|
Re: Money & Power
Julie <jlist@...>
Thanks for your input, Cat and Dawn.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Julie
----- Original Message -----
From: catherine aceto To: AlwaysLearning@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 8:40 PM Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] Money & Power My 5 yo gets $5/week -- enough so that she can buy a small toy if she wants to, or save for a bigger toy (like a barbie or playdough set) in an amount of time that is conceivable to a five year old. She likes to window shop the toy stores, thinking about what she'd like to save her allowance for. The first couple of months, it seemed to burn a whole in her pocket -- as soon as she got it she wanted to spend it -- now she is more concerned with finding something that she wants to own, rather than just spending money because she has some. I think she has about $20 saved right now. The money isn't tied to her behavior in any way. It is the line item in the family budget for Lydia discretionary spending, similar to the line item that my husband and I each have. The baby does not have a line item yet. : - ) -Cat ----- Original Message ----- From: Dawn Bennink To: AlwaysLearning@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 8:30 PM Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] Money & Power Julie wrote: > Another thing--do your kids get allowances? I'd really like to know > an effective approach toward handling money in an inclusive way and > with respect for all (and, of course, without burdening little ones > too much with financial concerns). Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: AlwaysLearning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
|
|
|
|
Re: television
Julie <jlist@...>
from Sandra:
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
<<Some people are teens or adults when they first realize that commercials appeal to fantasy and self-image. My kids have known it since they were young, and so not only did they discuss it and get over it, but they've freed up their minds to think of loftier things. We got a copy of GQ (Gentleman's Quarterly) last week, for articles on three guys Marty really likes (The Rock, Conan O'Brien and Jack Black). That magazine is mostly ads. Holly and I looked at a few and talked about how some appeal to European fantasy, some to teens (not by SHOWING teens), etc. We had an English version (not of the same issue)brought by a travelling friend, and the ads were really different. That's art, psychology, photography, commerce... Holly is 11. She understands things now that I didn't understand until I was in college.>> I didn't even begin to realize the way I had fallen prey to advertising until I was in my mid-20s. Now I see that the main reason for this was probably the extreme peer dependence and need for security that was nurtured by confinement schooling--not the TV and advertising itself. I wouldn't have responded to it if I didn't have the need for acceptance and the desire for conformity in the first place. Thanks for helping me see this! Julie
----- Original Message -----
From: SandraDodd@aol.com To: AlwaysLearning@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 8:28 PM Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] television In a message dated 10/17/2003 5:46:30 PM Mountain Daylight Time, fishierich@aol.com writes: -=-Having the television on all day is not something I want and I live here too. -=- We don't have the television on all day. You live there too, but if your priority is your children's learning, then limiting input is going to make that more difficult. -=-Do you think at 4 years my daughter should be the one deciding what shows to watch?-=- I think (from years of experience at these kinds of exchangs) that what you're envisioning and what I would be talking about would be two extremely different things. My short answer is "yes." I don't think she will even BEGIN to choose the shows you're afraid of. -=-What about the influence of commercial TV? -=- "The influence" so far is that they know that the broadcast is free because the sponsors paid for it. They were TINY little when we explained that companies pay for advertising on TV, radio, magazines, billboards, and newspapers. When the boys were little they were glad to know what toys were being offered at which fast-food places, and they watched for those ads. Some toys they weren't interested in; some they were. They were discerning even about fast food toys. Some people are teens or adults when they first realize that commercials appeal to fantasy and self-image. My kids have known it since they were young, and so not only did they discuss it and get over it, but they've freed up their minds to think of loftier things. We got a copy of GQ (Gentleman's Quarterly) last week, for articles on three guys Marty really likes (The Rock, Conan O'Brien and Jack Black). That magazine is mostly ads. Holly and I looked at a few and talked about how some appeal to European fantasy, some to teens (not by SHOWING teens), etc. We had an English version (not of the same issue)brought by a travelling friend, and the ads were really different. That's art, psychology, photography, commerce... Holly is 11. She understands things now that I didn't understand until I was in college. -=-Do you not think that has an affect on the gimmes and yes I did read about 'Magical Thinking and Spoiled Children' and agree completely. -=- My