Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Cubs, you are so blinded by your righteousness that you seem to have have lost track of your own position in this thread. Let me remind you...
From rnc 76 "The trials and tribulations that go along with high school life are a real growing experience for many. I think homeschooled children lack socialization to a large degree. I'm sure some parents do a much better job than others. But I think it is almost impossible for a parent to provide a child opportunities to interact with people who are poor, rich, white, black, asian, smart, dumb, rude, friendly, athletic, lazy... You know, the kind of people that you have to deal with in REAL LIFE in college, at work, at the grocery store...
You basically have to do your best to raise your child to make good choices and hope that the bad choices they make don't have too bad of consequences and they learn from their mistakes. At some point, they have to leave the house and make it on their own. I saw a couple homeschooled children in college that had a real problem adjusting to unstructured, unsupervised life and went a little nuts."
Totally agree with everything you said...
>> since you make the statement, I'll hold you to the position that rnc76's words are your, va bene?
Blanket statements include... "I think homeschooled children lack socialization to a large degree."
LOL!! No stereotyping there. Some are and some are not.
"But I think it is almost impossible for a parent to provide a child opportunities to interact with people who are poor, rich, white, black, asian, smart, dumb, rude, friendly, athletic, lazy... "
Why would any parent want the full range of kids, especially if some kids are in positions to impose their ill on others and materially affect not only their school years but their own view of Self? To me, it speaks of hypocrisy. Most public school parents in affluent school districts have resisted full integration of schools. These types don't seek real diversity. I laugh when I read this. What they seek is selectivity. This is why the demographic representation of elite public schools is anything but representative of the greater population, but rather representative of the affluent communities from whence they come. Why not admit it? For every public school like Berkeley High, there are a dozen schools like Gunn, Los Altos and Saratoga that are quite comfortable to keeping their schools free from certian types, save for a token few to dot their brochures.
"At some point, they have to leave the house and make it on their own. I saw a couple homeschooled children in college that had a real problem adjusting to unstructured, unsupervised life and went a little nuts"
LOL! Let's see the assumption is (a) HS kids are hopelessly joined to the hip to parents and (b) HS kids cannot function in the world. LOL!! Again, no stereotyping there. Maybe Chicago is the land of HS castoffs, like the Island of Unwanted Toys? I don't quite know. The HS kids I know are brilliant and independent. More than independent, they are well functioning adults who have worked throughout high school and go on to college and graduate school with seamless transition...probably at a higher rate than public school kids, but I won't go there...
Then I realized that many of the homeschooled kids seemed sad, isolated, and disconnected from their peers.
Geez, what kind of sad exposure to homeschoolers have you received? Sad? Isolated? Disconnected? What are you a truancy officer? The Child Catcher from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang? Just to let you know, parents who keep their chained and locked in closets are not homeschoolers. I am not sure if you know the difference! Now, obviously there are some misguided parents out there who have put ideology over the suitability of HS to their children. But by in large nearly every HS parent I know of has had to seriously weigh the pros and cons of homeschooling vs going along with the neighborhood crowd. However, this process of self-reflection is far less prevalent with public school parents. Attendance of public schools is a fait accompli by virtue of residence. Few parents bother to transfer or even know they might have the right to move their kids to other schools. Even fewer bother to evaluate public versus private versus homeschooling. Few...not all...few.
I felt that, if I homeschooled, I would be sheltering my kids and limiting opportunities to learn from other types of kids, teachers, etc.
Sure that is a risk, but it depends on the school, the kid, and the alternatives, no? My children have logged close 50,000-200,000 miles with me and have interacted with kids from all over the world. Do all HS kids have this opportunity? Of course not....but some do. Do all public school kids have this opportunity? Of course not, but some do. While advocates of HS simply argue that the potential of HS is great and worthy of serious consideration, public school advocates are dismissive at even the thought that their dear and frightfully expensive public school (tax $$) might actually offer an inferior education. Funny...
Educating the whole child is not just about textbook academics. It's about being part of the large, diverse community that is outside your home.
>> Each point you make is simply too easy to refute and I am getting bored. But you are smart and eloquent enough to suggest that the information set upon which you are making these wild assumptions is somewhat biased. It is clear your exposure (or presumed exposure) to homeschoolers consists of dreary, sad-faced, shy, mute humanoids, scared of the world and unable to communicted with their peers about the Jonas Brothers or UltraMan. The visual I am getting is drooling, white-as-ghost, disheleved kids, with a McGuffy Reader in one hand and a harmonica in the other. Whereas the image I have is of kids coming of an afternoon sail, with Blackberry in hand, laptop at home, and a set of physics projects and chem experiments to design and analyze and a critical paper to write on literature or the American Enlightenment. You are getting me worried that my HS bretheren in the Chicago area have spun off to some form of bizarroland far way from any access to the modern HS movement. Given the nature of your info set, I can excuse a great deal of your assumptions and assertions. However, that you seem to unable to believe that there might be a vibrant HS community amongst the elite public and private school students you know is less forgiveable.
It is about making good choices. It is about solving disputes on the playground, working with teammates during gym class, developing leadership by being on the student council, deciding what to do when a classmate cheats, giving a presentation in front of the school, attending classmates' parties, learning patience and compassion toward a child with disabilities, etc....
