Showing posts with label Homeschooling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Homeschooling. Show all posts
Sunday, January 15, 2012
Cultural Influence on Education
I can certainly see with my girls that learning is a cultural phenomenon, unique to each family and community.
If we made our living as dairy farmers (as my parents did), my girls would have a big understanding of the life cycle of cows and the planting of crops. If we ran a landscaping business, they'd know about trees and flowers and grades and soil. If we belonged to a church, it would form part of their community and they would learn there, too. Because we are literate, environmentally-minded, world-issue-conscious and committed to healthy living, our children will have those ideas as part of their culture. And because we live in a fast-paced, ethnically diverse city, they will have access to more ideas which will form their complete culture.
I think that culture is incredibly important in the education of children. (And by education I basically mean learning.) Culture determines priorities, perceptions and core values. I have read about a group of Mennonites or Hutterites who formed an isolated community in which to live within their beliefs without outside influence. Within two generations they were completely illiterate. But I bet their children could tend the animals, plant crops, bake bread, butcher a pig and make cheese. They probably understood weather patterns and the habits of wild animals, too. It goes to show that priorities determine education, as established by the culture of the community.
On Monday morning the principal at Partner-Guy's school made a school-wide announcement asking the students and staff to observe a moment of silence to remember the victims of the earthquake in Haiti and to be conscious of how many Haitian children are now without food, water and schools. Partner-Guy almost choked on his coffee when he heard her say that. As if schools are as important as food and water? And what about the Haitian children who are now without parents? Not as important as being without schools, apparently.
So why is it that whenever humanitarian aid is offered to impoverished regions, immediately teams of Westerners are sent to establish schools in the typical style of North America? Wouldn't it make sense to let the community establish its own educational priorities as reflected by their history, lifestyle and core values? I remember watching the Oprah special when she went to South Africa and built schools. Every child showed up for school wearing an American-style uniform and sat in desks in neat rows and wrote in notebooks and studied from textbooks. I couldn't believe it. Was she trying to make them into Americans? Just because the children study South African history, or read a novel written by a South African, does that mean their true educational needs are being met? And meanwhile, they are removed from the work of their parents for 8 hours a day and they lose the opportunity to learn meaningful life skills from them. I'm still confused.
I'm not anti-education. Really, I'm in favour of access to education for all. For example, preventing girls from attending school in Afghanistan is clearly just one more way that women are oppressed in that country. And literacy is a basic life skill that everyone should attain. Throughout the world ample evidence exists that access to education opens doors for people who would otherwise live generation after generation in perpetual poverty. But why has the word school come to mean just one style of education all over the world? ( It's like the word milk automatically connotes cow's milk, not soy milk or human milk even.)
This issue of forcing North American style schooling on the people of developing nations is one of the things that prevents me from giving to humanitarian groups such as Oxfam or Compassion or WorldVision. Instead, I keep my giving local by handing my pocket change to the homeless or panhandlers I see. I can't help it that my tax dollars fund a system of education that I don't endorse. (My tax dollars also fund a healthcare system that is wasteful and misguided, but I can't cover everything in one post.) But I can question where money is spent if I am going to make a donation to provide humanitarian aid overseas.
And I can remember everyday how fortunate I am to be raising my daughters in a time and place where I can not only ask these questions, but also follow my heart with regards to our priorities and core values.
Friday, January 13, 2012
School by Default
At least once per week since I wrote You're Not Homeschooling Because...Your Spouse is Against It, someone finds that post by doing a Google search:
- husband won't let me homeschool
- husband against homeschooling
- I want to homeschool but husband says no
- can I homeschool if my husband is against it
I totally get that a parent would not support homeschooling: choosing any path that is against the mainstream is a difficult decision. It is hard to forge a new way. And it is especially hard to choose NOT to do something for your children that you believe was actually really GOOD for YOU.
Even some of my friends who are pro-homeschool have chosen to send their children to school because their husbands won't accept homeschool as a viable option.
What is strange to me when spouses disagree about school vs. homeschool, is that SCHOOL always seems to be the default choice. It is especially perplexing to me when the parents have otherwise been following many attachment parenting practices.
Should the default choice be to send small children away from all that makes them feel safe and confident?
Should the default choice be to surround small children with people who don't know anything about them?
Should the default choice be to put your unique child into an environment where conformity is demanded?
The longer I watch my children learn and mature on their own terms, the more I become surprised at the reasons why parents choose school even if they aren't sure it's the right choice. When I imagine my authentic, creative children in an artificial and conformist environment, I cry for them. And when I see children who were previously confident and happy but have turned both aggressive and insecure after just a short time in school, I also cry for them.
Parents, if you are unsure whether school or homeschool is the right choice for your family, might I suggest considering the following?
- Create a Family Mission Statement. This means examining as a family what your priorities and values are and then deciding how to spend your time focussed on what really matters to you.
- Define 'success'. Look at whether your definition of FUTURE success depends on what you do right now. For example, is your definition of success timeless, or do you define success according to age or dollar value?
- For both School and Homeschool, describe what it will look like, sound like and feel like for EACH member of the family. This is SO important...
- Answer the question "What will this decision COST me?" Financially? Letting go of fears? Family support? Relationships? Career?
- Trust your child. Love yourself. Listen to what your child wants. Listen to your heart. Approve of your own decisions. Seek support.
I'd love to hear how YOU decided whether or not to homeschool. What would you add to this list to help others decide what to do?
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
I've Stopped Telling People That We are Homeschoolers
You know Homeschoolers, right?
Every September the Homeschool-Mama cranks up the curriculum machine, laying out plans for the learning patterns of her children. She buys books, kits and activities. She schedules lessons and playgroups. She wears her school-at-home hat and the children sit at the table and do school-at-home.
And that's fine if you really are a Homeschool-Mama and your kids really do school-at-home.
But to be honest, I'm operating from a completely different paradigm.
I'm operating from the perspective of Trust. I'm trusting my children to learn whatever they feel inclined to learn whenever they feel motivated to learn it. I provide a rich, full life and then I get out of the way and I watch with amazement as my children demonstrate and assimilate their literacy skills, their gross motor skills, their imaginations, their compassion and cooperation, their joy and excitement, their meaningful lives.
Yesterday we were at the Ontario Science Centre. On a Monday there are two kinds of people there: school groups and moms with tots. My older children stand out because they are not part of those two groups. So inevitably, someone asks "Are you off school today?" and they (or I) will answer "No. We don't go to school." And inevitably the next reply is "Oh, you're homeschoolers."
So I've stopped saying "Yes." Saying Yes, we are Homeschoolers implies a whole lot of things about the parent-child relationship in our home that our NOT TRUE. It implies that I am imposing something onto my children that I'm simply not.
Why was I saying "Yes" in the first place? Because of fear and accommodation. I was fearful of putting an idea out that other people wouldn't understand so I would accommodate them with an answer that would make them feel comfortable.
Well, no more.
My new answer is "No. We learn together wherever we are."
It's a small thing, this decision to be authentic about our learning. But it matters to me. I can't show my children that I am unwilling to be honest just because I can't be bothered to give an authentic answer. My children know about Homeschooling because we know families who choose that model for their home-based learning. So obviously they know that it is a lie for me to tell people that we are Homeschoolers. I have to be honest for their sakes.
But I also have to be honest because I think that it is important to let the world know that we who are the non-conformists will not be silenced or lumped together for the comfort levels of those who choose the status quo. I don't hide that I breastfeed or that I believe homebirth can be a safe option or that I don't poison my children with colours and chemicals disguised as food.
I've never pretended that the parenting path I've chosen is easy. It is hard to know that mainstream culture has no framework for understanding the paradigm I've chosen to live. But just like it took the parents who said "We will not spank" to make the major shift in mainstream parenting that now frowns on spanking, it will take parents like me who say "We will not control and coerce our children's learning" to make a shift in the general parenting consciousness.
I'm will to contribute to that change, even if it takes me (and other people) out of our comfort zones.
Every September the Homeschool-Mama cranks up the curriculum machine, laying out plans for the learning patterns of her children. She buys books, kits and activities. She schedules lessons and playgroups. She wears her school-at-home hat and the children sit at the table and do school-at-home.
And that's fine if you really are a Homeschool-Mama and your kids really do school-at-home.
But to be honest, I'm operating from a completely different paradigm.
I'm operating from the perspective of Trust. I'm trusting my children to learn whatever they feel inclined to learn whenever they feel motivated to learn it. I provide a rich, full life and then I get out of the way and I watch with amazement as my children demonstrate and assimilate their literacy skills, their gross motor skills, their imaginations, their compassion and cooperation, their joy and excitement, their meaningful lives.
Yesterday we were at the Ontario Science Centre. On a Monday there are two kinds of people there: school groups and moms with tots. My older children stand out because they are not part of those two groups. So inevitably, someone asks "Are you off school today?" and they (or I) will answer "No. We don't go to school." And inevitably the next reply is "Oh, you're homeschoolers."
So I've stopped saying "Yes." Saying Yes, we are Homeschoolers implies a whole lot of things about the parent-child relationship in our home that our NOT TRUE. It implies that I am imposing something onto my children that I'm simply not.
Why was I saying "Yes" in the first place? Because of fear and accommodation. I was fearful of putting an idea out that other people wouldn't understand so I would accommodate them with an answer that would make them feel comfortable.
Well, no more.
My new answer is "No. We learn together wherever we are."
It's a small thing, this decision to be authentic about our learning. But it matters to me. I can't show my children that I am unwilling to be honest just because I can't be bothered to give an authentic answer. My children know about Homeschooling because we know families who choose that model for their home-based learning. So obviously they know that it is a lie for me to tell people that we are Homeschoolers. I have to be honest for their sakes.
But I also have to be honest because I think that it is important to let the world know that we who are the non-conformists will not be silenced or lumped together for the comfort levels of those who choose the status quo. I don't hide that I breastfeed or that I believe homebirth can be a safe option or that I don't poison my children with colours and chemicals disguised as food.
I've never pretended that the parenting path I've chosen is easy. It is hard to know that mainstream culture has no framework for understanding the paradigm I've chosen to live. But just like it took the parents who said "We will not spank" to make the major shift in mainstream parenting that now frowns on spanking, it will take parents like me who say "We will not control and coerce our children's learning" to make a shift in the general parenting consciousness.
I'm will to contribute to that change, even if it takes me (and other people) out of our comfort zones.
Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Want to Destroy your Child's Creativity? Send Her to School
My opinion:
The curriculum and the structure of the school day work cohesively to stifle and destroy the natural creativity and curiosity of children. And as if that wasn't enough, the teachers and other children would effectively smother it anyway.I'm sure that writers and researchers who are far smarter than I am have written epics about how children are naturally curious and how important creative play is for their development. My own experiences with my children would actually prompt me to say that the opportunity for creative expression is as fundamental to child development as learning how to walk and talk.
My children can spend hours with paper, scissors, glue sticks, glitter, markers, stickers, pipe cleaners, play dough, plasticine, paint, popsicle sticks, toilet paper rolls and anything else that they can turn into art. They paint pine cones. They glue dried beans and seeds. They cut wrapping paper, magazines and boxes. They make cards for their cousins and grandparents. They make presents for their imaginary friends. They drip glue and they spill the glitter. They get messy.
And they DRAW. Their drawings look nothing like the standard stick-figures and triangle-on-top-of-a-square houses that are common for other children their age. My children have never seen the way that other children draw and I have never critiqued their drawings. As a result, they are completely uninhibited in their creations. And they draw prolificly. In the last year, Anna and Holly have filled more than 80 36-page drawing tablets with carefully drawn masterpieces. Many of the books have been made into stories: Anna and Holly narrate each picture or series of pictures and I write down their stories for them. Creative writing, anyone?
The point is, they do it because it is fundamentally in them to do it. I don't make them sit at the table and do a craft, draw a picture or write a story. I leave them alone to do whatever they want with whatever materials they choose. Very occasionally Anna, Holly or Jasmine will ask me to make something with her or to help her make something that she has seen on TV. Mostly they do not want to me interfere.
And isn't this the opposite of what would happen at school? In a Kindergarten setting, Holly would have access to about 1/100 of the materials that she has at home. And she would be lucky to have 20 minutes of 'creative time' before she was told to clean up because she and the rest of the class would have to move on to 'library time' or 'gym time'. So much for creativity.
And in the higher grades (I have taught Visual Art in Grades 5 - 8) there is no opportunity for creative artistic expression at all because the curriculum dictates what type of art the students must produce. Students are rarely motivated to produce the required pieces because the assignments are boring and trite, or else they are so sophisticated that the students don't even want to try to produce them for fear of not meeting the 'standard'. There are no other opportunities to be creative in the form of visual expression. Even projects are judged and critiqued for their relevance to the curriculum, and their creative expression is given no value.
And what about curiosity? Teachers have no time to answer the questions of curious children. And besides that, the teachers have curriculum to cover; they simple cannot have 20+ children all doing something different according to their individual curiosity, interests, strengths and inclinations. Also, other students are inclined to ridicule the children who show 'too much' interest in school and certain subject areas. The social 'rules' of the classroom restrict a child's natural enthusiasm for any area of study.
The term 'creative writing' is one of the biggest oxymorons that exists in school. How can a child write creatively when she knows she is writing for one purpose only? So that the teacher can mark what she has written. The Literacy Coaches and Consultants are always talking about how to motivate kids to write. My suggestion would be "Leave them alone."
It's a wonder that any person leaves highschool and goes on to become a graphic designer or a visual artist or a novelist or have any other type of career that involves creative expression. I have heard so many adults say "I'm not very creative" and I now know that that's because their natural creativity was destroyed in their early years in school. Creativity that is unappreciated or that is treated as irrelevant is soon hidden away by its owner.
Want to foster and protect creativity? Never offer judgement on what your child produces. Provide materials, opportunity and time. Engage your own creativity by writing, knitting, painting or whatever interests you. Show that you value the creative self-expression of others.
And, if you can, don't send your child to school.
The curriculum and the structure of the school day work cohesively to stifle and destroy the natural creativity and curiosity of children. And as if that wasn't enough, the teachers and other children would effectively smother it anyway.I'm sure that writers and researchers who are far smarter than I am have written epics about how children are naturally curious and how important creative play is for their development. My own experiences with my children would actually prompt me to say that the opportunity for creative expression is as fundamental to child development as learning how to walk and talk.
My children can spend hours with paper, scissors, glue sticks, glitter, markers, stickers, pipe cleaners, play dough, plasticine, paint, popsicle sticks, toilet paper rolls and anything else that they can turn into art. They paint pine cones. They glue dried beans and seeds. They cut wrapping paper, magazines and boxes. They make cards for their cousins and grandparents. They make presents for their imaginary friends. They drip glue and they spill the glitter. They get messy.
And they DRAW. Their drawings look nothing like the standard stick-figures and triangle-on-top-of-a-square houses that are common for other children their age. My children have never seen the way that other children draw and I have never critiqued their drawings. As a result, they are completely uninhibited in their creations. And they draw prolificly. In the last year, Anna and Holly have filled more than 80 36-page drawing tablets with carefully drawn masterpieces. Many of the books have been made into stories: Anna and Holly narrate each picture or series of pictures and I write down their stories for them. Creative writing, anyone?
