Jump to content


What's with the ads?

Photo
* * * - - 5 votes

Unschooling math opinion--how long to catch up--poll (don't have to be an unschooler to vote!)


174 replies to this topic

Poll: How long to catch up? (99 member(s) have cast votes)

I do not unschool, but I have nothing against unschooling / it is a valid educational option

  1. less than 1 month (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 1-3 months (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. 3-5 months (1 votes [1.01%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.01%

  4. 5-7months (5 votes [5.05%])

    Percentage of vote: 5.05%

  5. 12 months (14 votes [14.14%])

    Percentage of vote: 14.14%

  6. more than 12 month (41 votes [41.41%])

    Percentage of vote: 41.41%

  7. N/A (38 votes [38.38%])

    Percentage of vote: 38.38%

I do not unschool and I think unschooling is neglectful / lower educational option

  1. less than 1 month (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 1-3 months (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. 3-5 months (1 votes [1.01%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.01%

  4. 5-7 months (2 votes [2.02%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.02%

  5. 12 months (3 votes [3.03%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.03%

  6. more than 12 months (28 votes [28.28%])

    Percentage of vote: 28.28%

  7. N/A (65 votes [65.66%])

    Percentage of vote: 65.66%

I unschool (even if not math)

  1. less than 1 month (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  2. 1-3 months (1 votes [1.01%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.01%

  3. 3-5 months (1 votes [1.01%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.01%

  4. 5-7 months (1 votes [1.01%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.01%

  5. 12 months (3 votes [3.03%])

    Percentage of vote: 3.03%

  6. more than 12 months (2 votes [2.02%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.02%

  7. N/A (91 votes [91.92%])

    Percentage of vote: 91.92%

Vote Guests cannot vote

What's with the ads?

#151 luuknam

luuknam

    Feeling the Weight of Levity

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5195 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 08:00 PM

Completed :lol:
ETA:
If you are looking at the 2016/17 thread. Else I am not the "guilty" one :)

 

 

Oops. I just search the boards for 7th grade planning thread and didn't notice it was last year's (it was only on page 2 or 3 of the Logic Stage board). Not that it matters for the point I was making.



#152 Jean in Newcastle

Jean in Newcastle

    Beekeeping Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 63771 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 08:06 PM

It seems to me though - why risk it? It's kind of like a Pascal's Wager in my mind. Consider:

Possibility #1: teach the child math systematically from Kindergarten. If the child is math-intuitive, motivated or gifted, you have not lost anything. If the child is not motivated, intuitive or gifted, they will need all the time they can get and you're better off because you know this earlier.

Possibility #2: don't teach the child systematically from Kindergarten. "Trust" the child to learn what they need to know when they need to know it. If the child is math-intuitive, motivated or gifted, it will probably work out. If the child is not motivated, intuitive or gifted, you may not know the full extent of this until it is too late to remediate effectively. If this is compounded because your life circumstances have changed and the child must go to b&m school, now there are a lot of difficulties.

So, it seems to me that the most logical wager is to teach the child systematically from Kindergarten. There is nothing to lose by doing it this way. There is much potential loss by not doing it this way unless all the stars align and everything plays out ideally.

 

 

Possiblity #1: Teach the child math systematically from Kindergarten. If the child is math-intuitive, motivated or gifted, he might start resenting math because the early years of arithmetics and "math facts" can be absolutely soul sucking, especially to gifted children. If the child is not intuitive, motivated or gifted, he might resent math even more and might start feeling like he "can't do math."

 

Possibility #2": Don't teach the child systematically from Kindergarten. If the child is math intuitive, motivated or gifted he'll be picking up math anyway, he has a chance to grow up loving math when he is ready to study it beyond arithmetics. Meanwhile, the child might have enjoyed other things and developed other passions without being burdened by "math facts" and mindless worksheets. If the child is not motivated, intuitive or gifted, he still has an opportunity to grow up without hating math and his confidence intact--which is one of the biggest precursors to being successful in math later on.

 

Obviously, in my opinion there's much to lose in teaching a child who is not intersted or not ready too early.

 

I do agree that there are risks involved in both approaches. Some are easier to digest than others, especially in our culture of achievement. Different people take different risks.

