Home’s Cool
Posted on November 27th, 2006 by catalyst into the About Us categoryYou'd think after a four day weekend, a person would be all rested up and ready to get back to work. But yeah, for me, not so much, I just found myself wishing I had a five day weekend.
Interesting article in the NY Times yesterday, talking about how some homeschoolers don't even study actual courses. Their parents just let them study whatever they want, figuring that they will learn more if they are studying things they're actually interested in. It's called "unschooling".
Quote:
In a traditional school setting, such free time would probably be called recess. But for Juli Walter, the children’s mother, it is “child-led learning,” something she considers the best in home schooling.
“I learned early on that when I do things I’m interested in,” Ms. Walter said, “I learn so much more.”
As the number of children who are home-schooled grows — an estimated 1.1 million nationwide — some parents like Ms. Walter are opting for what is perhaps the most extreme application of the movement’s ideas. They are “unschooling” their children, a philosophy that is broadly defined by its rejection of the basic foundations of conventional education, including not only the schoolhouse but also classes, curriculums and textbooks.
Whatever. Call it what you want, "Homeschool" or "Unschool", Ms. Walter's kids still don't have any friends.
RSS feed for posts
November 27th, 2006 at 12:45 pm
They might master video games.
November 27th, 2006 at 12:54 pm
Unschooling only works if … IF … IF the teacher (usually mom) is dedicated to guiding the child(ren) into a big variety of topics. AND is unrelenting in making every subject seem fun. It’s way more work than plain school.
Most kids I know don’t think all learning subjects are fun. And to teach only the “fun” ones — or to pursue only “delight directed” learning (that’s a Gregg Harris term), means that a child never learns to do things that are necessary but unpleasant.
Unless, of course, that’s what cleaning up the yard after the dog is for.
November 27th, 2006 at 4:14 pm
And Gregg Harris has lots of strange interpretations of the Bible himself too…. and how to run a church and “pastor a flock.”
Run little red hen, run. The sky is falling.
November 27th, 2006 at 4:59 pm
There was a famous school (still there actually) in England called Summerhill that was started by a man named AS Neill.
At his school there were no required classes. Classes were held when kids asked for them–teachers taught whatever kids wanted to learn. Kids were allowed to be “free” for as long as they wanted or needed to “trust” again. Some kids went several years without once ever attending class.
The campus was also democratic–adults got 1 vote in the government process just like the kids.
The idea was that once kids decided they wanted to learn they would and could make up all that time fairly quickly. But Summerhill would also find value in whatever play the kids were giving themselves to.
I’ve always been kind of fascinated by the idea of Summerhill–it’d be great to be a kid there, but definitely would not want to teach there.
KM
November 27th, 2006 at 6:48 pm
I was involved in (or the victim of) a similar school. It was an elementary school in the portland area. They had an ingenious idea that the kids would rather be in class than in the recreation rooms. So they made classroom participation optional and any time you needed a “break” you could go to the “bee” room and do educational play activities. Boy was I the wrong kid for that program. I went from being an ‘A’ student, to a master newspaper kite builder in no time. Even though we were still graded, nobody forced us to attend class - so I didn’t go. I believe this two year program did more to ruin my study habits then anything else. And while it could be argued that empowering the kids is a positive, my empowerment led me to slip into a schoolastic coma. I guess I was the exception, the kid that would rather build kites than learn to spell. Then again, the kite building competition was stiff and there were a lot of masters! Bottom line - kids don’t know what they need, just what they want and most of the time they are mutually exclusive.
November 27th, 2006 at 7:58 pm
Homeschooling has worked out great for our family. We have three children, 17, 15, 13, each enjoying meaningful relationships with peers and adults. As they grow into adulthood I’m open to alternatvives outside of the home. However, I find it interesting that homeschooled kids are commonly stereotyped as “out of the loop.” Incarnational living is a choice for all families, regardless of educational preference. The gospel tension of “salt and light” + “unspotted from the world” should keep all Christian parents humbly dependant and tenaciously missional.
