Is Unschooling Beneficial or Harmful for Child Development?

[waht]

The Biegler children live as though school doesn't exist.
Hands-off approach to education allows kids to make their own decisions.

They're at home all day, but they're not being homeschooled. They're being "unschooled." There are no textbooks, no tests and no formal education at all in their world.

What's more, that hands-off approach extends to other areas of the children's lives: They make their own decisions, and don't have chores or rules.

Is this a good or bad thing?

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Parenting/unschooling-homeschooling-book-tests-classes/story?id=10410867

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEUzsooa1JE

 

[MotoH]

Oh wow. Now we will have more stupid kids. Go America.

 

[Evo]

Reporter: Do you feel prepared to go to college?

girl: "Ugh, If I decide to go to college, then I'll pick up a textbook." Ok, but when you're 19 and the the only "text book" you can master is "Run spot run, run, run, run", you might be a tad behind.

 

[Jack21222]

I think a far better method of "unschooling" is the Sudbury Valley method.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudbury_Valley_School

This way, the kids are actually at a school, and there are teachers around for tutoring, or to hold a class if a group of kids want to get together and form one. For what it's worth, it is fully accredited to award diplomas.

The kids that want to go to college have something like an 80% acceptance rate at the school of their first choice, according to a study done by Sudbury Valley School of its alumni. Consider the source, of course.

 

[rootX]

Chaotic and unsustainable!

 

[Borg]

Wow, tragic. I guess the parents won't mind when the kids never move out. After all, they probably won't be interested in working either. If they do work, I hope they like saying "You want fries with that?".

 

[MotoH]

Wow, tragic. I guess the parents won't mind when the kids never move out. After all, they probably won't be interested in working either. If they do work, I hope they like saying "You want fries with that?".

I think it is a requirement now that you have to have a high school degree to work at Mcdonalds, or at least be in high school.

 

[Evo]

It's just so stupid, for most of history an edcuation was the privilege of the wealthy. Women were denied formal educations as were the poor. And now we have people that willingly decide to remain uneducated. So many people fought for so long for the opportunity to get an education and these people throw it away.

 

[Jack21222]

It's just so stupid, for most of history an edcuation was the privilege of the wealthy. Women were denied formal educations as were the poor. And now we have people that willingly decide to remain uneducated. So many people fought for so long for the opportunity to get an education and these people throw it away.

If done correctly, "unschooling" does not lead to being "uneducated." I'm not saying these parents are doing it correctly, however.

 

[Nabeshin]

It's just so stupid, for most of history an edcuation was the privilege of the wealthy. Women were denied formal educations as were the poor. And now we have people that willingly decide to remain uneducated. So many people fought for so long for the opportunity to get an education and these people throw it away.

Sounds like pretty spot-on America to me.

 

[leroyjenkens]

That's probably the worst idea I've ever heard in my life.
It sounds like an idea thought up by a 12 year old.

And if I heard them right, it sounded like the parents of those little kids let the kids decide what they want to eat and when they need to brush their teeth, in addition to not making them go to school. That's dooming them to become fat, toothless, stupid, poor people. These people are dummies.

 

[Q_Goest]

I have to believe there are studies done on "no-schoolers" that show just how f***ed up the whole concept is.

 

[Evo]

It's one thing to give a child a choice, it's another to, in essence, not give them one. The older male child said that his parents pulled him out of school in the 1st grade, age 6-7. Seriously, ask any 6 year old "would you rather get up and go to school or lay in bed, watch tv, and eat junk food all day?" What do you think the answer would be?

 

[DavidSnider]

I was 'unschooled' as a kid. It doesn't mean 'uneducated'. It's more like custom tailoring a curriculum guided by your own interests. It worked fairly well for me, but I knew exactly what I wanted to do when I was older.

Slackers will slack whether they are 'unschooled' or not. Learning is up to the individual.

 

[DavidSnider]

That said, it is extremely alienating. The sort of vitriol you see in these posts is pretty much the reaction I got from everybody I knew growing up.

 

[Jack21222]

I have to believe there are studies done on "no-schoolers" that show just how f***ed up the whole concept is.