kids have never "had the gimmes." I've tried to even change the words in which I will think about my children and their environment. There are LOTS of phrases used as put-down and belittlement. "gimmes" spoiled rotten boob tube junk food brat mindless tv zombie daydreaming (better connotation for some people than others) It's possible to have long conversations with other parents which don't require much thought, which don't say anything original, and which are very disrespectful of children as a class and as individuals. Part of what got me where I am today was a conscious choice NOT to go there. My husband was at a "no children" barbecue with people from work, and they got to badmouthing teens. What they were saying did NOT apply to our teens, and it might not even have applied to theirs. They were just having a canned conversation about how irresponsible and stupid teens are, and how hard it is to be the parent of a lazy teen who never thinks. When Keith did say something flattering about Kirby, our oldest, one of the parents made a dismissive comment and they went back to their martyrly insults of people who had been disallowed from the party. Parents do it without thinking. They do it about school starting, they do it when they use terms like rug rats drape apes just a kid young'uns (some manage to use that without insult; others intend to create us/them) -=-So does that mean I should not worry about commercial TV? -=- It means I don't and lots of other people don't. You can worry about what you want to worry about, but wouldn't it be cool if your 'worry' list could be shorter? -=-What about the news or just the news flashes? Regular prime-time news coverage is not really something a 4 year old needs to hear about let alone a 29 year old. -=- My kids don't watch the news. They could if they wanted to. They rarely choose to. -=-Is there a place for me in the chat group with my views on TV or should I reconsider my involvement in this chat group?-=- What are you really asking? Would you feel better if people weren't honest? Are you looking for a group that says whatever anyone does is great and all parenting decisions are equally close to unschooling success? You're welcome to stay in this group, but if you express your views they probably WILL be questioned and dissected. It's part of learning about unschooling for people to pick apart other parents' theories and ideas and practices. Sandra Sandra Yahoo! Groups Sponsor To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: AlwaysLearning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
|
|
|
|
Re: And yet another new one
Julie <jlist@...>
Dawn wrote:
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
<<Thanks for your support for F.R.E.E. in NY! I'm in Jamestown, in Western NY. My husband used to live in Endicott when he was very small. His Dad was an IBMer. We pass through your area at least twice a year when going to visit my SIL in the Kingston area. http://www.nyhen.org/ <http://www.nyhen.org/>is a great place to learn about regulations for NY homeschoolers, find a support group local to you and more. They have a few email lists to which you can subscribe for support as well. Check 'em out. I'm on their legislative committee as well. I'm also list mom for NYSHomeschool@yahoo.com. We are presently a moderated group due to the onslaught of porn on homeschooling lists lately. You are welcome to join.>> It's a small world, Dawn. My hometown is Jamestown! We visit my parents there several times a year. Did you grow up in Jamestown? My husband was born and raised in Endicott, and his dad was an IBMer, too. We live minutes from the Endicott exit on rte 17, so feel free to stop by if you need a break on your way to Kingston. :) I'll definitely check out www.nyhen.org and join the list. Thanks! Julie
----- Original Message -----
From: Dawn Bennink To: AlwaysLearning@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 7:20 PM Subject: Re: [AlwaysLearning] And yet another new one Julie, Thanks for your support for F.R.E.E. in NY! I'm in Jamestown, in Western NY. My husband used to live in Endicott when he was very small. His Dad was an IBMer. We pass through your area at least twice a year when going to visit my SIL in the Kingston area. http://www.nyhen.org/ <http://www.nyhen.org/>is a great place to learn about regulations for NY homeschoolers, find a support group local to you and more. They have a few email lists to which you can subscribe for support as well. Check 'em out. I'm on their legislative committee as well. I'm also list mom for NYSHomeschool@yahoo.com. We are presently a moderated group due to the onslaught of porn on homeschooling lists lately. You are welcome to join. NY has a horrible reputation for their treatment of homeschoolers, but in most cases districts are not too difficult. There are a few exceptions, but there is plenty of support out there to help you learn the finer points of the regulations, probably better than the district people know them, to combat any difficulties. My paperwork takes me just a few minutes every quarter. Of course, it would be even nicer if I didn't have to deal with it at all. Thus F.R.E.E. in NY. We are very proud to have the support of people like Linda Dobson, John Taylor Gatto, Paul Matte & Doris Hohensee. Thanks again for your support, and don't hesitate to let me know if I can be of help with regards to NY homeschooling. Dawn
|
|
|
|
Re: tv watching
SandraDodd@...