The point is, they do it because it is fundamentally in them to do it. I don't make them sit at the table and do a craft, draw a picture or write a story. I leave them alone to do whatever they want with whatever materials they choose. Very occasionally Anna, Holly or Jasmine will ask me to make something with her or to help her make something that she has seen on TV. Mostly they do not want to me interfere.
And isn't this the opposite of what would happen at school? In a Kindergarten setting, Holly would have access to about 1/100 of the materials that she has at home. And she would be lucky to have 20 minutes of 'creative time' before she was told to clean up because she and the rest of the class would have to move on to 'library time' or 'gym time'. So much for creativity.
And in the higher grades (I have taught Visual Art in Grades 5 - 8) there is no opportunity for creative artistic expression at all because the curriculum dictates what type of art the students must produce. Students are rarely motivated to produce the required pieces because the assignments are boring and trite, or else they are so sophisticated that the students don't even want to try to produce them for fear of not meeting the 'standard'. There are no other opportunities to be creative in the form of visual expression. Even projects are judged and critiqued for their relevance to the curriculum, and their creative expression is given no value.
And what about curiosity? Teachers have no time to answer the questions of curious children. And besides that, the teachers have curriculum to cover; they simple cannot have 20+ children all doing something different according to their individual curiosity, interests, strengths and inclinations. Also, other students are inclined to ridicule the children who show 'too much' interest in school and certain subject areas. The social 'rules' of the classroom restrict a child's natural enthusiasm for any area of study.
The term 'creative writing' is one of the biggest oxymorons that exists in school. How can a child write creatively when she knows she is writing for one purpose only? So that the teacher can mark what she has written. The Literacy Coaches and Consultants are always talking about how to motivate kids to write. My suggestion would be "Leave them alone."
It's a wonder that any person leaves highschool and goes on to become a graphic designer or a visual artist or a novelist or have any other type of career that involves creative expression. I have heard so many adults say "I'm not very creative" and I now know that that's because their natural creativity was destroyed in their early years in school. Creativity that is unappreciated or that is treated as irrelevant is soon hidden away by its owner.
Want to foster and protect creativity? Never offer judgement on what your child produces. Provide materials, opportunity and time. Engage your own creativity by writing, knitting, painting or whatever interests you. Show that you value the creative self-expression of others.
And, if you can, don't send your child to school.
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
It's Not Necessary to Control Children {Even Though Schools Try To}
I'm not a big fan of Public Education. Maybe you've already noticed?
Let's talk today about another of the hidden agendas of education.
Classroom Management is a euphemism for control.
Which is fine if you think that children need to be controlled. Which I don't.
Teachers' reputations are defined by whether or not they have good classroom management, which means whether or not their students are orderly, do as they are told, are 'on task' when required to be, don't get too noisy and more or less get along with each other in the room. It also means that teachers are expected to make their classes comply with school rules, even when the rules don't have much context within the confines of the classroom.
For example, if it's 5 minutes before the students are dismissed for the day and the principal walks into the room to deliver a message to somebody, and she sees one kid eating an apple and another kid wearing a baseball cap, then this makes the teacher look bad because apparently wearing hats and eating apples are forbidden under the school rules, even though the teacher might find it perfectly acceptable. So the principal may come in and enforce the nonsensical rules in the name of 'maintaining control' but it's really all about her having the power and the student's having none.
If someone would like to leave me a comment to explain why children should NOT eat when they are hungry and NOT wear outdoor attire 5 minutes before going outdoors, I'd love to read it.
I don't find it necessary to control my children. I'm not the mother at the playground yelling "Why don't you go on the slide?" or the mother at the grocery store trying to force her child to say "Thank you" to a total stranger who happened to pick up her hat off the floor. I instruct my children regarding their behaviour only when there is an issue of safety or when there are certain social considerations. For example, they know that if they burp in public they should say "Excuse me" but at home they don't have to if they don't want to. Why have a double standard? Because it's not worth fighting about.
But at school the teacher can't have some rules for some kids and some rules for others. And the teacher can't pick some rules to allow to be 'broken' in the class, but 'upheld' elsewhere on school property. There are two reasons for this. One, as I mentioned before, is that the teacher's reputation has a lot to do with how well-controlled the class is. Two, it is nearly impossible to administer the required curriculum without keeping all the children under the teacher's thumb by way of enforcing a lot of otherwise arbitrary and demeaning rules.
Let's take the rule about children not being allowed to eat in class. Why is this so important? Don't most adults eat when they are hungry, regardless of where they are? Is it because of the potential for a mess to be created? Then why don't we just expect the kids to clean up after themselves, and then enforce that rule? Is it because when a child is eating, he isn't working? Well, who can learn anything on an empty stomach? Is it because it's not fair if some kids didn't bring something to eat? Well, in that case, the hungry kids will likely remember to bring a snack for the next day if they feel jealous of the kids who are eating!!
The only place I've ever been as an adult with my children where eating is forbidden is the Royal Ontario Museum, where the rule is not arbitrary, as food residue could lead to the deterioration of the exhibits.
What about the rule about standing in a silent straight line? The only time I've ever been silent in a straight line was at a funeral and it didn't take me from Kindergarten to Grade 8 to learn how to stand still and be quiet.
What about rules regarding bathroom breaks? Can you imagine as an adult being told by your boss that you weren't allowed to go to the bathroom? Yet children are denied bathroom privileges all the time. They are expected to go at recess or lunch, unless it's an emergency. Like any kid is going to admit in front of the whole class that it's an emergency.
In my opinion, parents and teachers try to control children because of their own fear. The adults are afraid of what the children will do if they are not controlled. For teachers responsible for large groups of children who all come from different backgrounds and experiences, the fear is somewhat legitimate. But as a parent, I don't fear my children's behaviour. Mostly, I'm delighted by their behaviour, even when it is unexpected, unusual or unbecoming. If they act in a way that is generally considered to be 'socially unacceptable' then I am there to connect, instruct or console, depending on the circumstances. Since I accept that they act on the outside because of how they feel on the inside, I usually try to determine the inner feelings that precipitated the behaviour. Then I deal with the feelings, which always solves the behaviour problem.
The more rules a child has to follow, the more rules she is likely to break. That just makes sense. And the more nonsensical the rules are, the more likely she is to ignore them. Especially if the rules happen to make her feel physically uncomfortable or emotionally vulnerable.
I have no worries whatsoever about my children growing up to have manners, to recognize and show respect to authority at appropriate times and to get along with their peers and associates. They don't have to spend 10,000 hours (the approximate number of hours a child spends in school from Kindergarten to Grade 8) having it arbitrarily and dictatorially drilled into them by strangers.
Let's talk today about another of the hidden agendas of education.
Classroom Management is a euphemism for control.
Which is fine if you think that children need to be controlled. Which I don't.
Teachers' reputations are defined by whether or not they have good classroom management, which means whether or not their students are orderly, do as they are told, are 'on task' when required to be, don't get too noisy and more or less get along with each other in the room. It also means that teachers are expected to make their classes comply with school rules, even when the rules don't have much context within the confines of the classroom.
For example, if it's 5 minutes before the students are dismissed for the day and the principal walks into the room to deliver a message to somebody, and she sees one kid eating an apple and another kid wearing a baseball cap, then this makes the teacher look bad because apparently wearing hats and eating apples are forbidden under the school rules, even though the teacher might find it perfectly acceptable. So the principal may come in and enforce the nonsensical rules in the name of 'maintaining control' but it's really all about her having the power and the student's having none.
If someone would like to leave me a comment to explain why children should NOT eat when they are hungry and NOT wear outdoor attire 5 minutes before going outdoors, I'd love to read it.
I don't find it necessary to control my children. I'm not the mother at the playground yelling "Why don't you go on the slide?" or the mother at the grocery store trying to force her child to say "Thank you" to a total stranger who happened to pick up her hat off the floor. I instruct my children regarding their behaviour only when there is an issue of safety or when there are certain social considerations. For example, they know that if they burp in public they should say "Excuse me" but at home they don't have to if they don't want to. Why have a double standard? Because it's not worth fighting about.
But at school the teacher can't have some rules for some kids and some rules for others. And the teacher can't pick some rules to allow to be 'broken' in the class, but 'upheld' elsewhere on school property. There are two reasons for this. One, as I mentioned before, is that the teacher's reputation has a lot to do with how well-controlled the class is. Two, it is nearly impossible to administer the required curriculum without keeping all the children under the teacher's thumb by way of enforcing a lot of otherwise arbitrary and demeaning rules.
Let's take the rule about children not being allowed to eat in class. Why is this so important? Don't most adults eat when they are hungry, regardless of where they are? Is it because of the potential for a mess to be created? Then why don't we just expect the kids to clean up after themselves, and then enforce that rule? Is it because when a child is eating, he isn't working? Well, who can learn anything on an empty stomach? Is it because it's not fair if some kids didn't bring something to eat? Well, in that case, the hungry kids will likely remember to bring a snack for the next day if they feel jealous of the kids who are eating!!
The only place I've ever been as an adult with my children where eating is forbidden is the Royal Ontario Museum, where the rule is not arbitrary, as food residue could lead to the deterioration of the exhibits.
What about the rule about standing in a silent straight line? The only time I've ever been silent in a straight line was at a funeral and it didn't take me from Kindergarten to Grade 8 to learn how to stand still and be quiet.
What about rules regarding bathroom breaks? Can you imagine as an adult being told by your boss that you weren't allowed to go to the bathroom? Yet children are denied bathroom privileges all the time. They are expected to go at recess or lunch, unless it's an emergency. Like any kid is going to admit in front of the whole class that it's an emergency.
In my opinion, parents and teachers try to control children because of their own fear. The adults are afraid of what the children will do if they are not controlled. For teachers responsible for large groups of children who all come from different backgrounds and experiences, the fear is somewhat legitimate. But as a parent, I don't fear my children's behaviour. Mostly, I'm delighted by their behaviour, even when it is unexpected, unusual or unbecoming. If they act in a way that is generally considered to be 'socially unacceptable' then I am there to connect, instruct or console, depending on the circumstances. Since I accept that they act on the outside because of how they feel on the inside, I usually try to determine the inner feelings that precipitated the behaviour. Then I deal with the feelings, which always solves the behaviour problem.
The more rules a child has to follow, the more rules she is likely to break. That just makes sense. And the more nonsensical the rules are, the more likely she is to ignore them. Especially if the rules happen to make her feel physically uncomfortable or emotionally vulnerable.
I have no worries whatsoever about my children growing up to have manners, to recognize and show respect to authority at appropriate times and to get along with their peers and associates. They don't have to spend 10,000 hours (the approximate number of hours a child spends in school from Kindergarten to Grade 8) having it arbitrarily and dictatorially drilled into them by strangers.
Monday, October 3, 2011
How the Public Education System Encourages Parents to Abdicate their Parenting Responsibilities
This is my opinion.
An overwhelming number of parents have abdicated their parenting responsibilities to the school system, and they think this is right, good and normal.
So let me clarify.
The school system has taken on the responsibility to 'teach' children the characteristics of being a good person such as honesty, kindness, helpfulness, patience, tolerance and trust. The system also takes responsibility for teaching basic life skills such as hygiene, nutrition, health, sexuality and lifestyle choices. In my opinion, these areas are fundamentally the responsibility of parents.
What has happened is that the school system caters to what I would describe the lowest-common-denominator of its community. In other words, since there are going to be children in the system who, sadly, come from circumstances where they will not learn basic life skills or where they will not see in adults the attributes of good citizenry, the school has taken on the responsibility to provide opportunities for these children to learn what they need, supposedly, to live successfully as adults.
But this so-called solution to a sociological problem (and let me point out that the problem rests with the parents, not with the children) has completely backfired. If the point was to educate the 'less advantaged' children about topics that their parents might not have the resources to teach about, what has actually happened is that most parents, even those with the means and background, have stopped teaching their children the fundamentals of growing up.
Here are a few examples:
For two years I taught Grade 6 in a predominantly white, English-speaking working/middle class neighbourhood, where most families had two incomes. I was responsible for teaching Health, which included the topic of puberty. I was STUNNED that not a single student in my class knew the difference between the uterus and urethra. I was also required to teach a unit on nutrition, and I gave my class a challenge to not eat any junk food for 48 hours. They accepted that they couldn't eat candy, chips or soda, but they were STUNNED that they also couldn't eat fries, pizza, hamburgers, hotdogs, donuts, ice cream, popsicles, pudding, cake or cookies. Their parents showed up to ask me "So what are they supposed to eat? Lettuce?" Uh, ......yes.
You see, the more the school takes on the role of parent, the more parenting can be avoided by the actual parents. The school system has made it easy for parents to avoid important but uncomfortable topics like puberty, sexual health and lifestyle choices. So even 'good' parents allow themselves to be relieved of some of their responsibilities. They even stop trying. I have seen for example, that parents don't have to put effort into learning about what the healthy eating habits of adolescents should look like, because the school will tell their children what to eat. And what if the children won't eat healthily? Well, it's the school's fault, of course.
And it's not just the teaching of certain topics that parents have left up to the school system. Parents have asked me tell their child what time to go to bed, what time to get up, to be nice to his little sister, to help her grandmother, to spend more time on homework, to spend less time on homework, to do more chores around the house. The list goes on and on. I had parents asking me to issue punishments to their children for 'offences' that had nothing to do with me or school. This, when I was only 22 years old and my students were 13 years old!
Craziness.
Another area that parents have left up to the school is to allow them to label children and then 'fix' them. If a child is even slightly behind her peers in literacy or mathematics, her teacher will inform the parents that she is at risk. The parents are thrown into a dither of disappointment and relief: disappointed that their child is not, apparently, going to be a brain surgeon and relieved that now the school will 'fix' her and make her problem go away. It's ridiculous. How could parents let a person who has known their child for a few months make such a big judgement? And the parents beg for the school to help their poor child, as if there is nothing that the parent can possibly do, because after all, isn't learning something that happens at school?
Honestly, and speaking as an insider, teachers are horrified when a parent refuses to have a child tested for a learning disability or removed from the regular program to a remedial program or put in a Special Education class. Now that I am a more removed from the world of public education, whenever I hear a parent talking about a child who 'needs' testing or a special class, I always tell them they should never let the child be removed from the regular class, and they should get a private tutor or do whatever else it takes to help the child keep up with her peers. Why? Because whatever academic benefit the child might get by being part of school-based remedial program will be completely nullified by the sledgehammer that destroys her self-esteem when everybody knows she's gone to the 'dumb class'. It's not worth it.
Yes, I acknowledge that there are some good parents who truly believe that they have a greater role in their child's life than any teacher or curriculum. Those parents deserve some laud and honour, because they are parenting against the mainstream and they are incredibly rare. The good parents don't care about homework, while the rest of the parents are begging the school for more homework--because they don't know what to do with their children in the evenings!!!