When the studies are done in the context of a Sudbury Valley-style school, which is still technically "unschooling," the studies show the opposite of what you think. At least the ones I've seen. I haven't seen the studies for children "unschooled" at home.

I do find it interesting that the members of a science board are jumping to conclusions without examining evidence.

 

[rootX]

When the studies are done in the context of a Sudbury Valley-style school, which is still technically "unschooling," the studies show the opposite of what you think. At least the ones I've seen. I haven't seen the studies for children "unschooled" at home.

I do find it interesting that the members of a science board are jumping to conclusions without examining evidence.

Studies that are done by Sudbury Valley-style school as you said earlier

 

[Evo]

When the studies are done in the context of a Sudbury Valley-style school, which is still technically "unschooling," the studies show the opposite of what you think. At least the ones I've seen. I haven't seen the studies for children "unschooled" at home.

I do find it interesting that the members of a science board are jumping to conclusions without examining evidence.

I've always said that Sudbury is stupid, but at least the kids are exposed to some type of learning. maybe. None of them have ever been heard of again.

Not much to examine, no education is, well, no education. What's to ponder about?

 

[Desiree]

Now we will have more stupid kids

"Not-educated" is not equal to being "stupid".

 

[Jack21222]

I've always said that Sudbury is stupid, but at least the kids are exposed to some type of learning. maybe. None of them have ever been heard of again.

Not much to examine, no education is, well, no education. What's to ponder about?

A high school diploma is "no education?"

 

[Evo]

A high school diploma is "no education?"

If there is no education behind it, which is what they essentially claim.

 

[Jack21222]

If there is no education behind it, which is what they essentially claim.

I think we are using different definitions of the word "education."

 

[Q_Goest]

The Sudbury Valley school isn't what the video shown in the OP is about. The video shows kids doing absolutely nothing to learn anything. Perhaps that was done purposely by ABC to sensationalize this particular situation, but it doesn't look like the parents of the kids have tried anything to teach their children.

My sister home schooled her 2 kids most of the way through grade school. That home schooling was monitored by the state, and they both went on to college and have done exceptionally well. But the video doesn't show any kind of home schooling either. Not Sudbury Valley. Not home school. In the video, it looks like the parents are wearing blinders, just hoping that by doing nothing their kids will somehow figure out by themselves what they need to do to cope with the modern world.

 

[DavidSnider]

Unschoolers use the word education like most people use the word indoctrination.

This movement is pretty much inspired by a guy named John Taylor Gatto and his book "The Underground History of American Education".

http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/

 

[Desiree]

It's just so stupid, for most of history an edcuation was the privilege of the wealthy. Women were denied formal educations as were the poor. And now we have people that willingly decide to remain uneducated. So many people fought for so long for the opportunity to get an education and these people throw it away.

Well, maybe it's time to make new history by not believing in the "education is a must" thing any longer. In my opinion, one needs to be literate, not necessarily be a college/high school graduate. There are a lot of jobs which actually don't need formal education. For instance, check out all your home appliances' tags, clothes, jeans... most if not all are "Made in China". The average workers who are making all these for us for less than $1/day don't need to go to college or to high school to be able to make these. And please don't tell me, had these poor uneducated people got formal education, they would not have to work on the factory floors or in the sweatshops for such low wages, then who would do such jobs?

I do however believe that in the years to come, ONLY a small percentage of us need to get formal college education, the rest of the population could effectively perform/do things that don't need knowledge of calculus or solving integrals! "formal-education-for-all" is not what we think is necessary in the future and frankly most of the pioneers of science actually discovered things out of their own curiosity while they had little or no formal education at all.

 

[Jack21222]

The Sudbury Valley school isn't what the video shown in the OP is about. The video shows kids doing absolutely nothing to learn anything. Perhaps that was done purposely by ABC to sensationalize this particular situation, but it doesn't look like the parents of the kids have tried anything to teach their children

While that's true, the term "unschooling" has been applied to the Sudbury Valley method as well as people that just keep their kids home. I maintain that if done right, "unschooling" is perfectly acceptable. The problem is it's hard to do it right, and I'm not so sure just keeping the kid home will be the right kind of environment to foster learning.