 

It's not an either/ or scenario.  You can teach the child you have.  And I assume that most parents can figure out (with some help from the HIve!) where their child fits on the math spectrum.  I have a late bloomer.  I did not push math with her.  And when she was ready, it clicked and she took off like a rabbit.  This only happened this last year.  But we still did math from K to 8th grade.  We did games and ran her quickbreads business and did some Khan academy at a slower pace that suited her.  All that less intensive math work from K to 8th grade gave her the vocabulary and concepts so that when she was ready she had the foundation so that she could rabbit ahead.  If she hadn't had that, I suppose that she could have built it up, but we would have been wasting time building up what could have been already there waiting for her to bloom. 

 

And honestly, I wasn't 100% sure if she would bloom.  LDs were a possibility.  Though I have a special ed. degree and had a gut feeling from working with her that it was a late blooming thing and not an LD thing.  Plus, I knew that she had my genes and I was a late math bloomer.  If she hadn't started to click with things this year then I would have continued working with her at her level but I would have stepped up the therapeutic ways of working with her instead of letting her lead the pace. 


Edited by Jean in Newcastle, 22 April 2017 - 01:02 AM.

  • Amy in NH, Lawana, Quill and 3 others like this

#153 Quill

Quill

    Team Introvert - Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16279 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 08:44 PM

Possiblity #1: Teach the child math systematically from Kindergarten. If the child is math-intuitive, motivated or gifted, he might start resenting math because the early years of arithmetics and "math facts" can be absolutely soul sucking, especially to gifted children. If the child is not intuitive, motivated or gifted, he might resent math even more and might start feeling like he "can't do math."

Possibility #2": Don't teach the child systematically from Kindergarten. If the child is math intuitive, motivated or gifted he'll be picking up math anyway, he has a chance to grow up loving math when he is ready to study it beyond arithmetics. Meanwhile, the child might have enjoyed other things and developed other passions without being burdened by "math facts" and mindless worksheets. If the child is not motivated, intuitive or gifted, he still has an opportunity to grow up without hating math and his confidence intact--which is one of the biggest precursors to being successful in math later on.

Obviously, in my opinion there's much to lose in teaching a child who is not intersted or not ready too early.

I do agree that there are risks involved in both approaches. Some are easier to digest than others, especially in our culture of achievement. Different people take different risks.


I actually think the danger of being bored and resentful when you are good at something is incredibly small, much less if you're good at something and have the freedom of homeschooling as well. People generally enjoy doing things they are good at. Sure, if your child could skip pages and pages of review because - got it, let's move on - then it would be idiotic to keep passing them pages in some uptight attempt to fill out every paper. But working with a systematic curriculum is not automatically boring or resentment-inducing to bright, intelligent children. It gives them exactly what they desire - knowledge.

Take a parallel - playing a musical instrument. One of my children loved instruments from a very early age. I gave this child many opportunities to explore music non-didactically. BUT! There are systematic things to learn in music as well. It's not ALL just diddling around and playing what sounds pleasing. People don't master musical instruments that way. So there were also years and years of didactic lessons and that included years and years and years of intentional, daily practice. Sometimes it was difficult. Sometimes the kid was sick of playing piano. But that's part of learning discipline - you keep going. The child plays beautifully now.

I have never heard of a master musician who did not learn the didactic part of music theory, who only just played what they could pick up and became a master at it. Never heard of an accomplished musician who just dabbled at an instrument once in a while when the mood struck. A musically intuitive person does not become bored and resentful when someone teaches them the staff and what all those circles mean and why it says "largo" or "allegro" at the top of the piece. All that info is just a key that unlocks greater mastery and thus, greater joy in the instrument.

See, I think this whole "gifted kid is bored with didactic teaching" is a myth. Gifted children love to learn. They are hungry for knowledge and thrilled when they can obtain more of it in their area(s) of interest. What a gifted kid doesn't want to do is sit in a room with 20 other kids who are being taught something they already know. But homeschooling has the advantage of not having to be that way at all, but not because the solution is that they shouldn't be instructed on purpose at all. Just that you don't dwell on 2+2 when they have already mastered that and are ready to explore 4-x=2.
  • Jean in Newcastle, Amy in NH, Nan in Mass and 9 others like this

#154 Bluegoat

Bluegoat

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10642 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 08:52 PM

RU involves unparenting.

