Unschooling=a function of privledge/3rd world education

[Cukup]

Hi Mommas of unschoolers

Part of me gets unschooling but then part of me thinks you can only unschool in a nation like ours that is 1st world. We have a choice here of public/home/unschool schooling.

You can only unschool if one parent can stay home ie your income is high enough. That doesn't seem fair-public school has to be available to everyone yet unschooling is not. If I am not wealthy enough to stay home, then I can't unschool.

Then I was thinking about countries that are so poor that they don't encourage schooling or have public school systems. Imagine being a family in Africa and not being able to send your child to school. Effectively they are unschooling but it takes on a different tone because it's due to poverty that they unschool.

An African family with children who have no education are at a huge disadvantage and may never recover from this in terms of getting out of poverty. So what is it that makes unschooling in a 1st world location desirable?

My mind has been thinking about lots of things re education recently.

Thanking you all.

[SagMom]

You can only unschool if one parent can stay home ie your income is high enough.

There are unschoolers here who are single parents and I know people of various income levels who unschool. There are outsides of course--if I was a single mom, who could find no other option but to work full time and had no friends or relatives who could help with the kids and the kids were young enough that they needed constant supervision...we'd probably not be unschooling. But there were a lot of qualifiers in that description, yk? Many people are able to make changes in their lives in order to unschool.

So, I don't think being a sahp with a high income are requirements, but there will be a minimum for each of us.

That doesn't seem fair-public school has to be available to everyone yet unschooling is not.

Well, yes. public school is funded by taxpayer dollars, that's the whole point of it--that it's available to all.

Because I think there are a lot of creative ways to go about unschooling, I don't think it's only for the weathly, however, people with more money naturally have more options as to how to spend it. Of course, there is a point where survival takes precedence over educational choice, but I think that's pretty far from needing two parents with a high income, kwim?

Then I was thinking about countries that are so poor that they don't encourage schooling or have public school systems. Imagine being a family in Africa and not being able to send your child to school. Effectively they are unschooling but it takes on a different tone because it's due to poverty that they unschool.

An African family with children who have no education are at a huge disadvantage and may never recover from this in terms of getting out of poverty. So what is it that makes unschooling in a 1st world location desirable?

One huge difference here is CHOICE. You're not making a choice if there are no other options.

The other difference is access to resources.
Even the poorest unschoolers here have access to libraries, the internet, community parks, museums etc. I think having access to information and resources is more important to unschooling than how much money you have to spend.

Maybe the wealth of the country is more key than the wealth of the individual in this case?

[purslaine]

Originally Posted by Cukup

Hi Mommas of unschoolers


You can only unschool if one parent can stay home ie your income is high enough. That doesn't seem fair-public school has to be available to everyone yet unschooling is not. If I am not wealthy enough to stay home, then I can't unschool.

I think there are a variety of employment options that work-including part time, work at-home scenarios, and working alternative shifts. I will say that I personally would not like to HS and work a full time job outside of the house while my husband is working full time outside of the house. It would make for difficult choices - put children in childcare full time or put them in school. For me, it would be a difficult choice and one I am glad I do not have to make. I am not saying it can't be done however. I do think that many, many lower income families can make HS/US work without needing both parents to work full time, though.

Then I was thinking about countries that are so poor that they don't encourage schooling or have public school systems. Imagine being a family in Africa and not being able to send your child to school. Effectively they are unschooling but it takes on a different tone because it's due to poverty that they unschool.

Well, I don't think they are USing. USing is a choice -which implies school is a choice - and if you cannot afford to send a child to school it is not a choice, per se. USing an active thing, not a passive default. More over, it does take some resources to US - we use the Library, internet, and I pay for a small amount of stuff (textboks, art supplies, etc) and a large amount for classes (drama, archery). If you do not have access to resources, which is what I imagine the case would be if you were dirt poor, I don't think you can call what you are doing USing.