In a message dated 10/18/03 9:32:11 AM, rettafontana@yahoo.com writes:
<< Tv is a series of 600 black dots that light up in sequence over and over. This is damaging to the brain development to children under age 7. >> Says who? And what about the computer screen? Same CRT technology, right? Without the benefit of music an d good acting. <<Tv lowers the brain waves to the pre-sleep state, so things that are going in hypnoticcally and it's really hard to make a conscious choice to turn it off. >> I've read this in two books, and heard it parotted by "educators," but I haven't seen it seem true with kids who weren't limited. I've seen kids dance and talk and run to the other room to get me to show me something, and if it's hard to make a choice to turn it off, it's for the same reason it's hard to put a good book down. The mind is engaged, not asleep. The tests I've read about that some of that "research" was based on was putting daycare or school kids in a room pointed at a program chosen by the re searcher, and they were wired up and told "watch this." It wasn't real kids in the real world making a choice to watch something or not. Please don't believe all the research you see which is designed to support schools' agendas. For example, Sesame Street: Educational research created Sesame Street for sound reasons. Also Schoolhouse Rock came out of the same research, and they were popular AND effective. Then a few years later, educational reasearch turned on Sesame Street, to try to blame it for "short attention span," which was bullshit. Sesame Street was created to make learning easier for kids, theoretically so school would be easier for them (and thereby success in life, yada yada). But school had been kinda counting on kids being ignorant. Kids who don't already KNOW their numbers and letters might possibly sit still for a boring long lesson. Kids with no other option for learning letters will carve them out on a wax slate that has to be re-melted on a wood stove that night, but those days are LONG, long gone, and to rein kids in from cutting edge opportunity (these days, computer games) is selfish cruelty on the part of adults who don't want to lose their audience for their lame old-timey presentations. There never was a uniformly ignorant kindergarten class anyway, but if the teachers can blame a few parents that's limited. (Parents are told "don't teach these things at home, because he'll be ahead of the other kids and that's hard on kids.") But if they can find one big scapegoat like Children's Television Workshop and heap blame on THEM, a few people get master's degrees or PhDs for their "research," which gets them out of the classroom and into the administration, and schools are "better served." As unschoolers we don't have to buy into their stuff, and that anti-TV propaganda is part and parcel of their "science." Sandra
|
|
|
|
Re: Money & Power
SandraDodd@...
In a message dated 10/18/03 7:49:48 AM, jlist@redjellyfish.net writes:
<< I keep forgetting that unschooled kids won't necessarily react the same way as I did in situations involving money. >> Nor about just about anything else, I've found with mine. I reported here a while back that the first week Kirby had his license and I was letting him go out and he had the go to be gone overnight or all day, he kept coming back!! If I had permission to be out until midnight when I was a teenager, I would NOT have risked stopping by the house for anything, lest my mom take it back. And if I had permission to be out overnight, I would have stayed out overnight even if I had to sleep in the car, because such freedoms were rare. So there was Kirby, in his own bed, the first night he had permission to keep the car out overnight. He said he was too long for his friend's couch now, and it just wasn't going to be comfortable. When he had gotten tired, he wanted to sleep in his own bed. !! Sandra
|
|
|
|
Re: registered of not in NC
Leslie530@...
Thanks, Pam. I will pass this info on to my friend.
Leslie <<<<They send out this post card after you have been homeschooling a couple of years. You send it in also to state how many children are currently enrolled in your homeschool. Not by name but by age and gender. And yes that is what it says. But it does not say your chances of a visit increase it says you are willing to have a home visit. >>>>
|
|
|
|
Re: television
SandraDodd@...