I just can't have my children around other children who come from a culture of hands-off parenting. Children whose parents figure very significantly in their values and actions do not know how to be around children whose parents are largely irrelevant. I don't even know how to be around these hands-off parents. I can't remember how many times I have heard a parent at the playground say "My kids never listen to me." I always want to suggest "Why don't you try saying something relevant?"
So really what I am rebelling against in this particular derisive commentary is the parenting culture that puts teachers and curriculum above the instincts, knowledge and responsibilities of parents. Teachers and principals may love the power they have achieved in society, but society does not benefit from unloading the job of parents onto teachers.
I have decided to raise my own children, not hand them over to the government at the age of 4 to be raised in a culture that I don't subscribe to.
An overwhelming number of parents have abdicated their parenting responsibilities to the school system, and they think this is right, good and normal.
So let me clarify.
The school system has taken on the responsibility to 'teach' children the characteristics of being a good person such as honesty, kindness, helpfulness, patience, tolerance and trust. The system also takes responsibility for teaching basic life skills such as hygiene, nutrition, health, sexuality and lifestyle choices. In my opinion, these areas are fundamentally the responsibility of parents.
What has happened is that the school system caters to what I would describe the lowest-common-denominator of its community. In other words, since there are going to be children in the system who, sadly, come from circumstances where they will not learn basic life skills or where they will not see in adults the attributes of good citizenry, the school has taken on the responsibility to provide opportunities for these children to learn what they need, supposedly, to live successfully as adults.
But this so-called solution to a sociological problem (and let me point out that the problem rests with the parents, not with the children) has completely backfired. If the point was to educate the 'less advantaged' children about topics that their parents might not have the resources to teach about, what has actually happened is that most parents, even those with the means and background, have stopped teaching their children the fundamentals of growing up.
Here are a few examples:
For two years I taught Grade 6 in a predominantly white, English-speaking working/middle class neighbourhood, where most families had two incomes. I was responsible for teaching Health, which included the topic of puberty. I was STUNNED that not a single student in my class knew the difference between the uterus and urethra. I was also required to teach a unit on nutrition, and I gave my class a challenge to not eat any junk food for 48 hours. They accepted that they couldn't eat candy, chips or soda, but they were STUNNED that they also couldn't eat fries, pizza, hamburgers, hotdogs, donuts, ice cream, popsicles, pudding, cake or cookies. Their parents showed up to ask me "So what are they supposed to eat? Lettuce?" Uh, ......yes.
You see, the more the school takes on the role of parent, the more parenting can be avoided by the actual parents. The school system has made it easy for parents to avoid important but uncomfortable topics like puberty, sexual health and lifestyle choices. So even 'good' parents allow themselves to be relieved of some of their responsibilities. They even stop trying. I have seen for example, that parents don't have to put effort into learning about what the healthy eating habits of adolescents should look like, because the school will tell their children what to eat. And what if the children won't eat healthily? Well, it's the school's fault, of course.
And it's not just the teaching of certain topics that parents have left up to the school system. Parents have asked me tell their child what time to go to bed, what time to get up, to be nice to his little sister, to help her grandmother, to spend more time on homework, to spend less time on homework, to do more chores around the house. The list goes on and on. I had parents asking me to issue punishments to their children for 'offences' that had nothing to do with me or school. This, when I was only 22 years old and my students were 13 years old!
Craziness.
Another area that parents have left up to the school is to allow them to label children and then 'fix' them. If a child is even slightly behind her peers in literacy or mathematics, her teacher will inform the parents that she is at risk. The parents are thrown into a dither of disappointment and relief: disappointed that their child is not, apparently, going to be a brain surgeon and relieved that now the school will 'fix' her and make her problem go away. It's ridiculous. How could parents let a person who has known their child for a few months make such a big judgement? And the parents beg for the school to help their poor child, as if there is nothing that the parent can possibly do, because after all, isn't learning something that happens at school?
Honestly, and speaking as an insider, teachers are horrified when a parent refuses to have a child tested for a learning disability or removed from the regular program to a remedial program or put in a Special Education class. Now that I am a more removed from the world of public education, whenever I hear a parent talking about a child who 'needs' testing or a special class, I always tell them they should never let the child be removed from the regular class, and they should get a private tutor or do whatever else it takes to help the child keep up with her peers. Why? Because whatever academic benefit the child might get by being part of school-based remedial program will be completely nullified by the sledgehammer that destroys her self-esteem when everybody knows she's gone to the 'dumb class'. It's not worth it.
Yes, I acknowledge that there are some good parents who truly believe that they have a greater role in their child's life than any teacher or curriculum. Those parents deserve some laud and honour, because they are parenting against the mainstream and they are incredibly rare. The good parents don't care about homework, while the rest of the parents are begging the school for more homework--because they don't know what to do with their children in the evenings!!!
I just can't have my children around other children who come from a culture of hands-off parenting. Children whose parents figure very significantly in their values and actions do not know how to be around children whose parents are largely irrelevant. I don't even know how to be around these hands-off parents. I can't remember how many times I have heard a parent at the playground say "My kids never listen to me." I always want to suggest "Why don't you try saying something relevant?"
So really what I am rebelling against in this particular derisive commentary is the parenting culture that puts teachers and curriculum above the instincts, knowledge and responsibilities of parents. Teachers and principals may love the power they have achieved in society, but society does not benefit from unloading the job of parents onto teachers.
I have decided to raise my own children, not hand them over to the government at the age of 4 to be raised in a culture that I don't subscribe to.
Friday, September 30, 2011
"But How will they be Socialized?" {My Own Perspective on the Social Skill Development of Schooled Children}
This is my opinion.
The social atmosphere in schools is toxic, it does not reflect 'the real world' and it is hard enough to navigate as an adult, let alone as a child.
Everybody's big concern about children who are homeschooled is "How will they socialize?" My own family and friends have shown concern about whether my children have or will have friends and they ask what I am doing to provide them with opportunities to be around children their age. Before I started to study child development (which happened only after I became a mom, not while I was in Teacher's College) I too believed that children needed to be with each other to learn how to behave in socially acceptable ways.
What I now understand is that it would be impossible for a group of immature beings to help each other achieve maturity. Social skills and socially acceptable behavior are learned from people who exhibit the skills and behaviours that we want children to adopt, namely their parents or other adults who we hope our children will emulate.
Gordon Neufeld explains in his book Hold on to your Kids how 'getting along' with others does not occur because of peer contact but from the gradual development of authentic personality and from having developed both self-respect and value for the personhood of others. He also explains how children who have spent time in daycare before attending school initially seem to have an advantage over children who have not attended daycare. This is because the children who had been to daycare had been 'socialized', which is to say that they were more comfortable around large groups of children and interacting with adults whom they had never met. In other words, their shyness (which is what naturally repels children from people to whom they have no attachment) was gone. However, this so-called advantage is an illusion: Neufeld sites research that the longer a child had been in daycare, the more likely they were to exhibit defiant or aggressive behaviours, the opposite of socially acceptable behaviours.
My personal observations from 10 years as a teacher back up Neufeld's research. Sending a child into school who has never been to daycare is throwing a sheep to the lions. School is not a level playing field, whatever that means. Rather, the school system is hierarchical, and that does not just include the principal, vice principal and teachers. In every classroom there is a hierarchy, and each child finds their place. It is never the smartest child who is at the top of the hierarchy. In fact, the most intelligent children are usually treated with disdain by the other children, and as a nuisance by the teacher. It is the loudest child who gets the most attention, not the nicest child. And if a child has any attribute that makes him or her 'different', the child is ostracized completely.
So many negative social interactions occur in a day with 20-30 children, that a teacher cannot possibly assist in finding a solution or creating a balance every time a dispute or problem occurs. In fact, a teacher is more likely to settle a dispute by siding with the aggressor, in the hopes of appeasing him or her and having fewer behaviour issues to deal with, at least in the short term. The pecking order is cruel and random and it can change daily. The children are always vulnerable to the whims and moods of the teachers and to ever changing power dynamics amongst their peers. Nothing can ever be taken for granted.
The 'power' exhibited among 25 children who are all the same age has nothing to do with merit and everything to do with playing a 'social game' with rules that are constantly changing. Is this the way we want power to be gained in the adult world? And is it what is really happening? Is Obama the President because of merit or personality? Is Harper the Prime Minister because of merit or personality? For me, it's all too complicated and if I can't figure out the 'social game' (this, from a chick with virtually no friends) how can a 5-year-old figure it out? School is an ever-changing popularity contest, and if that's a reflection of the 'real world' then I definitely choose to opt out.
Does this mean that I'm not sending my kids to school because I'm afraid they won't make friends? Not at all. What I'm afraid of is that their brains will be so stressed out trying to navigate the social game that there will be very little of it left for actual learning. Besides that, nobody needs to be with people 5 days/week in order to be their friend. Most adults would say that their best friends are NOT the people they see at work everyday.
One of my friends experienced this frightening social order that I have observed in schools is several profound ways. Being significantly smarter than his peers and possessing a strong need for social justice, he was almost always rejected and ridiculed. His creativity was thwarted and his natural authenticity was put down. One time he planned a huge art project--a mural--but was told that he couldn't complete it because the school was focused on literacy at that time. Another time his personal property--a math text!!--was confiscated because it was different from the style of mathematics being taught at the time. Incredibly, he was even sent home for refusing to be in the same room with a student who had told him to f*ck off, and he was subsequently told (by a person with no authority or training to make such an assumption) that he had an anger management problem.
Now, re-read that paragraph with the new knowledge that all of those things happened to my friend while he was a teacher, not a student. If an adult can be treated with such arbitrary and contrived 'rules', imagine how difficult it must be for a child to exist authentically in the same environment? How can a child possibly learn the rules of 'socially acceptable behaviour' when they change every day? Or when the adults who are supposed to be modelling them for the children do not apply them to their relationships with each other?
For me, raising authentic children is my highest goal, which really means that I must act as a guardian of their authentic selves. In school, their authenticity would have no value, and would certainly not be protected. They would be expected by their peers and teachers to conform to a pre-existing standard, a standard that probably doesn't have anything to do with the values of our family.
That's not what I want for them.
The social atmosphere in schools is toxic, it does not reflect 'the real world' and it is hard enough to navigate as an adult, let alone as a child.
Everybody's big concern about children who are homeschooled is "How will they socialize?" My own family and friends have shown concern about whether my children have or will have friends and they ask what I am doing to provide them with opportunities to be around children their age. Before I started to study child development (which happened only after I became a mom, not while I was in Teacher's College) I too believed that children needed to be with each other to learn how to behave in socially acceptable ways.
What I now understand is that it would be impossible for a group of immature beings to help each other achieve maturity. Social skills and socially acceptable behavior are learned from people who exhibit the skills and behaviours that we want children to adopt, namely their parents or other adults who we hope our children will emulate.
Gordon Neufeld explains in his book Hold on to your Kids how 'getting along' with others does not occur because of peer contact but from the gradual development of authentic personality and from having developed both self-respect and value for the personhood of others. He also explains how children who have spent time in daycare before attending school initially seem to have an advantage over children who have not attended daycare. This is because the children who had been to daycare had been 'socialized', which is to say that they were more comfortable around large groups of children and interacting with adults whom they had never met. In other words, their shyness (which is what naturally repels children from people to whom they have no attachment) was gone. However, this so-called advantage is an illusion: Neufeld sites research that the longer a child had been in daycare, the more likely they were to exhibit defiant or aggressive behaviours, the opposite of socially acceptable behaviours.
My personal observations from 10 years as a teacher back up Neufeld's research. Sending a child into school who has never been to daycare is throwing a sheep to the lions. School is not a level playing field, whatever that means. Rather, the school system is hierarchical, and that does not just include the principal, vice principal and teachers. In every classroom there is a hierarchy, and each child finds their place. It is never the smartest child who is at the top of the hierarchy. In fact, the most intelligent children are usually treated with disdain by the other children, and as a nuisance by the teacher. It is the loudest child who gets the most attention, not the nicest child. And if a child has any attribute that makes him or her 'different', the child is ostracized completely.
So many negative social interactions occur in a day with 20-30 children, that a teacher cannot possibly assist in finding a solution or creating a balance every time a dispute or problem occurs. In fact, a teacher is more likely to settle a dispute by siding with the aggressor, in the hopes of appeasing him or her and having fewer behaviour issues to deal with, at least in the short term. The pecking order is cruel and random and it can change daily. The children are always vulnerable to the whims and moods of the teachers and to ever changing power dynamics amongst their peers. Nothing can ever be taken for granted.
The 'power' exhibited among 25 children who are all the same age has nothing to do with merit and everything to do with playing a 'social game' with rules that are constantly changing. Is this the way we want power to be gained in the adult world? And is it what is really happening? Is Obama the President because of merit or personality? Is Harper the Prime Minister because of merit or personality? For me, it's all too complicated and if I can't figure out the 'social game' (this, from a chick with virtually no friends) how can a 5-year-old figure it out? School is an ever-changing popularity contest, and if that's a reflection of the 'real world' then I definitely choose to opt out.
Does this mean that I'm not sending my kids to school because I'm afraid they won't make friends? Not at all. What I'm afraid of is that their brains will be so stressed out trying to navigate the social game that there will be very little of it left for actual learning. Besides that, nobody needs to be with people 5 days/week in order to be their friend. Most adults would say that their best friends are NOT the people they see at work everyday.
One of my friends experienced this frightening social order that I have observed in schools is several profound ways. Being significantly smarter than his peers and possessing a strong need for social justice, he was almost always rejected and ridiculed. His creativity was thwarted and his natural authenticity was put down. One time he planned a huge art project--a mural--but was told that he couldn't complete it because the school was focused on literacy at that time. Another time his personal property--a math text!!--was confiscated because it was different from the style of mathematics being taught at the time. Incredibly, he was even sent home for refusing to be in the same room with a student who had told him to f*ck off, and he was subsequently told (by a person with no authority or training to make such an assumption) that he had an anger management problem.
Now, re-read that paragraph with the new knowledge that all of those things happened to my friend while he was a teacher, not a student. If an adult can be treated with such arbitrary and contrived 'rules', imagine how difficult it must be for a child to exist authentically in the same environment? How can a child possibly learn the rules of 'socially acceptable behaviour' when they change every day? Or when the adults who are supposed to be modelling them for the children do not apply them to their relationships with each other?
For me, raising authentic children is my highest goal, which really means that I must act as a guardian of their authentic selves. In school, their authenticity would have no value, and would certainly not be protected. They would be expected by their peers and teachers to conform to a pre-existing standard, a standard that probably doesn't have anything to do with the values of our family.
That's not what I want for them.
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Unschool Lessons: Goals
As an Unschooling parent, I don`t follow a curriculum or teach lessons. I don`t look for ways to turn our experiences into `learning moments`. But I don`t take my responsibility for the futures of my children lightly. Unschooling is not the lazy sister of homeschooling. This series of posts will highlight some of the lessons that I hope my children will learn in their Unschooled lives.
Lesson #5: A child with a goal can probably handle it.