An African family with children who have no education are at a huge disadvantage and may never recover from this in terms of getting out of poverty. So what is it that makes unschooling in a 1st world location desirable?

ARe you implying that USed children have no education? I think that depends on how you define education. Does it mean institutionalised schooling, or stuff learned? My children have had little institutionalised schooling, and yet they easily know as much as their schooled peers. Their general knowledge is good, they have passions they have explored in a more in depth way, and there basic literacy and numeracy skills are fine.

I think that is key - what skills, values etc do they arrive in adulthood knowing? It isn't the building but what they know that matters. I imagine this is the same in Africa. Yes, schools have been usefull in breaking the povery cycle in AFrica (that is a loaded statement and I am not even sure it is true, but for the purposes of this discussion I will assume it is) - but is it the building per se, or the knowledge they acquired there......

My mind has been thinking about lots of things re education recently.

Thanking you all.

A lot of your questions make me think you are wonderring if USing a priveledged option. The answer, IMNSHO, is yes. It is also somewhat irrelevant on a personal scale. I am not going to not choose USing (if I beleive it is the best choice) because I am priviledged enough to be able to do so. That is a little a$$ backwards. On occasion I read about a families cool exploits and feel a twinge of jealousy that I cannot do such things due to lack of resoureces - but I never, for one minute, think the family doing cool stuff shouldn't do it because others can't.

[Needle in the Hay]

Originally Posted by Cukup

Hi Mommas of unschoolers

Part of me gets unschooling but then part of me thinks you can only unschool in a nation like ours that is 1st world. We have a choice here of public/home/unschool schooling.

Well in North America the key thing is that parents have the choice to home educate as they see fit (for the most part), not that there is the choice of public schooling. I live in a (1st world) country where, in some parts of the country, homeschooling is not legal, so people definitely don't have the choice to unschool. You must be wealthy enough to afford a private school (and they tend to be awfully expensive) to avoid the public school system. So certainly unschooling is going to be more popular in a country like the U.S. where the laws make it easy to do than in a country where homeschooling is highly regulated or even banned.

You can only unschool if one parent can stay home ie your income is high enough. That doesn't seem fair-public school has to be available to everyone yet unschooling is not. If I am not wealthy enough to stay home, then I can't unschool.

Ah, you mean it's not fair my son and I get to stay home when not everyone has that opportunity. Would it be more fair to others then if I sent my child to school? Also, there are plenty of people who have the resources to unschool but choose school. Is it fair that they get to choose when some people don't? What about people who send their kids to private schools?

Then I was thinking about countries that are so poor that they don't encourage schooling or have public school systems. Imagine being a family in Africa and not being able to send your child to school. Effectively they are unschooling but it takes on a different tone because it's due to poverty that they unschool.

I don't believe someone is unschooling simply because they do not have access to schools. Unschooling is a concious decision one makes for their child(ren) because they think it will serve the child(ren) well.

An African family with children who have no education are at a huge disadvantage and may never recover from this in terms of getting out of poverty. So what is it that makes unschooling in a 1st world location desirable?

Apples and oranges.
What makes unschooling in a first world location desirable is that in a first world location, schooling is not necessary in order to have a good education. So, you compare the option of unschooling with other available options and not with what the poorest people without access to schools have to endure. I've seen this argument before but I have trouble understanding it. I realize there is a mother out there who would be grateful to have a local school her child could attend. She might like even better to do what I do, if such an opportunity were available to her. Either way, what difference would it make to her whether my son attended our local public school?

My mind has been thinking about lots of things re education recently.

Thanking you all.

Thinking is good!

[Piglet68]

Originally Posted by Cukup

...part of me thinks you can only unschool in a nation like ours that is 1st world.