In a message dated 10/18/03 3:10:48 AM, fetteroll@earthlink.net writes:
<< If we spent our childhoods doing what our parents wanted us to do and we enter adulthood (and then parenthood) trying to fulfill the need to do what we want, then we pass that legacy of neediness and unhappiness onto our children. >> AMEN. I lived with "when you grow up you can..." and my parents had lived with it too. And another "legacy" of this culture is "I hope your kids treat you as badly as you treat me" (and other parental curses). "When you have kids you'll understand." "I suffered through this when I was a kid and you will too, and then your kids will too, but you'll understand." Yes. What I understand is that just like fraternity hazing, to tell someone "endure this and your reward is that you will get to do it to others later" is one of the unerpinnings of continuing violence. How many wife beaters were themselves intimidated by children or saw their mothers hit and were powerless to do anything about it, and rather than resolving to do better, they swallowed it all and identified with the strong male in the picture because they were afraid and disgusted by the mother's powerless, and their own. That's extreme, but it's the other end of the same continuum. Can we splash in the shallow end of that water without seeing the violence in the deeper parts? <<My daughter has always been able to choose what she wanted to watch. She didn't much care about flipping through channels at 4 but by 6 she would search for the stations that had cartoons. She'd pass by anything live action.>> Just two days ago Holly mentioned about some movie (she's asleep and I dont' remember which) "Yes, but it doesn't have any kids in it." So she still pretty much prefers movies about kids, or at least with kid/teen characters as witnesses to the action. I reminded her that The Green Mile didn't, really, either. But I was wrong. Children were murdered, and men's lives were hugely affected. The first time she watched parts of The Green Mile, because she was interested in some of the actors, I sent her off on an errand (she knew it was so she'd miss some of the movie, and she didn't mind) for the kid-parts because they're scary. Not graphic nor detailed at all, but still... After she knew and liked the story, she was willing (but certainly not required) to see those parts, but just a glimpse at first. Now she can watch the whole movie, asked me to buy a copy (we've rented it twice) and asked me to read the book so I could tell her what parts were different from the book. She's also quite interested in the fact that Hasbro just started manufacturing My Little Pony horses and accessories and stickers lately. Because we don't have age milestones and requirements and threshholds for things, she didn't have to put aside playing with Barbie and Ponies to watch R rated movies. So she will do both on the same day. Her level of thought and conversation is really remarkable, and I say "remarkable" because two adult friends have commented in the past month on her maturity and poise, totally at their own initiation. That maturity has come from her being treated as a person, as Holly, rather than as a four year old or six year old or eleven year old. She's never been treated as "a first grader" or "a sixth grader." She is where she is, she's learning what is new and interesting, and we try to keep the options for input and activity swirling around her so she DOES have choices. She's not waiting until she's twelve for this privilege or fifteen for that other one. She has not motivation to act "more mature" because she has no school "peers" to pressure her. Sandra
|
|
|
|
Re: do unschoolers get good jobs?
SandraDodd@...
In a message dated 10/18/03 2:55:27 AM, Dnowens@aol.com writes:
<< How about Peter Kowalke? And Mae Shell too. And they got married! So I guess that would make her Mae Kowalke, unless she is a Shell-Kowake like I am an Edds-Owens. <bg> >> Her webpages are linked from http://sandradodd.com/unschooling Sandra
|
|
|
|
Re: television
SandraDodd@...
In a message dated 10/18/03 2:11:14 AM, kara@stjonn.com writes:
<< Yes, my daughter acts out what she sees in a movie, but she does that with books too, should I limit her reading time and book choices? She acts out things she sees in her everyday life. >> I love to see the kids adding to their make-believe the things that have happened in their real lives, like deaths, divorces, accidents, broken bones or out-of-control backyard fires or whatever. Literature pretty much exists for us to exercise our biochemistry and imagination on "what ifs." Like an amusement park for brains, scary stories stimulate the parts of us that usually don't get a workout unless there's a real fright, and love stories stimulate parts that are usually quiet and still unless we're currently really involved with some crush/romance, and so forth. That works with storytelling, reading, movies, song lyrics, paintings, sculpture, music... So I was surprised and disappointed to find that the wife of one of my best friends is on him about not letting their sons watch movies. She doesn't mind the child sitting behind a chair or couch, playing with toys and listening to a movie, but she says if he watches movies he's not exercising his imagination, and that it's healthier for him (the older one, I'm talking about) to picture the action and characters himself. He was asking me what I thought about that. I tried to be kind, because he does love his wife. She has one of those totally quicky master's degrees in early childhood education. The NEA's flooding the unemployment market with unemployeed master's degreed EXPERTS in early childhood ed in preparation for their push to get government-funded preschools back to two year olds. It will take them awhile, but they are working on it. So I asked him to consider why people with that anti-video prejudice are not complaining about illustrated books. He hooted with joy and said THANK YOU, that's going to help. But what's more and I didn't say it was that movies are not intended to be for the blind or the behind-the-chair. You can't follow all the action from just hearing the dialog and music. They're carefully built of music, dialog, scenery/sets and subtle facial acting. To look at a piece of art like a movie or a cartoon and say "just listen" is one of the dumbest things I've heard in my now-long life. Sandra
|
|
|
|
Re: Emulating Arthur (was: television)
SandraDodd@...
