Friday, March 7, 2008
Homeschooling ruling in CA
Interesting ruling in California but troubling for all kinds of reasons. If this is legitimate, where have they been for the last fifty years? If it's just a matter of retaliation or seeking school tax moneys, why didn't they approach the ruling more publicly and with community discussions? Seems especially odd given that it's in California, the epicenter of personal freedom. I hope that perhaps one of my homeschooling blog friends will add a note of rationality and explanation.

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 1 comment(s) | posted by jau at 12:50 PM

Friday, July 13, 2007
Say it ain't so
Laura who muses reports on an Australian news service article that says Winston Churchill is being dropped from basic history courses about World War II for ages 11-14 in the U.K. The news item says that "traditionalists" will be "aghast" but, to me, it's appalling to read that "Adolf Hitler, Mahatma Gandhi, Joseph Stalin and Martin Luther King have also been dropped from the detailed guidance accompanying the curriculum." Please tell me how one learns about the twentieth century without these figures??

A few years ago I read an article in my local (fairly small town) newspaper about D-Day that included the phrase "Adolf Hitler, Chancellor of Germany during World War II." I remember thinking that was absolutely absurd. I went around for several days saying things like "Adolf Hitler? Would that be the dry cleaner or the ice cream truck driver or the programmer or the Chancellor of Germany" and cracking myself up because of course one needn't explain who HE is. Shows what I know, apparently. I guess the world should expect a whole generation, soon, who don't know fundamental facts. So what IS taught about the twentieth century if it doesn't include major figures? It happened. That's that. Quick and easy.

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 3 comment(s) | posted by jau at 11:40 AM

Friday, May 25, 2007
What about headstart?
Sometimes I have delayed reactions. This is one of them. Hillary recently said that she thought all children should attend preschool or day care because of the richness of experience and interaction and education that are provided there. This has been rolling around in the middle area of my consciousness because something bothered me but I wasn't sure what. I'll give her points for putting preschool and preparedness into the discussion, but I get stuck after that. I'm not a hundred percent sure all children should be in day care, for one thing. Is it "day care" as long as there are one or two other children there too? Well, I'm not sure that daily interaction with other kids is all she meant nor all that matters. And if there has to be some teaching or structure, then what about Project Headstart and why didn't she mention it and explain any differences? Isn't Headstart exactly what she's talking about? Are there problems getting all children into it? If so, then why not fix those rather than dream up another government project when one already exists that's earned almost unanimous praise? Am I missing something?

Labels: ,

Permalink | 2 comment(s) | posted by jau at 11:53 AM

Sunday, January 7, 2007
children learning
There are so many people writing wonderful blogs about schooling (home and otherwise) but I wonder how people influence their children to become excited about learning and curious about the world. I grew up in a family where curiosity and intellectual expression were rewarded the way saying "please" and "thank you" are rewarded in most families. Learning and good grades were so expected that it wouldn't have occurred to any of us that there were other choices. Keep in mind that we grew up before television was omnipresent and obviously way before the internet. (Yes, it was the 17th century - the cat's out of the bag.) Now that I and my friends are beginning to have grandchildren in this time with so many other influences than ourselves, I am seeing the impact of many other elements and influences on not only what a child learns and experiences, but also (and perhaps more importantly) how a child is prepared to learn and experience. Not unlike gardening, a child needs good soil and good mulch as well as seeds and food. So I'm wondering whether any Rare Readers have thought about this and, if so, whether you have ideas about enriching children's soil and mulch. (And apologies for the slightly clumsy analogy, it's just that it's so perfectly apt.)

Labels: ,

Permalink | 1 comment(s) | posted by jau at 3:06 PM

motivation
What motivates you to do things? I've been reflecting on that this morning because I have dilly-dallied so long with my French reading that I have almost 80 pages (loose-leaf size) to read and understand, and a report on the last 20 to write before Wednesday. I chose to be in this group so it's not as if it's school that's forcing me and I'll fail some huge test or anything, but it is a little like exercise: if you let it go because you just don't feel like doing it, you're in for doing tons more just to catch up. Oo la la, quelle stupide.