Another name for unschooling is Natural Learning. The theory is this: that human children are programmed to learn that which they need to learn in their unique culture in order to succeed and become meaningful contributors to their culture. Example, a child growing up in a rainforest tribe of hunter gatherers will be motivated to acquire those skills needed: hunting, learning all the plant names, weaving baskets, making spear points, etc. and doesn't need to be sent away to learn these things, nor to attend an institution of learning. Under this definition, unschooling can happen anywhere in any human community. So it is not, IMO, a "1st world" phenomenon.

However, when you are talking poverty and dysfunctional communities then unschooling cannot happen so naturally. And here in the 1st world, with our cultural tools of literacy, technology, science, etc it really helps to have access to libraries, computers, museums, etc. The problem is 3rd world countries trying to learn 1st world skills and tools in a system that cannot provide them with the resources to learn. So in that context, it is difficult to unschool in that situation.

You can only unschool if one parent can stay home ie your income is high enough.

Not true. Others have answered this above.

Imagine being a family in Africa and not being able to send your child to school. Effectively they are unschooling...

No, unschooling is not "the absence of school". Unschooling is an active process, and requires an involved parent/s or caregivers who can provide access to necessary resources. I doubt many families in Africa are aware of unschooling, and even if they were, they likely would not be able to provide their children access to the resources needed.

An African family with children who have no education are at a huge disadvantage and may never recover from this in terms of getting out of poverty. So what is it that makes unschooling in a 1st world location desirable?

I remember asking myself this same question: if school is SO vital for African children, for example, why am I so actively against school for my own children? I realized that the issue is as I described it in the beginning of my post. Many third world countries are in trouble because they have lost their traditional ways of living and instead are trying to become "Westernized" (whether this is good or not is a matter of philosophical debate, I suppose). They want the jobs, the technology, the culture...literacy is of primary importance if you are going to try and become a meaningful contributor to a Western society. My own kids grew up in a house full of books with parents who could read to them. In a third world country books may be hard or impossible to come by and the parents themselves may not be literate. It is highly doubtful they have a computer. So these children have to go to school to have access to these resources.

However, if they lived in an intact, healthy, tribal community where they could be "successful" adults simply by learning the skills required by that culture, then they wouldn't need school. They would learn Naturally, which IMO is unschooling.

[4evermom]

Originally Posted by Cukup

You can only unschool if one parent can stay home ie your income is high enough. That doesn't seem fair-public school has to be available to everyone yet unschooling is not. If I am not wealthy enough to stay home, then I can't unschool.

Oh how I wish I could be vaguely construed as wealthy... Yes being able to unschool is not something everyone can do financially. We only manage because we have relatives willing to let us live with them. Many of the choices we make are ones others in much better financial situations would find inconceivable lifestyle compromises. We have no home equity, no retirement, no savings. We just acquired our first car in years (a gift and still a financial stretch just to pay for insurance).

As most parents, the focus of our choice is what is best for ds. Doing something that is not best for him does not help anyone else. Speaking of it not being fair that I can unschool and others can't, it isn't fair that school is designed to suit some children's learning styles and not my ds's. It isn't fair that I couldn't send my ds to school without traumatizing him. It isn't fair that I had a high needs kid that never slept through the night. Sure there are people who would be thrilled to have the opportunity to send their child to our local public school. If it were possible, I'd be happy to give them ds's spot.

Unschooling is arguably desirable in a 1st world country and not a 3rd world one because the children don't lack an education as a result. No opportunities are lost to them.

[laohaire]

Originally Posted by Piglet68

Many third world countries are in trouble because they have lost their traditional ways of living and instead are trying to become "Westernized" (whether this is good or not is a matter of philosophical debate, I suppose).

...

However, if they lived in an intact, healthy, tribal community where they could be "successful" adults simply by learning the skills required by that culture, then they wouldn't need school. They would learn Naturally, which IMO is unschooling.

I think this is huge. The so-called poor nations were not always poor nations. They only became so as they were exploited by colonialists.

Communities were educated in the things that were valuable to them - obviously, different things than, say, the English considered valuable.