 

I'd say that distinguishes it quite a lot from the unschoolers busy strewing info on the rock cycle and great composers and math games, while at the same time, reserving the right to tell your kid to brush their teeth.

 

I suspect they wouldn't like me suggesting that. 



#155 Arcadia

Arcadia

    Hive Mind Royal Larvae

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15326 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 09:30 PM

It's the "Sandra Dodd" unschooling that I am frankly opposed to. I think it's a terrible idea, risks something that isn't the parent's to gamble (their child's future options), and makes a lot of excuses for its shortcomings.

I am not familiar with Sandra Dodd nor this lady that I am linking but I guess they are similar in the type of unschooling?

http://www.gifteduns.../coming-of-age/

My strengths aren't my passions and can feel more like a burden sometimes. So yes, it is possible for a person to have no joy in doing what a person is good at.

I suspect they wouldn't like me suggesting that.

It is a parental right and duty to nag kids to brush their teeth according to my kids' pediatricians and dentists. It can take me an hour (ETA: of nagging my kids) some nights :p

Edited by Arcadia, 21 April 2017 - 10:51 PM.


#156 luuknam

luuknam

    Feeling the Weight of Levity

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5195 posts

Posted 21 April 2017 - 09:50 PM

I am not familiar with Sandra Dodd nor this lady that I am linking but I guess they are similar in the type of unschooling?

http://www.gifteduns.../coming-of-age/

 

 

I didn't finish reading the entire thing, but yes. RU of the type where if a young child chooses to run in front of a bus they should have the right to do so, because they'll learn from natural consequences and it isn't right for anyone, even a parent, to control another human being.

 

ETA: I should probably clarify that I haven't seen SD say that literally, but I have seen her make similar-ish statements about very young kids' rights to refuse medical treatments for potentially lethal conditions. Now, in all fairness, it's been about 10 years since I was on her email list, so I have no idea what her current views are.


Edited by luuknam, 21 April 2017 - 10:12 PM.

  • Quill likes this

#157 Quill

Quill

    Team Introvert - Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16279 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 06:31 AM

I didn't finish reading the entire thing, but yes. RU of the type where if a young child chooses to run in front of a bus they should have the right to do so, because they'll learn from natural consequences and it isn't right for anyone, even a parent, to control another human being.

ETA: I should probably clarify that I haven't seen SD say that literally, but I have seen her make similar-ish statements about very young kids' rights to refuse medical treatments for potentially lethal conditions. Now, in all fairness, it's been about 10 years since I was on her email list, so I have no idea what her current views are.


Yes, the linked lady appears to be very similar to Sandra Dodd. (BTW, if you google Sanda Dodd Unschooling, her own site will be in the top of the search.) i have not looked at anything from Dodd or about RU in over a decade, but there were a LOT of things I did not agree with. The lady in the link has at least one thing working in her favor - she says her children are profoundly gifted. It is much easier to not worry about didactic teaching if your child is highly intelligent. For example, if your child teaches himself to read at age 2 (not saying it is true for the linked lady, but I am aware of it from my years on gifted boards), well then, how worried are you going to be that they will be ignorant? It is no threat at all.

One of my children learned to read at age 3 and read The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe to me in Kindergarten. I didn't really do reading programs with this child in homeschooling. There was no point.

If one's child is highly gifted, of course you're going to adjust homeschooling so thaey aren't sounding out "cat" and "bat" in first grade. But that is itself one of the huge advantages of homeschooling and was the main reason I headed down this path from the beginning. This is why I even know about unschooling, because it made a lot of sense in the context of a very gifted child. But I did learn that it also does not make a lot of sense in the context of a child with LDs. Fortunately, I was catching on to the fact from an early point and I didn't disadvantage my LD child too much from my early idealism.
  • Jean in Newcastle, Amy in NH, kiana and 3 others like this

#158 kiana

kiana

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7178 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 06:43 AM

Yes, the linked lady appears to be very similar to Sandra Dodd. (BTW, if you google Sanda Dodd Unschooling, her own site will be in the top of the search.) i have not looked at anything from Dodd or about RU in over a decade, but there were a LOT of things I did not agree with. The lady in the link has at least one thing working in her favor - she says her children are profoundly gifted. It is much easier to not worry about didactic teaching if your child is highly intelligent. For example, if your child teaches himself to read at age 2 (not saying it is true for the linked lady, but I am aware of it from my years on gifted boards), well then, how worried are you going to be that they will be ignorant? It is no threat at all.