Have loved this blog from day 1! As a former PBC student I’ve appreciated the provocative posts. Happy holidays!
November 27th, 2006 at 9:58 pm
I recently met a graduate of unschooling…she’s a colleague of mine at the bank. It’s interesting to compare our respective homeschooling experiences, since I consider mine to be rooted in staunch conservatism and she describes her parents as hippies (apparently, her mom is kind of a bigwig in unschooling circles, presenting at conferences and such). Now, despite the conservative philosophy that I feel pervaded my mom’s approach to my and my siblings’ education, she also left us to our own devices quite a bit within the context of the textbooks and materials she chose. We knew we had to finish our stuff, but we also knew we might very well be able to go for a long time without getting caught for not doing it….and this knowledge worked itself out in…ahem….interesting ways (I will never forget the 48 hours of my life in which I did a semester’s worth of Latin assignments….but at the same time, skipping a day of math would be unthinkable, even though I claimed to hate it. We won’t even get into the fact that I sometimes did my Cathedral Daughters’ Choir music theory assignments multiple times over just because I loved doing them…).
I’m of the opinion that no system of education is for everyone. I’ve known people who were homeschooled who didn’t know their head from a hole in the ground at the end of it, and I’ve known people who were homeschooled who came out well-read, well-informed, and well-prepared for the rest of their lives. I haven’t known as many of the latter category as I have of the former, but I think parents as well as outfits like Bob Jones University Press are both to blame. Pedagogy isn’t easy….and most people who teach think that good students are people who come in already knowing what you were supposed to have to teach them. Sometimes teachers luck out and have a lot of those kinds of students…and sometimes parents give birth to kids who are predisposed to being thirsty for knowledge and bloodthirsty for spelling bee glory.
There’s no predicting how homeschooling, unschooling, or any other form of schooling will ultimately work out….but I do think it’s irresponsible and arrogant of parents to assume that they should have sole and total control over what their children learn, and equally irresponsible to give their children all the onus for their own learning. Many heads are still better than one…or two.
November 28th, 2006 at 7:34 am
It would have been shorter just to say, “I knew the Mortons”.
Missed you Jimmy
I never did my Choir homework.
November 28th, 2006 at 7:42 am
It would have been shorter just to say, “I knew the Mortons”.
Comment of the year.
November 28th, 2006 at 9:31 am
It would have been shorter just to say, “I knew the Mortons”.
and then we went to TCHS…
I like to think I am one of the most Uneducated people to ever receive their HS diploma.
November 28th, 2006 at 10:26 am
Living life, you are sure RIGHT, “Gregg Harris has lots of strange interpretations of the Bible himself.” He sure did have some strange ideas, particularly regarding education and business. He did not, however, coin the phrase “delight-directed learning” (do a web search on that one); he probably inaccurately took credit for it in his own little circles, though.
I’m an educator (administrator) and so familiar with the unschooling movement, as well as the democratic school movement (http://www.democratic-edu.org/). I have worked with homeschool families and networks off and on during my career, and have found that there are many philosophical “camps,” i.e., the two largest being the liberal hippies that Jiminy mentioned and the extreme fundamentalists, with many in between (including the conspiracy theorists who fear that registering their child for school means “big brother” will have access to all the details of their lives).
If done well, homeschooling can be very effective, but “well” needs to be defined in detail. My take on it: Those who can balance the “classical education” (i.e., logic and knowledge) with a rich variety of instructional materials from numerous sources, critical thinking, hands-on/experiential learning, “extra-curricular” activities and much socialization, tend to equip their children with a stellar education and the capacity to effectively relate to diverse people. Those who just use rote memorization, limited instructional materials and minimal social interaction produce, well, less than well-educated, well-rounded adults.
As adults, we all have to round our our own personal educational experiences, because none is perfect.
