "I might
miss
> something!"
>
> And maybe I had missed something already.
>
> Heidi, didn't you just join lately?
> If you joined when I was on pain killers and not too mobile,
(October and
> early November) that might explain why I would have missed your
bold
> assertion. I'm sure if I had read that I would have said at
LEAST "Oh, huh!"
>
>
>
> Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/30/03 2:56:35 PM, bunsofaluminum60@... writes:

<< The man was a GENIUS, btw. Self-learned three Romance
languages, plus Latin. >>

But he didn't learn them out of textbooks. He learned by reading real books,
and by going to Europe, by corresponding in those languages, and by reading
Latin texts, I think. (I could be wrong. But I KNOW he didn't take French
101, French 102, Conversational French...)

Sorry I missed reading something a few weeks ago. I don't know what
happened.

Sandra

Heidi <[email protected]>

Oh, absolutely. I may not be a full-fledged radical unschooler, but
I've always given my kids actual books to read, not textbooks. NEVER
textbooks, though we have a few in the home library in case they ever
wanted to peruse one.
In fact, we're ready to toss Abbie's science text out the window.
Oceans, then Weather, then Chemistry, then this, then that...so far,
none of these topics has sparked a fire in her, but what am I
supposed to do, according to the correspondence school we're using
for her high school, if some science topic DOES take off in her mind?
When she gets through that topic in the text, jump to the next topic
and drop what she's falling in love with? I just HATE textbooks. The
public school mentality...I'm becoming more and more convinced THAT
is what is wrong with American youth, NOT the ditching of prayer or
Bible reading IN the schools...the freaking schools, themselves.

How B.Franklin learned Latin was, in his middle adulthood, he decided
to learn it. Found a Latin grammar (textbook? maybe) and found that
he picked it up in a few months, BECAUSE he already knew the French
and Italian. And he also learned the French and Italian because he
wanted to.

peace,
Heidi

--- In [email protected], SandraDodd@a... wrote:
>
> In a message dated 1/30/03 2:56:35 PM, bunsofaluminum60@h... writes:
>
> << The man was a GENIUS, btw. Self-learned three Romance
> languages, plus Latin. >>
>
> But he didn't learn them out of textbooks. He learned by reading
real books,
> and by going to Europe, by corresponding in those languages, and by
reading
> Latin texts, I think. (I could be wrong. But I KNOW he didn't
take French
> 101, French 102, Conversational French...)
>
> Sorry I missed reading something a few weeks ago. I don't know
what
> happened.
>
> Sandra

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/31/03 8:13:29 AM, bunsofaluminum60@... writes:

<< but what am I
supposed to do, according to the correspondence school we're using
for her high school, if some science topic DOES take off in her mind?
When she gets through that topic in the text, jump to the next topic
and drop what she's falling in love with? I just HATE textbooks. The
public school mentality...I'm becoming more and more convinced THAT
is what is wrong with American youth, NOT the ditching of prayer or
Bible reading IN the schools...the freaking schools, themselves. >>

If some science topic does take off, it could be neverending.

I wish "science" as a school-topic didn't exist.
That's not what I mean to say, but I'm leaving it because it popped out.

What I wish is that no one had come up with the idea to lump all the cool
stuff about the earth and space and microscopic life into one heading. I've
never known anyone equally interested in all of that, unless they "hated
science" and so decided in advance to shun and ignore anything that anyone
else thought was "science." Someone can know all about marine biology
without caring anything at all about crystal formation or metamorphic rock.
But in school it seems "good at science" or "likes science" is like an on/off
switch that not only the students don't understand, but most of the teachers
don't either.

Worse than math which is presented "in order" so that those who are stuck or
dislike one level are barred from the rest for a while (or discouraged
forever), science's arbitrary levels seem entirely unrelated, except for that
thread of scientific observation and measuring and discovery and methodology.