That's been disrupted and lost, and poverty has arisen, as colonialism has oriented those communities toward far-away nations.

Now poor areas in the Southern Hemisphere grow cash crops (tea, spices, coffee, etc.) to ship to wealthy nations. Instead of growing their own food to nourish themselves.

And at the same time, as globalism has increased, the competition for these cash crops has increased. At the drop of a hat, if Egypt can grow a crop for cheaper than South Africa, that crop will suddenly come from Egypt. So farmers have no choice but to sell for the lowest price - or not at all.

Yes, this all distracts them from a good education - even beside the point that a good education means something different for different communities - or it should.

I think the point that unschooling is not "uneducated" is also very important. Unschooling is not lack of education at all.

And while I do agree there is a certain privelege here, I think it's important to draw a distinction between having all your needs met and having more than you need. So, it's priveleged to have three square meals a day, sure, but I don't feel guilty for it. I am not doing anything wrong eating enough. The wrong thing is that not everyone has enough, that's the problem.

On the other hand, I should feel guilty for wasting food, or electricity or gasoline or whatever. The problem lies in my waste, not that everyone doesn't have enough to waste.

The ability to educate your children is a good thing, and the natural thing, and there's no need to feel guilty for it. It's a problem that not everyone can, but the solution is NOT to not avail yourself of the opportunity for your own children.

[Needle in the Hay]

Originally Posted by Piglet68

However, when you are talking poverty and dysfunctional communities then unschooling cannot happen so naturally. And here in the 1st world, with our cultural tools of literacy, technology, science, etc it really helps to have access to libraries, computers, museums, etc. The problem is 3rd world countries trying to learn 1st world skills and tools in a system that cannot provide them with the resources to learn. So in that context, it is difficult to unschool in that situation.

Yes! I was thinking it's just not the same (apples and oranges) but having a hard time articulating why, tried to draw a parallel with vaccination and then decided to just give it up.

Originally Posted by 4evermom

As most parents, the focus of our choice is what is best for ds. Doing something that is not best for him does not help anyone else. Speaking of it not being fair that I can unschool and others can't, it isn't fair that school is designed to suit some children's learning styles and not my ds's. It isn't fair that I couldn't send my ds to school without traumatizing him.

Amen! And I'm not really the religious sort but it just had to be said. I wouldn't have thought of this but how true. Of course we don't go around complaining about how it's not fair, but if someone is going to say unschooling isn't fair I think we can find a lot in life that isn't exactly fair.

Originally Posted by laohaire

I think this is huge. The so-called poor nations were not always poor nations. They only became so as they were exploited by colonialists.

Communities were educated in the things that were valuable to them - obviously, different things than, say, the English considered valuable.

--snip--

The ability to educate your children is a good thing, and the natural thing, and there's no need to feel guilty for it. It's a problem that not everyone can, but the solution is NOT to not avail yourself of the opportunity for your own children.

I liked your whole post, I only snipped so this post wouldn't be too intolerably long. I was put off by the whole "what about the kids in Africa?" thing (which is not only due to the OP, I've seen that before in other posts) but couldn't totally put my finger on why. There is something vaguely insulting about it though I am sure the OP didn't mean it to be. Your post was really helpful, thank you.

[CrazyCatLady]

You can only unschool if one parent can stay home ie your income is high enough. That doesn't seem fair-public school has to be available to everyone yet unschooling is not. If I am not wealthy enough to stay home, then I can't unschool.

I am a single, unschooling parent living on less than $8,000 a year lol. I'm not as smart as some of the other moms here, so I'll let them keep addressing everything else. But being wealthy or a married sahm is certainly not a requirement to unschool in the USA. It would be easier/more fun if I had more money. But we do ok.

[zeldamomma]

Originally Posted by Cukup

Hi Mommas of unschoolers

Part of me gets unschooling but then part of me thinks you can only unschool in a nation like ours that is 1st world. We have a choice here of public/home/unschool schooling.

