Unschooling demystified

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I remember when I was on bed rest reading a bunch of the forums on mothering.com. They have a section on unschooling and its a terrible situation. There are many posts from mothers with tweens and teenagers having serious problems, doing nothing but video games, and kid's being angry that never had school and have no future.

IMO, its a form of child neglect.

But that's what they're INTERESTED in! So it's all OK. When they get to be 28, and have the high score on World of Whateverthefuckitscalled, it'll totally translate to being a productive member of society. They just march to a different drummer, is all.

[Anonymous]

I don't teach in other countries so it does not matter. But I do teach logic.

So it does not matter what they teach in their history class because it is useless once they become a doctor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many doctors in this area were educated in the US? How many learned about the Mayflower, Robert E. Lee, etc.

I agree you would not be a good unschooler. You don't really seem like a good citizen either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since we agree that a person could become a doctor with our the history classes taught in school.

Sure. But not a good doctor. Not a well-informed citizen either.

I also can't decide which argument I'm impressed by more:

1. history class, in principle, is useless, because history classes, in practice, are inadequate.
2. "Indians/Mayflower/Boston Tea Party, and all the major wars, Robert E. Lee and a bunch of names" is a bunch of useless facts.

As long as we're going down this rabbit hole (<---useless literary reference I'm using to appear to be educated): How many doctors in this area, who were not educated in the US, didn't take history classes in the country/countries they were educated in?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
For example, I found a gallery of interviews with grown-ups who had been unschooled. I tried to find it again just now but couldn't readily track it down, but they came across as very mature, confident, motivated, self-aware and satisfied with their lives, I suppose because they'd been given the freedom to make a lot of their own choices and really own their failures and accomplishments.

A statistically-representative sample, definitely. (By which I mean: not a statistically-representative sample.)

It's all very well to say that children need the freedom to make their own choices etc. etc. etc. But at some point it is necessary to accept that

1.the teacher knows (or ought to know) more than the student, and
2. there are lots of things a person needs to learn, even if that person may not want to learn them

I'm glad you got unmystified about unschooling, I guess. But if you expect that everybody who actually makes it through that wall of text has the same reaction as you, you will be disappointed.

OP here. Ok, wow, where to start. I said I'd read statistical AND anecdotal accounts, and then I referenced one of the anecdotal accounts; I never said the cited example was statisticallly representative. (I didn't recall enough details about the latter to reference it right then, so I didn't. But basically it was a study of the "unschooling" school, Sudbury, that another poster referenced today. It's been around for about half a century, and someone did a survey with a large number of graduates. The overwhelming majority turned out the same way as the formerly unschooled kids in the anecdotal accounts I described. And they were in professions they really enjoyed and were content with their lives.)

I used to agree with both of your enumerated points, but here's my take on them now. Yes, teachers do know more than their students. That is sort of by definition, right? But it's interesting that you didn't say "schoolteachers" instead of just "teachers," and it inadvertently highlights one of the key things about unschooling: there is no reason a teacher has to be a person working in a school. There is nothing magic or exclusive about what schoolteachers know or do, contrary to what most of us grew up thinking. I think one of the other posters provided some great examples of effective teachers who are not schoolteachers. Also, just because a schoolteacher knows more than their students (in most if not all cases), it doesn't mean they are effectively teaching them, and it doesn't mean that what they are teaching is something the child needs to learn, or something they need to learn right then according to the teacher's schedule, when the child may not be interested and receptive to that topic. The more crucial distinction is that schooling is top-down, teacher-mandated, whereas unschooling puts the responsibility and the choices in the hands of the student. That doesn't mean that adults play no part. Parents can offer an enriching environment, offer guidance when it's asked for, answer questions, point the student to resources, and in general facilitate learning.

Please provide some examples of things everyone "needs" to learn when they're school-age. Reading, perhaps? I think any kid who wants to do anything with their life will take the initiative to learn to read, because it's useful in so many ways. They can't really function well after a certain point without learning to read. So they'll see that and learn to read. The same goes for everyday math, and so on (and those who find they need to learn more advanced math will do so). And if there's a kid who doesn't want to do anything with their life, well, forced schooling wouldn't really change that outcome, would it? I think we've all seen many examples of that. In fact, forcing kids to do something is pretty much the least effective way to make them do something in any sustained way.

