Who's in Charge?

By Stephanie

There have been a slew of reports on unschooling lately in the media…some positive, some not. Each had their "expert" that raised concerns with what they perceived as a completely child-led approach.

It seems that the biggest worry that people have about "child-led" learning comes from the belief that the parent has no input and that the kids are in complete control and only do what they want to do. Which, according to the critics, will lead to sheltered children who can not function in the "real world". These children will have no experience in dealing with the fact that they can not always do what they want and sometimes need to do things they do not want to do. Not to mention that kids are kids and thus less experienced then adults and do not know or understand everything that they need to know.

What it seems to come down to, is that people want to know who's "in charge". Is it the kids? Or is it the parents?

My answer is why does it have to be one or the other?

For me, child-led means that I approach homeschooling and the relationship with my children from the perspective that my children are my guides as much as I am theirs...their interests, their learning styles, their needs are what drive our homeschooling. But that does not mean that I do not have any input or any influence. Of course I do!

A very large part of my job as a homeschooling parent is to expose my kids to all the exciting things out there and to guide them as they discover their passions and interests. I am obviously older and more experienced and am more aware of what the world has to offer. But I also know that we are each unique individuals and have our own interests and reasons for wanting to learn things. And, I firmly believe, as the saying goes, if a child is not interested in what he is learning, it is like throwing marshmallows at his head and calling it eating.

So my job is to find those interests. To do so, I make a lot of suggestions. Sometimes, these suggestions are met with enthusiasm. Sometimes not. Sometimes I ask them to give the suggestion a try before rejecting it. Sometimes they wind up finding that after giving it a try, they love it. Sometimes they find that after giving it a try they still are not interested. And that is ok with me. My goal is to expose, not to require.

Recently, I saw that our local recreation center was offering a homeschool pottery class. Knowing my oldest (who is very creative, yet not traditionally artistic), I thought that this would be something that he would really enjoy. When I told him about it, his initial reaction was lukewarm. I suggested that he sign up and give it a try. He agreed.

In the beginning, he complained when we had to leave for class. He did not want to go. Yet, once he got there, I could see that he enjoyed it. He wanted to stop after the first class. I encouraged him to give it a little more time. The next couple of classes he still complained about going, but by the third or fourth class he was totally hooked. When I asked him if he wanted to sign up for the next session, he did not even have to think about it, of course he wanted to.

What about the argument that kids won't want to learn all the things that they really need to know? My oldest is 10 and since he was a "late" reader, we have not done much in the way of spelling. Since he is not a natural speller, I suggested this year that we should work on his spelling. I will admit I was a little bit surprised when he agreed! I found a program that works well with his learning style (focuses on patterns, does not rely on memorization and does not require him to "study").

Does he ever ask to do his spelling? Nope. Does he argue or complain when I say it is time to do it? Not really (occasionally he will gripe a bit but when I remind him that this was something that he wanted to work on he grudgingly agrees). You see, he wants to be able to spell. He knows that spelling is a good thing to know. But he also is a kid for whom spelling is not easy. So that is where I as a parent come in. Not to "make him" do his spelling. But to work with him in finding the least painful way to achieve his goal and to remind him that even though it is "boring" the end result will be worth it. To help him achieve his goal.

And it goes both ways. Both of my boys have a passion for video games that I do not share. However, video gaming is a valued and important part of our homeschooling.  I support them in this passion fully, helping them research the latest game and find resources such as cheats and gaming magazines. I have found that my kids expand my horizons as well, leading me into learning more in areas that I had little prior interest (samurai warriors and ancient Japan for my oldest and bird watching for my youngest).

I think that one of the reasons that this "child-led" approach works for us is because they know and trust that I will not "force" them to learn something. I do not think that you truly can force a child to learn something (without teaching other unwanted lessons such as "learning is hard") and I would prefer to wait until the child is in a place where he is more open to the learning. Luckily there are very few things (if anything) that have to be learned "right this instant".  And homeschooling gives us more flexibility in what and when my kids need to learn.

So who is in charge?

