My current summer reading is “ten ways to destroy the imagination of your child.” As the title suggests , the rueful irony of the book is a little dense at times, but the first chapter tackles exactly this dilemma. Focus on facts can ruin the beauty of knowledge. But without factual knowledge, perhaps explicitly in math of all subjects, you can’t have the discovery moments that can come afterward.
I love the idea that it’s our job to put interesting things in our children’s way and then see which ones interest them. Lately I’m more and more letting go of the attachment I’ve had to getting my kids to do the things I think are worthwhile and recognising that they are in fact doing valuable learning of their own volition: this has to a large degree been influenced by discovering your Substack. Thank you for your thoughts on this book.
I used to follow Fisher on twitter, back when I used the site regularly.
A few months back, a tweeter said they’d been educated by their parents in a similar way to that which Fisher recommends, and that they wished this hadn’t been the case as they felt they had missed out, had gaps in their learning as a result. Fisher was unsympathetic and asked the tweeter what was stopping them learning those things as an adult, now?
Something about the exchange felt veey glib to me, as though Fisher was unwilling to engage properly with criticism.
My home educated youngest is autistic (as am I) and as Fisher’s work is recommended a *lot* to parents of autistic children, she has a huge following in the online groups I’m in. Any criticism is quickly shut down. I’m not sure this is especially healthy. I agree with much of what you’ve said in this post, for sure.
(As for multiplication tables, I could write an essay on my thoughts about that, but I’ll spare you!)
I think in person Naomi comes across as much more open and less extreme - and also willing to talk through parents particular challenges.
That said, She’s more extreme than my view and I don’t particularly challenge her (but try and draw out her views) but you might like listen to this podcast I did with her. https://www.thendobetter.com/arts/2022/8/31/naomi-fisher-home-education-unschool-agency-in-learning-meltdowns-child-led-learning-cognitive-psychology-podcast
My current summer reading is “ten ways to destroy the imagination of your child.” As the title suggests , the rueful irony of the book is a little dense at times, but the first chapter tackles exactly this dilemma. Focus on facts can ruin the beauty of knowledge. But without factual knowledge, perhaps explicitly in math of all subjects, you can’t have the discovery moments that can come afterward.
I love the idea that it’s our job to put interesting things in our children’s way and then see which ones interest them. Lately I’m more and more letting go of the attachment I’ve had to getting my kids to do the things I think are worthwhile and recognising that they are in fact doing valuable learning of their own volition: this has to a large degree been influenced by discovering your Substack. Thank you for your thoughts on this book.
I used to follow Fisher on twitter, back when I used the site regularly.
A few months back, a tweeter said they’d been educated by their parents in a similar way to that which Fisher recommends, and that they wished this hadn’t been the case as they felt they had missed out, had gaps in their learning as a result. Fisher was unsympathetic and asked the tweeter what was stopping them learning those things as an adult, now?
Something about the exchange felt veey glib to me, as though Fisher was unwilling to engage properly with criticism.
My home educated youngest is autistic (as am I) and as Fisher’s work is recommended a *lot* to parents of autistic children, she has a huge following in the online groups I’m in. Any criticism is quickly shut down. I’m not sure this is especially healthy. I agree with much of what you’ve said in this post, for sure.
(As for multiplication tables, I could write an essay on my thoughts about that, but I’ll spare you!)