And to your last point, no, I definitely did not expect everyone who reads the piece (which I had no trouble reading and understanding, fwiw) to agree with me. I just thought that a lot of other people on here might find it interesting and at least thought-provoking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I remember when I was on bed rest reading a bunch of the forums on mothering.com. They have a section on unschooling and its a terrible situation. There are many posts from mothers with tweens and teenagers having serious problems, doing nothing but video games, and kid's being angry that never had school and have no future.

IMO, its a form of child neglect.

Not everyone who unschools their kid is an effective parent or an effective facilitator of learning (which does take effort), just as not everyone who sends their kid to school is an effective parent, and not every schoolteacher is an effective facilitator of learning. If you look, you will find angry, troubled kids in any setting. The point is which system favors which outcome for a particular family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't teach in other countries so it does not matter. But I do teach logic.

So it does not matter what they teach in their history class because it is useless once they become a doctor.

If the history stuff a future-doctor person has learned is useless once the person becomes a doctor, why bother with history at all, either in class or through unschooling?

If you're trying to persuade people that unschooling is a good thing, I don't think that saying history is useless is a good strategy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't teach in other countries so it does not matter. But I do teach logic.

So it does not matter what they teach in their history class because it is useless once they become a doctor.

If the history stuff a future-doctor person has learned is useless once the person becomes a doctor, why bother with history at all, either in class or through unschooling?

If you're trying to persuade people that unschooling is a good thing, I don't think that saying history is useless is a good strategy.

Saying your "curriculum" is paramount in being a successful <fill in the blank> is not a good strategy. I don't want you to unschool so I am not trying to persuade you to do so. I think it is a valid form for educating some children as is home school, public school or private school. I will never believe that all kids will do best with 1 way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't teach in other countries so it does not matter. But I do teach logic.

So it does not matter what they teach in their history class because it is useless once they become a doctor.

If the history stuff a future-doctor person has learned is useless once the person becomes a doctor, why bother with history at all, either in class or through unschooling?

If you're trying to persuade people that unschooling is a good thing, I don't think that saying history is useless is a good strategy.

Saying your "curriculum" is paramount in being a successful <fill in the blank> is not a good strategy. I don't want you to unschool so I am not trying to persuade you to do so. I think it is a valid form for educating some children as is home school, public school or private school. I will never believe that all kids will do best with 1 way.

Has anybody here said that all kids do best with one way? I certainly haven't.

Indeed, has anybody said anything about any curriculum at all? "History" is not a curriculum. It's an area of knowledge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't teach in other countries so it does not matter. But I do teach logic.

So it does not matter what they teach in their history class because it is useless once they become a doctor.

If the history stuff a future-doctor person has learned is useless once the person becomes a doctor, why bother with history at all, either in class or through unschooling?

If you're trying to persuade people that unschooling is a good thing, I don't think that saying history is useless is a good strategy.

This is OP. I haven't participated in this discussion about history, but I'll give my two cents. I think the PP meant that knowing some facts about US history is not relevant to knowing how to treat an ulcer, for example. But more broadly, what specific historical knowledge are you claiming is necessary, and necessary to do what exactly? Ask 10 regularly schooled people what history they REMEMBER (which is far more important than what they learned in school, remembered long enough to pass a test, and then forgot), and I bet you'd get 10 very different answers. I went to regular schools and took history classes, like probably everyone else on here. But the history that is relevant to my life and that I remember (other than in the form of totally useless, sketchy facts and figures, like that the Magna Carta was signed in 1215), I learned voluntarily from having conversations with knowledgeable individuals and from books that I chose to read, mostly as an adult.

[Anonymous]

^^ I should have added that I've also learned a lot of history through watching documentaries. These are accessible to anyone, at any age, who finds their topics interesting or useful.

[Anonymous]

History is a subject matter in an overall curriculum.

I also found documentaries, specifically the history of Jazz, taught US history in a way that was way more interesting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't teach in other countries so it does not matter. But I do teach logic.

So it does not matter what they teach in their history class because it is useless once they become a doctor.

If the history stuff a future-doctor person has learned is useless once the person becomes a doctor, why bother with history at all, either in class or through unschooling?

If you're trying to persuade people that unschooling is a good thing, I don't think that saying history is useless is a good strategy.

Saying your "curriculum" is paramount in being a successful <fill in the blank> is not a good strategy. I don't want you to unschool so I am not trying to persuade you to do so. I think it is a valid form for educating some children as is home school, public school or private school. I will never believe that all kids will do best with 1 way.

Has anybody here said that all kids do best with one way? I certainly haven't.

Indeed, has anybody said anything about any curriculum at all? "History" is not a curriculum. It's an area of knowledge.