One of my children learned to read at age 3 and read The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe to me in Kindergarten. I didn't really do reading programs with this child in homeschooling. There was no point.

If one's child is highly gifted, of course you're going to adjust homeschooling so thaey aren't sounding out "cat" and "bat" in first grade. But that is itself one of the huge advantages of homeschooling and was the main reason I headed down this path from the beginning. This is why I even know about unschooling, because it made a lot of sense in the context of a very gifted child. But I did learn that it also does not make a lot of sense in the context of a child with LDs. Fortunately, I was catching on to the fact from an early point and I didn't disadvantage my LD child too much from my early idealism.

 

Plus, quite honestly, a student in the HG+ range is much more likely to be able to catch up quickly and easily on a subject. 

 

I know one person who moved from 0 math instruction and scoring at 3rd grade level on an online placement test to beginning algebra 1 with 2 days of multiplication/division workbooks from the dollar store and life of fred fractions/decimals, and proceeded to get B's in the algebra classes and then A's in precalc/calc. But this person is PG (not tested, but intellectually comparable to older siblings who test in the PG range) and just did not do any math. 

 

BTW, while I know people have issues w/LOF, it worked extremely well for a highly verbal but uninstructed person. 


  • Quill likes this

#159 Nan in Mass

Nan in Mass

    Apprentice Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9705 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 07:30 AM

...His education has leaned more unschooly than the others ... He often gets thrown off by the phrasing of questions ...


We weren't unschoolers but we were very flexible and once my boys were used to homeschooling, they were heavily involved in choosing what they learned and how they learned it. The above, in my very limited experience, is one of the four major problems with this more unschooly approach. (The others are that it is a ton of work for the parents, materials and mentors become increasingly expensive and hard to find as the child grows older, and it can be uncomfortable to be very different from one's peers during young adulthood.) My boys struggled with figuring out what was really meant by the wording of questions, especially science questions, even in college, despite doing a formal math program every year. (They also struggled with being different from their peers in college . They themselves are happy with their education and experiences but they had to work to learn to blend in, despite being with public school kids their age 4 or 5 days a week all during their homeschooling years.)

I have little experience with Khan but in my experience with catching a few people up in math, I would say that catching up properly would require havinghaving someone who is good at explaining math and good at spotting wrong mathematical thinking work closely with the student unless the student was naturally mathy.

I learned my math facts in 8th grade, at the beginning of algebra, when I needed them for factoring. Before that, I hadn't needed them consistently enough for them to stick. I think the dots I made and the mental juggling used before that significantly improved my basic mathematical thinking and made me good at math. I taught my own children and the adult I tutored to do the same thing. I think it is not a good idea to memorize math facts too soon.

Nan
  • Amy in NH likes this

#160 Nan in Mass

Nan in Mass

    Apprentice Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9705 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 08:37 AM

I worked with a young adult who was terrified of written math, very damaged, and who didn't know that multiplying a number by ten results in the same number with a zero on the end. She wanted to go to the community college. And needed to place into algebra 1 for financial reasons. I only agreed to work with her because she was a waitress and could make change. She had major LDs but I don't know much about LDs so that didn't scare me. We worked sporadically in 4 hour sessions. I did set theory with her and taught her different number bases (so she understood how written math works) and then took her through Singapore Primary Math 5. It took us a school year, working together once every week or two. She didn't do any written math on her own. I did a lot of customizing. We mostly worked at a white board together. She tested into algebra 1at the end. I helped her a bit with her algebra class too because by then I was good at explaining so she understood. She's doing math for a living now.

My point is that if someone is motivated and has some practical math (time, money, measuring), I think they can be caught up to algebra fairly fast, but I think it is important that the catching up be done in such a way that it lays the foundation for algebra, not just teaches the algorithms for long division and multiplying fractions.

