About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Page 7Page 8Page 9Forward one pageLast Page


Post 40

Thursday, May 5, 2005 - 8:11amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Becky,

You asked, "If at some point your child said she wanted to attend a school and made a case for it, would you support her decision?
Also, is her education your full-time job? Do you have help, like tutors or others who are experts in some academic area?"

It would depend on the school and on her age. If she wanted to go to Montessori, I'd probably discuss my ideas with her and then let her. There are some schools that I consider too dangerous for her mind and body, and I would not let a small child go there. At a certain age, though, I would let her make her own decision about it after explaining what I thought the dangers were. I don't really know what age that would be yet. If her reasons were mostly social (which I think they often are), I would find out if we could meet her social needs another way.

I am a stay at home mom now, but I have other things going on, and we will have other kids. I don't expect to devote myself to her education full time. If she expressed an interest in a subject I didn't know much about, have time to teach her, etc, I would look into mentors of some kind.

Kelly




Post 41

Thursday, May 5, 2005 - 8:32amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Besides, in this age of the internet, almost any subject can be learned online...

Post 42

Thursday, May 5, 2005 - 8:55amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
David Friedman has a discussion on this subject here.


Post 43

Thursday, May 5, 2005 - 11:33amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Mike,

Thanks for that David Friedman article recommendation. It was quite good. I especially liked this quote:

 My impression is that kids are
in fact passionately interested in things--what thing varying from kid to
kid and time to time. A few days ago my wife mentioned to our daughter the
existence of multiplication tables--and I gather she spent a good deal of
time during the rest of the day drawing them up.
Good stuff. That's how all kids are, I think, if left to their own interests.


Post 44

Thursday, May 5, 2005 - 12:02pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Mike said:
David Friedman has a discussion on this subject here.
For a different view, I suggest reading the response by Larry Sanger that follows Friedman's.
Thanks,
Glenn



Post 45

Thursday, May 5, 2005 - 12:34pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
That David Friedman thread was really interesting!  I find myself in Larry Sanger's camp, not surprisingly.  I loved a quote that someone posted in there, from Robert A. Heinlein: "Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human.  At best he is a tolerable subhuman who has learned to wear shoes, bathe, and not make messes in the house."  OK, maybe it's a little extreme, but it sure gave me a good chuckle!

I thought of a question that I think will neatly divide us into the two camps.  I am taking a real estate class, just for the heck of it.  We were reviewing "real estate math" (which is basically grade-school level stuff).  One problem had us calculate how many cubic yards of gravel were required to cover an area 10x15 feet to a depth of 4 inches.  I, and several of the other students, happily pitched in to solve the problem.  One woman in the class said, "I don't know how to do that problem, and I don't care to learn.  If I ever need to know the answer to something like that, I'll just pay someone else to figure that out for me."  The poll question is:  Is this woman (A) pathetic, or (B) perfectly rational in ignoring a subject that is not of interest to her.  Of course, I vote (A), but I can see that many on this thread would vote (B), and I can see your point, but still, JEEZ, any human should know how to solve a simple problem like that!


Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Post 46

Thursday, May 5, 2005 - 12:48pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Well, Laure, it's a matter of priorities, isn't it?  It's no more pathetic for her not to care about how to solve a certain math problem than it is for me not to care how to fix a pipe or how to change a timing belt in my car.  I do, however, know how to change a flat tire because it's easier for me to do that than to wait for somebody to show up and do it for me.  That's a personal decision.  And any knowledge I gain should be applicable to me and my life and my priorities.

And if a situation pops up that makes me realize I should've learned something simple like that math problem, I can slap bang find out.  That's the excellent thing about people writing books and publishing things on the internet - knowledge can be taken in as needed, instead of forcibly stuffed into one's brain when it's not relevant (and when it will probably be forgotten - how much have you forgotten completely because it's not relevant to you?).

As far as "any human should know how to solve a simple problem like that", can you say that objectively?  Is calculating cubic yards of survival value and, beyond that, does it somehow make you flourish as a human being (i.e., does it give you pleasure or provide a skill needed for your productive life)? 

I'm not saying that there is knowledge that's useless.  I'm saying it may be useless to her but of value to you, but that's your respective priorities.

Jason


Sanction: 28, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 28, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 28, No Sanction: 0
Post 47

Thursday, May 5, 2005 - 10:41pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I wonder if many of the 'unschoolers' have ever had a truly great, transforming teacher in a traditional classroom and have viscerally experienced how much difference such a charismatic person can make in a young child's or adolescent's life. There are many movies and stories that tell of this, from "To Sir With Love" to "Stand and Deliver". (And I can attest that it makes all the boredom worthwhile and unimportant.)

