Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How is deciding what you want to learn a bad thing?
Don't ALL college students do that? In HS, we had to start picking classes to determine which college classes we would want to pursue for an eventual major/career choice.
We do a bit of unschooling. She chooses which subjects that interest her the most, and we go from there. Yes, she still gets her cores, so no worries there.
If your child wants to be a Dr., how is it a bad thing to prep them as early as possible with bio classes? (for example)
1) College students are basically functional adults who are presumed to have developed the foresight to understand the importance and necessity of learning specific subjects. Plus they're still choosing among classes delivered in a traditional learning environment. Adults determining their future education and career path in a structured environment is a little different from letting a 6-year-old learn (or not learn) about the world as it comes his way, on his terms and schedule.
2) What you are doing is not "unschooling." You are still providing instruction and basic educational structure.
3) Non sequitur. Non-schooling doesn't involve any formal "prepping" at all.
I'm a radical unschooler (not rabid ) and the first piece on Good Morning America was incredibly biased, and heavily edited. They did a second piece yesterday, a follow-up with the family, and it did allow them to answer some of the questions raised. You certainly won't get the full picture of unschooling from a 5-minute fluff piece.
We live with no rules, yet my kids are not hellions. We live no structure determined by me, yet my kids get done what they need to. I have never, ever forced them to do anything, yet they persist in difficult tasks, take on new challenges, and are kind and thoughtful.
I do not make "educational opportunities" for them. I support their desires and interests, and through that, they learn everything they need.
It has taken a lot of soul-searching, growth, and discarding of old ways of being for this life to work for us - yet work it does, quite beautifully. I know my kids are prepared for life, because they're living their lives now. They know how to find out what they need to know - a skill that will serve them their whole lives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by harhar
Are you telling me that they are going to pick up Kierkegaard with a 1st grade understanding of the English language, and say, "I get this." Of course not.
Why would you think unschoolers have only a first-grade understanding of the English language? Do you think someone really has to study "English" in school to get it? They are immersed in English every day of their lives.
Not to mention... how many public school kids are able to pick up Kierkegaard and converse intelligently about it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by harhar
Sure some of these kids might say, "OK, so I want to go to college and learn about this stuff." Well congratulations unschooling parents you've made it infinitely more difficult to get your son or daughter into one.
Actually, most unschoolers who choose to go to college get into the college of their choice. They are curious, engaged learners, not there just to go through the motions. Colleges recruit unschoolers, for that reason.
Most unschoolers would not think, however, they need to go to college to learn about something they're interested in. In the philosophy example, more than likely, they would read books, maybe join a discussion group, seek out experts if they were truly curious. Going to an institution to learn about one thing they're interested in is incredibly inefficient and expensive.
Why would you think unschoolers have only a first-grade understanding of the English language? Do you think someone really has to study "English" in school to get it? They are immersed in English every day of their lives.
Not to mention... how many public school kids are able to pick up Kierkegaard and converse intelligently about it?
I was going off the kid's quote, "about first grade being the last grade he attended" in the ABC piece (which I admitted was biased in a following post.)
And yes I do believe someone must study English to get it. I'm assuming academic English. You may not have to be fluent in grammar, but in order to understand the intricacies of a subject matter and say, writing to a particular audience, are very important skills that could be missed by unschooling, because (at it's definition) it is up to the whim of the child to learn this.
This is of course assuming that the child is bright and the parents are nurturing, both of which seem to be in your favor.
As far as a public school student understanding and/or conversing about Kierkegaard I think the numbers would be about the same for both: probably 1/1000.
What gets me is how an unschooler would get to that point. I had an interest in the meaning of life, but had no clue what to look for, until I enrolled into college. How would the unschooler be introduced to Kierkegaard and in what fashion? What is the progression, the same? It may not be necessary to learn but it sure is awesome stuff. That's why I also think in many cases it isn't unschooling at all but rather a modified homeschooling. I don't know.
Quote:
Actually, most unschoolers who choose to go to college get into the college of their choice. They are curious, engaged learners, not there just to go through the motions. Colleges recruit unschoolers, for that reason.
