Natural Learning
Michelle Cannon has a great discussion of the idea of “Natural Learning” (sometimes called “unschooling”). Check out the whole thing on her the Homemade Living site, but here’s an excerpt, followed briefly by some of my thoughts on the subject.
The way I see it.. if you have children, you’re ALREADY homeschooling.. and then you put them into school and it all stops. You’ve been homeschooling since you gave birth. Look at the amazing mental and intellectual growth they’ve reached without “benefit” of school. Why is that? It’s because children naturally learn. They are naturally curious about all things. And when you child is interested and expresses interest.. what do you do?? You flow with it. You have conversations about it.. you get books at the library.. etc. This is what you’ve been doing since he/she was born. This is called unschooling or as I prefer to call it “natural learning”. This is what I do and have done with my children. No need for for curriculums and texts and schedules. (again–why not put them in school if that’s the
case?)…
But how does this work? It’s simple. It takes little effort at all. Basically, you just live. Yes, that’s what I said. You live with your children, close to your children and open with you children. They do not have their “own world” because they are children. (In my opinion,
that view is exactly why there are teens out there having their own lives of which parents are totally unaware!) They’re there with you all day and everything is a learning matter. Whether they’re cooking with you, cleaning with you, working with you, watching the evening news with you, riding in the car having discusssions, going to a library, museum, historical monument, discussing people you know, or current world events or even discussing problems with people, work, or life. Simply keep the age and maturity of the child in mind. (Obviously, world politics is beyond my 2 year old and I don’t discuss the latest child-mutilation on the news with my 7 year old!) I would brave to say that there is a lot more conversation and relating with my children than I see in other families. Almost every waking moment, there is conversation going on between them and myself. And they are learning.
I wholeheartedly agree with nearly everything that Michelle says in the paragraphs above. She has put into words how we have tried to live with our children since day one. The one place where I would elaborate a bit is that there are two reasons that I believe we do actually need some structure in our homeschooling.
First, our children need to be able to work and learn in a structured environment, because in the future they will likely be in such a setting and we do not want them to be unprepared. College classrooms are structured, and most jobs have structure to them. If the family is involved regularly in activities where structured settings exist and learning happens within them, then this requirement may be completely met through the “Natural Learning” methodology of teaching. But if not, the addition of some intentional structure can be a critical facet of learning.
Second, and for us, more importantly, is to assist us in ensuring that we do not miss teaching the children a critical skill needed for the next stage of their lives. For example, I want to make sure my six year old memorizes his “math facts” for all four primary operations, I want to make sure he eventually learns physics, I want him to understand the parts of speech, not just be able to speak, I want him to know about famous literature, and many other things. While these things may come up in my daily conversation, without a bit of a structure (whether it be a formal curriculum or not), I may inadvertantly miss something critical. There have already been occasions where a basic building block of learning would not have occurred to me, had I (well, actually, my wife) not been reviewing the year’s curriculum plan.
I’m not sure that my teenagers will learn the formulas for the gravitational rate of acceleration in my every day conversation. Maybe they will, but I would hate to miss something critical without realizing it until it’s too late. You may argue that such a formula is not critical … maybe you’re right … but unless you - the parent - are extremely well rounded in all subjects, you’re bound to miss something. There are so many things that I am not an expert at that I could not teach (or more importantly, may not even think of) without assistance; from the history of European warfare to the ideas of quantum physics to basic Latin to advanced algebra or trigonometry.
Overall, I’m a huge fan of “unschooling” or “natural learning” as described by Michelle. I just think that there is a bit of a caveat that needs to go along with it, that we have a sort of “checklist” of critical learning events to keep us sane and accountable, and provides assistance where needed, during the time when our children live and learn in our homes.
Comments are welcome.
UPDATE: Here’s a site with more information on this whole idea dubbed “unschooling.”
