pull down to refresh
I think we are getting off topic.
I said that public schools are better than no education.
Unschool is a type of education, as homeschooling is another type.
In that case, I'd say that there's no such thing as no education. We're pattern seeking animals and learning is involuntary.
What I mean is in a general sense of schooling.
Of course people are able to learn and manage life through their experiences.
If unschooling counts as education, then there's no meaningful line between education and not education.
Unschooling is not uneducated. I think the original comparison should have been uneducated vs. public School educated.
If unschooling is learning from unstructured experiences, what could be a better counterfactual for assessing the value added by government schools?
It's not like I'm asserting that government school isn't better than being locked in a basement.
Government schools give you a foundation of education to build your life on.
It isnt perfect in any way, but if you are ambitious enough, you can build up from there.
I never thought my schooling was like being locked in a basement in any way...
If your ambitious enough you'll build up either way. There's plenty of evidence to this effect.
Government schools give you a foundation of education to build your life on.
Just because you say this doesn't make it true. Most students retain essentially nothing from their years in government school. If you mean that it makes that foundation available, then I agree, but most students don't actually take advantage of it.
Yes, this seems more right.
In the USA, I think 99% of people have some kind of education.
Unschooling is a type of natural education.
There is a meaningful line between education and no education.
I might have had a misconception about it then. I thought it was strictly an education methodology that hypothetically could be done by a private un-school or even a government un-school.