Most unschoolers would not think, however, they need to go to college to learn about something they're interested in. In the philosophy example, more than likely, they would read books, maybe join a discussion group, seek out experts if they were truly curious. Going to an institution to learn about one thing they're interested in is incredibly inefficient and expensive.
I will probably look it up for myself but do you have statistics about college acceptance for unschoolers? Do you know of any substantial studies that follow the lives of unschoolers and how they are as adults?
Also I'll have to disagree about school being inefficient. (Expensive, in most cases yes.) At least in the case of Philosophy (or anything for that matter). Logically it seems if one in interested in many things then other things will be ignored. School gives a well rounded approach to general knowledge and then if one is interested in something (and they don't know it yet), they probably would miss out on it if they were unschooled. This very principle of unschooling is both it's greatest asset and detriment.
I see it like this (as I've stated in my previous) post: Kids can still have their interests and still go to school too, I don't get the need for one or the other.
I'm open minded but extremely skeptical of unschooling. It fascinates me because I very curious about the 'self motivating' part.
If I were left to my own devices I'd play video games, listen to a lot of music, read occasionally, play guitar, record music and take photographs. I would be on the internet all day learning stuff, but how does that translate to a job?
When do the parents cut the cord? I just have tons of questions about this.
Here is a good website with lots of info on unschooling:Unschooling
And a snippet about learning in an unschooling environment.
Quote:
Think about how an adult learns something new, how you yourself do it; there is no reason why a child can't learn in the same way. You have an interest, let's say, in tying flies for fishing, or in the Civil War, or in chinchillas. What do you do? Research, for one. What kind? The library, perhaps. You find books on the subject. You find movies about the Civil War. You go to the zoo or a pet shop or a state fair to see chinchillas and talk to people who raise them. You find a TV program about tying flies and how to cast, and you go to the lake and see people fishing, and talk to them. You realize you can't quite understand how to do it by reading, so you find someone who can show you. You want to have some fun interaction with others, so you join a Civil War reanactment society. Now, imagine you are in school, and you have to "study" tying flies, or raising chinchillas. You have no interest in these things at all; you are totally absorbed by the Civil War right now. It would take coercion (rewards/grades and punishments/grades) to make you "learn" about flies and chinchillas, and as soon as that last final is done, you forget it all and go back to that fascinating book on Antietam.
People learn because they are interested in learning something, for some reason. A man learns Greek to fulfill a goal important to him; a girl learns to keep her heels down and her reins even, because she wants to advance to using a bit. If these things, being a priest or horseback riding, were not important to the individuals in question, would either of them learn them? Would they be happy doing so if someone were making them do it? Children will learn long division, and algebra, and calculus in the same way. If they truly are not interested in mathematics, then they don't need it. They will most likely not pursue careers that require it. Basic arithmetic, sure. People need that, and without the interference of school, kids find it fun.
Here is a good website with lots of info on unschooling:Unschooling
And a snippet about learning in an unschooling environment.
I don't know. It all seems very very subjective. And really shouldn't be called unschooling, it should be deschooling or re-education. Or something more positive. The parents (although portrayed wrongly in the original video) aren't really hands off. These kids are learning something, but will all kids learn this way? Would we call gang bangers, with no real direction, motivation or (most importantly) resources capable?
Fundamentally, and to its end we're assuming a lot of things about society, children, learning and motivation. I contend children are more 'well rounded' with a general education (i.e. life isn't always about doing things one is interested in) and very involved parents.
Picasso knew the rules before he broke them. Hemingway and Stein knew how to write correctly before they went off into their own world. These kids don't know anything. The unschooling parents might know how the world works, but they (ironically) are now, not giving their children the same chance.
Yes, I agree that when I have kids I will want them to have an open and critical mind, but you can't do that without a foundation.
I think this is the crux. If the foundation is laid by learning the basics, there is no limit to the directions education can go in. Learning the 'rules', the basics is most important, then the sky is the limit.
I don't know. It all seems very very subjective. And really shouldn't be called unschooling, it should be deschooling or re-education. Or something more positive. The parents (although portrayed wrongly in the original video) aren't really hands off. These kids are learning something, but will all kids learn this way? Would we call gang bangers, with no real direction, motivation or (most importantly) resources capable?