You can only unschool if one parent can stay home ie your income is high enough. That doesn't seem fair-public school has to be available to everyone yet unschooling is not. If I am not wealthy enough to stay home, then I can't unschool.

Then I was thinking about countries that are so poor that they don't encourage schooling or have public school systems. Imagine being a family in Africa and not being able to send your child to school. Effectively they are unschooling but it takes on a different tone because it's due to poverty that they unschool.

An African family with children who have no education are at a huge disadvantage and may never recover from this in terms of getting out of poverty. So what is it that makes unschooling in a 1st world location desirable?

My mind has been thinking about lots of things re education recently.

Thanking you all.

What's your point? Not everyone can unschool, or homeschool, or even feed their kids nutritious meals and give them a safe and comfortable place to sleep, but that doesn't mean that those of us who have the ability to give our kids more should not.

Unfortunately, the world is not perfect or fair, and some people get privileges that are denied others. When the privilege allows a child to grow up healthy and better able to help others, I can't see revoking the privilege in the name of "fairness".

[joy_seeker]

Fairness isn't about lowering standards to meet the minimum available to everyone it's about raising others up to their fullest potential. So perhaps the better question would be what can we do to ensure choice and make resources available for success in the third world?

[joy_seeker]

Originally Posted by Melaya

I am a single, unschooling parent living on less than $8,000 a year lol. I'm not as smart as some of the other moms here, so I'll let them keep addressing everything else. But being wealthy or a married sahm is certainly not a requirement to unschool in the USA. It would be easier/more fun if I had more money. But we do ok.

Don't confuse lack of information about specific issues with not being smart. You're a smart enough mamma to be doing what you think is best for your child- that's spectacularly brilliant IMO. :

[Cukup]

"What's your point?"

Um, discussion?

"Ah, you mean it's not fair my son and I get to stay home when not everyone has that opportunity. Would it be more fair to others then if I sent my child to school? "

No, you're taking it on a personal level. By not fair I mean that the choice to unschool is not open to all in this country. You are lucky enough to be in a situation where you can unschool, but another family who has to have both parents working can't unschool. They have to make a choice-income or unschool.

"A lot of your questions make me think you are wonderring if USing a priveledged option."

Yes, I suppose that is the crux of the matter. That others may be judged for choosing institionalized learning over unschooling, but unschooling is a privledge not every family can achieve.

If I do pursue the public schooling route because I have to go back to work or study, then I feel I am seen as buying into the mainstrean view and treating learning in an unnatural way. If I want to unschool but can't, then I'm viewed as not good enough by unschoolers, even though unschooling really resonates with me. That's when I feel it it a priveldge that not everyone has-but this is never acknowledged.

[zeldamomma]

Originally Posted by Cukup

Yes, I suppose that is the crux of the matter. That others may be judged for choosing institionalized learning over unschooling, but unschooling is a privledge not every family can achieve.

If I do pursue the public schooling route because I have to go back to work or study, then I feel I am seen as buying into the mainstrean view and treating learning in an unnatural way. If I want to unschool but can't, then I'm viewed as not good enough by unschoolers, even though unschooling really resonates with me. That's when I feel it it a priveldge that not everyone has-but this is never acknowledged.

I don't see any judgment of non-unschoolers on this board. Why would you care what we thought anyhow? Do what's best for your family, and be proud of that.

I think the fact that not everyone can unschool is acknowledged fairly often, although I'm not sure "can't " is the right word, because there are people who unschool in situations where I might feel it was impossible. We all have to look at the big picture in our family, and set our own priorities-- unschooling may be less important to you than some other things (financial security is pretty valuable), and that's ok.