Probably among the deepest core values that I learned from my parents is that 'hard work' is nothing to be afraid of. In many ways that attitude served me well. I worked hard at school to get good marks, I had a job beginning at age 13 (and I wasn't unemployed once in the following 24 years), and I paid for 4 years of university by myself, without any gifts or loans. As a teacher I always performed at a high level in my jobs, and often took on additional responsibilities. And in my life with my kids I have no problem doing the work necessary to give us a comfortable life: cooking, cleaning, laundry, going here and there, making a garden, etc, etc.
There's a bit of irony in the way the school system seems to value students who work hard to achieve good marks, yet the same system is committed to making the work accessible to all kids. Teachers call this process 'dumbing it down.' Essentially, it means that even though the curriculum documents are written with a specific list of outcomes and expectations, the teachers are expected (instructed!) to modify the content so that all the children can successfully complete the work. In fact, students in Special Education Programs are taught from a curriculum specifically created so that each child can achieve a mark of 'B' or 'B+'.
So I'm not going to go into a long explanation of all the reasons why schools are sending out mixed messages to kids about the meaning of hard work and how this is not good for kids. What I am going to point out is that whatever goals I set for myself (such as living a greener lifestyle) I have to be willing to do the work to achieve the goal. And whatever goals my children have, I have to be willing to do the hard work to assist them. (Actually, when I first decided to try to live a greener lifestyle, my plan was to turn my lawn into a vegetable garden. This plan was completely derailed when it became apparent that nothing will grow in our lawn due to the presence of two enormous Manitoba Maples. So sometimes revising the plan is part of the hard work. We are now going green in other ways.)
I actually think it's only adults who define work as hard, since children are more likely to persist at an activity or goal that is really meaningful to them. Children can have some pretty interesting goals. For example, my daughter Jasmine was determined to learn how to swim when she was just 2 years old. Every week we took her to a pool where she would jump in and swim to the best of her ability. Now, at 3.5 years old, she is a better swimmer than either of her older sisters. She had a goal and we facilitated her desire by providing access to a pool on a regular basis.
If I had told her that she was too little to learn to swim, or if I had acted like helping her with her goal was too much work for me (getting to the pool, getting cold in the water, trudging back home) then I'd have been sending her the message that goals which require hard work are not achievable. I would also be sending her the message that she is not important enough for me to help. Obviously I would not want to send either of those messages.
What I really hope is that the tenacity and resilience that my children (all children, perhaps?) seem to naturally possess will not be undermined by exposing them to only simple, very achievable goals, such as they would experience at school. By letting them set their own goals while still young and then giving them the tools to pursue their goals, I hope their tenacity and resilience will remain intact throughout their lives. And I think they will discover that factoring in the hard work is part of setting the goal in the first place.
**********************************************
Only 4 more days to enter to win Organized Simplicity by Tsh Oxenreider. Click here to leave a comment to enter the Giveaway!
Lesson #5: A child with a goal can probably handle it.
Probably among the deepest core values that I learned from my parents is that 'hard work' is nothing to be afraid of. In many ways that attitude served me well. I worked hard at school to get good marks, I had a job beginning at age 13 (and I wasn't unemployed once in the following 24 years), and I paid for 4 years of university by myself, without any gifts or loans. As a teacher I always performed at a high level in my jobs, and often took on additional responsibilities. And in my life with my kids I have no problem doing the work necessary to give us a comfortable life: cooking, cleaning, laundry, going here and there, making a garden, etc, etc.
There's a bit of irony in the way the school system seems to value students who work hard to achieve good marks, yet the same system is committed to making the work accessible to all kids. Teachers call this process 'dumbing it down.' Essentially, it means that even though the curriculum documents are written with a specific list of outcomes and expectations, the teachers are expected (instructed!) to modify the content so that all the children can successfully complete the work. In fact, students in Special Education Programs are taught from a curriculum specifically created so that each child can achieve a mark of 'B' or 'B+'.
So I'm not going to go into a long explanation of all the reasons why schools are sending out mixed messages to kids about the meaning of hard work and how this is not good for kids. What I am going to point out is that whatever goals I set for myself (such as living a greener lifestyle) I have to be willing to do the work to achieve the goal. And whatever goals my children have, I have to be willing to do the hard work to assist them. (Actually, when I first decided to try to live a greener lifestyle, my plan was to turn my lawn into a vegetable garden. This plan was completely derailed when it became apparent that nothing will grow in our lawn due to the presence of two enormous Manitoba Maples. So sometimes revising the plan is part of the hard work. We are now going green in other ways.)
I actually think it's only adults who define work as hard, since children are more likely to persist at an activity or goal that is really meaningful to them. Children can have some pretty interesting goals. For example, my daughter Jasmine was determined to learn how to swim when she was just 2 years old. Every week we took her to a pool where she would jump in and swim to the best of her ability. Now, at 3.5 years old, she is a better swimmer than either of her older sisters. She had a goal and we facilitated her desire by providing access to a pool on a regular basis.
If I had told her that she was too little to learn to swim, or if I had acted like helping her with her goal was too much work for me (getting to the pool, getting cold in the water, trudging back home) then I'd have been sending her the message that goals which require hard work are not achievable. I would also be sending her the message that she is not important enough for me to help. Obviously I would not want to send either of those messages.
What I really hope is that the tenacity and resilience that my children (all children, perhaps?) seem to naturally possess will not be undermined by exposing them to only simple, very achievable goals, such as they would experience at school. By letting them set their own goals while still young and then giving them the tools to pursue their goals, I hope their tenacity and resilience will remain intact throughout their lives. And I think they will discover that factoring in the hard work is part of setting the goal in the first place.
**********************************************
Only 4 more days to enter to win Organized Simplicity by Tsh Oxenreider. Click here to leave a comment to enter the Giveaway!
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
Unschool Lessons: Preparing for the Future
As an Unschooling parent, I don`t follow a curriculum or teach lessons. I don`t look for ways to turn our experiences into `learning moments`. But I don`t take my responsibility for the futures of my children lightly. Unschooling is not the lazy sister of homeschooling. This series of posts will highlight some of the lessons that I hope my children will learn in their Unschooled lives.
Lesson #4: Your (and my) life's work is NOW, not at some point in the distant future.
When I was in school the prevailing lie that we were all brainwashed into believing was that those who do well in school will go on to be successful later in life. This is the whole 'good job syndrome' --the idea that getting a good job is the highest goal we can all attain. My earliest memory of this refrain being sung at school was in Grade 5: "If you don't do well in school, how will you get a good job?" I heard it for the next 12 years. Then I went to work as a teacher and sang the same tune to my students.
There are two problems with this line of thinking. The first problem is that there are lots of kids who don't excel at school-related learning, so it is very defeating to them if they buy into the belief that success at school = success in life. If you grow up believing that you will be a failure, it's very likely going to be true. The second problem is that it makes kids believe that their life is in the future. More specificly, it means that the only goals that matter will happen when they are adults. If that is the case, what is the point of childhood? Is there no value in childhood, except to prepare youngsters to get a job when they grow up?
If children are really to grow up to be adults whose lives are fully meaningful, then I believe that they must grow up believing that their lives have meaning right now. I believe that their life's work is everyday. The value of this lesson is in valuing the focus of your child's energy for it's own sake, and not for how it prepares your child to achieve some future hypothetical goal. What I am learning is to value the daily activities that have nothing to do with academics and have everything to do with intellect and relationships and having a good time.
A perfect example is the way Anna(7yrs) and Holly(5.5yrs) can invent a different game everyday that involves emptying all the DVDs out of the drawer under the TV. How amazing that in one week they have used the DVDs to play video store, build castles, make podiums for the Barbie dolls, be surprise presents for 'their kids' and as a form of currency. Fascinating. There is no reason for me to get annoyed at constantly having to pick up and put away (after tripping over or walking around) all the DVDs all week long because I am so amazed by the creativity of a 7-year-old and a 5-year-old that I can deal with the mess. They are living out their lives in the fullest possible way and I would rather pick up DVDs than wipe away tears or pay big money to have them entertained elsewhere. At this stage, their life's work is to play creatively and build their relationship with each other.
Another example is the way that Jasmine (3.5yrs) is so dedicated to the development of her gross motor skills. Already she can swim under water, dive and do the front crawl. She rides a 2-wheeled scooter and a bicycle. She can climb a ladder and walk across the garage roof. She is fearless. Her life's work is to accomplish whatever she wants to, and she is doing it!
My children's life's work is also to love and be loved. What a great job!! If only we were all as loving and lovable as children who are free of stress and unreasonable expectations. Whether they ever have a good job, or even a bad job for that matter, is not going to be dependent on how much random information can be crammed into their brains while they are young. It's going to depend on how they esteem themselves and what their personal values are. If they value their own authenticity and their important relationships, and if they know that they are loved unconditionally, then jobs are going to be secondary in their pursuit of their goals. They are going to grow up confident enough to honour their authenticity (by not doing a job that they hate) and to honour their relationships (by not doing a job that puts a strain on maintaining closeness).
I also think that if I honour their authenticity while they are young, the possibilities are endless for what they might accomplish before they are adults. Everytime I think of Craig and Marc Keilburger, who began their Me to We campaign as children, I have to assume that their authenticity was totally honoured by their parents. Those two great young men make me mindful of the fact that kids are people too, and they don't have to reach a certain age, or a certain level of education, to accomplish great things, to be greatand to have a great life.
The greatness of my children is now. My job is only to stay out of the way as they accomplish their life's work.
Lesson #4: Your (and my) life's work is NOW, not at some point in the distant future.
When I was in school the prevailing lie that we were all brainwashed into believing was that those who do well in school will go on to be successful later in life. This is the whole 'good job syndrome' --the idea that getting a good job is the highest goal we can all attain. My earliest memory of this refrain being sung at school was in Grade 5: "If you don't do well in school, how will you get a good job?" I heard it for the next 12 years. Then I went to work as a teacher and sang the same tune to my students.
There are two problems with this line of thinking. The first problem is that there are lots of kids who don't excel at school-related learning, so it is very defeating to them if they buy into the belief that success at school = success in life. If you grow up believing that you will be a failure, it's very likely going to be true. The second problem is that it makes kids believe that their life is in the future. More specificly, it means that the only goals that matter will happen when they are adults. If that is the case, what is the point of childhood? Is there no value in childhood, except to prepare youngsters to get a job when they grow up?
If children are really to grow up to be adults whose lives are fully meaningful, then I believe that they must grow up believing that their lives have meaning right now. I believe that their life's work is everyday. The value of this lesson is in valuing the focus of your child's energy for it's own sake, and not for how it prepares your child to achieve some future hypothetical goal. What I am learning is to value the daily activities that have nothing to do with academics and have everything to do with intellect and relationships and having a good time.
A perfect example is the way Anna(7yrs) and Holly(5.5yrs) can invent a different game everyday that involves emptying all the DVDs out of the drawer under the TV. How amazing that in one week they have used the DVDs to play video store, build castles, make podiums for the Barbie dolls, be surprise presents for 'their kids' and as a form of currency. Fascinating. There is no reason for me to get annoyed at constantly having to pick up and put away (after tripping over or walking around) all the DVDs all week long because I am so amazed by the creativity of a 7-year-old and a 5-year-old that I can deal with the mess. They are living out their lives in the fullest possible way and I would rather pick up DVDs than wipe away tears or pay big money to have them entertained elsewhere. At this stage, their life's work is to play creatively and build their relationship with each other.
Another example is the way that Jasmine (3.5yrs) is so dedicated to the development of her gross motor skills. Already she can swim under water, dive and do the front crawl. She rides a 2-wheeled scooter and a bicycle. She can climb a ladder and walk across the garage roof. She is fearless. Her life's work is to accomplish whatever she wants to, and she is doing it!
My children's life's work is also to love and be loved. What a great job!! If only we were all as loving and lovable as children who are free of stress and unreasonable expectations. Whether they ever have a good job, or even a bad job for that matter, is not going to be dependent on how much random information can be crammed into their brains while they are young. It's going to depend on how they esteem themselves and what their personal values are. If they value their own authenticity and their important relationships, and if they know that they are loved unconditionally, then jobs are going to be secondary in their pursuit of their goals. They are going to grow up confident enough to honour their authenticity (by not doing a job that they hate) and to honour their relationships (by not doing a job that puts a strain on maintaining closeness).
I also think that if I honour their authenticity while they are young, the possibilities are endless for what they might accomplish before they are adults. Everytime I think of Craig and Marc Keilburger, who began their Me to We campaign as children, I have to assume that their authenticity was totally honoured by their parents. Those two great young men make me mindful of the fact that kids are people too, and they don't have to reach a certain age, or a certain level of education, to accomplish great things, to be greatand to have a great life.
The greatness of my children is now. My job is only to stay out of the way as they accomplish their life's work.
Monday, September 26, 2011
Unschool Lessons: Liberal Arts
As an Unschooling parent, I don`t follow a curriculum or teach lessons. I don`t look for ways to turn our experiences into `learning moments`. But I don`t take my responsibility for the futures of my children lightly. Unschooling is not the lazy sister of homeschooling. This series of posts will highlight some of the lessons that I hope my children will learn in their Unschooled lives.
Lesson #3: The needs of the weakest/youngest/injured always come first.
This may not seem like a subject on a curriculum, but I believe it is one of the most important lessons we can all learn. The Liberal Arts are broadly defined by the acquisition of general knowledge and the development of rational thought and intellectual capabilities. For me, rational thought requires knowing one's place in relation to others. Our futures are only as successful as our meaningful relationships, so rational thought and intellectual development must include the ability to value our own needs and to assess each situation based on what is best for all concerned.
Children are by nature egocentric and it is hard for them to be patient or to put someone else's needs ahead of their own. But children are also naturally empathetic, and I believe that their empathy can lead them to be patient. In a family with 4 children under the age of 7, it is a rare moment when no one needs something or when everyone's needs are met at the same time, so I have to have a way of sorting out who will get my attention first. I also want my children to learn that while all of their needs are important, there is, in fact, a hierarchy of needs.
This philosophy came to me when Holly was born just 20 months after Anna. Anna was essentially still a baby herself and needed my full attention, yet she had to share me with someone else. Knowing I would easily feel overwhelmed by trying to fulfill each one's needs at the same time, I decided that I would not weigh each situation before reacting, but rather that I would establish the 'rule' and then follow it. This rule has definitely helped me to keep my wits about me when four little people are yelling at me at the same time.
But this is much more than just a way to make my family operate smoothly. As far as curriculum goes, it is a world view, a lens through which to study history, religion, culture, economics and politics. Imagine if all the world's governments committed to ensuring that the needs of the weakest, youngest or injured in society were always taken care of first. People before profit. This is not a new or even an original idea. And I've never been much of a social activist, but it just makes so much sense that 21st century children should grow up with a sense of social justice and an ability to rank their needs amongst the needs of others.