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted by jau at 12:54 PM

Thursday, November 16, 2006
majoring
Laura muses today about a Florida school program that's requiring 8th graders to select a "major" and a "career". As am I, she is disturbed by this. It's one thing if a child is naturally driven and focused on something (Hemingway and writing, for example) but altogether another if our choices are narrowed and restricted externally. Most people are going to spend at least five decades, maybe as many as eight, at work and in careers, and I'm not sure that there's a prayer of choosing well without knowing oneself thoroughly. I know we live in the age of self esteem but that's not necessarily the same thing as self awareness. Almost every adult I know would major and minor in different subjects than they did in college. Many would want different jobs and pursue different careers. I'm guessing no one's mentioning anthropologist or aesthetician (the philosophical kind, not the day spa kind) to these eighth graders. Or textile designer or ice cream flavor tester. Or any of the many many possibilities there are. Plus, despite how mature we think we are when we're kids, we're not, and very few of us are encouraged to develop and recognize the quirks and enthusiasms that make us who we are - and give us a chance to be reasonably happy people. I'd love it if we could institutionalize going to college at 30 for people who want to after they've had some experience at figuring out their actual dislikes and passions, not the ones they thought they ought to have when their parents and teachers talked about it. In fact, far from it being a good idea to narrow things down in 8th grade, choices and possibilities should be expanded and widened much much further, don't you think?

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted by jau at 3:19 PM

Wednesday, August 9, 2006
joyeux anniversaire
Today is the 110th birthday of Jean Piaget, a Swiss philosopher/educator who studied and wrote about the development of intelligence and understanding in children. I am particularly fond of his description of the fact that before two, a child simply cannot judge whether a tall thin cup and a short wide cup hold the same amount of liquid. Reading some of his studies and work is both enjoyable and fascinating. Basically, he divided cognitive development into four stages:
-birth to 2, during which children learn and experience through their senses and movement
-2 to 6/7, during which they acquire motor skills
-6/7 to 10-12, during which they begin to think logically about concrete events, and
-10-12 onwards, during which they develop abstract reasoning
Obviously there are variations depending on a child and his/her teaching, but it's fascinating that it's not just how we learn but the fact that there is a physical component, and therefore we (a) simply cannot learn some things at one time or another, and (b) can learn some other things optimally when ways of processing and understanding are at their peaks.

Anyway, there's a Piaget Society and lots of books, not to mention many references and discussions on the internet.

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 2 comment(s) | posted by jau at 12:24 PM

Tuesday, July 11, 2006
homeschooling redux
There's been an interesting thread at Spunky, begun by a question (John's) and carried forward by 54 commenters as of this writing. Some comments have been rude (how unusual for blog commenters - not), some have been informative. What I realized midway through reading them is that homeschoolers make some fundamental assumptions, some of which I share and agree with and some I'm not so sure about:
1. "Brainwashing" is a term loosely used to mean inculcating children with the viewpoints and/or ideologies of those who instruct. Private and public schools have their own sets of viewpoints and ideologies so they are also "brainwashing" children. In a sense, then, one of the decisions involved in where one educates children is which brainwashing one disagrees with least. (I pretty much agree with this. Every school and every teacher comes with a set of predispositions and values. Sometimes these are religious, sometimes political, sometimes cultural. It would be nice to think that children could be taught those things that are factual, as facts, and those that are evaluative, as opinions. But it's not gonna happen, I think. Besides, one man's ceiling fact may be another man's floor opinion.)
2. Parents are ideal teachers of their children because they (a) know their children and (b) are knowledgeable enough to teach because they were taught, once, themselves. (I have to say "huh?" about this one. It's one thing to know someting and quite another to teach it, let alone teach it well. There's an adage that parents should never teach their own children to drive, right? Not because parents don't know how to drive but because children usually learn best from someone who has no emotional interest or investment in the outcome. Which I would think also applies to academic subjects.)
More to come but must do some other things for a while. Meantime, would love to know readers' thoughts.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted by jau at 12:13 PM