 

[MotoH]

It is called being lazy. The parents are lazy and irresponsible. They are lazy by not doing anything for their kids education, and irresponsible because they don't even care if their kids are getting an education.
You can't play sword fight in your yard all day and learn anything valuable.

 

[cronxeh]

Perhaps it is for the best. Most blue collar jobs you can learn how to do on the job, and you don't need a high school education or college one for that matter to do your job exceptionally well. If anything, modern education will teach you about war, religion, hatred, social inequality, and injustice. How many can honestly say that in a difficult situation you did not fall back on what was done historically in a particular case, found comfort in the conventional solutions to the problems? You sleep better at night if you do something that everybody does, whether good or bad, even if you don't always agree with it.

What does high school teach you anyway? There is english and literature, history, mathematics, sciences, computers. It does not teach you how to be a better person. If anything, high schoolers are more violent, sexually promiscuous, substance abusive teenagers. Some try to fall through the cracks and eventually get out of the jungle and go to college.

 

[Evo]

I maintain that if done right, "unschooling" is perfectly acceptable. The problem is it's hard to do it right, and I'm not so sure just keeping the kid home will be the right kind of environment to foster learning.

There is no education, at all, as opposed to "home schooling" which in many cases far exceeds formal classroom education. These kids don't seem to be learning anything that will allow them to survive on their own after their parents die.

If a person is going to be a manual laborer, sure they only need to learn how to do a job. I'd be happy living on a farm, but I also have a desire to learn, even if it's only to gain knowledge for my personal pleasure.

Those kids interviewed seemed rather dim and without passion for anything. Sad.

I am just as opposed to the other extreme where kids are forced to be perfect by over bearing parents. But from what these parents presented in the interview, unless it's on tv, their children don't even know it exists.

Have these parents made any attempt to expose their children to the wonders that are out there? Museums, planetariums, books? How can a child make a decision if they have nothing to choose from? Truly mind boggling.

 

[DavidSnider]

It is called being lazy. The parents are lazy and irresponsible. They are lazy by not doing anything for their kids education, and irresponsible because they don't even care if their kids are getting an education.
You can't play sword fight in your yard all day and learn anything valuable.

Slacking in public school is just as easy. How many people look back on K-12 and remember it as a time of great productivity?

 

[DavidSnider]

Have these parents made any attempt to expose their children to the wonders that are out there? Museums, planetariums, books? How can a child make a decision if they have nothing to choose from? Truly mind boggling.

The flip side with public school is they give you such a homogenized breadth-first education where everything just turns to a bowl of mush. If you want to explore deeper, you have to do it on your own, because the teacher has to accommodate to the lowest common denominator.

 

[turbo]

My good friend's kids (he was head of the Philosophy Dept at UMO) attended Skitikuk, a private school that personalized the curriculum to the students, and did not bin them by ages. It was the polar opposite of "unschooling". The high teacher-student ratio made sure that every kid got challenged. Interested in art, botany, math? That school educated kids at their own speed and ability-level. My neighbor (Broadway producer specializing in lighting, who was only around Friday-Sunday) sent his kids there as well. It probably wasn't cheap, but the kids came out well-rounded and advanced beyond their years.

 

[skeptic2]

Sounds like it may be similar to Summerhill.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summerhill_School

 

[Jack21222]

Those kids interviewed seemed rather dim and without passion for anything. Sad.

I'm willing to bet they'd be rather dim and without passion for anything even in a public school. I had a passion for learning as a child, but public school beat that out of me. It took me nearly 10 years to recover from public school to continue my education.

Maybe I'm just biased, but the public school system is HORRIBLE for gifted students. I know we have a lot of gifted students (and former students) here that can attest to that. A system of "unschooling," where the child is allowed to learn at his own pace, rather than at the pace of the dumbest person in the class, could be beneficial to those gifted students.

If I had all of those hours back where I learned what a prepositional phrase is over and over and over again, I might have found my interest in physics much sooner. Somewhere between the age of 5 (when I was addicted to Carl Sagan's Cosmos on PBS) and the age of 18 (where I wanted to be a pest control tech for the rest of my life), the public school sapped me of my will to succeed in life. It wasn't until about 2 years ago (age 25) when I decided I'm getting my degree.