This is the complete opposite of the way needs are met in the school system. There, the prevailing rule is "The person with the most power has needs that are more important than everyone else." In practice, this means that the loudest, most obnoxious child will always get the most attention. Or, when a child is put in a Special Education class, the needs of the teachers are being met, not the needs of the child. (Having a child's lack of intellectual ability publicized by separating him/her from peers is a great way to destroy a child's self esteem. What's the motivation to learn when everyone already thinks you're dumb? But segregating the slower learners sure does make it easier on the teachers!!)
Notice how adult society follows the same pattern as schools for first meeting the needs of the strongest or most attention-seeking. Do you think politicians have to wait for medical treatment? When a mother lets her baby 'cry it out' whose needs are being met first? Is the formula industry putting people before profit?
Making my older children put their needs on hold while I tend to the baby has worked in so far as they know that I will do what they want, but not while Julian is nursing or going to sleep or otherwise needing attention. And when someone gets hurt, everything around us stops while that one is comforted. Even when there is a fight (there honestly aren't very many) I ask them to talk to each other about why they are upset, and then I can easily determine who the injured party is, or often just talking about it is enough to end it. So far so good!! Even Julian has experienced having to wait while I help someone who is sick or hurt.
So Lesson #3 gives us a context in which to study all of the social sciences. I'm excited about exploring history, culture, religion, economics and politics with my children. I expect to learn as much as they do and I am looking forward to their original insights, rather than hearing them express the one 'right' answer or opinion that dominates teacher-led study of the curriculum. Mostly, I look forward to observing them show compassion and solve problems with a mind towards honouring the youngest or weakest.
If only The World could be so simple....
Lesson #3: The needs of the weakest/youngest/injured always come first.
This may not seem like a subject on a curriculum, but I believe it is one of the most important lessons we can all learn. The Liberal Arts are broadly defined by the acquisition of general knowledge and the development of rational thought and intellectual capabilities. For me, rational thought requires knowing one's place in relation to others. Our futures are only as successful as our meaningful relationships, so rational thought and intellectual development must include the ability to value our own needs and to assess each situation based on what is best for all concerned.
Children are by nature egocentric and it is hard for them to be patient or to put someone else's needs ahead of their own. But children are also naturally empathetic, and I believe that their empathy can lead them to be patient. In a family with 4 children under the age of 7, it is a rare moment when no one needs something or when everyone's needs are met at the same time, so I have to have a way of sorting out who will get my attention first. I also want my children to learn that while all of their needs are important, there is, in fact, a hierarchy of needs.
This philosophy came to me when Holly was born just 20 months after Anna. Anna was essentially still a baby herself and needed my full attention, yet she had to share me with someone else. Knowing I would easily feel overwhelmed by trying to fulfill each one's needs at the same time, I decided that I would not weigh each situation before reacting, but rather that I would establish the 'rule' and then follow it. This rule has definitely helped me to keep my wits about me when four little people are yelling at me at the same time.
But this is much more than just a way to make my family operate smoothly. As far as curriculum goes, it is a world view, a lens through which to study history, religion, culture, economics and politics. Imagine if all the world's governments committed to ensuring that the needs of the weakest, youngest or injured in society were always taken care of first. People before profit. This is not a new or even an original idea. And I've never been much of a social activist, but it just makes so much sense that 21st century children should grow up with a sense of social justice and an ability to rank their needs amongst the needs of others.
This is the complete opposite of the way needs are met in the school system. There, the prevailing rule is "The person with the most power has needs that are more important than everyone else." In practice, this means that the loudest, most obnoxious child will always get the most attention. Or, when a child is put in a Special Education class, the needs of the teachers are being met, not the needs of the child. (Having a child's lack of intellectual ability publicized by separating him/her from peers is a great way to destroy a child's self esteem. What's the motivation to learn when everyone already thinks you're dumb? But segregating the slower learners sure does make it easier on the teachers!!)
Notice how adult society follows the same pattern as schools for first meeting the needs of the strongest or most attention-seeking. Do you think politicians have to wait for medical treatment? When a mother lets her baby 'cry it out' whose needs are being met first? Is the formula industry putting people before profit?
Making my older children put their needs on hold while I tend to the baby has worked in so far as they know that I will do what they want, but not while Julian is nursing or going to sleep or otherwise needing attention. And when someone gets hurt, everything around us stops while that one is comforted. Even when there is a fight (there honestly aren't very many) I ask them to talk to each other about why they are upset, and then I can easily determine who the injured party is, or often just talking about it is enough to end it. So far so good!! Even Julian has experienced having to wait while I help someone who is sick or hurt.
So Lesson #3 gives us a context in which to study all of the social sciences. I'm excited about exploring history, culture, religion, economics and politics with my children. I expect to learn as much as they do and I am looking forward to their original insights, rather than hearing them express the one 'right' answer or opinion that dominates teacher-led study of the curriculum. Mostly, I look forward to observing them show compassion and solve problems with a mind towards honouring the youngest or weakest.
If only The World could be so simple....
Sunday, September 25, 2011
Unschool Lessons: Reading
As an Unschooling parent, I don't follow a curriculum or teach lessons. I don't look for ways to turn our experiences into 'learning moments'. But I don`t take my responsibility for the futures of my children lightly. Unschooling is not the lazy sister of homeschooling. This series of posts will highlight some of the lessons that I hope my children will learn in their Unschooled lives.
Lesson #2: Reading is one activity that people do for entertainment or education. It is not at the top of a hierarchy of ways that children learn.
The public school system is obsessed with books. Huge money is spent on Early Literacy Programs. Librarians spend hours teaching kids how to 'take care of books'. (What is it--a pet?) Kids are tested on their ability to use a glossary or an index. They have to keep a log of how many minutes per week they spend reading. Some schools have a program called DEAR--Drop Everything And Read. Non-fiction is valued above fiction, which is valued above comics or magazines.
Enough already.
While there is some evidence that children who are good readers are usually good in all subjects, there is no evidence that making kids read is good for them. The way the school system coerces and manipulates kids to read is really a problem in my opinion and it's no wonder that kids tend to resist it. Wouldn't you resist something that you were constantly forced, coerced and bribed to do?
Our house is full of books and we regularly let our children pick out new books to buy. They read whenever they want and they sometimes ask me to read to them. They read to their dolls, to each other and to themselves. If they are watching something on TV and we have a book with the same story, they will hold the book on their laps and turn the pages when it's appropriate.
I must add here that when I say 'read' I mean 'look at', since neither Anna(7yrs) nor Holly(5.5yrs) is able to read independently yet. Nonetheless, they are both able to spend significant time--more than 30 minutes, more than once a day--engaged with books. Often they say the story in their own words as they turn the pages, or they narrate the pictures in books they are less familiar with. But they also ask each other to point to certain objects on the page, or they create other games with books such as pretending the book is a TV, or pretending that the book is talking to them. Who am I to say that one way of reading is better than another?
We don't have a specific time every day for scheduled reading. We also don't have a specific time for scheduled eating, sleeping or playing. We eat when we're hungry, sleep when we're tired and engage in whatever we're interested in the rest of the time. I don't quiz them about the content of books we read, and I don't try to make them do inferring, predicting or character analysis. I don't rush to grab a book every time someone asks a question about penguins or pirates. And I never act like reading is a more important or worthwhile activity than dressing up dolls, making playdough cookies or watching TV. The girls see me reading books, magazines and at the computer. They also see me cooking, knitting, painting, writing, scrapbooking and doing other activities that I enjoy significantly less than those I've mentioned.
The lesson here is that we are not ranking literacy as more important than any other skill our children will naturally want to develop. They are also developing gross and fine motor skills and spatial sense and personal history and cultural expectations. Why would I try to make them learn one set of skills when they are more naturally inclined to learn another at this time? I didn't rush them when they were learning to walk, and I won't rush them to learn to read and write either. Kids learn to read because people read, just as they learned to walk because people walk, just as they will learn to use a computer because people use computers.
They are people, after all.
******************************
Lesson #1: Science is Everything.
Lesson #2: Reading is one activity that people do for entertainment or education. It is not at the top of a hierarchy of ways that children learn.
The public school system is obsessed with books. Huge money is spent on Early Literacy Programs. Librarians spend hours teaching kids how to 'take care of books'. (What is it--a pet?) Kids are tested on their ability to use a glossary or an index. They have to keep a log of how many minutes per week they spend reading. Some schools have a program called DEAR--Drop Everything And Read. Non-fiction is valued above fiction, which is valued above comics or magazines.
Enough already.
While there is some evidence that children who are good readers are usually good in all subjects, there is no evidence that making kids read is good for them. The way the school system coerces and manipulates kids to read is really a problem in my opinion and it's no wonder that kids tend to resist it. Wouldn't you resist something that you were constantly forced, coerced and bribed to do?
Our house is full of books and we regularly let our children pick out new books to buy. They read whenever they want and they sometimes ask me to read to them. They read to their dolls, to each other and to themselves. If they are watching something on TV and we have a book with the same story, they will hold the book on their laps and turn the pages when it's appropriate.
I must add here that when I say 'read' I mean 'look at', since neither Anna(7yrs) nor Holly(5.5yrs) is able to read independently yet. Nonetheless, they are both able to spend significant time--more than 30 minutes, more than once a day--engaged with books. Often they say the story in their own words as they turn the pages, or they narrate the pictures in books they are less familiar with. But they also ask each other to point to certain objects on the page, or they create other games with books such as pretending the book is a TV, or pretending that the book is talking to them. Who am I to say that one way of reading is better than another?
We don't have a specific time every day for scheduled reading. We also don't have a specific time for scheduled eating, sleeping or playing. We eat when we're hungry, sleep when we're tired and engage in whatever we're interested in the rest of the time. I don't quiz them about the content of books we read, and I don't try to make them do inferring, predicting or character analysis. I don't rush to grab a book every time someone asks a question about penguins or pirates. And I never act like reading is a more important or worthwhile activity than dressing up dolls, making playdough cookies or watching TV. The girls see me reading books, magazines and at the computer. They also see me cooking, knitting, painting, writing, scrapbooking and doing other activities that I enjoy significantly less than those I've mentioned.
The lesson here is that we are not ranking literacy as more important than any other skill our children will naturally want to develop. They are also developing gross and fine motor skills and spatial sense and personal history and cultural expectations. Why would I try to make them learn one set of skills when they are more naturally inclined to learn another at this time? I didn't rush them when they were learning to walk, and I won't rush them to learn to read and write either. Kids learn to read because people read, just as they learned to walk because people walk, just as they will learn to use a computer because people use computers.
They are people, after all.
******************************
Lesson #1: Science is Everything.
Saturday, September 24, 2011
Unschool Lessons: Science
As an Unschooling parent, I don`t follow a curriculum or teach lessons. I don`t look for ways to turn our experiences into `learning moments`. But I don`t take my responsibility for the futures of my children lightly. Unschooling is not the lazy sister of homeschooling. This series of posts will highlight some of the lessons that I hope my children will learn in their Unschooled lives.
Lesson #1: Science is not a subject. Everything is SCIENCE.
I'm not sure how I went to school from age 5 to 22 and I don't know anything useful about the domain of science. In fact, not only do I not know anything useful, I don't even remember what we studied. I have some vague recollections of dissecting a fish in Grade 9 and of doing a science fair project in Grade 7 on the necessary conditions to make yeast rise.
What I didn't learn in school (either because it wasn't in the curriculum or because I simply didn't retain what was taught) is staggering. Among the science-related questions I have recently considered are:
What is air pressure?
How do I obtain the right humidity level in my house?
What are the different kinds of clouds and what do they have to do with the weather?
Why does washing clothes in hot water 'set' the stain, and how do I get mustard out of cotton shirts?
What's the difference between baking soda and baking powder and why can't they be used interchangeably and why do some recipes call for both?
What are the names of the trees (and birds and butterflies and wildflowers) that are native to Ontario?
At our house, science is based on inquiry rather than facts. In other words, it's not about answering the question, it's about asking the question. We have a lot of conversations like this:
Me: I wonder why the cookies that bake on the left side of the oven always come out darker than the cookies on the right side of the oven.
Anna: I don't know. Why?
Me: I don't know either. I just wonder.
I am building our collection of resources to learn about our environment. We have many books and magazines that are related to science and we use the computer as an important resource. The other day we saw a very extraordinary wasp with a long tail at the playground and when we came home we searched for it online and discovered that it was not dangerous to humans. I want my kids to ask the questions and to know how to find the answers that matter to them.
My experience as a teacher (1996-2004, 2007) has definitely left me with the impression that schools do not do nearly enough to cover the science and technology part of the curriculum. The current trend is that every aspect of the curriculum should be tied into literacy development. This means that the 150 or so minutes per week that the students spend 'studying science' is dedicated in large part to reading and writing. I think this is backwards. I think science should be the context in which all other subjects are explored and that kids should have real life science experiences like cooking, gardening, and animal care everyday, especially in the primary grades. Children used to learn these things just by participating in life with their parents, after all.
The manner in which technology is explored in schools is beyond pathetic. The average elementary school student spends less than 30 minutes per week engaged in activity using modern technological equipment. Outside of school they can all use cell phones and digital cameras and iPods, but they've never made and edited a video about the classroom gecko or used computer-assisted animation to make a comic strip about recycling. They spend hours and hours in school practicing cursive writing but they've never used a voice-recognition computer program to 'write' a story. What decade are they going to school in?
Anyway, my point is that if I'm raising my kids in the post-industrial era, I'm not going to let them waste their time on activities that were important if they were going to be stenographers in 1955. And they aren't going to learn science out of a book. They are going to spend their time exploring the world around them, with access to appropriate technology whenever necessary.
Already, Jasmine (3.5yrs) walks around outdoors with her magnifying glass, examining everything from sticks to the neighbour`s dog. Anna (7yrs) is asking for a snorkel for Christmas. Holly wants us to move to the country so she can get a telescope for looking at the stars.
Science is really all about exploration and in our Unschooled lives together, we have plenty of time for it.
Lesson #1: Science is not a subject. Everything is SCIENCE.
I'm not sure how I went to school from age 5 to 22 and I don't know anything useful about the domain of science. In fact, not only do I not know anything useful, I don't even remember what we studied. I have some vague recollections of dissecting a fish in Grade 9 and of doing a science fair project in Grade 7 on the necessary conditions to make yeast rise.
What I didn't learn in school (either because it wasn't in the curriculum or because I simply didn't retain what was taught) is staggering. Among the science-related questions I have recently considered are:
What is air pressure?
How do I obtain the right humidity level in my house?
What are the different kinds of clouds and what do they have to do with the weather?
Why does washing clothes in hot water 'set' the stain, and how do I get mustard out of cotton shirts?
What's the difference between baking soda and baking powder and why can't they be used interchangeably and why do some recipes call for both?
What are the names of the trees (and birds and butterflies and wildflowers) that are native to Ontario?
At our house, science is based on inquiry rather than facts. In other words, it's not about answering the question, it's about asking the question. We have a lot of conversations like this:
Me: I wonder why the cookies that bake on the left side of the oven always come out darker than the cookies on the right side of the oven.
Anna: I don't know. Why?
Me: I don't know either. I just wonder.