[purslaine]

Here is areally intersting discussion on privelage you might want to check out:

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...ight=privilege

As for myself, I never question the choice to not US (it does not work for all families) and I rarely question the choice to not HS (and even then it is with full knowledge that what I am questioning is simply based on what I know from what has been posted - which is never the full story). The only time I question the choice to not HS is when the child is clearly miserable at school, the school is not able to resolve the situation, there are no other school options and the family has the resources to HS but refuses to even consider it. This last scenario does not happen very often. This is my long winded way of saying that I do not think you have to worry about being judged. Most reasonable people understand that parents make the best decisions they can with the options they have and that everyone wants the best for their child. And even if you are judged by a few people online or in real life, so what?

[mary3mama]

Originally Posted by Cukup

That doesn't seem fair-public school has to be available to everyone yet unschooling is not. \

Fairness aside, technically speaking unschooling is available to everyone...though not necessarily easy. For those in places that are heavily regulated there are options to 'fudge' the paperwork or tests and/or not register at all, aka: stay under the radar. Each of these options can come with its own moral dilemmas and/or difficulty. But to say that they are not options may not be accurate.

One of the big things about unschooling to me is really owning my choices and not falling into 'have to' or 'can't' mentalities. If there is a choice then I need to acknowledge it and that is empowering in and of itself even if what I choose is not what I'd really prefer to do.

Originally Posted by kathymuggle

As for myself, I never question the choice to not US

Same here! Unschooling is not for everyone. Not all parents are interested and, I'm assuming, not all children will thrive within it.

And, despite what it might look like from the outside, unschooling can be pretty damn hard. I think of it as attachment parenting on steroids and with older children. It takes a lot out of you and is based on really knowing your child/ren and making the choices that are in THEIR best interests. It is also about trying to leave one's personal baggage at the door instead of heaping it on the children's heads.

[Annoia]

Originally Posted by Cukup

You can only unschool if one parent can stay home ie your income is high enough. That doesn't seem fair-public school has to be available to everyone yet unschooling is not. If I am not wealthy enough to stay home, then I can't unschool.

Our income is not high. And at various times, I've been a WOHM, WAHM, and a student mom. I just kinda do what I do.

Originally Posted by Cukup

An African family with children who have no education are at a huge disadvantage and may never recover from this in terms of getting out of poverty.

I assume you are talking about sub-Saharan Africa, but I'll add my 2 cents.

We just returned from a trip to North Africa, where I spent plenty of time discussing education with some wonderful North African mamas. These were, for the most part, high SES, well educated women. Who HATED their public school systems. Who spent lots and lots of pooled time trying, together, to find a good school for their children (and were pretty beaten down and depressed by their lack of options).

They loved the concept of unschooling. Totally agreed with it, in theory. But the absolute lack of resources made unschooling a non-option for them. There were no libraries, museums, parks, ...... nothing. The McDonald's playground was The Place to go (and the only place!).

The mamas said if they were in the US (they had lived in the US previously) they would totally HS, and probably unschool.

But in their area in North Africa, the only option is institutional learning. Any other route is a direct road to poverty (according to the moms).

So I suppose that is my long-winded way of saying community resources and personal choice (having options) is key.

[Annoia]

Originally Posted by Annoia

I just kinda do what I do.

And by that I mean, and I want to stress this - once I realize a certain path works for our family, I pursue it. I don't think "that will never work" or "I'm not doing it right". I just kinda 'do'. It's not always easy, and is often messy, but it works for us!

[Piglet68]

Seems to me the issue of whether one is privileged enough to unschool is pretty much the exact same question as whether one is privileged enough to be a stay-home parent. Seems to boil down to an assumption about how much money a family needs to live on and whether both parents need to work in order to get that much money. Some families are willing to live a very frugal lifestyle to SAH/unschool. To me that means it's not an issue of privilege. It's about choices and priorities.

I don't believe there is such a thing as CAN'T unschool. People make choices, they order their priorities, and for some families other things take priority. That's okay, but it's not the same thing as "CAN'T".

[laohaire]

Note to self: it's "privilege."

Next note to self: look up "maintenance" and other words I frequently misspell.