Fundamentally, and to its end we're assuming a lot of things about society, children, learning and motivation. I contend children are more 'well rounded' with a general education (i.e. life isn't always about doing things one is interested in) and very involved parents.
Yes, "unschooling" is probably not the best term. "Homeschooling" is not the best term for what I do either, because 1. what we do does not look much like traditional school, and 2. We don't spend most of our time at home.
Homeschooling and unschooling could be better referred to as "education by parental facilitation." The hundreds of forms that the facilitation takes vary widely, but it's really just degrees on a spectrum.
Yes, "unschooling" is probably not the best term. "Homeschooling" is not the best term for what I do either, because 1. what we do does not look much like traditional school, and 2. We don't spend most of our time at home.
Homeschooling and unschooling could be better referred to as "education by parental facilitation." The hundreds of forms that the facilitation takes vary widely, but it's really just degrees on a spectrum.
Yes, agreed. Some people buy a complete curriculum along with teacher's editions, and some people totally let the kids follow their bliss. Most are somewhere in between. We only bought curriculum for math and spelling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by harhar
I was going off the kid's quote, "about first grade being the last grade he attended" in the ABC piece (which I admitted was biased in a following post.)
And yes I do believe someone must study English to get it. I'm assuming academic English. You may not have to be fluent in grammar, but in order to understand the intricacies of a subject matter and say, writing to a particular audience, are very important skills that could be missed by unschooling, because (at it's definition) it is up to the whim of the child to learn this.
Not reading past first grade level b/c first grade was last grade attended? Huh? Kids naturally progress to higher levels of reading when they read. They do not have to be taught this; they just have to have plenty of time to practice reading.
I taught my kids to read via direct instruction in phonics, but I never taught them writing. I required them to keep a journal and write in it daily, and we wrote stuff for different purposes such as thank-you letters and such things, but there was no formal program. They read a lot, and this taught them more about writing than I ever could have. They were able to see what a well constructed sentence looked like. They are both excellent writers and like to do it. My 15 yo set out to write a novel last summer, though she didn't finish it, but she writes a lot of material for the fanfiction website. I'm not allowed to read any of it, but her teachers tell me she's quite good.
What gets me is how an unschooler would get to that point. I had an interest in the meaning of life, but had no clue what to look for, until I enrolled into college. How would the unschooler be introduced to Kierkegaard and in what fashion? What is the progression, the same? It may not be necessary to learn but it sure is awesome stuff. That's why I also think in many cases it isn't unschooling at all but rather a modified homeschooling. I don't know.
How did you get to Kierkegaard? Were you introduced in college? I wasn't. I know about Kierkegaard from reading books about other subjects, and when I read, one thing naturally leads to another. I always hope that I don't sound rude when I explain to people about why I can't read the book they're recommending to me, but it has to do with the fact that I've planned the next five books ahead, b/c of what I'm reading now or have just finished. When I read, I make lists of next books to read and it's all interrelated somehow. If you read K on your own time, I'm sure you know what I mean. If you don't read him on your own time, then you're not really interested enough. I'm not giving you trouble here b/c I'm sure you're interested in many other things. But the point is that I've been exposed to much more material out of college than in it, and I remember better what I've learned on my own.
I will probably look it up for myself but do you have statistics about college acceptance for unschoolers? Do you know of any substantial studies that follow the lives of unschoolers and how they are as adults?
Also I'll have to disagree about school being inefficient. (Expensive, in most cases yes.) At least in the case of Philosophy (or anything for that matter). Logically it seems if one in interested in many things then other things will be ignored.
[COLOR="rgb(139, 0, 0)"]Think of how much time is wasted in school. I work in one and I can attest to how much of their time we waste and I feel guilty for it. Also, the students hold each other back--they're considered nerds if they like to read or pursue other subjects. Only the strongest persist. The others give in and join the group. It may not be a bad group, but it will probably be one that doesn't value the intellect. From what I can tell, most school kids don't seem to like to read. If I think of it tomorrow, I may keep a log of how much school time is spent in actually being engaged in learning.
Anyway, what you said about if one is interested in many things then others will be ignored: of course that's true--there are way too many things to learn in this world and naturally you're going to have to specialize at some point. Does it really make any difference if I don't learn medical science at this point in my life? Of course not. My oldest hates math, and I mean, really hates it. I have little expectation that she'll ever be interested in becoming an accountant or an engineer or a scientist. No problem--there are other careers.