I feel a vast majority of my time in high school was completely wasted. If I had been free to learn on my own, maybe with some individualized guidance, I'd be much further along in my life.

Of course, this is just an anecdote. You shouldn't base your opinions on my story. Similarly, you shouldn't base your opinions of "unschooling" on the anecdotes presented in the original video. There are ways to do it, whether through a Sudbury Valley-style school, or though dedicated parenting, which lead to a well-educated child without a formal course structure.

Are there opportunities for abuse by lazy parents and lazy students? Of course. However, lazy parents and lazy students aren't often helped by public schools anyway. Don't discount the whole idea based on a few people abusing the system.

 

[turbo]

Sounds like it may be similar to Summerhill.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Summerhill_School

Don't know, but it seemed that curious, motivated kids (with well-to-do parents, of course) were greatly benefited. One striking similarity is that students in structured courses were grouped by ability, not by age. Got a 12-year-old that is as adept at Trig as a 16-year-old? They would be in the same class, regardless of their abilities in other fields.

 

[Evo]

I'm willing to bet they'd be rather dim and without passion for anything even in a public school. I had a passion for learning as a child, but public school beat that out of me. It took me nearly 10 years to recover from public school to continue my education.

I had my books taken away from me starting when I was 8 years old because the teacher discovered that by the 3rd week of school I had completed the entire year's workbook. They had no programs for motivated "gifted" children.

Long story short, thanks to a new teacher that was hired when I was 11 that thought the idea of making me sit and do nothing in class because, as one teacher put it, "I can't teach two classes, the other kids can't keep up with you, so you will have to slow down", she changed everything. I finished High School at the age of 14, went to France to visit family for a year and started college at 16.

So, I know all about the limitations of bad public schools, but a really smart, motivated kid will overcome it. I consider myself "self taught" and due to that I missed out on so much. I do not recommend it, there is nothing that can compare to people that have formal educations. What these parents are doing to their children is so bad on so many levels.

 

[rootX]

I had my books taken away from me starting when I was 8 years old because the teacher discovered that by the 3rd week of school I had completed the entire year's workbook. They had no programs for motivated "gifted" children.

Long story short, thanks to a new teacher that was hired when I was 11 that thought the idea of making me sit and do nothing in class because, as one teacher put it, "I can't teach two classes, the other kids can't keep up with you, so you will have to slow down", she changed everything. I finished High School at the age of 14, went to France to visit family for a year and started college at 16.

So, I know all about the limitations of bad public schools, but a really smart, motivated kid will overcome it. I consider myself "self taught" and due to that I missed out on so much. I do not recommend it, there is nothing that can compare to people that have formal educations. What these parents are doing to their children is so bad on so many levels.

But, learning something few years earlier doesn't make a big difference. There is a lot beyond learning more and more ... I don't think exceptional kids should be pushed to their abilities, if they want they will do it themselves.

 

[Desiree]

the public school sapped me of my will to succeed in life.

Speaking of life, I think I know little bit more about it than you do. Believe it or not, there is no such thing as "success or failure" in life. Eventually everybody dies some day, whether or not they succeeded in becoming a physicist, an engineer, a doctor, a Wall street billionaire...or a failure who has got no money, no house of their own, and no academic achievements what so ever.

Life as I know it, has inherently no purpose or meaning, it just keeps going on and on with constant births and deaths...

 

[Evo]

But, learning something few years earlier doesn't make a big difference. There is a lot beyond learning more and more ... I don't think exceptional kids should be pushed to their abilities, if they want they will do it themselves.

I can't emphasize enough how important a real education is. I think it was Moonbear that really summed up the difference that going to grad school makes in finally putting it all together and showing you have the ability to do something with all of that knowledge. You aren't going to get to that level by sitting on the couch watching tv for 20 years.

Sorry, I'm not going to agree that all schools are a waste of time and teachers are worthless.

 

[DavidSnider]

Life as I know it, has inherently no purpose or meaning, it just keeps going on and on with constant births and deaths...

... Thank you Desiree, and now here's Tom with the weather.