In a message dated 10/18/03 12:15:50 AM, ikonstitcher@cox.net writes:
<< (and I told them if they started talking like SouthPark, they couldn't watch it anymore -- then they started imitating Cartman so perfectly, I couldn't stop laughing long enough to nuke 'em!) >> I've told this story before, but there are new people. My husband loves musicals, and before I hung out with him I knew very little about them, outside of Jesus Christ Superstar. My husband who loves musicals was working in Minneapolis when I and two other adult friends took Kirby and Marty to see the South Park Movie. This was the greatest preparation and security we'd ever had outside of marking kids with names and phone numbers and emergency plans when they went to the State Fair with another family. We sat adult-child-adult-child-adult. I hadn't seen the movie and had been warned it was REALLY horribly offensively adult. But before I had known, I had promised the boys they could see it. So my counsellor/bodyguards, one male and one female to be able to answer any questions the kids might have during or after accompanied these two children to the movie and the children had the following onus put up on them: Do not quote them movie at any homeschooling functions. Do not quote the movie outside of our house. And, it was added, after we saw it was a musical: "Do not learn and sing these songs." I had two motivations in all this, and one was not to so totally irritate the other homeschooling families that my kids were isolated as toxic-child-waste, and the other was not to get in trouble for being some kind of neglectful mom. So two funny things happened. A few weeks passed and my husband went to see the movie in Minneapolis. He had visited home in the meantime, and he had gone back to MN and seen the movie. He called and said "I didn't know it was a musical!" That proves how quiet my kids REALLY were, in honoring their contract. And the other funny thing was that when it came out on CD I bought the CD and we all sang along. Because, it turns out, the subject matter of the movie is exactly the thing I had been doing: Parents overreacting insanely to the idea that children will hear bad words in movies. HUGE learning experience for all involved. Sandra
|
|
|
|
TV - question, please don't flame me
Irsue@...
OK, for fear of being flamed, I have hesitated in sending this message, but
my curiosity is getting the best of me. I am fairly new to unschooling, I have been homeschooling for 4 years, and this is my first year of unschooling. Around our house, TV isn't something we watch a lot of. Yes, we watch a ton of videos, we have quite a collection of videos, and the kids usually pick videos of interest to them from the library. My question is for the people that do not put limits on what their kids watch, and again, please don't flame me, I am not trying to ask a dumb question and I really hate groups that start flaming. If your child chooses to watch something along the lines of borderline pornography, or full blown pornography, do you put an end to that, or are you letting them watch it or has that not become an issue in anyone's home? I guess that is something I wouldn't want to walk in and see my kids watching and I would hope that other parents would feel the same. Again, I am just asking a question, not trying to start an all out war. Susan
|
|
|
|
Re: registered of not in NC
genant2@...
In a message dated 10/18/03 9:11:26 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
Tuckervill@aol.com writes: But I wouldn't allow them to visit, on principle. Invasive andBut in NC when you fill out your notice of intent it says, and the law supports it, that they can make homevisits when they like but do have to give notice before coming. In order to file for your NOI you have to agree to this. I am not saying that you "have" to let them in just if you do not, after you agreed to, they might assume, correctly or incorrectly, that you have something to hide and will probably take further actions. It isn't a home inspection, as there are no regulation like for day care or private schools, it s just to "review your records". Now I know some out there choose to not comply based on principal but I am not one of them. I do the minimum to comply so that I do not in any way put my boys in jeopardy of any state intervention. Pam G
|
|
|
|
Re: television
Leslie530@...