Monday, May 22, 2006
great classes
I spent almost the whole weekend in knitting classes taught by Judy Pascale. I signed up last week for the first one (sizing and fitting). On Saturday morning, after about two minutes, I'd already learned several different and interesting techniques so I signed up for the afternoon class on armhole sizing and fitting. And learned a lot and enjoyed it. Then, I debated whether to take the Sunday beading class - wanting a day to myself and for errands. But my friend pointed out that it's awfully rare to have someone teach who actually has things to impart and in an interesting and fun way. So I went back today for four hours of beading and fun! Judy has an unusual way of putting in the beads and you don't need the eyesight of a 10-year-old nor the patience of a saint to string millions of beads ahead of time and then fray the wool as you push off the ones you won't use as you go along. Her way is to do it on the fly. And it works!! Plus, her designs for scarves and bags are charming. As a teacher, she sets goals as well as challenges and I really did learn several tricks and tools that I will use a lot. (The ones about the cable cast on are great!) I'm most grateful and very excited to get going on new and improved projects now.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted by jau at 1:27 AM

Sunday, May 14, 2006
mocking freedom
Terrific post by the redoubtable John Weidner on the ridiculous resignation at Boston College due to Secretary Rice's speaking at commencement. There are three very important points to make about this:
1. The resignation absolutely mocks free speech by suggesting that only what certain people think should be given a forum such as commencement at a major university.

2. A university is "an institution of higher learning" and as such is supposed to be a forum for exchanging ideas as well as learning to think and speak intelligently. Denying students and anyone else who might be in the audience a chance to hear the U.S. Secretary of State would deprive them of an unusual opportunity to hear such a powerful person, in person, and then to apply their own critical thinking to what they have heard.

3. "Lyle" commented to the post and I'm including his comments here because I would have liked to say these things just like this because when one thinks about all these things carefully and logically, it turns out that the conclusions many have drawn might best be reconsidered:
"There is something bizarrely immature about the insistence that Bush Lied, Cheney Lied, Rice Lied, et cetera. [This] presumes daddy-like omniscience on the part of the administration. Even if Bush administration statements on WMD and al Qaeda were wrong, they were based on assessments made by the world's intelligence agencies. Critics evidently believe that US officials have supernatural access to the truth, beyond anything the CIA or NSA can provide. Making an educated but mistaken guess in an environment of uncertainty is not lying. Believing flawed intelligence is not lying. No rational human should need to have this explained to them.... Worse, now that captured Iraqi documents vindicate suspicions about Saddam's WMDs and ties to al Qaeda, Bush critics are unable to absorb the new information. Ironically, it turns out that they themselves have been relying upon incomplete data and bad analysis. By their own definition, they are now liars.
Technorati tags: , ,

Labels: , ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted by jau at 9:32 AM

Tuesday, May 2, 2006
homeschooling: microscope contest
A very cool contest is taking place on one of the interesting schooling blogs:
Spunky is giving away a Benz Microscope and Apologia Biology Set this week. Click here to get the details.
I highly recommend Spunky just for reading, anyway, but this makes a visit next to mandatory although words like "mandatory" are probably being expunged from educational dictionaries everywhere. (Two others very worth perusing are Why Homeschool and Homeschool Alumni.) Spunky's enthusiasm about learning is so infectious that, after reading her for a while, I often find myself wondering where I could find someone who would let me teach.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted by jau at 4:25 PM

Tuesday, April 4, 2006
montessori
When Montessori advocates use the word "obedience", what do they mean? It seems jarring and odd in the midst of discussions about learning to be oneself, discovery of all things brilliant and exciting in the world, etc.
Technorati tags: ,

