<<What I don't meet very often are families that are homeschooled with a
"plan". In fact, I would say that 75% of the homeschoolers I meet would call
themselves "unstructured" and maybe 50% of those would call themselves
"unschoolers." Most of those with lesson plans are not that happy about it.
But this isn't what it is about -- lesson plans or no, courses or no,
curriculum or no, it is all about control. And guess who has the control in
a homeschooling situation? The rule maker, the driver, the head(s) of the
household. Need I go on?>>
It was amusing to read this and then, immediately afterward, find a post from
the TCS (Taking Children Seriously) list critical of the limits to personal
control faced by children at Sudbury Valley.
Those who call themselves "unschoolers" but are controlling their children
are confused about what unschooling means. It's about allowing, helping and
encouraging natural intellectual and moral growth. It's not about
The TCS criticism was about the Sudbury process in which the majority imposes
it's rules on everyone. This may not be control to the degree found in most
schools or in some homes, but it is certainly control of the minority by the
majority. This may not be a terrible situation for the child in most cases,
but I don't believe that it is superior to a good unschooling environment.
It certainly lacks the clear superiority that your posts have implied.
My personal opinion is that the Sudbury model is the best option for those
who lack the means to create a good unschooling environment, but for the rest
of us, the more I learn about unschooling, the better it looks.