Bordering on Unschooling
// 9.15.06 // Filed under: Homeschooling, Parenting
When people ask me what my homeschooling philosophy is, I answer that our style is eclectic and we tend toward unschooling. But I never call myself an unschooler.
Since many people unfamiliar with homeschooling read my blog, I will explain that unschooling is allowing your children to learn what they want, when they want, and not forcing them to learn any particular lessons or curriculum. Unschooling is simply letting learning happen. It’s exposing children to as much as possible and giving them the tools they need to pursue their passions.
Unschooling is logical and appealing to me. I’ve seen first hand how it works. I did virtually nothing to “teach” my son to read. He figured it out on his own because of his desire to play a Star Wars trading card game without having Mom or Dad know what his cards were. But, for me, there is a fine line between unschooling and apathy.
It’s been hard for me to pinpoint exactly where that line is and exactly what gives me an uncomfortable feeling about surrendering to the label of unschooler. I thought it was my deeply-ingrained schooled background that created the need to assign a grade level to my children and check off accomplished skills on the “Typical Course of Study” lists. If I didn’t make lists and have some general idea that my children were learning what they were “supposed to learn,” I felt that I was doing them a disservice.
Then I came across this article by Kelly Reynolds, who writes:
The most important reason why I don’t force her, pressure her, or try to influence her to learn particular things at particular times is because of her volition. It is far more important that she learn the lessons of morality (that her values are her own, that her life is her own, that her agenda is her own, that it is her responsibility to exercise volition) than it is for her to learn math, reading, or anything else. When we tell a child that he must learn spelling rather than whatever else he wants to do, we are telling him that our desires for him are more important that his desires for himself.
I agree wholeheartedly with this reasoning, and after some thought, I realized that I am only guiding my children’s education to ensure that they are aware of all that is out there to learn. Regardless of what the list says a 2nd grader should know, I have never forced my children to learn anything. (The concept alone makes me laugh actually. How DO you force learning?) I see “Basic Geography” on the list and say to myself, “Hey – we haven’t really talked about that. I’ll get a book on continents and oceans and see if L is interested.”
Unschooling takes different forms for different families and my (admittedly stereotypical) view of it has lead me to fall short of identifying with its ranks. I am not saying that unschooling parents do nothing. Far from it. But they probably don’t consult the Typical Course of Study lists or make lesson plans on a regular basis. I need to make lists, plan unit studies, familiarize myself with what other kids that age are learning – not because I want to force my children to learn something the government says they need to learn, but because I don’t want to miss anything. I don’t want my kids to miss one tiny opportunity to immerse themselves in something that might turn into a life-long passion.
So am I an unschooler? Who really cares? I am just a Mom who wants her children to grow to be free-thinking adults who know how to pursue anything their hearts desire.
A Teacher’s View of Homeschooling
What I Learned From Preschool
Your Child Can Be A Human Body Detective
16 Responses to “Bordering on Unschooling”
Leave a Reply
My Blog Design Portfolio.
- Furniture: Cheap modern furniture store.
- Affordable Modern Furniture , cheap.
- Westwood College
- Child Development
- Private Tutors
- Homeowners Insurance
- Offertissima Passeggini Chicco Bambini
My Webstream.
There are no events to show at this time.
Powered by Lifestream from iBegin.
Categories
Search
YOu sound very much like I was when my kids were your age. We did tons of unit studies, usually prompted by their interests, books they had read, or our travels. The only subject we did on a consistently, as it build upon itself, was math. My kids loved learning and it built a great foundation for them.
Now that they are in middle school, there is more to consider than their own volition. Kids need to also learn the very adult truth that there are some things you just must learn, for living skills or entrance into college. I never enjoyed learning grammar, yet it was important for me to know how to correctly punctuate a letter for everyday life. I didn’t enjoy chemistry, but it was a necessary prerequisite class that I had to take to be considered by colleges.
This is when I started really diverging from unschoolers. They can see the value in teaching a child to do laundry, yet don’t want to make them do higher level school work if they don’t like it. I view both with the same lens: kids need to learn that some things we must do are NOT going to be fun or interesting.
The nice outcome if this is that my kids are developing a more mature attitude in general. THey do love most things we do, as I create their curricula to reflect their interests, but they do have study a few things they aren’t loving. Being able to learn something well without loving it is character building, and they take great pride in meeting hte challenge.