I wouldn’t use “unschooling” with my own kids, nor would I send them to a “democratic school.” If I could afford it, I’d send them to OES, but that’s not realistic.
I agree with Jiminy, no one pedagogy, or approach to teaching and learning, is right for everyone. Factoring in your beliefs about the aim(s) of education, the quality and demographics of the local public and private schools, the learning styles of your children, etc., to make the best decision possible for how to educate your own children is, hands-down, one of the most challenging tasks of parenting.
November 28th, 2006 at 10:39 am
Those of you in education, are there any standardized tests given to students to determine their learning style? I’m hands on and struggled greatly in school because the teaching method was almost exclusively lecture, book absorption, memorization and regurgitation. Just curious - school failed me miserably. OJT and life taught me more than school ever did.
November 28th, 2006 at 11:42 am
I grew up in the ACE school system which was barely more than assisted home-schooling. There was a defined curriculum, but it was basically a “learn at your own pace” thing, which basically meant that lazy kids (like me) did just enough work to get by, and I managed to cram almost my entire high school education into a year and a half. For the motivated student, it would make you graduate early, but it only taught me how to procrastinate with the best of ‘em. The whole system was geared around self-directed study, and the biggest thing I learned was how to beat the system, so I could procrastinate more. There were few students in our “school” that actually graduated (the rest gave up and went back to public school) and I think I was able to do it because I’m naturally bright and enjoy learning (and I’m unusually modest!). But the biggest problem with that system, and I think any other home-schooling system is the lack of social learning. I came out of school socially stunted and it took all of my college years to “grow up” and become a semi-normal person. We live in a very social society and part of any education should include learning how to interact with others, and the ability to learn from others as well. I think it’s a mistake that any one person can provide sufficient tools & input into a child’s education to make them a well-rounded adult.
As far as this self-directed learning goes, I can’t believe that any normal child would take the initiative to actually do the work to learn enough to make a passable SAT score. All you have to do is watch Nanny 911 to see what happens when parents allow their children to be “self directed”. haha
November 28th, 2006 at 1:24 pm
I went to a private school that followed the ACE curriculum from K-9th grade and I agree with FICM that it really depends on the student. My parents traveled frequently and the ACE curriculum allowed us to do alot of our work outside of the classroom and still stay caught up with the rest of the class while traveling. Really, there’s nothing like doing your “pace work” while lying on the beach in Mexico!
I moved on to Public School at the start of my sophomore year and couldn’t believe how easy that was comparatively. I was much more academically advanced than my public school peers, and I did just fine socially. I don’t quite see how the ACE school would have stunted my social development at all. There was plenty of interaction with both students and teachers, including sports programs and extra-curricular activities. I think that just goes to prove it really depends on each individual child and maybe even more so their home environment.
After we moved to Portland I ended up graduating from Temple Christian (now City Christian) and honestly I think I got the best education there! I don’t know if any of you had her as a teacher, but Mrs. Coleman didn’t really allow for laziness and/or procrastination. She was very tough, but she taught well!
November 28th, 2006 at 3:17 pm
I’m with ChurchGirl here. It really is up to the personality of the kid.
My education was very mixed. Public school = K-4, 10-11. Private school = 5-9 and 12th. My parents put me in private school in 5th grade to give me a more “christian” environment as I headed into those Jr. High’ish years, but allowed me to leave private and go back to public my 10th and 11th grade years when we felt that TCHS was failing to provide optimal Math/Science classes. Ironically, I was given “the choice” my Senior year, and decided to go back to TCHS to be with my closer, Christian friends. (Part of me still regrets that decision! I think I would have been a drastically different person if I had stayed in public school!)
I did the ACE system from 5th to 9th though and enjoyed it…but only in topics I liked. I got ahead enough in Math/Science that as a 10th grader (back in public school) I was allowed to take 11th grade classes.
The flip side to that was that I hated English and Social Studies (History) and barely did enough to make it through high school on those topics. To this day my wife (a teacher!) relentlessly teases me about all the cultural/historical things I have no idea about.