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted by jau at 9:31 AM

Thursday, March 30, 2006
schooling: un- or home-
Could/would someone explain to me what the difference is between unschooling and letting a kid do whatever he or she wants? There was a brief report on the news about unschooling the other night, and a friend of mine has been talking about it in relation to her daughter, but I'm confused. I get that both homeschooling and unschooling are focused on keeping a kid's psyche as clear as possible of [what they perceive as] the mistakes (at minimum) or dangers (most likely) and/or horrors (in some cases) of classroom schooling. And that homeschooling puts students in a non-classroom and less didactic setting. But does unschooling mainly disband the entire process without putting much in its place? Or am I misunderstanding? I'm concerned about where education comes in. What if a student has absolutely no interest in math or literature? Or refuses to write the essay you request on the scientific principle. Or has no interest in learning the history or geography of anything. Wouldn't it be really easy for an unschooled person to grow up to be . . . uh, wait, I'm searching for the right word . . . um, I've almost got it . . . er . . . aha! . . . uneducated?

Seriously, I really am curious, if skeptical, and I want to undertand unschooling better, especially since some smart and good people are so enthusiastic about it.

Update - Many thanks to Mom of All Seasons for her time in writing a helpful, long explication (in comments). I have to digest and think about what she wrote. Would love to hear others' thoughts on all this.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 2 comment(s) | posted by jau at 3:49 PM

Wednesday, March 8, 2006
sheesh
Apparently "Baa Baa Black Sheep" has been rewritten in some British schools, reported by the ever so reliable London Times. (HT: Joanne Jacobs) The word "black" has been removed so as not to cause offense. They replaced "black" with "rainbow" which upsets me from the point of view that the two words don't scan even remotely alike. Oh, and Humpty Dumpty is being given a new ending lest anyone get upset at his eggshell's demise. Has anyone read the Brothers Grimm lately? Talk about doomed, if this is what's happening to the sheep and the egg. Besides, it's puzzling about the sheep thing since some sheep actually are black (are sheep racist?) and in the rhyme they're simply asked if they have any wool and they respond that they do - for their master, their master's dame and for a little boy who lives down the lane. But wait: do all three live down the lane together or do they live separately? Is the master's "dame" his woman, a euphomism for something less proper? Could the little boy be their illegitimate offspring? Oh dear, oh dear. Perhaps it would be best to ban the rhyme altogether.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted by jau at 10:18 AM

Sunday, January 8, 2006
a new skill
Wednesday I'll begin an 8-week weaving class. People are always telling me that if I had lower expectations I would rarely feel disappointed but it's hard to be anything except thrilled and excited about the idea of being able to make a piece of fabric (blanket, scarf, wall-hanging . . . ).

Technorati tags: , ,

Labels: ,

Permalink | 0 comment(s) | posted by jau at 4:22 PM

Monday, August 22, 2005
Mother questions
Some questions to which I truly would like answers (read all - don't assume you know where I'm going).
— Does the context of a child's death change (minimize or enlarge) its tragedy for his or her parents?
— After his first tour of duty, Casey Sheehan chose to re-enlist. It is logical to assume he knew that he might be killed by returning to fight in Iraq.
— Natalee Holloway chose to take a senior class trip to Aruba to party hearty. Is it logical to assume that taking a silly trip will result in being kidnapped or killed?
— Does the seriousness of Casey Sheehan's choice elevate his death above Natalee Holloway's?
— Does the frivolity of Natalee Holloway's choice diminish her death and make it less horrifying?
— Does either mother deserve our respect and attention more or less than the other?
— Does the sober context of Sheehan's death validate his mother's thoughts and words and make her more profound or meritorious?
— Does the party context of Holloway's death invalidate her mother's thoughts and words and make her less reflective or meritorious?
— Many people listen to Mrs Sheehan's comments as if they are pearls of wisdom even when she contradicts her own written statements; why?
— Many have praised Bob Costas for refusing to anchor a show that would spend time talking with Mrs Twitty about her daughter's disappearance in Aruba; why?
— Do Cindy Sheehan and Beth Twitty both deserve our respect and sympathy?
— Should we react differently to either death?
— Is either mother's loss greater, or more tragic, than the other's?
— Does a mother's sorrow and grief automatically endow her with wisdom of thought and speech?
Update. Related post and comments at The Fly Bottle.

Labels: ,

Permalink | 6 comment(s) | posted by jau at 5:52 PM