In a message dated 10/17/2003 6:51:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
ambdkf@earthlink.net writes: Do you feel like they were always like that? When the tv thing happened with us they were 2 and 4 now 3 and 5. I wonder if the difference is that at such a young age they take in info differently or if it is just them/me (i.e. personality). Using AOL 9.0 so don't know if this will work... I did limit my son's TV content a bit when he was this young. He was very sensitive to what he saw. He would act like the characters and have nightmares if he watched something intense. When he was this young, that just meant not having the TV on a channel where this might show up and not bringing those videos into the house. I feel like it was more management than anything. Now (he's seven), if he's not so affected and he leaves the room for scary parts. He still picks up an occassional behavior he's seen, but it doesn't usually last long. I see it as sort of an acting thing, trying it on for size. If it's inappropriate, I tell him so. The only movie I've "censored" lately is Lilo and Stitch, I didn't take him to see it at the movies. He would have acted like Stitch, all crazy. But he didn't ask, hasn't asked to rent it or anything, so have I really censored it? I just didn't suggest it. He's gained enough maturity since the movie came out that if he saw it now, I would only have an hour or two of Stitch-ness instead of days. Leslie
|
|
|
|
Re: television
Fetteroll <fetteroll@...>
on 10/17/03 6:17 PM, fishierich@aol.com at fishierich@aol.com wrote:
Having the television onDid they turn it on themselves and watch it all day? For how many months? What other things did they have in their lives that they enjoyed doing that were available to them? Did you take them out to places and were they unhappy and wanting to get back to the TV? How much did you watch with them? How much were they left to themselves? Having the television onAnd if they did want it on all day and you didn't then there are two sets of incompatible desires. And the solution to that dilemma you're modeling for your kids is that bigger, stronger people get to have what they want and smaller, weaker people get the shaft. If we spent our childhoods doing what our parents wanted us to do and we enter adulthood (and then parenthood) trying to fulfill the need to do what we want, then we pass that legacy of neediness and unhappiness onto our children. And our relationship with our kids isn't as joyful as it could be because using our power to get our way creates an adversarial relationship with them. It's helpful in terms of building a relationship to recognize that children have no power over the world. All the power they wield is what they get through us. If our goal is to have our own way, then having kids isn't a good way to achieve that. If our goal is to help our kids (give them the power to) get what they want in life -- which is the goal of unschooling -- then we need to recognize when we're being our own roadblock to our goal. Blocking our children's access to something they like (TV) is being a roadblock to our goal. If you set your sights on helping them get what they want out of life, then the things you want your way won't seem as important as they did in the past. That doesn't mean we should set our needs aside entirely. If we don't respect ourselves, our kids won't respect us either. But it doesn't help our relationship if we take away our kids power (that they're getting through us) in order to respect ourselves. My opinion may change asThe more help and practice they have when they're younger trying to get what they want (on things that aren't dangerous), the easier it will be when they have the power and freedom to do whatever they want with choices that are dangerous. Learning how to make choices between TV shows is much safer than learning how to make choices when cars and alcohol are available. Do you think at 4Yes. At 4 does she go to the adult section of the library and pull out The Joy of Sex and full color photos of war? Those things just don't interest kids. My daughter has always been able to choose what she wanted to watch. She didn't much care about flipping through channels at 4 but by 6 she would search for the stations that had cartoons. She'd pass by anything live action. There isn't any reason for little kids to be watching shows that we fear they'll watch. They won't want to see the news or sex or violence. It just doesn't interest them. (And if it does, then it's likely there's something else going on in their lives that they need help with.) (There are, though, kids who develop deep compassion early who can be upset by images of people being mean to each other. Rather than avoiding TV, we can help them have power over TV by helping them figure out ways to get to what they want on TV while avoiding seeing the things they don't want to see.) What about the influence of commercial TV? Do you not think that has anYou can talk about advertisements with them to give them power over them. I think it's more helpful to use commercials for things the kids don't want -- adult stuff like laundry detergent and toys that don't interest them -- for discussion rather than using the commercials for things they want. If we use commercials for things they want the kids will recognize the agenda isn't commercial awarenes but is really about convincing them they're being decieved and manipulated into wanting that product. What about the news or just the news flashes? Regular prime-time newsMy daughter has told me that news flashes don't seem real to her. And we've talked about that being advertising for the news. The stations want us to watch the news so they make it sound like the sky is falling so we'll feel like we have to watch it. Is there a place for me in the chat group with my views on TV or should IAs in a place where people can comfortably share the walls they've built up around their fears rather than examining whether those fears have foundations and discussing ways to deal with the fears? Building and maintaining walls against what we fear is always much easier than examining and dealing with fears. But walls give power to the things we fear beyond what they have. Knowledge helps us understand what the true power is of the things we fear and gives us power over them. Joyce
|
|
|
|
Re: registered of not in NC
Tuckervill@...