UPDATE 2: Brandie has made me aware (via the comments section) that the website I linked to which contains the article is not Michelle’s, but rather was simply reprinting Michelle’s article in full. I have not found a link to the original article online, but Michelle runs a website called Holistic Health Hut which can be found by clicking through to the HomeMadeLiving site above. (Thanks for the correction, Brandie!). Interestingly enough, this article is also reprinted in full, with the exact same blog template, here.
Corrections are needed: your link is not to Michelle Cannon’s website, but rather to my website, where I simply published Michelle’s article. Also, for reprinting a substantial part of Michelle’s article, you must give her proper credit which does include a link to her own site. You can read her bylines and find a link to her site at the end of the original article you copied from.
Comment by Brandie Valenzuela — July 26, 2005 @ 11:23 pm
Your theory is flawed in that you assume that if you TEACH it they will LEARN it.
Comment by CS — July 27, 2005 @ 1:43 pm
I believe that your comment is a misreading of my “theory.” I’m agreeing with the general idea that children want to learn, and we should teach into their interests. I’m just suggesting that a bit of structure helps to remind us, as the teacher, to promote their interest in certain things that they may otherwise have no idea even exist. For example, if I live in the middle of a big city, it may not occur to my children to be interested in how erosion works, and if I don’t have something to remind me “hey, don’t forget to get your kids interested in erosion” then they may grow up and never know about it. Or 15th century artists. Or cave drawings. Or the composition of Mars. Or iambic pentameter. Or a host of other things. Structure isn’t a bad thing, it is a tool that, when appropriately applied, can make the learning process even better!
Comment by Eric — July 27, 2005 @ 2:17 pm
I am the Michelle who wrote the argument. I appreciate the remarks on the article (and the reprinting of it in so many places!) :-)
I wanted to respond to the comment about whether structure is needed or not. I believe that a certain amount of structure comes naturally in life. As I stated in the article, through work, mealtimes, bathtimes, etc. I own a natural cleaning service, for instance, and my children work with me. They understand that we must be at certain places and certain times. And even if they didn’t, they would still learn this by watching me. They understand that in public school (they HAVE attended it) that they must sit there for x amount of hours, etc. But, I don’t think that because a child doesn’t attend school or have a “school schedule” at home.. that when he or she is 20 years old he’s gonna fall into shock when he goes to college *LOL*. They are not secluded from reality, in other words.
As for needing to know equations and such that don’t occur “naturally”: Natural learning occurs by following your child’s lead. What THEY are interested in. My son, for instance has been interested in architecture since he was 12. So how did I incorporate this interest into learning?? Well that’s easy. Let’s put it into school terms then:
READING– getting books on the subject
MATH– architectural design is rife with mathmatical problems and solutions!
SCIENCE: the science of materials used for buildings which leads to
HISTORY: designs, materials, etc used throughout history and in different geographical areas (which leads to geography!)
and so it goes.
Natural learning does not mean that our children never lift a book, nor does it mean they will not learn things that they may need in “higher” education. My 15 year old does not need to learn the same mathmatical equations that my son would simply because he desires to be an architect and she is on her way to becoming an opera singer and my other daughter, a midwife. And that is one of the major downfalls of sending to school. They teach everything the same thing in the same way despite the individual interests or learning abilities.
And so if your child needs to learn the formulas for the rates of gravitational acceleration.. well then he probably has an interest in something that requires it. His natural curiosity will lead him to ask you, look it up or whatever other way of gaining the knowledge. He will not be lacking in this “critical” thing which he wants/needs to know.
My children are now 2,7,15,18 and 19. Through the learning journey, they have eached passed their yearly testing for the school board well above their grade levels. They’ve never been lacking in anything at all.
Regards,
Michelle
Comment by Michelle — July 28, 2005 @ 7:21 pm
Michelle,
Thanks so much for your comments. The added clarifications and perspective are very helpful!
Eric.
Comment by Eric — July 30, 2005 @ 1:07 pm
testcomment178
Comment by testanchor650 — October 16, 2005 @ 12:18 am