But back to the quote:

-=-I'm becoming more and more convinced THAT
is what is wrong with American youth, NOT the ditching of prayer or
Bible reading IN the schools...the freaking schools, themselves.-=-

Is it the schools or is it the traditional teaching methods?

Because the great majority of homeschoolers seem to be using traditional te
aching methods.

Sandra

Heidi <[email protected]>

> But back to the quote:
>
> -=-I'm becoming more and more convinced THAT
> is what is wrong with American youth, NOT the ditching of prayer or
> Bible reading IN the schools...the freaking schools, themselves.-=-
>
> Is it the schools or is it the traditional teaching methods?
>
> Because the great majority of homeschoolers seem to be using
traditional te
> aching methods.
>
> Sandra

Yeah, that's what I mean. But it is the institutional school that
started the trend, Homeschoolers just opt for "doing school at home,"
not thinking it through. Even to the point of having a separate room
with desks and everyone's workbooks in his or her own desk, and
having school time, etc. I never could do that. We've always just
gotten out the books and sat down to "school" at the kitchen table,
and "school" has always been "Get your math done!" LOL Thank God I
have opted from the beginning, for self-created curriculum using
living books (Principle Approach), or very hands off curriculum where
the kids teach their own selves (Robinson, albeit Math is pretty
forced with Robinson, even if kids aren't shaping up to have a brain
for math)

It's possible, even at home, to break up a kid's time into little
increments, although I would definitely say, even the most scheduled
and regimented homeschoolers find all their school work done in a
couple of hours, and the rest of their time for cool stuff. I don't
know any families where the home lessons have taken five or six hours
a day.

peace, Heidi

[email protected]

In a message dated 1/31/03 6:15:52 PM, bunsofaluminum60@... writes:

<< Even to the point of having a separate room
with desks and everyone's workbooks in his or her own desk, and
having school time, etc. >>

When I was just in the early stages of reading about homeschooling, when
Kirby was five, I was sitting at the playgroup meeting with several other La
Leche League types (lots of leaders, lot of regulars, and some people I
didn't know.

I was asking some of the unschoolers questions.

I said (probably too raucously) "HEY, I hear there are some homeschoolers who
even make a SCHOOLroom with a teacher's desk and maps and a flag, and the
kids have to stand up in the morning and say the Pledge of Allegiance. . ."
and I wasn't even through with my "Can you beLIEVE this Sh** would really
happen!?" when one of the leaders, I noticed started kind of twitching parts
of her face toward the woman sitting next to her.

I trailed off and she said "Yeah, some people really do." I knew exactly who
she meant, and I changed the subject just enough to cover what was left of my
butt.

Had I known more, I'd've just asked her WHY. But I was so new I didn't feel
confident in saying more.

Years ago when there was no separate place for unschoolers, but the bulletin
boards were mixed homeschoolers, someone reported to us with great
satisfaction that during school hours, her children were required to call her
"Mrs. Smith" or whatever it was. That way they remembered they were Really
in SCHOOL.

Sandra

Have a Nice Day!

>>>>Years ago when there was no separate place for unschoolers, but the bulletin
boards were mixed homeschoolers, someone reported to us with great
satisfaction that during school hours, her children were required to call her
"Mrs. Smith" or whatever it was. That way they remembered they were Really
in SCHOOL.<<<<


I've heard this off and on. I can hardly imagine it. I mean, even my kids friends call me by my first name, and some of them even call me "mom".

To make my own kids call me "mrs."????? LOLOLOLOL

I'd have lost them the very first minute of "school". What kid is going to take that seriously??

Oh well, just my rambling musings.

Kristen





~~~~ 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]

Fetteroll

on 1/31/03 11:43 PM, Have a Nice Day! at litlrooh@... wrote:

> I'd have lost them the very first minute of "school". What kid is going to
> take that seriously??

The kids who are taught that no means no. That know that there is a clear
division between the role of parents and the role of kids. That kids are
clearly subordinate to mom. (Who is subordinate to her husband. Who is
subordinate to God.)

Joyce