Excellent point, Angela. That’s another reason I struggle with the unschooling label. And I’m sure there have been many instances where a child has not “wanted” to learn something, but once involved a bit, they find they love it.
I don’t agree with some of the above characterization of unschooling as only learning what you find enjoyable. The example that Angela provides, grammar, perfectly demonstrates the idea of an instrumental skill, one that might not be _in itself_ all that compelling for a given student, but that is requisite for other interests the student _does_ want to pursue. One thing that I like about unschooling is that it asks the student to pursue the difficult subjects at the time they are instrumentally significant, instead of saying “trust us, you’ll need to know this later”. I think that’s a superior position both pedagogically and psychologically.
My neck hair raises a bit to read “kids need to learn that some things we must do are NOT going to be fun or interesting” and “Being able to learn something well without loving it is character building”. Hearing that you “must” do something and that “it’s character building” is cold comfort for an adult, and it doesn’t fly any better with kids, but the difference is that a child may feel greater pressure to acquiesce. One of the major lessons I try to model for my children is that there is nothing I “must” do, only things I choose to do. Even unpleasant tasks are chosen for their service of other aims that justify the unpleasantness. Relabeling surrender as “maturity” seems like something that would discourage children from growing up.
Thanks for sharing the quote (and the link!), Shannon. Kelly Reynolds’ words resonated with me right away, so I guess I shouldn’t have been surprised to discover that her article was published on an Objectivist site!
I’m also glad to see that my dear husband was likewise moved to respond to this entry… we really are like-minded about our children’s learning. That puts a smile on my face too.
I think Mother Crone diverges from my brand of unschooling more than she thinks. It’s not that I see doing laundry and studying grammar through two different lenses, I just see them through a very different lens than she. I don’t view either as something we simply “must” do, unpleasant or not. I see both as means to ends that we have chosen. If one doesn’t choose to have clean clothes, for example, one need not do laundry. There is no imperative without some value judgment behind it, and as Lance said, both pedagoically and psychologically I find it far superior to ultimately leave that value judgment up to the child.
I think the “living skills” to which Mother Crone refers are learned quickly, easily, and with great motivation when a child finds them meaningful and significant to reaching his own goals. Shannon gave a great example of her son learning to read easily when it became requiste to playing his favorite game. And how many of us are amazed by the computer skills our children pick up with virtually no instruction? As for subjects required for college entry… well, if and when a child decides that college is something he wants to pursue, those subjects too will become meaningful to him. His goal may not make those subjects any more enjoyable, but he will nonetheless study them with purpose (and without resentment), as an exercise in self-responsibility and the pursuit of his own happiness.
I think children who spend their childhood learning primarily what, when, and how others tell them are at risk of losing sight of the underlying values that make learning a virtue (or worse, they never even develop the ability to recognize those values at all). They live life in a philosophical and moral haze, purposeless, waiting for the next instruction, next requirement, next evaluation from anyone other than themselves. These are the kids who will grow up to hate their jobs and bosses and will be unmotivated to go beyond “good enough”.
I think “being able to learn something well without loving it” (or as Mother Crone seems to mean, being forced to learn something at a time when one himself sees no value in doing so) is the opposite of character-building. I think it’s character-degrading. That’s not to say that I won’t guide my children as much as I can — through conversation, example, and simple exposure to a variety of topics, activities, etc. I may even tell them what knowledge and skills will likely be important if/when they share their particular goals with me and suggest ways in which they might acquire those knowledge and skills. But ultimately, what they choose to learn and when is up to them.
One of my Favorite books! The Teenage Liberation Handbook *how to quit school and get a real life and education* Thanks for your thoughts! I stumbled upon your site, and I’ll be adding you to my Favorites!
I finally have a minute to catch up on the conversation here and, while I can’t speak for Angela, I believe my perspective is not so far off from Lance & Trixie’s. The word “must” may be read in an offensive way, but I am understanding Angela’s use of the word to imply “required as a means to a desired end” as opposed to “force.”
I feel that any person, child or adult, will truly learn if and only if they are motivated to learn. Some things “must” be learned to achieve a goal and that in itself is a lesson. I have watched my son try to take short cuts with games, not fully reading or understanding but just wanting the end result (the fun). That, of course, caused frustration. In this sense, I see that it’s character-building for him to realize that he needs to work through the not-so-fun stuff to more fully enjoy the fun stuff.