 

[rootX]

I can't emphasize enough how important a real education is. I think it was Moonbear that really summed up the difference that going to grad school makes in finally putting it all together and showing you have the ability to do something with all of that knowledge. You aren't going to get to that level by sitting on the couch watching tv for 20 years.

Sorry, I'm not going to agree that all schools are a waste of time and teachers are worthless.

I was not saying that exceptional children shouldn't be given real education but wanted to say more along the lines that providing home education or special education to those children might not be good for them in the long run. Doesn't starting school at 14-16 alienate children or produce some negative effects on them that harm them in the long run?

 

[ideasrule]

It's one thing to give a child a choice, it's another to, in essence, not give them one. The older male child said that his parents pulled him out of school in the 1st grade, age 6-7. Seriously, ask any 6 year old "would you rather get up and go to school or lay in bed, watch tv, and eat junk food all day?" What do you think the answer would be?

The answer may not be as obvious as you think. Laying in bed, watching TV, and eating junk food all day gets boring very quickly.

 

[Evo]

The answer may not be as obvious as you think. Laying in bed, watching TV, and eating junk food all day gets boring very quickly.

But they've been doing it since they were 6-7 years old, they're 17-18 now.

 

[DavidSnider]

But they've been doing it since they were 6-7 years old, they're 17-18 now.

So what? Do you really think public school motivates people to do things? There was no shortage of Junk food eating-tv watchers in my neighborhood when I was 17-18.

 

[Evo]

So what? Do you really think public school motivates people to do things? There was no shortage of Junk food eating-tv watchers in my neighborhood when I was 17-18.

Because they also said that they have never seen a textbook. And they don't learn anything, and they don't even know elementary school math.

 

[rootX]

So what? Do you really think public school motivates people to do things? There was no shortage of Junk food eating-tv watchers in my neighborhood when I was 17-18.

Going back and reviewing your previous posts, you seem to be bashing public schools while offering no feasible alternative. Yes, I agree public schools are not perfect but they are better than what people in the OP are doing.

Slacking in public school is just as easy. How many people look back on K-12 and remember it as a time of great productivity?

The flip side with public school is they give you such a homogenized breadth-first education where everything just turns to a bowl of mush. If you want to explore deeper, you have to do it on your own, because the teacher has to accommodate to the lowest common denominator.

 

[DavidSnider]

Going back and reviewing your previous posts, you seem to be bashing public schools while offering no feasible alternative. Yes, I agree public schools are not perfect but they are better than what people in the OP are doing.

The feasible alternative is to eliminate compulsory schooling. Get rid of the disruptions and let the moonbear's and evo's of the world hit their stride without feeling guilty.

 

[russ_watters]

If done correctly, "unschooling" does not lead to being "uneducated." I'm not saying these parents are doing it correctly, however.

By definition, children are incapable of making the necessary choices to do it correctly, so the very notion of doing it correctly is an oxymoron.

I do find it interesting that the members of a science board are jumping to conclusions without examining evidence.

It shouldn't be. It is a requirement of this forum that those making extrordinary claims must substantiate them. You've done little to support your position and thus the reaction has been negative.

 

[russ_watters]

Slackers will slack whether they are 'unschooled' or not. Learning is up to the individual.

A slacker with a college degree can still get a job and perform at it if he ever choses to mature. A former slacker who can barely write his own name but becomes mature enough to realize it cannot. It is better to force-feed kids the tools so that when they hit 20 or 30 or whatever age they mature, they have them and don't have to start over as if they were 8.

 

[russ_watters]

Well, maybe it's time to make new history by not believing in the "education is a must" thing any longer. In my opinion, one needs to be literate, not necessarily be a college/high school graduate. There are a lot of jobs which actually don't need formal education.

Getting an education isn't just about getting/performing in a job, it is about being a generally functional member of society.

...and frankly most of the pioneers of science actually discovered things out of their own curiosity while they had little or no formal education at all.

That's a common misrepresentation. The pioneers of science were by definition uneducated in the things they were discovering because they were discovering them! That's what a "pioneer" is!

At the same time, the pioneers were typically educated in everything relevant that was known at the time. They most certainly did not start completely from scratch.