My parents were both teachers for 30+ years, and I think we were all pretty on top of what system would work best for me. Unfortunately, I just think ACE system looks better on paper than in application.
And that’s not even to mention the bigger struggle I had at that time…judgementalism/elitism. While I had a great time at TCS/TCHS and made a ton of great friends, I was VERY sheltered from the “differences” of other kids. That “cookie-cutter Christianity” that I grew up under at BT didn’t lend well anywhere else.
Maybe I’m still a little naive, as my kids are only 5 and 2, but I feel it’s less about the educational “system” your kid is under and more about the parent’s involvement and proactive efforts you give to exposing them to a plethera of situations that helps them expand mentally, spiritually and emotionally.
Time will tell, I suppose.
November 28th, 2006 at 3:43 pm
“Maybe I’m still a little naive, as my kids are only 5 and 2, but I feel it’s less about the educational “system” your kid is under and more about the parent’s involvement and proactive efforts you give to exposing them to a plethera of situations that helps them expand mentally, spiritually and emotionally.”
Very true. Well said, Grey Sheep.
November 28th, 2006 at 4:55 pm
John 444,
Schools are much more sensitive these days to diverse learning styles. Howard Gardner’s theories re: multiple intelligences are widely known and used within the public school system. Gardner’s basic premise is that everyone is intelligent, the issue is HOW each person is intelligent. Gardner specifies the following eight different intelligences:
Linguistic intelligence (”word smart”):
Logical-mathematical intelligence (”number/reasoning smart”)
Spatial intelligence (”picture smart”)
Bodily-Kinesthetic intelligence (”body smart”)
Musical intelligence (”music smart”)
Interpersonal intelligence (”people smart”)
Intrapersonal intelligence (”self smart”)
Naturalist intelligence (”nature smart”)
Unfortunately, school (not to mention western culture) traditionally has–and still does to a large extent–primarily cater to the linguistic and logical-mathematical intelligence. So, students, even adults who don’t “default” to these two intelligences are often labeled as unintelligent, even learning disabled, ADD, ADHD, etc., etc. Many people such as yourself, John 444, are more hands-on, so a “constructivist” curriculum would be a better fit for you. I’m glad you said “school failed me,” because you’re absolutely right, and too many people perceive it in reverse, that people fail school. The system fails far too many of our kids…which is what compels me to work within the system to reform it.
There are many diagnostic “tests” that can be used to determine which intelligence is a person’s dominant intelligence. Here’s one I quickly found online for adults: http://www2.bgfl.org/bgfl2/custom/resources_ftp/client_ftp/ks3/ict/multiple_int/index.htm and one for kids: http://www.mitest.com/omitest.htm.
Re: ACE, I share FICM’s view moreso than Church Girl’s. Sorry, Church Girl, but I also have to disagree with TCHS providing a high quality education. Inarguably, Mrs. Coleman is an excellent teacher. However, the curriculum, focus, and most of the other teachers leave much to be desired…in my opinion, but again, it’s all about what you want out of education, how you define a quality education, what you think an educated person is, etc. I’m glad you were happy with yours. Do you mind my asking if you went to higher ed, and if so, how you fared there given your ACE/TCHS experience?
I whole-heartedly agree with you, Grey Sheep, regarding the vital role of parental involvement. There’s scads of research that shows the significant value of parental involvement…and the significant detriment of its absence, both in the short and long term for children.
Please forgive my verbosity, but education is my “thing.”
November 29th, 2006 at 11:10 am
Mr Matrix,
Let me clarify… I didn’t state that TCHS provided “high quality education”. I am only saying that out of the schools I attended from k-12th grade (I went on to college, by the way) I learned more from the curriculum at TCHS than the ACE school and the public school. In fact, going to college straight from the public school system would have been a huge disadvantage for me personally. Prior to TCHS I wasn’t really required to do a lot of studying on my own because the classes I took (some of them AP) were very easy to cruise right through. ACE really lacks in that aspect. At TCHS I learned to actually enjoy researching, writing and going beyond the “required work” and discovered that I really enjoyed learning!