I am building our collection of resources to learn about our environment. We have many books and magazines that are related to science and we use the computer as an important resource. The other day we saw a very extraordinary wasp with a long tail at the playground and when we came home we searched for it online and discovered that it was not dangerous to humans. I want my kids to ask the questions and to know how to find the answers that matter to them.
My experience as a teacher (1996-2004, 2007) has definitely left me with the impression that schools do not do nearly enough to cover the science and technology part of the curriculum. The current trend is that every aspect of the curriculum should be tied into literacy development. This means that the 150 or so minutes per week that the students spend 'studying science' is dedicated in large part to reading and writing. I think this is backwards. I think science should be the context in which all other subjects are explored and that kids should have real life science experiences like cooking, gardening, and animal care everyday, especially in the primary grades. Children used to learn these things just by participating in life with their parents, after all.
The manner in which technology is explored in schools is beyond pathetic. The average elementary school student spends less than 30 minutes per week engaged in activity using modern technological equipment. Outside of school they can all use cell phones and digital cameras and iPods, but they've never made and edited a video about the classroom gecko or used computer-assisted animation to make a comic strip about recycling. They spend hours and hours in school practicing cursive writing but they've never used a voice-recognition computer program to 'write' a story. What decade are they going to school in?
Anyway, my point is that if I'm raising my kids in the post-industrial era, I'm not going to let them waste their time on activities that were important if they were going to be stenographers in 1955. And they aren't going to learn science out of a book. They are going to spend their time exploring the world around them, with access to appropriate technology whenever necessary.
Already, Jasmine (3.5yrs) walks around outdoors with her magnifying glass, examining everything from sticks to the neighbour`s dog. Anna (7yrs) is asking for a snorkel for Christmas. Holly wants us to move to the country so she can get a telescope for looking at the stars.
Science is really all about exploration and in our Unschooled lives together, we have plenty of time for it.
Saturday, September 10, 2011
Criticism of Our Homeschooling Family
When we decided to follow our hearts into a mode of parenting that is less common and not at all mainstream, we knew there would be some criticism. People are naturally skeptical about new ideas and theories that haven't been proven by years and years of practice. Think of Copernicus and Galileo. And some people are naturally defensive; they act as if our choice to do things differently is a direct threat to them. We don't tend to care what they do, yet they want to explain their way as if they are trying to convert us.
And of course there are some people who genuinely care about Partner-Guy and I and the kids and their criticism or skepticism is usually thinly veiled as a question. These people are usually family, and we respect that they care about us and only want what is best for our children. We excuse them for not knowing the same things about child development as we do. We know that they engage in relationships with children from a different perspective and set of priorities from what we do. And most of the time we are not offended by their skepticism.
Socialization
For example, I was asked by a relative if our children have any friends and are they given lots of opportunities to 'socialize'. In his book Hold onto Your Kids: Why Parents need to Matter more than Peers, Dr. Gordon Neufeld calls the modern preoccupation with playdates and childhood friendships "courting the enemy". Yes, my kids have opportunities to be around other children. Mostly, they have no interest in other kids. They are each other's best friends and we don't fill our lives trying to find an assortment of children for them to ignore. Social skills begin at home and are learned by modelling the behaviour of people who already have social skills, not by spending endless unsupervised hours with other immature people.
Formal Lessons
Another relative asked when we were going to begin teaching formal lessons. I wonder if the definition of "formal lessons" is to force children to learn something that they are not interested in just because I think it is important. What I do is to expose them to new ideas and subject areas and let them pursue whatever they are interested in. The school system is obsessed with 'early literacy', yet without a single 'formal lesson' both Anna and Holly are learning how to read and both of them can spell many words from memory. They can rhyme extensively and they make oral lists of words with the same initial consonant sound. Who needs a formal lesson? When they want to learn something special, like how to play the piano for example, we'll get them lessons if they ask for them. Formal lessons are not out of the question, they just aren't a requirement.
Boredom
On another occasion we were asked if our children are bored being stuck in our little bungalow all day. Hmmmm. The children aren't chained to the table legs! They play indoors and outdoors. We go somewhere almost everyday : the Zoo, the Science Center, an indoor or outdoor playground, a museum, a pool. We visit people. Sometimes we go to a movie. We visit the Valley and the beach as often as the kids suggest it. We walk around the block every night after supper and look at gardens and trees and lawns and talk to our neighbours and play with their pets. No, the children are not bored.
Social Skills
One relative asked if we were going to teach the children how to act. I guess that person was concerned that we don't seem to be teaching our children how to get along with adults, particularly adults who they don't actually know. We tend to believe that it is the role of the adult to accommodate the maturity level of the child. Our children don't conform to many of the usual expectations for children, and we don't make them. We try to model good behaviour for them, but we let them live authentically and we don't force them to do things that they aren't comfortable with. And we don't shame them or punish them when they don't comform to the expectations of other adults. They don't hug anyone outside of their immediate family. They don't act 'charming' to make adults feel good. They rarely answer when asked assorted random inane questions that adults ask (like, How do like your little brother?). We respect them. And we hope that we are modelling respect in our relationships with other adults so that they can learn about how different relationships require give-and-take in order to function smoothly.
But by far the most unexpected question we've been asked has us completely perplexed.
We were asked if we had joined a cult.
Wow. I guess there are aspects of 'cultishness' in our lives. We keep mostly to ourselves. We reject the methods of the majority. We try to find other like-minded people (although not very successfully). We read extensively about what we believe in, so when we talk about our family we use expressions that other people may not be familiar with. We procreate like rabbits. (Not sure if that's cultish or not, but the cults I've seen on TV tend to have a LOT of children running around!)
So I'm not sure if that comment has me feeling offended or amused. When I consider the source, I am inclined to be amused. I don't expect everyone to understand our choices or why we are choosing a path less travelled. I don't expect people to share our goals or to have insight into our relationships. But to think that our lifestyle reflects that of a cult? Now that's a good laugh.
And so we continue on this journey of life learning and non-violent communication and raising ourselves along with our children. We are not doing so to either please or offend or confuse or reject other people. We are doing it because we are convinced that it is the best way for children to grow up authentically and to eventually live meaningful adult lives fulfilling their true potential.
We welcome comments and questions. We are happy to explain our ways, and we are not trying to 'convert' people. We ask for patience, as there is still much that we are learning. And we ask that criticisms not be directed at our children.
Have you had any strange inquiries about the education of your children?
And of course there are some people who genuinely care about Partner-Guy and I and the kids and their criticism or skepticism is usually thinly veiled as a question. These people are usually family, and we respect that they care about us and only want what is best for our children. We excuse them for not knowing the same things about child development as we do. We know that they engage in relationships with children from a different perspective and set of priorities from what we do. And most of the time we are not offended by their skepticism.
Socialization
For example, I was asked by a relative if our children have any friends and are they given lots of opportunities to 'socialize'. In his book Hold onto Your Kids: Why Parents need to Matter more than Peers, Dr. Gordon Neufeld calls the modern preoccupation with playdates and childhood friendships "courting the enemy". Yes, my kids have opportunities to be around other children. Mostly, they have no interest in other kids. They are each other's best friends and we don't fill our lives trying to find an assortment of children for them to ignore. Social skills begin at home and are learned by modelling the behaviour of people who already have social skills, not by spending endless unsupervised hours with other immature people.
Formal Lessons
Another relative asked when we were going to begin teaching formal lessons. I wonder if the definition of "formal lessons" is to force children to learn something that they are not interested in just because I think it is important. What I do is to expose them to new ideas and subject areas and let them pursue whatever they are interested in. The school system is obsessed with 'early literacy', yet without a single 'formal lesson' both Anna and Holly are learning how to read and both of them can spell many words from memory. They can rhyme extensively and they make oral lists of words with the same initial consonant sound. Who needs a formal lesson? When they want to learn something special, like how to play the piano for example, we'll get them lessons if they ask for them. Formal lessons are not out of the question, they just aren't a requirement.
Boredom
On another occasion we were asked if our children are bored being stuck in our little bungalow all day. Hmmmm. The children aren't chained to the table legs! They play indoors and outdoors. We go somewhere almost everyday : the Zoo, the Science Center, an indoor or outdoor playground, a museum, a pool. We visit people. Sometimes we go to a movie. We visit the Valley and the beach as often as the kids suggest it. We walk around the block every night after supper and look at gardens and trees and lawns and talk to our neighbours and play with their pets. No, the children are not bored.
Social Skills
One relative asked if we were going to teach the children how to act. I guess that person was concerned that we don't seem to be teaching our children how to get along with adults, particularly adults who they don't actually know. We tend to believe that it is the role of the adult to accommodate the maturity level of the child. Our children don't conform to many of the usual expectations for children, and we don't make them. We try to model good behaviour for them, but we let them live authentically and we don't force them to do things that they aren't comfortable with. And we don't shame them or punish them when they don't comform to the expectations of other adults. They don't hug anyone outside of their immediate family. They don't act 'charming' to make adults feel good. They rarely answer when asked assorted random inane questions that adults ask (like, How do like your little brother?). We respect them. And we hope that we are modelling respect in our relationships with other adults so that they can learn about how different relationships require give-and-take in order to function smoothly.
But by far the most unexpected question we've been asked has us completely perplexed.
We were asked if we had joined a cult.
Wow. I guess there are aspects of 'cultishness' in our lives. We keep mostly to ourselves. We reject the methods of the majority. We try to find other like-minded people (although not very successfully). We read extensively about what we believe in, so when we talk about our family we use expressions that other people may not be familiar with. We procreate like rabbits. (Not sure if that's cultish or not, but the cults I've seen on TV tend to have a LOT of children running around!)
So I'm not sure if that comment has me feeling offended or amused. When I consider the source, I am inclined to be amused. I don't expect everyone to understand our choices or why we are choosing a path less travelled. I don't expect people to share our goals or to have insight into our relationships. But to think that our lifestyle reflects that of a cult? Now that's a good laugh.
And so we continue on this journey of life learning and non-violent communication and raising ourselves along with our children. We are not doing so to either please or offend or confuse or reject other people. We are doing it because we are convinced that it is the best way for children to grow up authentically and to eventually live meaningful adult lives fulfilling their true potential.
We welcome comments and questions. We are happy to explain our ways, and we are not trying to 'convert' people. We ask for patience, as there is still much that we are learning. And we ask that criticisms not be directed at our children.
Have you had any strange inquiries about the education of your children?
Friday, September 9, 2011
Why My Kids Don't Go to School
The other day my friend's husband asked me about why my kids don't go to school. He's a highschool teacher, and while he isn't anti-homeschooling, he is definitely pro-public-schooling.
He asked, "Was your decision to homeschool based more on your experiences as a student yourself, or on your experiences as a public school teacher?"
I thought it was such a thoughtful question, without a trace of judgement or criticism that usually comes from people who question our choices regarding the education of our children. I paused before I answered in order to give the question the type of thoughtful answer that I felt it deserved:
When I think about sending my children to school, I can't ignore all my experiences as both a student and a teacher and all the anxiety that it produces in me when I imagine them in that environment. But when I was a teacher, I never considered that I would someday homeschool my own children. Never.
It has actually been my experiences as a mother that most influenced my decision to keep school out of our lives.
When I observed that my first two daughters, just 20 months apart in age, were absolutely the best of friends, dependent on each other not just as playmates but also for emotional support and social skills development, I knew that I could never bring myself to separate them for schooling purposes. It would be like performing an amputation on a healthy limb--what would be the point?
When I observed how resistant my oldest daughter was to learning anything that she wasn't immediately motivated to learn, I started to ask myself how I could send her to an environment where 'learning' follows a linear timeline requiring absolutely no deviation. In fact, deviation is punished (by low marks or by separation from peers for the purpose of 'remediation').
When I observed how easily my children fill their days--with drawing, make-believe, story telling and reading, interaction with adults and gross motor skill development--and as I listened to their constant chatter and giggles and shrieks of delight, I couldn't imagine asking them to sit still and be quiet for 5 hours.
And by the time my third child came along, and I was already pretty sure that I wouldn't be sending the older two to school, I suddenly had an epiphany as I observed that my tiny baby was always just doing her best to learn and survive in the environment into which she'd been born. It hit me that my older two daughters were also just doing their best all the time, every day.
I understood that my role in their lives was going to be to provide the best possible environment in which to grow and learn. I knew that I had to work on myself to be healthier, more patient, more creative and more joyful. I had to create an environment where Freedom is our guiding principle and where Trust trumps control.
And now we just live our lives together everyday. It just works.
And I can't imagine doing it any other way.
A big 'Thankyou' goes out to a friend for asking such a great question.
What is your motivation for choosing an intentional role in the education of your children?
He asked, "Was your decision to homeschool based more on your experiences as a student yourself, or on your experiences as a public school teacher?"
I thought it was such a thoughtful question, without a trace of judgement or criticism that usually comes from people who question our choices regarding the education of our children. I paused before I answered in order to give the question the type of thoughtful answer that I felt it deserved:
When I think about sending my children to school, I can't ignore all my experiences as both a student and a teacher and all the anxiety that it produces in me when I imagine them in that environment. But when I was a teacher, I never considered that I would someday homeschool my own children. Never.
It has actually been my experiences as a mother that most influenced my decision to keep school out of our lives.
When I observed that my first two daughters, just 20 months apart in age, were absolutely the best of friends, dependent on each other not just as playmates but also for emotional support and social skills development, I knew that I could never bring myself to separate them for schooling purposes. It would be like performing an amputation on a healthy limb--what would be the point?
When I observed how resistant my oldest daughter was to learning anything that she wasn't immediately motivated to learn, I started to ask myself how I could send her to an environment where 'learning' follows a linear timeline requiring absolutely no deviation. In fact, deviation is punished (by low marks or by separation from peers for the purpose of 'remediation').
When I observed how easily my children fill their days--with drawing, make-believe, story telling and reading, interaction with adults and gross motor skill development--and as I listened to their constant chatter and giggles and shrieks of delight, I couldn't imagine asking them to sit still and be quiet for 5 hours.
And by the time my third child came along, and I was already pretty sure that I wouldn't be sending the older two to school, I suddenly had an epiphany as I observed that my tiny baby was always just doing her best to learn and survive in the environment into which she'd been born. It hit me that my older two daughters were also just doing their best all the time, every day.
I understood that my role in their lives was going to be to provide the best possible environment in which to grow and learn. I knew that I had to work on myself to be healthier, more patient, more creative and more joyful. I had to create an environment where Freedom is our guiding principle and where Trust trumps control.
And now we just live our lives together everyday. It just works.
And I can't imagine doing it any other way.
A big 'Thankyou' goes out to a friend for asking such a great question.
What is your motivation for choosing an intentional role in the education of your children?
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
You're Not Homeschooling Because...You Don't Know How to Teach the Hard Subjects
Part 1: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You Can't Afford to
Part 2: You're Not Homeschooling Because...Your Spouse is Against it
Part 3: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You're Overwhelmed by the Responsibility
Part 4: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You Don't Want Your Child to turn out Weird
Part 5: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You Don't have the Patience and Organization
**********************************************************************************
Can I tell you the secret to learning ANYTHING?