I like the term ‘unschooling.’ I think your approach is positive and wonderful for a second grader. I will be reading to see how you cope with motivation in future years. Do you plan to home school to a certain age, or are you playing it by year?
I’m not sure I like putting either me or the child as the reason for learning something. There are both internal and external motivators that are necessary.
The problem with learning just for “delight” and that being the only end, is that you end up with moral relativism. If I think it’s important than it must be important. If you think it’s important and I don’t then it isn’t important. Neither is completely true. As parents we are facilitators part of our job isn’t just to teach spelling, but to help the child understand its importance in the life.
Philip – we’d prefer to homeschool all the way through, but we’re not ruling anything out.
Spunky – I’ve been pondering your comment. Moral relativism deals with right and wrong. If a person is passionate about something, then it *is* important to them and if they don’t care about it, it’s *not* important to them. We learn very naturally that some people enjoy some things and others don’t. I don’t think a child would grow up “dismissing” everything in life that is not “important” to them and labeling those things as “wrong.” Drawing a parallel to moral relativism seems like a bit of a stretch.
There’s a lot of discussion one could engage in regarding whether homeschooling in general, or unschooling in particular, fosters relativism (moral or otherwise). But I’d like to pose a more narrow question in response to Spunky’s comment: who is more likely to correctly assess the importance of correct spelling, a child who is given spelling drills and spelling tests, or one who is not? I’m not asking who is the better speller, as spelling, like most skills, is one that improves with practice. But who has a better idea of the _importance_ of spelling?
One need not develop a personal theory on the importance of spelling to come to an answer. The “untested” speller will only encounter spelling in the context of other disciplines, and will judge the importance of spelling to the degree it serves those purposes. The “tested” speller’s evaluation will also include the significance of proper spelling to the grades they receive on spelling tests. Whatever purpose spelling serves, it is _not_ to do well on spelling tests. If it were, one could justify the study of _anything_ simply by compelling the testing of it (”Why are you testing me on the state capitals?” “Because knowing them is important.” “Why is it important to know them?” “Because they’re on this test I’m giving you.”). Factoring in spelling’s effect on isolated tests skews one’s evaluation toward the arbitrary.
However, there’s one additional consideration. I thought about this some time ago when someone, a very bright, admirable, and engaging person I should add, confessed some confusion as to what orbited what with respect to the earth, moon, and sun. Now my first reaction was to laugh, wondering how on earth someone so smart could be confused on such a basic issue in cosmology. But I quickly reconsidered. This person was not an astronomer, nor was she particularly interested in Kepler’s laws of motion or Newton’s mechanics, or the science of tides or meteorology, so why would I expect her to know about the relative orbits of these celestial bodies? I had only one answer. Familiarity with basic astronomy is a _marker_ of an education.
Of all markers of education, spelling is perhaps the biggest. My two previous managers at work were atrocious spellers (with even worse grammar). Only spellchecking technology allowed them to avoid appearing as total fools in written communication. So here we have another candidate for the true importance of spelling: to not seem dumb. And in fact, many people _will_ judge others by their spelling. And they are wrong to do so, as wrong as I was to judge my friend by her lack of basic astronomical knowledge.
These two previous bosses of mine were no fools. Their oral communication skills were excellent, and their limited spelling skills still allowed them to communicate adequately in written media, thanks to readily available technologies to correct most of their mistakes. And most importantly, spelling was not a key component to the primary pursuit of their lives’ work. (My new boss is a fine speller. And I have formed a company with those other two previous bosses and am working my way out of my current employment situation.
)
One thing I will eventually like to teach my children is that they are likely to be evaluated unfairly based on their knowledge or lack of knowledge on a few arbitrary topics that have happened to been chosen for inclusion in most schools’ standard curricula. I will also teach them that learning arbitrary skills for no other purpose than to impress others is a waste of time in the long run. And of course, I’ll teach them that people of character will not let their opinion of them be wholly constituted by first impressions, and that people of lesser character, those to whom impression is more important than substance, are best avoided anyway.
I really like the idea of unschooling and want to do go in that direction but I think if we do start homeschooling that my approach will be somewhat like yours. I really enjoyed that article too.