I definitely agree with you that the home environment and parental involvement is what can make or break a child’s overall education.
November 29th, 2006 at 11:57 am
Thanks Mrs. Matrix
Often I’ve talked with my wife who teaches high school Home Ec about the learning styles issue. She is a big advocate of tailoring curriculum to accomodate learning styles and specifically develops lesson plans to address every style. Until I talked to her last night, I did not realize she administered a test at the start of every new class to assess her student’s styles.
But apparently she’s alone in that … her former school brought in speakers who taught it, but few / none of the teachers adapted their curriculum for learning styles, most opting for lecture instead - it’s easiest for the teacher I guess. What’s startling to me, is having those sorts of tools available to the teachers, but never really having the method implemented in a meaningful way. This is a small rural ag-town school, with a significant student failure rate, such that the school board and admin have adopted an ‘every kid succeeds’ type standard. But the admins approach to student-success is bi-weeky meetings with the teachers to go over the grade reports and pressure the teachers to help the kids pass. It seems to me like the meetings are a sort of covert effort to pressure the teachers to simply promote the kids to the next grade with a minimum passable score. Reminds me of the project status reviews we used to have at Boeing where all the hot spots were identified, people fretted and wrung their hands over impending schedule slides, but they never addressed root causes, such as the antiquated business processes that constantly hindered timely production.
This is a small, rural agriculture based community, where several students will be taking over the family farm. Other than FFA, they see no use for remedial classes. Not all of student failures can be attributed to learning styles - some are just indifferent to the curriculum because they don’t see a need for it with their future determined by the family business. KK has a better than average success rate with the students because of addressing learning styles, but the other classes seem teacher/teaching style based than student/learning style based.
I’ll pass her those links. Thanks!
Jack
November 29th, 2006 at 8:17 pm
Having served on a school board for a government (public) school district AND as a parent of homeschooled children, I can share this insight:
* Parental involvement is absolutely a determining factor in student success, but some kids can do well in government schools without parental involvement or support. They are just survivors, self-driven, and uncommon in those regards.
* Lack of Socialization is a common myth about homeschooling. Sometimes, we are run ragged by the schedule for our children. Visiting friends, special classes, sports at the YMCA, field trips (more than the typical government school year), parties, mutli-age and multi-generational activities, weekly dance instruction and dances, church services, youth group, small groups, etc. etc. Not to mention when there is interest in soccer, baseball, or some other limited duration program…
* My three oldest are home schooled using a CD-based curriculum for Language Arts, History & Geography, Science, and Bible. Traditional textbooks are used for Mathematics and Writing. Weekly piano instruction is part of their curriculum, as well. Timothy (13) is about to begin guitar lessons, and Christopher (11) is interested in guitar or a wind instrument. Sarah (9) is also interested in guitar and is taking classes on making clothing. They each take standardized test, with two of them making consistent high marks, and mixed numbers for the other (he has a different learning style and his test results are improving).
Homeschooling has been a very positive experience for us. My wife, Lise, does quite well as our students’ teacher.
Personally, I would not have the patience and I thank God that Lise makes such a sacrifice for our children.
Dan Wood
November 30th, 2006 at 11:01 am
Uh, in public school we sang “Smokin’ in the Boy’s Room” and “School’s Out For Summer” … what did you home’s cool losers sing?
November 30th, 2006 at 11:47 am
Unscrupulous, to answer your question, my kids sing:
“I’m so cool, I wear pajamas to school!”, and “My teacher’s so hot my dad can’t stop kissing her!”, and the classic “If Alice Cooper is a boy, why is he called Alice?”.
You know, stuff like that.
November 30th, 2006 at 1:56 pm
Man, I thought you guys would be sining somepin’ like: “Vespers in the front room” or “Jesus loves the friendless losers” - you know.