Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] Re: peace and love (
[email protected]
In a message dated 8/7/2004 6:38:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
angels_heart82@... writes:
But I also see posts that seem to be saying you have
to let your kids make all their choices all the time
all by themselves no matter what and it is the only
way they can learn.<<<
Show me ONE post that said that!
ONE!
~Kelly
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
angels_heart82@... writes:
But I also see posts that seem to be saying you have
to let your kids make all their choices all the time
all by themselves no matter what and it is the only
way they can learn.<<<
Show me ONE post that said that!
ONE!
~Kelly
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
pam sorooshian
> But I also see posts that seem to be saying you haveI don't think anybody here would ever say the above - it isn't even
> to let your kids make all their choices all the time
> all by themselves no matter what and it is the only
> way they can learn.<<<
sensible. Well - I KNOW nobody would say that, because nobody would
have said, "all by themselves," that's for sure. Maybe the other parts,
depending on the context.
People here are good parents - caring parents. Start from that
assumption. The ideas are radical, maybe radically different than
anything you've heard before? But read carefully, don't jump to any
conclusions. Especially read about REAL experiences people have with
their REAL kids.
-pam
National Home Education Network
<www.NHEN.org>
Serving the entire homeschooling community since 1999
through information, networking and public relations.
pam sorooshian
On Aug 7, 2004, at 4:47 PM, Dianne wrote:
'in-your-face' group, if by that you mean that ideas will be
challenged. In fact, I'll post the list policies here, because it might
be useful for others to be reminded:
UnschoolingDiscussion Posting Policies
Please read carefully BEFORE posting on the list.
It is our sincere wish to provide a forum for those seeking to deepen
their
understanding of the unschooling philosophy. The primary purpose of this
list is to encourage the critical examination of ideas, beliefs and
viewpoints.
Questioning of deeply-held ideas and beliefs can be very uncomfortable
and
sometimes responses to that process can stand in the way of people
getting
what they need out of the list.
Therefore, we offer the following to help our members get the
most from the list:
1. We suggest that you read for at least a couple of weeks before
posting. Spend that
time getting a "feel" for the list and its members. This will help you
decide if this list is worth
your time or whether some other list might be more useful to you in
meeting your needs.
2 Expect your beliefs to be challenged. Welcome this as an opportunity
to
critically examine your own ideas.
3. When differences of opinion arise, stick to discussing ideas, not the
person with whom you are disagreeing.
4. If you have a belief or practice that you don't want held up to
public
examination, don't post it to the list.
5. Before you hit "send," consider whether your post will contribute
positively to the unschooling discussion.
6. Avoid using loaded terminology. For instance, "If you have no TV
restrictions why don't your kids just watch TV all day?" will get you
more
useful responses than, "I don't see how your kids learn anything if all
they
ever do is sit around like zombies watching unlimited TV."
7. It is not useful to inform the list that you believe someone else is
being rude or discourteous; please trust the rest of the list to
recognize
rudeness for themselves. Saying, "Jane was rude to me," just bogs down
the
list. It is also a waste of everyone's time when participants attempt to
correct or improve other list members' manners. It never works and
always
disrupts the list. Avoid
statements such as: "Jane, here is my suggestion of how you could write
more
nicely so people wouldn't think you are being rude."
8. Our brains automatically supply a "tone" to posts as we read. It can
be
helpful to imagine your best friend speaking the words you are reading,
in
the gentlest, most well-meaning tone you can imagine. It is
unacceptable to
attack the "tone" of the list or to make generalizations about it. "I've
been on many other lists and this one is the rudest I've seen," would be
unacceptable. Instead, attempt to create a positive, helpful tone with
your
own posts by setting the example you hope others will follow.
9. Envision every post and response as a dish at a potluck dinner. You
won't
love every dish at a potluck any more than you will love every poster's
style of help. But a dish/post may be exactly what someone else needs.
If
you don't like a certain list member's offerings, skip them and
leave them for others.
10. Read and write as clearly as you can. In casual conversation we
often
don't realize how much we rely on others to fill in the gist of our
conversation based on what they expect us to say. But here, without body
language or inflection, all we have to go on are your words and they
should
say what you mean. If you say, for example, you "never" do something, it
should not mean "almost never."
Our goal is to make the list as useful as possible for those seeking to
deepen their understanding of the unschooling philosophy. To do that,
all
new list members are initially moderated to prevent spamming and catch
posts
that could disrupt the list. People will also be moderated if they
disrupt
the usefulness of the list. Potentially disruptive posts will be
returned
for revision.
If you have questions, please write to:
[email protected]
> This just seems to be a very inPlease Dianne - go and reread the list policies, this IS an
> your face group.