I think serious unschoolers are very strict about how they apply the label, but on some level, even some people who send their kids to school all day are also unschooling at times — they just don’t realize it. Kids *will* learn, it spreads out of them and no amount of schooling can stamp it out. I’m not a strict unschooler and haven’t “earned” the unschooling tattoo, but I do dabble in it. Heh.
I enjoyed your thoughts — they’re so much like mine in this area! Unschooling is great — but what if we’re missing something? What if they never want to learn geography, or advanced math, or sentence diagrams? OK, well I’m not so worried about diagrams, lol. Usually I check in with Ron and Andrea and they talk me down — but my hubby always knows how to make me worry in this area! Balance is the key, I think, and being very aware of that fine line between unschooling and apathy. I have said for a while now that I’m a little afraid that if we totally homeschool we’ll end up in front of the TV eating poptarts!
Like Shannon, I’m pondering Spunky’s comment: “The problem with learning just for “delight” and that being the only end, is that you end up with moral relativism.” First, it seems that Spunky defines unschooling as one learning ONLY for immediate, short-sighted delight. That’s not at all how I see it, and I’d go so far as to say most unschoolers I know don’t either. I use the term “unschooling” to mean that I will not require my children to study anything they don’t *want* to. As mature adults with a larger context, we could be said to do many things “we don’t want to do” every day… though if we wanted to speak precisely, we’d say instead that we choose to do lots of things we find distasteful because we realize that they serve a purpose or goal that we *do want* to achieve. I don’t find delight in scrubbing the toilet, for example, but I do find value in having a clean bowl. In one sense, I don’t ever want to scrub the toilet, but I know that I really *do* want to because it’s a means to achieve my goal. These are the sorts of motivations I want my children to discover, evaluate, and choose for themselves when deciding what, when, and how to learn.
The reason for learning, practicing, or studying anything in an unschooling approach is always that the learner has determined that doing so is important and meaningful to him. I can think of no other valid reason to learn anything, and I don’t see why this approach would lead to moral (or any sort of) relativism. In fact, as Lance suggested through his discussion of spelling, I think this sort of learning discourages one from simply following the expectations of others and instead encourages him to ground his learning in the very real, objective values served by that learning. Unschoolers will never learn to spell just to do well on a test, only because they have some real-life goal served by accurate spelling.
Spunky fears that unschooled children may conclude: “If I think it’s important than it must be important. If you think it’s important and I don’t then it isn’t important.” I fear that schooled kids too often default to determining something is important *only* because somebody else (a teacher, parent, coach) tells them it is and (of course) because it will be on the test. But things aren’t important because *anyone* thinks they are… or because they’re on a test. They’re important because they’re of value to one’s life, and knowing this requires a very abstract and objective view of reality and one’s own nature. It’s this foundation that I want my kids to have.
And Gem, so what if your kids never *do* want to learn geography or calculus? Seriously, think about it. What if? How bad would it be? You joke about sentence diagrams (something I never learned in my public or private schooling, BTW), but are you saying that you could pass an AP Calculus exam if given one right now? How important is higher math to your success and happiness? I suspect that unless you’re an engineer, physicist, math teacher, etc., it’s largely purposeless. If you’re not sure, your current ability to recall the higher math you were once taught should reveal just how meaningful it is in your life.
All this talk about “missing something” honestly baffles me. There are countless subjects never even considered in public school curricula or included on any list of “what your X-grader needs to know”, but nobody seems concerned about “missing” those. I suspect the reason is rooted in our own culture of schooling. Having been schooled ourselves, I think many of us have already forgotten the real reason why learning is a virtue. Infants and toddlers seem to understand this intuitively. After all, it’s obvious — you learn things so that you can DO stuff… take action in the world; create, produce, and thrive; find purpose and success; and experience joy. But somewhere during childhood, many of us seem to lose sight of this obvious truth. And so we look to others’ (largely arbitrary) curricula and lists to determine what we need to know, rather than looking to our own lives, goals, and needs to determine that for ourselves.
//I have said for a while now that IâÂÂm a little afraid that if we totally homeschool weâÂÂll end up in front of the TV eating poptarts!//
That pretty much describes my senior year of high school
Going to school is no defense against pop tarts.
I would absolutely LOVE to be strictly unschoolers. It really sums up how I believe education should be. However, what to do about those standardized tests that the state requires? The only thing keeping me from totally unschooling is those tests.