I'm open minded but extremely skeptical of unschooling. It fascinates me because I very curious about the 'self motivating' part.
I was too, and I never would have dreamed that my daughter would take up learning French on her own, but she worked at it really hard and went into 3rd year French when she went back to school. I never once had to tell her to study. She also studied a lot about ancient Egypt and we decorated her room in that theme. It was really neat. My other daughter was lazier, but read everything she could get her hands on, and actually, for her school works better b/c she is motivated by competition with other smart kids and is doing great on the debate team.
If I were left to my own devices I'd play video games, listen to a lot of music, read occasionally, play guitar, record music and take photographs. I would be on the internet all day learning stuff, but how does that translate to a job?
Either you would get really tired of that and get started on learning something else, or you'd love it so much that you'd get really good and turn it into a career. Most people who've been thru school have very limited thinking about what kinds of jobs they can expect to get or what to do with their free time. HS or US kids have much more divergent thinking processes going.
When do the parents cut the cord? I just have tons of questions about this.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. If you mean that they'd tend to be more clingy and dependent, that's not necessarily true. Part of my girls' education was that I made them start making their own appts early in adolescence. If they needed to go to the dentist, they had to call. They were terrified at first, but they're really glad now that they had to do this. My oldest was an extremely clingy baby and wouldn't even let me go to the bathroom and she had this terrible fear of abandonment as a toddler, but now she's 18 and the reason I'm going to Peru is to keep her from going alone, which was her original plan. She's planning the whole trip though and ordered the airline tix on her own and got a good deal.
If anyone else is also curious, there are two writers that you'd probably really like, esp since you like philosophy. They are John Holt and John Taylor Gatto. Very good books by both of them and they'll keep you busy for awhile.
From my understanding the OP was not about homeschooling but about a subset of homeschooling where the kids fully dictate their learning. That I find to be a problem. This is not a thread about homeschooling in general, which when done right, can be very effective and work beautifully. I have seen parents who homeschool their children ensure that they are learning as much, if not more, than what their counterparts are learning in public school (especially when trips are involved).
However, the report from the OP indicates that these kids operating without any kind of structure or anyone pushing them to work harder and achieve more. I think that is very different that what many homeschool parents do with their children.
I have to take issue with what seems to be a general assumption that parents are completely hands-off when it comes to unschooling. Parents who unschool act as facilitators-- making sure Junior has the materials and opportunities necessary. They do not actively haul out the books and papers and worksheets and say "now we are going to learn geography"-- but at the same time, it's not precisely about letting Junior sit in front of the TV and decide whether he'd rather walk two miles to the library or play Halo 3, either.
Speaking personally, I don't know any homeschoolers who only unschool (though I know they exist). I know several-- including myself-- who unschool in some areas, and use workbooks and textbooks and "bought" curricula in others, and use other forms of learning in yet others. My daughter is a natural unschooler when it comes to writing and science. OTOH, I don't have the confidence-- in either her or myself-- to go that route with math. She doesn't do well with a "schooly" approach in that area, but pure facilitation wouldn't get her going, either.
I will say I give my kids a fair amount of latitude in what they choose to study within certain areas. Right now, we're spending a lot of time on the World Wars. That wasn't what I'd had planned, but it's what's captured their interest. If we go with it now, they'll absorb far more, far faster, than if I try and tell them it's time for Florida History and we'll catch the Nazis in a year or two, when the public school kids do it. That flexibility and team approach is my absolutely most favorite thing about the way we do HSing. Ideally, education is a team effort, not something you inflict on someone else. That can happen in a school situation with one teacher and 25 kids, and state standards for what gets taught to whom when, but IME, it doesn't necessarily happen. (Likewise, it probably doesn't happen in a homeschool situation with the "reproduce a classroom at the kitchen table" folks, either.)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) and the first piece on Good Morning America was incredibly biased, and heavily edited. They did a second piece yesterday, a follow-up with the family, and it did allow them to answer some of the questions raised. You certainly won't get the full picture of unschooling from a 5-minute fluff piece.