The nature of learning and the need for guidance changes once you get past the 'Montessori level' of the physical, tactile, self-exploratory "reach out and touch it" and once you get very high into the realm beyond the physical and immediate.

The reason a good teacher and mastery of a core curriculum -- English, Math, Science, History -- is vital (as is finding good schools, which DO EXIST) is that you can't just "snap bang" pick up all the stuff you didn't find interesting years ago. It is often hierarchical and slow to learn requiring many problems and can't be crammed into weeks but takes trial and error, step by step. Hierarchy refers not only to the way we store knowledge. It refers to the way we do and logically must -learn- it. You can't pick up algebra if you never mastered fractions, long division, certain aspects of logic, pre-algebra, etc. You can't learn to substitute letters for numbers in equations until you have thoroughly mastered -every single one- of the operations of arithmetic. Advanced or formal science won't make much sense unless you mastered general science in elementary or middle school. It will just be floating abstractions without concretes. Modern political issues in America about religion, race, gender won't fully make sense unless you have not just memorized but understand the Protestant Reformation, Reconstruction, etc.

There is no free lunch.

And there ain't no f**king shortcuts.

The only reason 'unschooler'parents or 'progressive education' intellectuals pooh-pooh or underestimate the process involved is they don't remember the fact they had to learn it in traditional schools. They don't remember the time and gradual brain-stretching over years that it took.

You need all four elements of the core curriculum. And they are both cumulative and interrelated.

You can't skip the Math in grade school or later because you need it to fully understand the Science. You can't skip the Science because you need it to assess what you might like to do, to understand a complex technological world, and you need the scientific method to learn how to think logically, without which -nothing else- is possible. You can't skip the English or let it slide for years at a time - including the grammar, the vocabulary, and the literature - because you can't think, communicate, understand yourself without them. You can't skip the History (and geography) because then you don't even recognize the planet you live in.

You won't be a good writer or a clear thinker in polished, well-honed English unless you know how to concretize, to give vivid examples, to make apt comparisons, choose metaphors, etc. And you won't know how to do that unless you have read great literature or great poets or skilled essayists. You won't be able to converse with well-educated people or write for an intellectual audience or persuade anyone with an education about Objectivism or your proposal for your local school or the direction of the country or your town unless you know something about our culture and western civilization other than Ayn Rand and can draw on its examples.

It's not just about whether kids are naturally lazy or naturally curious and try to seek out knowledge of value.

The reason you need a teacher to (gently, inspirationally) guide your children through this material is that it is too vast and the good stuff too hidden to think you will stumble on it via library search or internet googling. And you don't know what you don't know. Nor do you know when knowledge is floating or out of context or requires a base.

You'll never get a fraction of what you need in order to be well-rounded without guidance.

Nor can any one parent be as much of an expert, as can a professional who has taught world or American history or science or algebra over and over and has learned what works. (Do I need to mention again that I mean a GOOD professional.) Parents, themselves not always well-rounded Renaissance people, are just as likely to mis-guide the child as not.

And having read all of Ayn Rand, a touch of Mises, and a dab of Aristotle doesn't make you qualified to discuss the water cycle, organic chemistry, or to compare Chinese civilization with western. It is the height of hubris to think otherwise. Something, unfortunately, Objectivist and libertarians are seldom short of.

And being well-rounded -is- vital to being as successful, and even as intelligent as you can be. (Genius and intelligence grow out of vast knowledge.) While there may be exceptions to this, people who need to do nothing but pursue one thing for a lifetime or huge sections of one, they are the exception not the norm.

Once you've had a good, well-rounded 'classical' liberal arts education you can look back and see how many decades it took to acquire it and how much power and satisfaction and perspective it gives you in everything you do, in the level of pleasures you can have, far beyond the television set or the technician who wouldn't know Tennyson from a tsetse fly. (sorry about the triple alliteration.)

Don't let yourself remain a philistine, if you are or refrain from giving your children the guidance that will let them remain narrow specialists who, if they are 'creative' types, don't deeply and thoroughly understand science and the vast new world it has created and, if they are 'technical' types(or professional or businessmen, don't fully and thoroughly know who Freud and Herodotus and Constantine and Stowe were or what implications Thermopylae had for western civilization and for us today.

--Philip Coates

(PS, and don't get me started on why Latin in middle school is brain-expanding and helps triple your vocabulary, or the importance of a foreign language, or art and music and organized sports in school.)