Nan
  • Amy in NH, Closeacademy, PollyOR and 4 others like this

#161 eternalsummer

eternalsummer

    Empress Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3394 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 12:47 PM

We weren't unschoolers but we were very flexible and once my boys were used to homeschooling, they were heavily involved in choosing what they learned and how they learned it. The above, in my very limited experience, is one of the four major problems with this more unschooly approach. (The others are that it is a ton of work for the parents, materials and mentors become increasingly expensive and hard to find as the child grows older, and it can be uncomfortable to be very different from one's peers during young adulthood.) My boys struggled with figuring out what was really meant by the wording of questions, especially science questions, even in college, despite doing a formal math program every year. (They also struggled with being different from their peers in college . They themselves are happy with their education and experiences but they had to work to learn to blend in, despite being with public school kids their age 4 or 5 days a week all during their homeschooling years.)

I have little experience with Khan but in my experience with catching a few people up in math, I would say that catching up properly would require havinghaving someone who is good at explaining math and good at spotting wrong mathematical thinking work closely with the student unless the student was naturally mathy.

I learned my math facts in 8th grade, at the beginning of algebra, when I needed them for factoring. Before that, I hadn't needed them consistently enough for them to stick. I think the dots I made and the mental juggling used before that significantly improved my basic mathematical thinking and made me good at math. I taught my own children and the adult I tutored to do the same thing. I think it is not a good idea to memorize math facts too soon.

Nan

 

 

I wanted to address the two bolded points.

 

One: I can pick out homeschoolers in a crowd 9 times out of 10.  If we are at the park after school, I know who the homeschooled kids are.  I have been wrong about this once.  I don't know what it is, but I am convinced that homeschooling makes for a different way of interacting and presenting oneself.  It is slight, but there.

 

Two: DS8 is naturally good at math; it frustrates me to no end that he refuses to learn math facts to automaticity. Instead, he says things like (for say 703 times 42): "well three times four is one more four than two times four and three times two is six, and seven times four is two sevens and two sevens, and then two times seven is fourteen and so the answer is [...] 29,526."  He does this all day.  We have a multiplication chart so he could very easily look up 7*4, or whatever, but he prefers to add two sets of two sevens.  


  • Quill likes this

#162 Nan in Mass

Nan in Mass

    Apprentice Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9705 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 03:36 PM

I wanted to address the two bolded points.

...
Two: DS8 is naturally good at math; it frustrates me to no end that he refuses to learn math facts to automaticity. Instead, he says things like (for say 703 times 42): "well three times four is one more four than two times four and three times two is six, and seven times four is two sevens and two sevens, and then two times seven is fourteen and so the answer is [...] 29,526." He does this all day. We have a multiplication chart so he could very easily look up 7*4, or whatever, but he prefers to add two sets of two sevens.


This will be to his advantage in the long run. The son that is about to graduate from engineering school and has a job lined up already did that. : )
  • Quill, WoolySocks and eternalsummer like this

#163 kiana

kiana

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7178 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 04:41 PM

Two: DS8 is naturally good at math; it frustrates me to no end that he refuses to learn math facts to automaticity. Instead, he says things like (for say 703 times 42): "well three times four is one more four than two times four and three times two is six, and seven times four is two sevens and two sevens, and then two times seven is fourteen and so the answer is [...] 29,526."  He does this all day.  We have a multiplication chart so he could very easily look up 7*4, or whatever, but he prefers to add two sets of two sevens.  

 

I did this until pre-algebra, at which point I just naturally memorized them through usage. I am an absolutely terrible memorizer which is why I did badly in some classes (like orgo ... eek). I didn't have a lot of trig and calc identities memorized until I had to teach those classes, but would re-derive them as needed, and I would not be at all surprised if your son wants to do that.

 

Honestly I would not push it but just continue to disallow use of a calculator. I wouldn't even use the multiplication chart. As he computes them over and over again eventually they will stick. 


  • WoolySocks likes this

#164 eternalsummer

eternalsummer

    Empress Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3394 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 04:52 PM

We don't own a calculator, and as he is really quite adamant about not using the multiplication chart (he thinks it's too much trouble!!!!!!!!!!  how is that possible!?!?!) we're probably just going to keep on like this for a couple more years.  

 

Reassuring to hear that there is a positive side to his math stubbornness :)



#165 Mergath

Mergath

    Beekeeping Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11020 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 05:01 PM

I actually think the danger of being bored and resentful when you are good at something is incredibly small, much less if you're good at something and have the freedom of homeschooling as well. People generally enjoy doing things they are good at. Sure, if your child could skip pages and pages of review because - got it, let's move on - then it would be idiotic to keep passing them pages in some uptight attempt to fill out every paper. But working with a systematic curriculum is not automatically boring or resentment-inducing to bright, intelligent children. It gives them exactly what they desire - knowledge.