[Anonymous]

Would you let an unschooled professional: doctor, lawyer, architect, dentist, etc - do significant work for you or someone you love? If you would, then you go on ahead and unschool all you want. I'd much rather my professionals be taught the old fashioned way...where someone independent ensures the basics for the educational foundation are present.

Oh - and to the OP: I DO think teachers are more skilled at teaching. Yes, not all are great but teachers have to take courses, certify to teach, they are taught HOW to teach...parents are not. Why do you think so many parents his driving school companies to teach their kids to drive?

[Anonymous]

This is OP. Sure, I'd let an unschooled professional do significant work for me. The professions you cited all require licenses, btw, so there's your independent authority checking that they quality, if that's something that you value (though somehow there are still a lot of awful doctors and such). Plenty of other professions don't require licenses, and I'd judge those people's abilities by looking at the quality of their previous work and their references.

Regarding teachers, I guess we will just have to disagree. Do parents have to hire professional teachers to teach their kids to talk? That's a very complicated skill, but somehow children learn it just fine on their own, in their own way and in their own time, by listening and practicing. Do parents learn how to be parents from professional teachers? Another complicated skill set that most people manage to acquire through reading and talking to people and observing. And so on and so forth.

If you think about it, everyone is unschooling until age five, and everyone is unschooling after age 18 (in college, you have freedom to choose your major and many of your classes, decide whether or not to attend lectures, and so on). People learn a great deal as little children and as adults, and it works. There's no reason that things HAVE to be done differently between ages 5 and 18.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would you let an unschooled professional: doctor, lawyer, architect, dentist, etc - do significant work for you or someone you love? If you would, then you go on ahead and unschool all you want. I'd much rather my professionals be taught the old fashioned way...where someone independent ensures the basics for the educational foundation are present.

Oh - and to the OP: I DO think teachers are more skilled at teaching. Yes, not all are great but teachers have to take courses, certify to teach, they are taught HOW to teach...parents are not. Why do you think so many parents his driving school companies to teach their kids to drive?

Have you ever asked a doctor where they attended elementary school. So yes, I would, because I have never asked.

The only doctor that I saw that I know what school he went to told me. I asked a few questions about the diagnosis and treatment and he said "I went to Harvard medical school you are welcome to get a second opinion." So I don't see him anymore, I had a simple question. Maybe interpersonal skills should be part of "tradition school" because he was clearly not qualified to be my doctor. I saw another doctor and was able to avoid surgery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would you let an unschooled professional: doctor, lawyer, architect, dentist, etc - do significant work for you or someone you love? If you would, then you go on ahead and unschool all you want. I'd much rather my professionals be taught the old fashioned way...where someone independent ensures the basics for the educational foundation are present.

Oh - and to the OP: I DO think teachers are more skilled at teaching. Yes, not all are great but teachers have to take courses, certify to teach, they are taught HOW to teach...parents are not. Why do you think so many parents his driving school companies to teach their kids to drive?

One more thing from OP here. You refer to the "old fashioned way" of learning, but unschooling IS the old-fashioned way of learning, before compulsory K-12 education came into existence. People learned life skills from their parents, peers and other members of the community in an organic way. Professions were learned by apprenticing with more skilled individuals. The great thing is that now we have so many more opportunities to learn from so many sources, so it's possible to learn anything, without ever having set foot in a compulsory school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is OP. Sure, I'd let an unschooled professional do significant work for me. The professions you cited all require licenses, btw, so there's your independent authority checking that they quality, if that's something that you value (though somehow there are still a lot of awful doctors and such). Plenty of other professions don't require licenses, and I'd judge those people's abilities by looking at the quality of their previous work and their references.

Regarding teachers, I guess we will just have to disagree. Do parents have to hire professional teachers to teach their kids to talk? That's a very complicated skill, but somehow children learn it just fine on their own, in their own way and in their own time, by listening and practicing. Do parents learn how to be parents from professional teachers? Another complicated skill set that most people manage to acquire through reading and talking to people and observing. And so on and so forth.

If you think about it, everyone is unschooling until age five, and everyone is unschooling after age 18 (in college, you have freedom to choose your major and many of your classes, decide whether or not to attend lectures, and so on). People learn a great deal as little children and as adults, and it works. There's no reason that things HAVE to be done differently between ages 5 and 18.

Would you agree to be operated upon by an 'unschooled' surgeon?

I also call BS on the notion that 'everyone is unschooling after age 18". I don't know where and when you went to college, OP, but where I did, we had a significant number of required courses, and attendance was taken in a lot of classes.