Post 48

Thursday, May 5, 2005 - 11:01pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks Philip! I was beginning to think I was the only one here who liked school and the only one who ever had a truly great teacher! (Many in fact!) I also always felt very in charge of my own education even in a real school: being away from my parents and being responsible for my grades... and playing basketball for the school team... and being in the orchestra... and meeting all of my wonderful band nerd friends (for life)... and learning to take responsibility: just a signature at first in elementary school, and then later for huge research products... well, you know it all. I wasn't saying anything on this thread because I thought I might have been crazy. I do think that Philip is right that kids need formal schooling from great intellectual adults in many disciplines... so that they can be complete human beings. I have great respect for any parent that thinks they can measure up to the 30 or so teachers that a student might have over his or her life span. I just couldn't do it all for my child... not in the way that an amazing teacher could. Especially not in mathematics. *God*, I hate math. ;o)

But great response, Philip! (Perhaps I'm biased as well, because I have always wanted to open my own private school... that's sort of what I am working towards in school here. ;o)

~NT


Post 49

Thursday, May 5, 2005 - 11:13pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"I have always wanted to open my own private school... that's sort of what I am working towards in school here. ;o)"

Me too! Well, we'll have to talk once I find my spare billion dollars to start a chain of private schools in several countries. Let's see...I think it's in my other pants.

I've been enjoying your posts, Nicole, and your great grinning photograph: It reminds me that I have to have one taken where I actually crack a smile instead of looking like I'm planning a nefarious Enron conspiracy.

Post 50

Thursday, May 5, 2005 - 11:20pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
<burst of applause and standing O for Phil and post #47.>

Post 51

Thursday, May 5, 2005 - 11:25pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
*joining in the standing O!*

But seriously, when you find that other pair of pants, let me know! I'm opening up that school, mark my words.

Also, thanks for the compliment on my picture... it was one of those nights that you just have to smile like that. :o)

And keep planning that conspiracy... no one's going to suspect your mild-mannered outer disguise...

:o)

NT


Sanction: 21, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 21, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 21, No Sanction: 0
Post 52

Thursday, May 5, 2005 - 11:41pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
"no one's going to suspect your mild-mannered outer disguise..."

And who disguised as Phil Coates

Mild-mannered Educator for a great Aristotelian Philosophy

Fights a Never-Ending Battle for Truth, Justice, and Classical Liberal Arts Education

Faster than a Speeding Syllogism

More Powerful than a Logarithm

Able to Leap entire Historical Eras in a single Bound

Look!

Up in the Sky...




Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 9, No Sanction: 0
Post 53

Friday, May 6, 2005 - 12:07amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Kelly,
[Me]: "It all depends on who is doing the teaching/guidance."

[You]: This misses my point. I don't think anyone ought to be doing any teaching or educational guidance. ["Me" and "You" added.]
I want to clarify this a little. I was not clear, I suppose, on the word guidance because of the traditional connotation it has with guidance counselors, etc. I wasn't talking about that.

If you intend to leave a lot of educational material around for your child and procure information the child shows interest in and just be there, there is no way a child will not look up to an adult for answers when they are needed. That is the meaning of guidance I meant.

Is it possible to execute that role poorly as well as brilliantly? Of course it is. The same with school teaching.

I have no issues with your approach. If you are there brilliantly for your child (or some adult is), inducing love of learning and turning a question on a subject into an exciting journey into the area that was asked about, I see it coming off extremely successfully. I have serious doubts about it, though, if this adult role is performed poorly or without any interest shown in the child at all.

Just like with normal school.

Good luck to you. I for one am rooting for this to be a resounding success for you and your children.

Michael



Post 54

Friday, May 6, 2005 - 9:25amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Great post, #47, Philip!  Had to hit the little green checkmark on that one!

Post 55

Friday, May 6, 2005 - 9:37amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Philip,
I am unabashedly pleased to be able to agree with every word of your post.
This, definitely, should be expanded into an article and published as widely as possible.

Bravo.

Jeff


Post 56

Friday, May 6, 2005 - 9:39amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Bravo, Phil!

How I wish I could send my son to your school! Your post embodied the spirit, the wisdom, and passion that I've known for great educators, which I myself is not. But I have always revered the profession of teacher as the most noble of all. It's perhaps a Chinese sentiment, or perhaps comes from both of my parents.

And keep up that look of planning  "nefarious Enron conspiracy". I love it!

Best,

Hong

P.S. Very sad though thinking about that most of you've said should have been so obvious...


Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 57

Friday, May 6, 2005 - 12:18pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
My brother and his wife are unschooling both my nieces, and almost all the research I have done on this method excites me. Both girls are articulate, confident, connected, joyful and have an unusual amount of curiousity and confidence in their own ability to obtain answers for themselves.  Their parents take extraordinary effort to answer their questions in ways that make sense.  The difference between them and their children peers?  A remarkable lack of fear or pain or guilt.

Hooray, Kelly!  I think there should be unschooling for grown-ups.

Julia


Sanction: 13, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 13, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 13, No Sanction: 0
Post 58

Friday, May 6, 2005 - 2:15pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Julia, you didn't mention how old the nieces are: As I mentioned, I think up until well past the Montessori age, letting kids totally follow their natural curiosity may make perfect sense.

Unschooling, homeschooling, and formal schooling are contextual to some extent. But I think it's a mistake to confuse enjoyment with long-run acquiring of skills...and I gave my reasons in depth [#47]. Those long-range consequences trump the short-term attitudes you mention seeing. (And I agree with you it's great to see those things in children!)

The mistake many permissive parents make is out of benevolence. They so much don't want a shadow to ever cross their childrens' face, to protect them from any trace of pain or fear or guilt, and don't want to be the 'bad guy', or to "turn them off" on something they may enjoy someday that they indulge whatever they want to do, even if it's, for example, ten years of video games and no writing or grammar skills.

Kids are attracted first and for many years to the loud, visual, moving, tactile, immediate. Which is natural and healthy till a certain age. But they can stay at that perceptual stage or only be interested in one topic or thing. You see can people who never grew all around you. Having to learn grammar, for example, or basic facts about American history or society may not -ever- be appealing. But one needs both.

For example, I've seldom met anyone who, if it were purely his own choice, would have chosen to master grammar in detail (and very few who think they need to.) But you can't link concepts together properly without it and you need it to think clearly about whatever it is that you ARE interested in. Else you become the conceptual equivalent of a modern art finger painter.

But so many I see around me in super-educationally permissive California grow up happy, smiling, confident... their parents will not push them on anything - from readin, to homework to particular subjects if they simply say theya re bored. And they seem to be the happiest, most dazzling joyful kids.

And they are. Until sometime in adolescence they fall behind. They find that they are not in possession of the skills they didn't feel attracted by learning early in life (and it's logical that they wouldn't since those skills, drills, and memorization are *not* shiny, attractive, or fun). They suddenly want to be a scientist, a veterinarian, a pilot but they can't yet because they'd have to go back and do remedial or preliminary work. Or they want to be a writer or philsophere but have never mastered an incredibly long list of language skills. And have never developed the ability to grit your teeth and master boring stuff that it would require to catch up, to go back and build the fundamentals.

They needed to have mastered much or most of the long list of areas I posted originally.

I was fortunate that I had an old-fashioned mother who "pushed" me a little bit. I wasn't a happy, smiling kid for a while....until I began to realize that what she nudged me toward, or guided me toward, made me smart and knowledgeable. And well-rounded.

The things that make us happy and are attractive or pleasurable at one point in life may not be the best for the long run, whether it be a diet of candy or picture books or computer games or only wanting to learn gardening through life.

Take very seriously the people on this list who say they were angry, rebellious, resistant to being pushed...and not happy campers early on, but very happy and respectful toward their hard-nosed parents later on!

The great fallacy in unschooling or progressive education is that kids without yet having developed all the tools and knowledge to make adult judgments will either: (i) be attracted to what they will need to learn later in life, or (ii) if not, be able to double back and learn years worth of material they need very quickly if they have skipped core knowledge and core thinking, reading, logic, calculating skills that they need just to be able to understand the material they want to double back and learn.

Phil

PS, "I think there should be unschooling for grown-ups." There should be, once one has learned the basics.

Post 59

Friday, May 6, 2005 - 2:45pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
[Julia] "Their parents take extraordinary effort to answer their questions in ways that make sense."
[Kelly] "We fill the house with interesting, age-appropriate books, activities, and materials...If she asks us a question or shows interest in an activity, we answer or participate or point her in the direction of more information."

I neglected to say that these things make the unschooling much better. They are a degree or form of guidance and support (just not enough for the entire K-12 period).

The K-12 curriculum I have been writing COMBINES independent study or pursuit of interests with formal courses in a way that uses the advantages of both.
(Edited by Philip Coates
on 5/06, 2:50pm)


Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5Page 6Page 7Page 8Page 9Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.