In a message dated 10/18/2003 8:06:53 AM Central Daylight Time,
genant2@aol.com writes: I guess I figure if I am complying with the law then it really doesn't matter if they visit or not. ~~~ But I wouldn't allow them to visit, on principle. Invasive and unnecessary. Accomplishes NOTHING. Tuck
|
|
|
|
Re: registered of not in NC
genant2@...
In a message dated 10/17/03 12:18:34 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
Dnowens@aol.com writes: I don't understand the point. If there is no grade level requirement, thenYou would have to ask the state. I just comply with the law because I feel it is very easy to do and don't want any more requirements. The law is just very vague. Pam G
|
|
|
|
Re: registered of not in NC
genant2@...
In a message dated 10/17/03 9:53:29 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
Leslie530@aol.com writes: Does anyone know about this? I'm all for doing the least the law requires,They send out this post card after you have been homeschooling a couple of years. You send it in also to state how many children are currently enrolled in your homeschool. Not by name but by age and gender. And yes that is what it says. But it does not say your chances of a visit increase it says you are willing to have a home visit. The Notice of intent says that as well. (that you agree to a home visit). I know people who have sent it in both ways saying they will send the info in and not send it in and still don't know anyone that has had a home visit. This is a voluntary thing to send the info to the state. It says this on the paper. I guess I figure if I am complying with the law then it really doesn't matter if they visit or not. They have three people who work in the NC DNPE and that covers private schools as well. Sometime at the end of the year you will see a notice going around from the department asking for volunteers to help file int he office. I do believe that is to help file all that paperwork from the thousands of people who chose to voluntary send int he information. They ask for attendance records, and test results. Pam G
|
|
|
|
Re: television
kstjonn <kara@...>
Too long to get into but we don't have access to satellite TV. But
we have an extensive movie collection. My nearly five yr old can get out her own DVDs and put them in whenever she wants. And some may say that it's not a real choice, since we chose the movies. But there again, Soph makes the choices when we shop. Of course, we also buy things when she is not with us, so there are always lots of choices she may have not even known about or seen in a store or online. My husband travels a lot and always comes home with a suitcase full of movies (and books and toys and .... LOL). Yes, my daughter acts out what she sees in a movie, but she does that with books too, should I limit her reading time and book choices? She acts out things she sees in her everyday life. This is how she processes and learns. She adds her own flavor to these scenarios and changes things around to get a diff. outcome.
|
|
|
|
Re: television
fishierich@...
In a message dated 10/17/03 8:30:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
SandraDodd@aol.com writes: You're welcome to stay in this group, but if you express your views they probably WILL be questioned and dissected. Well, isn't this why I'm hear to broaden my views and opinions. Which will hopefully make me a more open minded parent/person. I like the idea of people giving honest opinions on subjects. No one said I had to agree; but I'm willing to think about it. Margaret
|
|
|
|
Re: Emulating Arthur (was: television)
Nancy Wooton <ikonstitcher@...>
on 10/17/03 4:22 PM, M. Dalrymple-Lepore at si1verkitten@mac.com wrote:
Yeah, I've had times when my little guy emulated the less-wonderfulIf you're leaving your kids alone to be babysat by the TV while you spend your day on the internet ;-))) that's one thing; I think watching with them can be a valuable introduction to issues they might not encounter as homeschoolers. For example, my dd started watching ER with me when she was about 12. Dad would play board games with ds, then about 9, while Laura and I had "ER Night." One episode featured a 14 y.o. who was pregnant. This opened a discussion following Laura's wide-eyed "She's *14*?" which included topics like compassion for young out-of-wedlock mothers (my maternal grandmother conceived my mom at 14), abortion, birth control, STD's, waiting until you're truly ready, etc. All during the commercial break <ggg> Nancy (but I hated that Arthur show ;-) (and I told them if they started talking like SouthPark, they couldn't watch it anymore -- then they started imitating Cartman so perfectly, I couldn't stop laughing long enough to nuke 'em!)
|
|
|