Slashdot Mirror
Schooling, Homeschooling, and Now, "Unschooling"
ciaohound writes "The Baltimore Sun has a story about 'unschooling,' which is like homeschooling except, well, without the schooling. '...unschooling incorporates every facet of a child's life into the education process, allowing a child to follow his passions and learn at his own pace, year-round. And it assumes that an outing at the park — or even hours spent playing a video game — can be just as valuable a teaching resource as Hooked on Phonics.' If you have ever been forced to sit in a classroom where no learning was taking place, you may understand the appeal. A driving force behind the movement is parents' dissatisfaction with regular schools, and presumably with homeschooling as well. Yet few researchers are even aware of unschooling and little research exists on its effectiveness. Any Slashdotters who have experience with 'unschooling?'"
Sounds like a another way to continue the trend of child-proofing the world, so that "everyone can learn at their own pace." Right. What these people are unable, or unwilling, to recognize is that the world meets nobody half-way. We either work hard at learning how to succeed and survive, or we fail hard.
"Unschooling" is just another way for lazy, stupid parents to coddle their children toward a lifetime of failure, mediocrity and narcissism. In 20 years, when these kids turn out to be useless tools who are unable to work for what they want or even support themselves, they will turn around and blame the government and you and me, for not doing enough to help them. (And no doubt they will do the complaining in a petulant, entitled tone that makes you want to punch them hard in the mouth.) Is this what we, as a society, want?
Yes, let's have more unschooling! Looks like a winning strategy to me.
You need a citation to prove that you need to pass certain criteria to get in? Go look at any college's admission requirements.
"But I seem remember..."
"I was bored out my mind..."
Yet you claim to be in the top percentile intelligence-wise.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
you have ever been forced to sit in a classroom where no learning was taking place
You mean like Obamas supposed back to school special next week?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
And here you lay out my point for me, without understanding the implications. Why do they lack the drive? Did the educational system contribute to their lack of drive? Could society benefit from a differing educational track for these individuals, whereby we all might benefit from their works, if their potential was realized?
That's neither falsification nor a proof. The fact that some people have excelled after institutionalized education has nothing to do with whether others would have excelled but for our institutionalized education system.
Apparently, logic and reason is not your strong point.
That "special snowflake" label is useless in your context, you completely mistake the point. There are, in fact, some special individuals. The "special snowflake" issue is one of too many people believing they fit into that category, and believing there is entitlement because of it. The truth is, there *are* people who should (for society's sake) be educated differently because of their gifts. The problem is convincing the parents of the normals that their kids do not meet the criteria.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
Granted, I am in the top 1 percentile intelligence-wise.
FWIW I'm the same level, but I wasn't bored.
From my own experience, I'm going to need you to either provide more detail or validate one or the other of your claims.
Did you not attend public school? Because if you did, you WERE bored for a good portion of the time, because they wouldn't let you alter the cirriculum. When I was in sixth grade Mr Woolsey sat me next to the encyclopedias to keep me out of trouble. Without that kind of intervention, I may have killed someone.
Spill it.
so your point is that traditional schooling does not affect the potential of an individual? Or that it can only increase their potential? I think that public school indoctrination limits the potential of many individuals who are brightest. Students who are socially and institutionally dissuaded from excelling, for example (Don't study so hard, let someone else win some awards, etc). Students who are actively dissuaded from accelerating their pace of study (no reading ahead in the textbook, etc).
I fail to appreciate your point because I feel it does not have merit. I've explained why (previously, and at length in this post).
You did not demolish it, as I pointed out in my last post. Care to address the means by which I tore down your "proof"? Or are you still going to stand by a "proof" that does not meet the test of logic?
And my point is that tossing in extra barriers to the cream rising to the top is a stupid idea. You do not promote greatness by throwing up roadblocks -- that inhibits greatness. While we're at it, why don't we make everyone live in a hovel and have to perform subsistence farming? Surely THAT would force the cream to rise to the top, right?
Please, before you continue down your illogical track, consider one concept that has continued to escape you: Is it possible that an institutionalized culture could inhibit the ability of some individuals to achieve greatness? If your answer is yes, then your argument is void. If your answer is no, then you've got, in my opinion, a sad and twisted understanding of what drives creative intelligence and excellence.
This has nothing to do with whether some people believe themselves to have greater potential than they actually do, which is a point you continue to harp on without recognizing that there are indeed people with great potential who we limit via poor educational institutions.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
The parent argued that this "dragging down" does not happen, what happens instead is that the smart kids just whine about not having their own wing. I also learned faster than my peers, and you know what? My parents bought me books when I ran out of stuff to read. I tried to tutor other kids. I even had good teachers who bought or gave me books as gifts because they knew I'd enjoy them. If a kid is that smart then they will find ways to be engaged.
Being a grade school superstar is bogus. In real life having the right answer is only 50% of solving a problem, the other 50% is selling your solution to everyone. You can easily make up for a deficiency in the former by being better at the latter. I can tell you for certain that it does not work in the other direction.
It could be engineering, it could be arts...your determination and power of persuasion are just as important or more important than your knowledge. I shined in school. Everything is a puzzle and if you solve the puzzle, the powers that be put you at the top of the heap. In real life you have to climb that heap yourself and I think that being good at school caused me to figure this out later than I would have otherwise. What if I had been catered to *more*? What if I'd skipped grades? What if my parents had the money to send me to Montessori school like they wanted? Well, what ifs are stupid but I doubt I'd be more successful. I'd be more spoiled and I'd have more boring friends.
I had enough growing up to spark my intellect. At some point you run up against your limitations anyway. I'm no Einstein; most of us aren't. The better skill to have is the determination to break through those limitations.
It doesn't matter what you say or what proofs you have. (Most) people who have been taught that memorizing multiplication tables are important are intellectually incapable of believing that what they thought was a True and absolute Religion could some how be wrong. You are preaching to the intellectually dull.