Is Unschooling Beneficial or Harmful for Child Development?

[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.

 

[russ_watters]

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.

One of the biggest problems facing the US today is our dismal high school graduation rate. We need to increase compulsory education, not decrease/eliminate it. Discussion of the few exceptionals is a red herring. Children are children. They need to learn what they need to learn. These things are obvious tautologies and the arguments being used against are self-contradictory. Such as:

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.

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.

Point proven to be blatantly/obviously wrong, goalposts moved! The whole line of argument is just plain silly.

 

[zomgwtf]

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?

I don't know about this rootX. Here in Canada they do various 'standard testing' at a young age to determine various things about students. I scored quite well and was doing great in school, far ahead of the rest of my classmates. My mother was offered to have me put into program for gifted students. My mother refused... on the same basis your using . She also refused to allow me to skip two grades on the same basis.

After awhile of being ahead all the time and swallowing a lot of information I just got bored of school. I didn't care about it, I understood it but I really couldn't be bothered to waste my time completing the assignments etc. Why waste my time?

It started around grade 8. In grade 6 I was doing grade 10-11 level maths and was studying various sciences on my own time... I had started reading the encyclopedia at my grandparents house but they had packed it away when they moved. I just really stopped caring about school by this point, I saw no point to it at all.

I truly feel had my mother decided to put me in a more intensive program tailored to my needs that I would have strived. Even in my senior years of high school, I didn't go to school a lot and I hardly ever did assignments, only the ones I thought were interesting. However I always seemed to get great grades when I showed up for tests.

 

[Proton Soup]

i don't see this as an either/or, but i do think there is a small minority of children that would do well with this method. i'd expect the average unschooled to compare with the average dropout, which, on average, is less than average, i think.

 

[Desiree]

We need to increase compulsory education, not decrease/eliminate it... Children are children. They need to learn what they need to learn.

Wow! You sound like those Indian parents who want (and pressure) their older son to become a doctor and their younger daughter to marry a doctor only!

 

[Borg]

I still find the original story tragic. It was like watching a train wreck. Just because there are cases where 'unschoolers' have succeeded doesn't mean that those two will. I'm sure that the reporter tried to find the worst example in order to sensationalize the story for the GMA show.

It would be interesting to know what the success rate is for this type of education. I did a quick Google search to see if I could get any real numbers on the success rates for this type of education. Unfortunately, most of the articles appeared to be from home school academies that were trying to boast about how great home schooling is in order to sell their products.

 

[russ_watters]

Wow! You sound like those Indian parents who want (and pressure) their older son to become a doctor and their younger daughter to marry a doctor only!

There is a lot of difference between becoming a doctor and finishing high school. Besides the extra years of education, becoming a doctor happens in adulthood and costs money. Finishing high school happens at the end of childhood and is free. There is no excuse for not taking advantage of it.

And as someone pointed out earlier, even a burger flipper type job often requires (or at least looks favorably on) a high school education.

 

[russ_watters]

I know I'm going backwards now, but...

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.

Much of this can be settled using history as the guide. The current level of development relies heavily on an educated populace and free/comuplsory education is truly one of the great triumphs/enablers of a developed society.

 

[Kajahtava]

People should be free to make stupid choices. The quaestion is if parents should be allowed to make stupid choices for their children... but as long as parents can fill their children with nonsense and send them to church, it's only fair.

In an ideal world though, teachers and parents would not be allowed to teach children things that are disproven by the scientific method, this includes nonsense like dressing warm outside, eating from the floor and all those other methods of control of children and excuses for censorship that people invented.

 

[Borg]

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.

High school was no picnic for some of us either.

 

[Evo]

I personally hated school, but how else is a child going to learn how to handle rejection, disapointment, the possibiliy of failure and how to turn these situations around? Unless they can stay isolated for the rest of their life, learning how to cope with these challenges as they grow and develop, they are not going to be able to handle with life around other people.

And yes, it's a good thing to be faced with the little disappointments and failures, or at least the risk of them. It makes you a stronger person. And before someone turns this into a "you're advocating abuse!", no, I'm talking about realizing you aren't going to have mommy and daddy handing out gold stars for getting out of bed in the morning and handing you sugar covered donuts because you managed to put socks on. Very few people have the opportunity to live a life where they are never faced with adversity and are coddled and pampered and have every need attended to. What's going to happen to these kids when their parents die and they are adults with no skills or knowledge?