Here it is, friends:
Motivation and Physical/Emotional Maturity
Let me give you some examples.
*Last year my 70-year-old father decided to start making his own bread and yogurt.
Motivation + Physical Maturity + Internet = a guy who is eating healthier and saving money
*At her second birthday, my oldest daughter could not yet put together two words into a sentence (e.g. me do). The doctor recommended a speech therapist. We ignored the doctor.
Motivation + Physical Maturity + Time = a seven-year-old who can talk your ear off and uses words like 'hypothesis' correctly
*We live really close to an indoor pool and an outdoor pool and we use them both frequently (weather permitting). We also go to hotels a few times each year where we use the pool. At 2 1/2 years-old my third daughter decided to jump into deep water and start swimming with her sisters and her dad.
Motivation + Physical Maturity + Opportunity = a 3 1/2 year old who can swim better than her mother
*My 41-year-old friend immigrated to Canada 10 years ago. She learned English, took some courses, got a job and found a boyfriend. Last year she successfully went for her driver's licence.
Motivation + Emotional Maturity + Practice = a new driver for our old Honda Civic
If you believe, as I do, that the goal of 'education' is to create life-long learners, then there is no better way than to give your child the opportunity to self-direct their learning right from the very start.
And here's another secret:
A person who can READ has the power to learn anything.
My dad did 5 highschool math courses by correspondence when I was a teenager. He succeeded without a teacher because he can read. I learned how to can and preserve jam, salsa and pickles. I succeeded without a teacher because I can read. My Partner-Guy (and this is NOT a cheap-shot. Honest.) can now change the oil in his own car. He succeeded because he can read.
You get it, right? If your 16-year-old wants to learn calculus, she'll figure it out herself.
Motivation + Maturity + the ability to READ = a person who can learn anything
**********************************************************************************
This is the end of my series on reasons why you might not be homeschooling even though you are interested in doing so.
Do you have any other concerns about homeschooling? I'd be delighted if you would share them with me.
Part 2: You're Not Homeschooling Because...Your Spouse is Against it
Part 3: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You're Overwhelmed by the Responsibility
Part 4: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You Don't Want Your Child to turn out Weird
Part 5: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You Don't have the Patience and Organization
**********************************************************************************
Can I tell you the secret to learning ANYTHING?
Here it is, friends:
Motivation and Physical/Emotional Maturity
Let me give you some examples.
*Last year my 70-year-old father decided to start making his own bread and yogurt.
Motivation + Physical Maturity + Internet = a guy who is eating healthier and saving money
*At her second birthday, my oldest daughter could not yet put together two words into a sentence (e.g. me do). The doctor recommended a speech therapist. We ignored the doctor.
Motivation + Physical Maturity + Time = a seven-year-old who can talk your ear off and uses words like 'hypothesis' correctly
*We live really close to an indoor pool and an outdoor pool and we use them both frequently (weather permitting). We also go to hotels a few times each year where we use the pool. At 2 1/2 years-old my third daughter decided to jump into deep water and start swimming with her sisters and her dad.
Motivation + Physical Maturity + Opportunity = a 3 1/2 year old who can swim better than her mother
*My 41-year-old friend immigrated to Canada 10 years ago. She learned English, took some courses, got a job and found a boyfriend. Last year she successfully went for her driver's licence.
Motivation + Emotional Maturity + Practice = a new driver for our old Honda Civic
If you believe, as I do, that the goal of 'education' is to create life-long learners, then there is no better way than to give your child the opportunity to self-direct their learning right from the very start.
And here's another secret:
A person who can READ has the power to learn anything.
My dad did 5 highschool math courses by correspondence when I was a teenager. He succeeded without a teacher because he can read. I learned how to can and preserve jam, salsa and pickles. I succeeded without a teacher because I can read. My Partner-Guy (and this is NOT a cheap-shot. Honest.) can now change the oil in his own car. He succeeded because he can read.
You get it, right? If your 16-year-old wants to learn calculus, she'll figure it out herself.
Motivation + Maturity + the ability to READ = a person who can learn anything
**********************************************************************************
This is the end of my series on reasons why you might not be homeschooling even though you are interested in doing so.
Do you have any other concerns about homeschooling? I'd be delighted if you would share them with me.
Monday, September 5, 2011
You're Not Homeschooling Because...You Don't have the Patience or Organization
Part 1: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You Can't Afford to
Part 2: You're Not Homeschooling Because...Your Spouse is Against it
Part 3: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You're Overwhelmed by the Responsibility
Part 4: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You Don't Want Your Child to turn out Weird
**********************************************************************************
One of my friends once had an unexpected year-long break from work. I asked him if he was tempted to take his kids out of school during that time. He responded, "No way ! I don't have the patience or organization to homeschool."
Sigh.
Like most people he believed that if his children weren't in school, he would be responsible for doing school at home. Still, his answer surprised me. I mean, this is a guy who can weld a suit of armour as easily as he can change a diaper. He's politically active and philanthropic. He is, by far, one of the most interesting people I've ever known, yet he didn't believe that his life and experiences were worthy fodder for the education of his children. Or maybe he thought that they would learn from him anyway so they had to go to school to learn the subjects of the curriculum. Or maybe his kids really enjoyed school. Or maybe the thought of homeschooling was totally outside of his frame of reference.
I don't know. And ultimately, I still respect him as someone who has made an informed choice about public education. But I do know that one doesn't have to be the most patient or organized parent on the planet to successfully homeschool.
Patience?
Yes, patience is among the most important aspects of being a good parent. In our home, our Family Mission Statement says that We love each other with Patience and Kindness. Most of the parents who I am friends with say that they are continually trying to be more patient and when they ARE, they are thrilled with the resulting connection with their children. And who is more likely to be patient with your child? YOU, the person who loves you child more than anyone else in the whole world? OR, a teacher of 25 kids who has barely had time to learn your child's last name?
To be honest, I struggle with having enough patience everyday for every one of my children. But I've learned a few tricks that really, really help. You might want to give them a try. Meditation. Yoga or other regular exercise. Talking to a life coach (such as Tara at http://www.theorganicsister.com/ or Amy at http://www.peace4parents.com/ .) Smiling more. Breathing deeply.
I think all parents are capable of finding enough patience to spend everyday, all day with their own amazing children.
Organization?
I bet every one of you would like to be more organized. Making weekly meal plans. Paying bills in advance. Starting Christmas shopping earlier. Washing, folding and putting away all the laundry on the same day. Finally sorting out the junk-drawer.
We all have a list of ways that we could function better, right? But what happens when we don't get around to it? Well, most of the time, nothing. We carry on just fine and the kids get fed and the laundry gets done and people get presents and so on.
Yes, I can certainly see that if you are going to spend a lot of time instructing that you are going to have to find the time to fold the laundry and get groceries. But remember how you couldn't imagine having a second child and still finding the time to fold the laundry and get groceries and AND still spend time with your first child? Then you had that second child and everything just fell into place and worked itself out, right? Homeschooling is just like that.
You can do it.
Trust me.
Part 2: You're Not Homeschooling Because...Your Spouse is Against it
Part 3: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You're Overwhelmed by the Responsibility
Part 4: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You Don't Want Your Child to turn out Weird
**********************************************************************************
One of my friends once had an unexpected year-long break from work. I asked him if he was tempted to take his kids out of school during that time. He responded, "No way ! I don't have the patience or organization to homeschool."
Sigh.
Like most people he believed that if his children weren't in school, he would be responsible for doing school at home. Still, his answer surprised me. I mean, this is a guy who can weld a suit of armour as easily as he can change a diaper. He's politically active and philanthropic. He is, by far, one of the most interesting people I've ever known, yet he didn't believe that his life and experiences were worthy fodder for the education of his children. Or maybe he thought that they would learn from him anyway so they had to go to school to learn the subjects of the curriculum. Or maybe his kids really enjoyed school. Or maybe the thought of homeschooling was totally outside of his frame of reference.
I don't know. And ultimately, I still respect him as someone who has made an informed choice about public education. But I do know that one doesn't have to be the most patient or organized parent on the planet to successfully homeschool.
Patience?
Yes, patience is among the most important aspects of being a good parent. In our home, our Family Mission Statement says that We love each other with Patience and Kindness. Most of the parents who I am friends with say that they are continually trying to be more patient and when they ARE, they are thrilled with the resulting connection with their children. And who is more likely to be patient with your child? YOU, the person who loves you child more than anyone else in the whole world? OR, a teacher of 25 kids who has barely had time to learn your child's last name?
To be honest, I struggle with having enough patience everyday for every one of my children. But I've learned a few tricks that really, really help. You might want to give them a try. Meditation. Yoga or other regular exercise. Talking to a life coach (such as Tara at http://www.theorganicsister.com/ or Amy at http://www.peace4parents.com/ .) Smiling more. Breathing deeply.
I think all parents are capable of finding enough patience to spend everyday, all day with their own amazing children.
Organization?
I bet every one of you would like to be more organized. Making weekly meal plans. Paying bills in advance. Starting Christmas shopping earlier. Washing, folding and putting away all the laundry on the same day. Finally sorting out the junk-drawer.
We all have a list of ways that we could function better, right? But what happens when we don't get around to it? Well, most of the time, nothing. We carry on just fine and the kids get fed and the laundry gets done and people get presents and so on.
Yes, I can certainly see that if you are going to spend a lot of time instructing that you are going to have to find the time to fold the laundry and get groceries. But remember how you couldn't imagine having a second child and still finding the time to fold the laundry and get groceries and AND still spend time with your first child? Then you had that second child and everything just fell into place and worked itself out, right? Homeschooling is just like that.
You can do it.
Trust me.
Saturday, September 3, 2011
You're Not Homeschooling Because....You're Worried your Kids will turn out Weird
Part 1: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You Can't Afford to
Part 2: You're Not Homeschooling Because...Your Spouse is Against it
Part 3: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You're Overwhelmed by the Responsibility
***********************************************************************************
Want to know what I think is WEIRD?
Do you think homeschooled kids could be that weird? Maybe, but I doubt it.
A few years ago I was chatting with my neighbour who was 12-years-old at the time. She was telling me about how a girl had just joined her class at school who had previously been homeschooled. This is what my neighbour said:
I think that the scariest thing about public education is the hidden curriculum of conformity.
Do I want my kids to be like everyone else's kids? Not on your life.
I want kids who can think for themselves. I want them to be creative and self-expressive. I want them to grow up comfortable in their own skin. I want them to be open-minded and accepting. I want them to be firm in their values and priorities. I want them to be kind and compassionate.
If that makes them WEIRD, then I'll be the proudest mother on the planet.
Part 2: You're Not Homeschooling Because...Your Spouse is Against it
Part 3: You're Not Homeschooling Because...You're Overwhelmed by the Responsibility
***********************************************************************************
Want to know what I think is WEIRD?
- When 10-year-old girls make fun of 9-year-old girls for being into Hannah Montana because it so BABYISH. (Isn't Hannah Montana, like, 15?)
- When a group of 4 boys around 12-years-old takes over the playground where my 3-year-old and 1-year-old are playing and they use the F-bomb as if they are being paid to promote it.
- When a 3-year-old girl comes to play at my house and she spends the entire time pushing my 1-year-old and yanking toys away from him.
- When a 15-year-old gets onto a public bus and carries on an obscene and offensive cellphone conversation and no one asks him to stop.
Do you think homeschooled kids could be that weird? Maybe, but I doubt it.
A few years ago I was chatting with my neighbour who was 12-years-old at the time. She was telling me about how a girl had just joined her class at school who had previously been homeschooled. This is what my neighbour said:
She's so weird. Like, she doesn't know how to act or anything. She always sits by herself reading at lunch and even when we try to be nice to her she doesn't want to hang out with us. And when she does talk to us, she doesn't know anything, like, what's cool or anything. And sometimes she SINGS. Like, isn't that weird? Like, didn't her parents teach her how to act?Sad, isn't it? A girl who was confident enough to spend time alone, engaged in her own activity, was branded as weird.
I think that the scariest thing about public education is the hidden curriculum of conformity.
Do I want my kids to be like everyone else's kids? Not on your life.
I want kids who can think for themselves. I want them to be creative and self-expressive. I want them to grow up comfortable in their own skin. I want them to be open-minded and accepting. I want them to be firm in their values and priorities. I want them to be kind and compassionate.
If that makes them WEIRD, then I'll be the proudest mother on the planet.
Friday, September 2, 2011
You're Not Homeschooling Because....You're Overwhelmed by the Responsibility
I hear from lots of people who are interested in keeping their children out of school, but they have numerous reasons for not doing it. This week I will explore some of those reasons.
If you are not interested in homeschooling, please feel free to browse the links in my sidebar and come back next week for more stories of authentic parenting and natural living.
*******************************************************************************
In Ontario, children spend about 6 1/2 hours each day under the supervision of teachers, which includes recesses and lunch (if the children don't go home for lunch). Of this time, the law says that 300 minutes are 'teaching time'.
But the reality is that children don't spend 300 minutes per day learning the skills and knowledge laid out in the curriculum. For Primary level students (Kindergarten to Grade 3, ages 4-9), of those 300 minutes, at least 30 minutes are spent standing in lines or walking from one location within the school to another. Another 30 minutes is spent distributing and collecting assignments, notes, letters to and from parents and dealing with money (such as money collected for trips or fundraising). Another 30 minutes (at least!) is spent listening while the teacher deals with the disruptive behaviour of other students. Another 30 minutes is easily filled in the winter by putting on and taking off snowpants, boots, hats, coats, mitts and scarves. And yet another 30 minutes is wasted by normal kid activities like sharpening pencils, going to the bathroom (when permitted), rummaging through desks, and talking to classmates.
So out of 300 minutes, what is left is approximately 150 minutes to be 'dedicated to learning'. Easily, 30 to 75 minutes of that time is spent with the teacher talking and the students listening. Sometimes they are learning something, sometimes they are daydreaming or talking or otherwise fooling around. The remaining 75 -120 minutes are spent engaged in an activity such as writing or doing a science investigation or creating something artistic, if the child is sufficiently motivated to engage in the activity without fooling around or wasting time and if the child is sufficiently able to disengage from the other kids who are fooling around or wasting time.
So let's be clear: Your child is spending less than 2 hours out of a possible 5 hours engaged in actually 'learning' what the curriculum says she should be learning.
A few years ago when I was first reading about homeschooling I found an article that said that most homeschooling parents report that they can follow the same curriculum as the school system and keep their children progressing at the same pace as their peers in school by completing 90 minutes of school-related activities per day.
My personal opinion and experience leads me to mostly agree. Specifically, I would say that 90 minutes of dedicated time is necessary for children at home to complete the curriculum from Grades 5-8. In Kindergarten and Grade 1, I would say that only 30 minutes of dedicated 'learning time' is required and maybe 60 minutes for Grades 2-4. For highschool, I suppose it would depend on the courses selected by the student.