'in-your-face' group, if by that you mean that ideas will be
challenged. In fact, I'll post the list policies here, because it might
be useful for others to be reminded:
UnschoolingDiscussion Posting Policies
Please read carefully BEFORE posting on the list.
It is our sincere wish to provide a forum for those seeking to deepen
their
understanding of the unschooling philosophy. The primary purpose of this
list is to encourage the critical examination of ideas, beliefs and
viewpoints.
Questioning of deeply-held ideas and beliefs can be very uncomfortable
and
sometimes responses to that process can stand in the way of people
getting
what they need out of the list.
Therefore, we offer the following to help our members get the
most from the list:
1. We suggest that you read for at least a couple of weeks before
posting. Spend that
time getting a "feel" for the list and its members. This will help you
decide if this list is worth
your time or whether some other list might be more useful to you in
meeting your needs.
2 Expect your beliefs to be challenged. Welcome this as an opportunity
to
critically examine your own ideas.
3. When differences of opinion arise, stick to discussing ideas, not the
person with whom you are disagreeing.
4. If you have a belief or practice that you don't want held up to
public
examination, don't post it to the list.
5. Before you hit "send," consider whether your post will contribute
positively to the unschooling discussion.
6. Avoid using loaded terminology. For instance, "If you have no TV
restrictions why don't your kids just watch TV all day?" will get you
more
useful responses than, "I don't see how your kids learn anything if all
they
ever do is sit around like zombies watching unlimited TV."
7. It is not useful to inform the list that you believe someone else is
being rude or discourteous; please trust the rest of the list to
recognize
rudeness for themselves. Saying, "Jane was rude to me," just bogs down
the
list. It is also a waste of everyone's time when participants attempt to
correct or improve other list members' manners. It never works and
always
disrupts the list. Avoid
statements such as: "Jane, here is my suggestion of how you could write
more
nicely so people wouldn't think you are being rude."
8. Our brains automatically supply a "tone" to posts as we read. It can
be
helpful to imagine your best friend speaking the words you are reading,
in
the gentlest, most well-meaning tone you can imagine. It is
unacceptable to
attack the "tone" of the list or to make generalizations about it. "I've
been on many other lists and this one is the rudest I've seen," would be
unacceptable. Instead, attempt to create a positive, helpful tone with
your
own posts by setting the example you hope others will follow.
9. Envision every post and response as a dish at a potluck dinner. You
won't
love every dish at a potluck any more than you will love every poster's
style of help. But a dish/post may be exactly what someone else needs.
If
you don't like a certain list member's offerings, skip them and
leave them for others.
10. Read and write as clearly as you can. In casual conversation we
often
don't realize how much we rely on others to fill in the gist of our
conversation based on what they expect us to say. But here, without body
language or inflection, all we have to go on are your words and they
should
say what you mean. If you say, for example, you "never" do something, it
should not mean "almost never."
Our goal is to make the list as useful as possible for those seeking to
deepen their understanding of the unschooling philosophy. To do that,
all
new list members are initially moderated to prevent spamming and catch
posts
that could disrupt the list. People will also be moderated if they
disrupt
the usefulness of the list. Potentially disruptive posts will be
returned
for revision.
If you have questions, please write to:
[email protected]
Dawn Adams
Dianne writes:
-Sometimes the seeming tone of a post comes from the readers and not the writers post. Are you really reading these posts with a clear mind? Frankly, I've been sort of puzzled about how you keep interpreting some things as being about food when they were clearly (to me at least) analogies used to illustrate something about control.
Dawn (in NS)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>I didn't say there was one specific post that saidSome thoughts...-Usually when I find a post of mine has been misread it's because I wasn't clear in the first place.
>exactly those words. I said it seems to be what some
>posts are saying, it may be the tone of the post or
>some statement that was made that implies that is what
>the writer believes. This just seems to be a very in
>your face group. You misread my post and then
>challenge me on it.
-Sometimes the seeming tone of a post comes from the readers and not the writers post. Are you really reading these posts with a clear mind? Frankly, I've been sort of puzzled about how you keep interpreting some things as being about food when they were clearly (to me at least) analogies used to illustrate something about control.
Dawn (in NS)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Elizabeth Hill
**I have not come to any real
conclusions about this list, just impressions so far
and it seems my impressions are considered invalid.**
I suggest that when something sounds too sweeping or too black and white
to you, that you quote it and ask a question about it. (Or paste it in
a reply email and don't sent it until the discussion has unfolded and
some confusion has cleared up.) The original poster can clarify her
intent if the relevant parts of her posts are quoted. It's really
time-consuming to go back and find the relevant part after it's been
sent. (Most likely, no one will do that.)