You tell me. It can be hard to really explain the give and take that takes place within the relationship I have with my kids because it changes from child to child and from one situation to the next.  And since human nature prefers to categorize things into neat and tidy packages, it can be easy to assume that this question has an either/or answer.

The truthful answer however is that my kids do not totally "run the show", but neither do I.  It is a relationship where we both listen to each other and work towards finding what works. Are we always able to find something that works for all of us? Nope. Sometimes one of us does not get what we want.  But we keep trying.

So are my kids sheltered from the real world of having to do things they don't want to do? Nope. But they learn these lessons, not because I am "in charge" and make them learn them. They learn them because these lessons are part of life. What I like about a child-led approach is that instead of being the person who makes them learn these lessons, I am their partner to whom they turn when they need advice and help.

Which is fine with me.

Stephanie is constantly trying to find that elusive state of balance in her life while enjoying her two energetic yet vastly different boys. You can read about their ongoing exploits on her blog, Throwing Marshmallows.

Comments

[Steph]

Excellent post! I have always felt that home learning is neither "parent led" nor "child led," but collaborative. We are not unschoolers in the strict sense of the word. But I do feel my kids have intuitive wisdom about what they need to meet their intellectual and emotional needs. Like you, I see a big part of my role as being to help them experience a wide range of things and helping them discover and nurture their interests.

[Deb]

Stephanie,

I really enjoyed this post. Can you tell me which spelling program you have found? My 7-year-old is a great reader and someone who loves method, but is a miserable speller. Having something where we learn the rules of spelling without memorizing lists would be awesome. Thanks.

Deb

[Nance Confer]

I enjoyed your insights, Stephanie.

We were also discussing these articles over at the Cocking A Snook blog. I posted a link to your blog there but do not know how to do trackbacks in comments.

Nance

[Stephanie]

The spelling program that we are using is Sequential Spelling (www.avko.org). We use it very loosely. It teaches using related word families rather the spelling lists. No memorization...you just have the child spell the word and immediately correct them if it is wrong. It relies strongly on seeing patterns, which is one of Jason's strengths (memorization is not).

A similar program is Natural Speller (which you can get through Rainbow Resource).

[Cindy]

Stephanie,

You sure have a way with words. You know how to zero in right on the topic at hand and not meander (as I'm known to do). You nailed this topic on the head and share collaboration clearly. Thanks for your voice! It is needed in helping each of us "see" the real deal :-)

[Jan]

Deb,

I hate to say "ditto" but I could have written your comment myself!

[Priscilla]

What a great post! I've been trying to articulate these same thoughts to post at my own blog, but hadn't quite formulated them as well as you did! It'd been on my mind since a couple of months ago when a *very* school-at-home friend said to me that, unlike me, she "actually has goals" for her children so there are things her children "have to do." I had been thinking about how to respond for a long time, not able to quite explain it this well. Now I'll just refer her here. :-) Thanks!

[JoVE]

I think you've nailed the "problem" for some of the experts. And you've described what is going on very well. But perhaps there is something else underlying that criticism -- valuing hierarchy, and a particular view of what children are (and thus what parenting does).

The hierarchy thing is a view of relationships in which someone is in charge and others are subordinate. Pretty common view. Leads to particular sorts of relationships both personal and in work situations. And if you think that is how the world works (and/or how it should work) then it would be pretty important to make sure kids learned how to operate in that system. You clearly don't think the world works that way (or at least don't think it needs to) and thus learning to operate in that heirarchical mode is not an important goal. I agree with you but then I homeschool a bit like you do.

The other aspect is a view of children as lumps of clay or blank slates or something. This leads to a view that everything a child becomes is put there by parents or other influences. I read a good piece on the '80s supermom ideal by Barbara Ehrenreich in which she said "Children are not salmon mousse. You cannot mold them." That expresses where I am on this question (and you, too, I suspect). If, like us, you believe that children have their own personalities, their own preferences, their own strengths and weaknesses, then you parent (and homeschool) very differently than if you think that parenting (and other influences) GIVE a child its personality, preferences, strengths and weaknesses. We can guide how our children express those things. We can help them develop those things. But we have to work with what we have. Some of the critics disagree about this fundamental principle.