The Family Tradition of Dialogue

Although no one wanted to do much formal bookwork today, what with the first warm days of spring upon us, we did have some very interesting spontaneous discussions.

For one, a minor rebellion from the peanut gallery involved the question, "Why do I have to learn anything?" So we talked about the fact that society does not owe us a living, and moreover, that in this culture, people are conditioned not to give a care for the most part. We talked about the long-term consequences of a lack of education - social marginalization, employment problems, basic life management problems. All in smaller words, of course.

Somehow, this transitioned into a discussion of sexuality. (Yes, although the kids are age 11 and under, this gets airtime in our home, but at an age-appropriate level.) The topic was feelings of attraction and the long-term effects of relationship breakdowns. Much as we are a Christian family, the kids know I didn't live a Christianized lifestyle as a teen and young adult. When we talk about the pitfalls of premarital sex, we talk about the real-time heartache, and possible physical side effects such as disease.

Then, at supper, Dave brought up the Virginia shootings. I took out a magazine from Focus on the Family which featured an article called "Killology." I read most of it, and we learned some new vocabulary words: Desensitization. Operative conditioning. Psychology. Frontal lobes. First-person shooter.

The discussion featured several side trails, including the random attack on a school attended by relatives. We talked about conscience, about why kids would "act out" violent games - "Anytime you guys watch a movie, you go get your toys and play the movie, don't you? You play Cars with your Hot Wheels, and the Barbie movies with your Barbies."

Banana Brain, who is a very intuitive 9-year-old, asked, "If they turn their conscience off, then can they ever get it back?" The article answered this question as well. Since the article also mentioned the link between understanding consequences, completing schoolwork, and taking on adult responsibilities, we ended up revisiting our earlier discussion on the importance of a good education.

Discussion has been the primary source of embedded family learning for three generations in my family. I can recall being in the tent out at my grandparents' cottage, lying awake and listening to them discussing and preparing my older cousins for life away from home. The family shares its wisdom, experience and skills this way.

Also in the family tradition, I try to ask non-leading questions that provoke critical thinking by challenging their assumptions. They're now starting to get ahead of the game, spontaneously bringing concepts together to form networked ideas. We're slowly beginning to move into a stage where we can generate ideas and use each other as sounding boards to test those ideas.

It's a very natural, connected way of learning, and is a core facet of life-led learning. Learning by doing and by discussing go hand-in-hand as we mentor our children by daily experience. The main thing is that it's dialogue, not monologue. As the kids participate, they process and take ownership of ideas. In spite of the issue of audial learning retention being "least efficient" on average, this kind of discussion actually roots more deeply than many other, more formal types of learning, because of the way it actively engages the kids' minds.