So what are children learning in the 2 hours per day that are not dedicated to teaching and learning what is specified in the curriculum? Whether they know it or not, they are learning a lot. When the teacher is dealing with disruptive behaviour, the other kids are learning that the more noise you make the more attention you get. When they are waiting in lines, they are learning that other people are more important than they are. When their art supplies consist of 8 markers to share with 5 other kids they are learning that budgets are more important than creative expression. When they get 10 minutes for recess and they have to spend 1/2 of it in the bathroom, they are learning that schedules are more important than freedom.
So after reading this, are you still overwhelmed by the responsibility?
Replicating school at home is nothing like sending your child to school. (I mean, are you really going to make your child ask to go to the bathroom?) Because you know your child's strengths and weaknesses and interests so well, it is enormously easier to help them to learn at home. Besides that, if you choose homeschooling (rather than unschooling), you will find hundreds of thousands of resources to help you just by Googling 'homeschool resources'. You can even buy complete curriculums that come with books and worksheets and lesson plans. There has literally NEVER been a better time to homeschool your child.
What is your biggest concern about homeschooling?
If you are not interested in homeschooling, please feel free to browse the links in my sidebar and come back next week for more stories of authentic parenting and natural living.
*******************************************************************************
In Ontario, children spend about 6 1/2 hours each day under the supervision of teachers, which includes recesses and lunch (if the children don't go home for lunch). Of this time, the law says that 300 minutes are 'teaching time'.
But the reality is that children don't spend 300 minutes per day learning the skills and knowledge laid out in the curriculum. For Primary level students (Kindergarten to Grade 3, ages 4-9), of those 300 minutes, at least 30 minutes are spent standing in lines or walking from one location within the school to another. Another 30 minutes is spent distributing and collecting assignments, notes, letters to and from parents and dealing with money (such as money collected for trips or fundraising). Another 30 minutes (at least!) is spent listening while the teacher deals with the disruptive behaviour of other students. Another 30 minutes is easily filled in the winter by putting on and taking off snowpants, boots, hats, coats, mitts and scarves. And yet another 30 minutes is wasted by normal kid activities like sharpening pencils, going to the bathroom (when permitted), rummaging through desks, and talking to classmates.
So out of 300 minutes, what is left is approximately 150 minutes to be 'dedicated to learning'. Easily, 30 to 75 minutes of that time is spent with the teacher talking and the students listening. Sometimes they are learning something, sometimes they are daydreaming or talking or otherwise fooling around. The remaining 75 -120 minutes are spent engaged in an activity such as writing or doing a science investigation or creating something artistic, if the child is sufficiently motivated to engage in the activity without fooling around or wasting time and if the child is sufficiently able to disengage from the other kids who are fooling around or wasting time.
So let's be clear: Your child is spending less than 2 hours out of a possible 5 hours engaged in actually 'learning' what the curriculum says she should be learning.
A few years ago when I was first reading about homeschooling I found an article that said that most homeschooling parents report that they can follow the same curriculum as the school system and keep their children progressing at the same pace as their peers in school by completing 90 minutes of school-related activities per day.
My personal opinion and experience leads me to mostly agree. Specifically, I would say that 90 minutes of dedicated time is necessary for children at home to complete the curriculum from Grades 5-8. In Kindergarten and Grade 1, I would say that only 30 minutes of dedicated 'learning time' is required and maybe 60 minutes for Grades 2-4. For highschool, I suppose it would depend on the courses selected by the student.
So what are children learning in the 2 hours per day that are not dedicated to teaching and learning what is specified in the curriculum? Whether they know it or not, they are learning a lot. When the teacher is dealing with disruptive behaviour, the other kids are learning that the more noise you make the more attention you get. When they are waiting in lines, they are learning that other people are more important than they are. When their art supplies consist of 8 markers to share with 5 other kids they are learning that budgets are more important than creative expression. When they get 10 minutes for recess and they have to spend 1/2 of it in the bathroom, they are learning that schedules are more important than freedom.
So after reading this, are you still overwhelmed by the responsibility?
Replicating school at home is nothing like sending your child to school. (I mean, are you really going to make your child ask to go to the bathroom?) Because you know your child's strengths and weaknesses and interests so well, it is enormously easier to help them to learn at home. Besides that, if you choose homeschooling (rather than unschooling), you will find hundreds of thousands of resources to help you just by Googling 'homeschool resources'. You can even buy complete curriculums that come with books and worksheets and lesson plans. There has literally NEVER been a better time to homeschool your child.
What is your biggest concern about homeschooling?
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
You're Not Homeschooling Because....Your Spouse is Against it
I hear from lots of people who are interested in keeping their children out of school, but they have numerous reasons for not doing it. This week I will explore some of those reasons.
If you are not interested in homeschooling, please feel free to browse the links in my sidebar and come back next week for more stories of authentic parenting and natural living.
*******************************************************************************
I know a woman whose husband was vehemently opposed to homebirth. She agreed to a hospital birth for her first child and for her second she chose a homebirth. However, when she was in labour, her husband called an ambulance and forced her into it. Her son was born en route to the hospital.
I know another woman whose husband insisted that it was time to sleep-train their 6 month old baby. For weeks this mother stood outside her baby's bedroom every evening, sobbing as her daughter cried herself to sleep.
I know another woman whose husband says he never agreed to her becoming a stay-at-home mom. When her children were 3yrs and 1yr, he insisted that she return to work. Everytime I see her she tells me how lucky I am to be raising my own children and how much she hates it that someone else is raising hers.
Friends, I'm not trying to vilify husbands.
A mother's relationship with her parenting partner is just as important as her relationship with her children.
But it is not MORE important.
The big decisions that a family faces should include the concerns and input of everyone involved: where to live, two incomes or one, the style of education. There should be no default to whatever option is the most familiar, especially if one person is raising questions about following the status quo.
I've written before about how my Partner-Guy and I make big decisions that profoundly affect our family. We start by LOVING one idea to see how it makes us FEEL. Then we try on the other idea. Once we've experienced both plans we discuss which one made us feel more authentic and tuned in to our values.
The topic of homeschooling deserves a big, serious discussion. But before you sit down with your spouse, be prepared.
And though I may draw a firestorm of fury from some readers, I would recommend that if you believe that school will harm or is harming your child, you have a duty to your child to prevent further harm, regardless of the opinion of the other parent. Your child has ONE CHANCE to grow up without being violated by a school system that is incapable of ensuring his or her emotional (or physical) well-being.
Homeschooling is not a panacea. But perhaps it a part of the type of family culture that, ultimately, you and your spouse both long for. It is worth discussing.
If you are not interested in homeschooling, please feel free to browse the links in my sidebar and come back next week for more stories of authentic parenting and natural living.
*******************************************************************************
I know a woman whose husband was vehemently opposed to homebirth. She agreed to a hospital birth for her first child and for her second she chose a homebirth. However, when she was in labour, her husband called an ambulance and forced her into it. Her son was born en route to the hospital.
I know another woman whose husband insisted that it was time to sleep-train their 6 month old baby. For weeks this mother stood outside her baby's bedroom every evening, sobbing as her daughter cried herself to sleep.
I know another woman whose husband says he never agreed to her becoming a stay-at-home mom. When her children were 3yrs and 1yr, he insisted that she return to work. Everytime I see her she tells me how lucky I am to be raising my own children and how much she hates it that someone else is raising hers.
Friends, I'm not trying to vilify husbands.
A mother's relationship with her parenting partner is just as important as her relationship with her children.
But it is not MORE important.
The big decisions that a family faces should include the concerns and input of everyone involved: where to live, two incomes or one, the style of education. There should be no default to whatever option is the most familiar, especially if one person is raising questions about following the status quo.
I've written before about how my Partner-Guy and I make big decisions that profoundly affect our family. We start by LOVING one idea to see how it makes us FEEL. Then we try on the other idea. Once we've experienced both plans we discuss which one made us feel more authentic and tuned in to our values.
The topic of homeschooling deserves a big, serious discussion. But before you sit down with your spouse, be prepared.
- Do some research to support your position. Make sure you have clear reasons why you don't support the public system of education. Learn about all the options available to homeschooled children, such as ILC and university.
- Talk to some people who are homeschooling so that you have a really thorough understanding of what you want to do. Don't try to sell a romanticized version of homeschooling. Know what you're getting yourself into.
- Pre-empt an argument by preparing a list of pros and cons in advance. It is good to help yourself understand what concerns your partner might have. Add to the list as you talk together.
- Give it lots of time. The time to start a discussion about homeschooling is not Labour Day.
- Investigate your options and be willing to compromise. Perhaps part-time schooling is possible? Or maybe your partner is willing to homeschool for just the first few years?
- Recognize that your partner loves your child as much as you do. You both want what is best for your child. Your partner is not against you.
And though I may draw a firestorm of fury from some readers, I would recommend that if you believe that school will harm or is harming your child, you have a duty to your child to prevent further harm, regardless of the opinion of the other parent. Your child has ONE CHANCE to grow up without being violated by a school system that is incapable of ensuring his or her emotional (or physical) well-being.
Homeschooling is not a panacea. But perhaps it a part of the type of family culture that, ultimately, you and your spouse both long for. It is worth discussing.
Sunday, August 28, 2011
You're Not Homeschooling Because....You Can't Afford It
I hear from lots of people who are interested in keeping their children out of school, but they have numerous reasons for not doing it. This week I will explore some of those reasons.
If you are not interested in homeschooling, please feel free to browse the links in my sidebar and come back next week for more stories of authentic parenting and natural living.
*******************************************************************************
Let me tell you a true story.
One of my friends is the single mother of a 6-year-old boy. She chose to have a child in her late 30s after having a well-established career and achieving financial stability. She imagined that she would return to work when her baby was 12 months old, as most Canadian women do, and that her baby would go to daycare and later to school.
But after 12 months of mothering her son, she felt compelled to stay home with him longer. She arranged for someone to rent her basement and she refinanced her mortgage so that she could afford to live off her savings for another year.
But she still couldn't bring herself to leave her son in daycare, so she committed to staying home with him until he was old enough for school. In that time, she learned more about homeschooling and she decided that the current public school system would not be able to meet her son's needs. For a little while she began to babysit someone else's children and eventually she decided that she would need to live in a less expensive Canadian city. She and her son moved away from Toronto and they continue to live a school-free, job-free life.
How?
They are not receiving government assistance. (Well, all Canadian families receive the Canada Child Tax Benefit, which varies according to how many children you have and the level of the family income. I receive $368/month for my 4 children.) Instead, my friend continues to live off of her meagre savings (which means she is completely depleting her retirement fund). She budgets carefully for food. She gets clothing for free or nearly free at thrift stores and exchanges. She uses public transit (which is free for children in her new city). She seeks free entertainment and learning opportunites for her son at public libraries and festivals. When she travels, she stays with friends, offering her help in exchange for hospitality.
What's your point, Patti?
Where there's a will, there's a way. If you truly believe, as I do, that school will harm your child, or that school already IS harming your child, then there is a way for you to keep your child home. You can find a way to give up a second income, or even a primary income.
But Patti, we are used to a certain standard of living. My kids expect vacations and meals in restaurants and movies and brand-name clothing. We can't give up our car. Our mortgage costs A LOT. We need a second income just to break even.
I know. Making major changes to the way you spend money is HARD. My family is very lucky to live comfortably on one teacher's salary. But the reason we are comfortable is because of the choices we've made. Until this month, we drove a 2002 Honda Civic which holds just 5 people although we are a family of six. We don't eat out or even buy pre-made foods from the grocery store. My children wear mostly hand-me-downs. Our home is a 2-bedroom bungalow in low-end neighbourhood.
The truth is, I LIKE the finer things of life. I like vacations and expensive leather shoes, boots and jackets. I like beautiful furniture and lattes and nice cars. With two teacher's salaries coming in, we could be living pretty lavishly (i.e. if I were working). But my Family Mission Statement says that I choose Freedom and Joy. If I have to go to work everyday and drop off my children to school and daycare, I have no Freedom and very little Joy.
I can't tell you how to save money so that you can afford to keep your kids out of school. But I can tell you that you CAN save money. You can live cheaper. You can afford to give up some things so that your kids can stay out of school.
It is possible. My friend has proven it.
What financial sacrifices have you made so that you can homeschool with your children?
If you are not interested in homeschooling, please feel free to browse the links in my sidebar and come back next week for more stories of authentic parenting and natural living.
*******************************************************************************
Let me tell you a true story.
One of my friends is the single mother of a 6-year-old boy. She chose to have a child in her late 30s after having a well-established career and achieving financial stability. She imagined that she would return to work when her baby was 12 months old, as most Canadian women do, and that her baby would go to daycare and later to school.
But after 12 months of mothering her son, she felt compelled to stay home with him longer. She arranged for someone to rent her basement and she refinanced her mortgage so that she could afford to live off her savings for another year.
But she still couldn't bring herself to leave her son in daycare, so she committed to staying home with him until he was old enough for school. In that time, she learned more about homeschooling and she decided that the current public school system would not be able to meet her son's needs. For a little while she began to babysit someone else's children and eventually she decided that she would need to live in a less expensive Canadian city. She and her son moved away from Toronto and they continue to live a school-free, job-free life.
How?
They are not receiving government assistance. (Well, all Canadian families receive the Canada Child Tax Benefit, which varies according to how many children you have and the level of the family income. I receive $368/month for my 4 children.) Instead, my friend continues to live off of her meagre savings (which means she is completely depleting her retirement fund). She budgets carefully for food. She gets clothing for free or nearly free at thrift stores and exchanges. She uses public transit (which is free for children in her new city). She seeks free entertainment and learning opportunites for her son at public libraries and festivals. When she travels, she stays with friends, offering her help in exchange for hospitality.
What's your point, Patti?
Where there's a will, there's a way. If you truly believe, as I do, that school will harm your child, or that school already IS harming your child, then there is a way for you to keep your child home. You can find a way to give up a second income, or even a primary income.
But Patti, we are used to a certain standard of living. My kids expect vacations and meals in restaurants and movies and brand-name clothing. We can't give up our car. Our mortgage costs A LOT. We need a second income just to break even.
I know. Making major changes to the way you spend money is HARD. My family is very lucky to live comfortably on one teacher's salary. But the reason we are comfortable is because of the choices we've made. Until this month, we drove a 2002 Honda Civic which holds just 5 people although we are a family of six. We don't eat out or even buy pre-made foods from the grocery store. My children wear mostly hand-me-downs. Our home is a 2-bedroom bungalow in low-end neighbourhood.
The truth is, I LIKE the finer things of life. I like vacations and expensive leather shoes, boots and jackets. I like beautiful furniture and lattes and nice cars. With two teacher's salaries coming in, we could be living pretty lavishly (i.e. if I were working). But my Family Mission Statement says that I choose Freedom and Joy. If I have to go to work everyday and drop off my children to school and daycare, I have no Freedom and very little Joy.
I can't tell you how to save money so that you can afford to keep your kids out of school. But I can tell you that you CAN save money. You can live cheaper. You can afford to give up some things so that your kids can stay out of school.
It is possible. My friend has proven it.
What financial sacrifices have you made so that you can homeschool with your children?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)