Take a parallel - playing a musical instrument. One of my children loved instruments from a very early age. I gave this child many opportunities to explore music non-didactically. BUT! There are systematic things to learn in music as well. It's not ALL just diddling around and playing what sounds pleasing. People don't master musical instruments that way. So there were also years and years of didactic lessons and that included years and years and years of intentional, daily practice. Sometimes it was difficult. Sometimes the kid was sick of playing piano. But that's part of learning discipline - you keep going. The child plays beautifully now.

I have never heard of a master musician who did not learn the didactic part of music theory, who only just played what they could pick up and became a master at it. Never heard of an accomplished musician who just dabbled at an instrument once in a while when the mood struck. A musically intuitive person does not become bored and resentful when someone teaches them the staff and what all those circles mean and why it says "largo" or "allegro" at the top of the piece. All that info is just a key that unlocks greater mastery and thus, greater joy in the instrument.

See, I think this whole "gifted kid is bored with didactic teaching" is a myth. Gifted children love to learn. They are hungry for knowledge and thrilled when they can obtain more of it in their area(s) of interest. What a gifted kid doesn't want to do is sit in a room with 20 other kids who are being taught something they already know. But homeschooling has the advantage of not having to be that way at all, but not because the solution is that they shouldn't be instructed on purpose at all. Just that you don't dwell on 2+2 when they have already mastered that and are ready to explore 4-x=2.

 

:iagree:  I was a HG kid who was bored senseless in school. It wasn't because I was being taught in a classroom setting with a standardized curriculum. It was because I was being taught things in third grade I'd known since preschool. On the rare occasion I got to learn something new, I LOVED learning. And I adored college. Much of the content was new to me and the classes moved much more quickly.
 


  • kiana and Quill like this

#166 Sadie

Sadie

    Beekeeping Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21598 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 05:42 PM

I suspect they wouldn't like me suggesting that. 

 

 

Nevertheless, unschooling the academic portion of the day whilst still making parenting decisions for a child is a very different proposition to RU.

 

I don't really care what RU's like or don't like. Or whether or not they think unschooling academics only is faux unschooling.

 

I've spent time in the RU world; I know of what I speak!


  • amy g. and Quill like this

#167 WoolySocks

WoolySocks

    Googleplex master of hivedom

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 8730 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 06:01 PM


 

Two: DS8 is naturally good at math; it frustrates me to no end that he refuses to learn math facts to automaticity. Instead, he says things like (for say 703 times 42): "well three times four is one more four than two times four and three times two is six, and seven times four is two sevens and two sevens, and then two times seven is fourteen and so the answer is [...] 29,526."  He does this all day.  We have a multiplication chart so he could very easily look up 7*4, or whatever, but he prefers to add two sets of two sevens.  

 

This was me too.  I have a math and comp sci degree and did a bunch of grad level math work. 


  • Quill likes this

#168 eternalsummer

eternalsummer

    Empress Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3394 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 06:07 PM

I don't think the idea of unschooling is that you don't ever learn things systematically, or in a disciplined way.  I think the idea is that as a child becomes interested in something and the interest is sustained, the parent provides access to systematic and disciplined learning.  Insisting that a child or young adult learn a musical instrument systematically (by mandating a program of study, lessons, etc.) is not the same thing as unschooling that same program of study, because in the latter, the child has chosen it and in the former he has not.


  • 38carrots likes this

#169 Quill

Quill

    Team Introvert - Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16279 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 07:48 PM

I don't think the idea of unschooling is that you don't ever learn things systematically, or in a disciplined way. I think the idea is that as a child becomes interested in something and the interest is sustained, the parent provides access to systematic and disciplined learning. Insisting that a child or young adult learn a musical instrument systematically (by mandating a program of study, lessons, etc.) is not the same thing as unschooling that same program of study, because in the latter, the child has chosen it and in the former he has not.


