When she was a baby, I read the books I was reading aloud to her because I wanted to read and she'd fuss if she couldn't hear my voice. When she was old enough to ask to be read to I only read to her when she asked. I do it because she asks, not because I want her to learn. And it's not (and never has been) an everyday thing in our house.
So you never read to your child without her asking you to? I think that's pretty unusual. I respect you for adhering perfectly to your hands-off approach.
I do things because I want my child to learn. That pretty much is the motivation for many things I do, including the times when I leave him alone to do what he wants as well as the other times, when I suggest something for us to do together.
Do you have some sort of evidence that your children have benefited from your instruction? All anyone really has is theory and anecdote, and our theories and anecdotes are obviously different.
Anecdotal evidence is some evidence. My point is partly that rejecting all structured teaching without a basis for belief that it's wrong just doesn't seem logical to me, though I admit that I haven't taken the time to find out what research may support unschooling. Still, many brilliant people, presumably PG by today's standards, have been taught quite rigorously and in structured ways. When you teach someone a concept, they learn it if the teaching is done properly; and you can even teach learning strategies. One great thing about people is our adaptability.
While I support anyone's personal choice (I am sure your children will muddle through quite fine regardless of our different choices, as will mine and most people's), I am just curious about the basis for questioning someone else's choice to teach their little one.
Ouch. Am I to understand that you believe that if my mother, for example, had actively tried to teach me to speak as an infant (and I can assure you that she did not) that I would speak better as an adult?
I am sure that your mother did actively teach you to speak, since parents regularly do this, and intelligent parents do it much more in my experience. I mean no offense, but I am certain on this, especially as your early language instruction must have predated the unschooling movement, so she would not have had any reason to consciously curb her natural urge to teach you to speak.
I believe (as a layperson) in the general idea that the early years are important growth periods, and so I think it's a key time to expose children to things that will help them grow. I don't understand why the choice of those things has to be solely in the hands of the child; I would think that a lot of children would not be their own best teachers, all the time and on all subjects.
On the other hand, I think that being ram-fed information all the time would be bad for kids, because they would get to be passive consumers of information and that might result in a lack of drive and self-confidence. I see a lot of merit in self-directed learning activities, but just don't understand why it is viewed by some as the only correct option, exclusive of all others.