It is just not possible to back up and understand how a reader reached
certain conclusions about the impression that the list makes on her
unless the reader/replier is specific about what parts of what posts she
wants to discuss. Without pointing out specific passages, there is no
way for people see specifically what someone is disagreeing with. I can
say to you "I interpret what was posted here last week differently than
you do", but I can't really go any further in discussing this.
I don't think anyone can give a meaningful response to your concerns
about always letting kids make decisions unsupported (my paraphrase),
unless you are more specific. (I can say that it is a common
misperception. People sometimes are very polarized in their thinking
and think that if a parent resists being very controlling that then that
parent just throws her hands up in the air and doesn't parent at all.
As if "black" and "white" were the only choices. As if you a parent who
isn't at the hovering and controlling end of the spectrum is ignoring
her children totally.)
I don't think Sandra said "all women who are concerned about food
quality are shrill and aggravating and need to chill" (my colorful
paraphrase). I think she gave an example trying to show that SOME
parents who are focused on food issues and political causes sometimes
put ideology first when making decisions and put their children
second. I think she is implying that the child should be more
important than the ideology. Having rules that are inflexible, for
ideological reasons, can make parenting harder and can be harder on kids
than we have to be.
(But, if I was responding in real time, at the time it was said, I could
refer back to Sandra's real words and not be shoving my own
interpretation into her mouth. That's gotta be annoying.) (Although
perhaps less annoying if I get pretty close to her intention.)
Betsy
PS One part of being specific that can be helpful is being specific
about ages of kids. Advice that rings true to parents of 13 year olds
(e.g. let them stay up and play quietly), often sounds inappropriate to
the parents of 3 year olds. But one poster can write "my kid likes to
do _____" and some people reading will visualize a little kid, and some
a much bigger one. It can be easy for us to talk past each other that
way. And I wish I had a specific example to give, as I think it would
make my point clearer.
conclusions about this list, just impressions so far
and it seems my impressions are considered invalid.**
I suggest that when something sounds too sweeping or too black and white
to you, that you quote it and ask a question about it. (Or paste it in
a reply email and don't sent it until the discussion has unfolded and
some confusion has cleared up.) The original poster can clarify her
intent if the relevant parts of her posts are quoted. It's really
time-consuming to go back and find the relevant part after it's been
sent. (Most likely, no one will do that.)
It is just not possible to back up and understand how a reader reached
certain conclusions about the impression that the list makes on her
unless the reader/replier is specific about what parts of what posts she
wants to discuss. Without pointing out specific passages, there is no
way for people see specifically what someone is disagreeing with. I can
say to you "I interpret what was posted here last week differently than
you do", but I can't really go any further in discussing this.
I don't think anyone can give a meaningful response to your concerns
about always letting kids make decisions unsupported (my paraphrase),
unless you are more specific. (I can say that it is a common
misperception. People sometimes are very polarized in their thinking
and think that if a parent resists being very controlling that then that
parent just throws her hands up in the air and doesn't parent at all.
As if "black" and "white" were the only choices. As if you a parent who
isn't at the hovering and controlling end of the spectrum is ignoring
her children totally.)
I don't think Sandra said "all women who are concerned about food
quality are shrill and aggravating and need to chill" (my colorful
paraphrase). I think she gave an example trying to show that SOME
parents who are focused on food issues and political causes sometimes
put ideology first when making decisions and put their children
second. I think she is implying that the child should be more
important than the ideology. Having rules that are inflexible, for
ideological reasons, can make parenting harder and can be harder on kids
than we have to be.
(But, if I was responding in real time, at the time it was said, I could
refer back to Sandra's real words and not be shoving my own
interpretation into her mouth. That's gotta be annoying.) (Although
perhaps less annoying if I get pretty close to her intention.)
Betsy
PS One part of being specific that can be helpful is being specific
about ages of kids. Advice that rings true to parents of 13 year olds
(e.g. let them stay up and play quietly), often sounds inappropriate to
the parents of 3 year olds. But one poster can write "my kid likes to
do _____" and some people reading will visualize a little kid, and some
a much bigger one. It can be easy for us to talk past each other that
way. And I wish I had a specific example to give, as I think it would
make my point clearer.
[email protected]
In a message dated 8/8/04 10:34:43 AM, ecsamhill@... writes:
<< I don't think Sandra said "all women who are concerned about food
quality are shrill and aggravating and need to chill" (my colorful
paraphrase). >>
True.
But I do think that those who are shrill and aggravating about anything that
isn't directly their child need to breathe through that and come back to take
care of the child today.
Sandra
<< I don't think Sandra said "all women who are concerned about food
quality are shrill and aggravating and need to chill" (my colorful
paraphrase). >>
True.
But I do think that those who are shrill and aggravating about anything that
isn't directly their child need to breathe through that and come back to take
care of the child today.
Sandra