But there is a continuum between those two extremes. There's the Tiger Mom mandate: "my children will attain Carnegie-level piano AND violin skill, and it will happen because that is my goal for them, not because they show interest in it." And there's Sandra Dodd view: "If my child shows interest in learning to play the piano, I will buy them a piano. I will pay for lessons if they ask for them and if they don't want to practice, they don't and if they don't want to have a lesson today or this week or all year, they won't. If they continue to want lessons, they will have them. If they wish to practice daily, they will. If they want to dabble for five minutes, they can. If they want to practice for ten hours in a binge, they can do that."

Most people are neither of these extremes, whatever their style of instruction. But proponents of either extreme tend to be dismissive of those who are not as committed as they are to their belief system. You have this, of course, in many areas of parenting; i.e., The Mommy Wars. You Breastfeed? Great! Oh, you quit at six months? Well, you suck.

#170 Sadie

Sadie

    Beekeeping Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21598 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 07:53 PM

I have literally never heard a woman diss another for b/feeding for 6 months, and I hang out with plenty of 'breastfed the kids till they were 5' hippies. Idk. Y'all need to move to Sydney and hang out with my peeps. Who also include the only non-neglectful unschoolers in the universe, apparently.


  • Quill and AmandaVT like this

#171 eternalsummer

eternalsummer

    Empress Bee

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3394 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 07:54 PM

Yes, I agree that the extremes - the idea that only one way will produce a desired result - are stupid.

 

On the other hand, you can have a fairly average kid, musically - I was one - whose parents never insist on one second of practice, or look for teachers, or anything, and just follow the child, and have that child learn an instrument just about to mastery (I was not an elite flutist but I was a fully competent one) without one second of parent involvement, other than applause at concerts (occasionally, anyway) and $ for instrument and lessons.  My parents were not unschoolers; they just didn't care whether I learned an instrument or not.



#172 Nan in Mass

Nan in Mass

    Apprentice Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9705 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 08:57 PM

I made my children do things, but they were generally things they said they wanted to do. I thought of it as lending them my adult self-discipline and will-power. They were generally grateful. It allowed them to achieve more of their goals than they would have otherwise. We were all pretty clear and open about which goals were theirs and which were mine. Often they matched but there were things that they disliked but consented to learn because they trusted me when I said that they would need them later or that the state said we had to, and a few they consented to learn just to please me. We talked about why we were learning what and didn't pretend that all learning was fun and easy all the time. In high school, I was grateful that they were interested enough in their education to negotiate with me about what they were learning, even though it was tiring and worrisome. And scary. They said they wanted to go to college and trusted me to make sure they learned what they needed to know to be able to survive their college classes.

Nan
  • Jean in Newcastle, kiana and Quill like this

#173 Quill

Quill

    Team Introvert - Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16279 posts

Posted 22 April 2017 - 09:01 PM

Yes, I agree that the extremes - the idea that only one way will produce a desired result - are stupid.

On the other hand, you can have a fairly average kid, musically - I was one - whose parents never insist on one second of practice, or look for teachers, or anything, and just follow the child, and have that child learn an instrument just about to mastery (I was not an elite flutist but I was a fully competent one) without one second of parent involvement, other than applause at concerts (occasionally, anyway) and $ for instrument and lessons. My parents were not unschoolers; they just didn't care whether I learned an instrument or not.


Sure, you could have that. I was drawing a parallel between math mastery and music mastery, because both have the structure that builds upon basics and doesn't lend itself well to dabbling. Music mastery is nice but not terribly important. Math mastery is quite important.

#174 IsabelC

IsabelC

    Grumpy old woman

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5236 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 06:54 AM

I made my children do things, but they were generally things they said they wanted to do. I thought of it as lending them my adult self-discipline and will-power. They were generally grateful. It allowed them to achieve more of their goals than they would have otherwise. We were all pretty clear and open about which goals were theirs and which were mine. Often they matched but there were things that they disliked but consented to learn because they trusted me when I said that they would need them later or that the state said we had to, and a few they consented to learn just to please me. 

 

This makes a lot of sense to me. I have had my children actually ask me to push them more with certain things that they wanted to do but knew they didn't have the self discipline or organizational skills to achieve on their own.



#175 Nan in Mass

Nan in Mass

    Apprentice Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9705 posts

Posted 23 April 2017 - 08:26 AM

This makes a lot of sense to me. I have had my children actually ask me to push them more with certain things that they wanted to do but knew they didn't have the self discipline or organizational skills to achieve on their own.


Exactly. It is a help-me thing often.