>> The HS community does not do these things. We beat others into submission. Give 'em the rack, I always say. We are also anarchists, citing crazy documents that dare to suggest that, "When a government fails to protect those rights, it is not only the right, but also the duty of the people to overthrow that government." We devise ways to cheat, hacking into computers as a way of selling computer security services. We present work to companies, NGOs, and conferences. Parties? OK, I'll bend. We like them too much. But we draw the line at patience. Homeschoolers hate patience. Homeschoolers are known to urinate in the bushes at parties. And the learning disabled? we have no compassion. We even tease them along with fellow clique-members and jocks....oh sorry, that is why public school kids have done for generations...Please, spare us the marketing campaign for Public School, Inc.
But it is very hard to replicate the total social experience a child receives at a good community school.
>> Let me abundantly clear. Truly good schools are hard to replicate period. Truly good educational experiences are hard to replicate. Truly special teacher-student and student-student relationships are had to replicate. The format in which such quality education takes places is varied as are varieties of apples in the world.
I also want to mention that there is a level of peer-to-peer competition at school that, for my kids, encouraged them to excel at academics and athletics (e.g. I worked for weeks to teach them math facts, but once they saw that "Johnny" could do it - they had it mastered).
Peer to peer competition is extremely important. Excellence is, well, excellent. The more on both the better. But alas, HS parents want none of this. They do not want teachers to score matches. Oh...sorry, that was an example from a public school. They want their kids to fail and love it. No excellence for you! Funny, though, what does it mean to master math? When I work with my homeschooled daughter, what she masters is the approach to problem solving she currently faces and the attitude she takes. I would never fool her into thinking she has "mastered" math. Must be a public school thing...
I understand that all kids do not thrive in this type of competitive environment. But, learning how to handle competition is a skill that will carry you far in this world.
I agree wholeheartedly with both statements. In fact, it is the cornerstone of the approach I take with my kids.
My solution was to find a good school where my kids were placed in gifted classes.
>> Good for you. Hmm....does not sound terribly public though. Are you not undermining the "all for one and one for all" spirit of public schools by seeking specialized and expensive classes to give to your child? Zero sum game when it comes to divving up the public school budget. No guilt? Unless you live in Lake Wobegon where all kids are above average, public schools are not going to be able to give the same "premium" access to kids whose parents are pushing the "my kid is gifted" angle.
I talk to the teachers daily and know where there are any deficiencies in curriculum and, where necessary, I will supplement with homeschool materials (Saxon Math, Singapore Science, Shurley English, etc.). We spend the summer traveling and continue the homeschool materials. I feel this is the best total education we can provide to our children.
>> Actually, I think you have a solid combination and have worked out a great agenda for your child. Your children are very lucky...and I mean that sincerely.
>> My only issue is that while you are very chipper about the rationale behind your decision calculus, you do not seem to have any capacity to believe that there are viable alternatives and that people with more and better wealth, education and public school opportunities than you have might actually dare to choose homeschooling over your approach. It is this rather limited view of HS that calls into question any sense of objectivity over the HS option.
I'll leave you with this. Few parents are in a position to properly homeschool. The HS community recognizes this and works together to build capacity and support for those parents and students who have made the committment. While the decisions made can be agonizing, they keep us alive and perpetually questioning ourselves over the right and best course of action. In great contrast, they are a vast number of public school parents who think the choice of their kids' education is solely between "free" public schools and expensive private schools, never once realizing that in this day and age there are dozens of viable candidates. So when a HS kid grows up through life, they do so with tremendous maturity having gone through many tough decisions in their youth. This comfort with decision-making is consistent with the finest traits of leadership, risk-taking and analytical thinking welcomed by elite botique firms and organizations. That a public school can generate a kid or two with such traits is commendable, but for many homeschooled kids independent decision-making is par for the course and rather ordinary. While this means homeschool kids are unlikely to feel comfortable within a massive vertically-organized bureacracy, they are well equipped to remain nimble, fresh and healthily skeptical of assumptions on homeschooling, particularly those of others without the proper information set.
S.
Last edited by Sandpointian; 04-02-2009 at 07:54 AM..
I have a shirt-tail relative who homeschooled all three of her kids, now all young adults. The oldest, almost 30, is still in "training" of some sort to be a non-denomiational minister, has no discernable source of income, yet has a wife and two kids. The middle one is also on that track, though unmarried. Both of these guys smoke; the middle one had a collapsed lung last yr and when he had surgery, it was reported his lung was entirely black. The youngest just had a baby outside of marriage. It's no guarantee of successful adulthood.
Well, of course not. Successful adulthood is not something which can be guaranteed, period.
That's fair enough. Not all public school teachers will give your kids an unbiased, quality education, but I think we can all be confident in saying that with a variety of teachers, there will be a variety of both biases and levels of quality, so perhaps things will ultimately even out in the end.
...and it usually does. When we are their teacher....they only get vanilla. When they go through a whole series of teachers from K-12 they get all 31 flavors.
The voucher system is nothing more than a plot to privatize the educational system and take the taxpayers money that is meant for the public good and put it into corporate hands.
This is much like what happened when much of the military was privatized and billions of dollars moved to corporations like Halliburton.
...and it usually does. When we are their teacher....they only get vanilla. When they go through a whole series of teachers from K-12 they get all 31 flavors.
I agree that that would be the case for a homeschooler who sat at home all day and learned only from his or her mother... but since 99% of homeschoolers are actually out learning from other people (yes, this is a made up number based on my own experience with homeschooling families, which is more vast than the typical non-homeschooling parent), this doesn't really apply.
I have found that sitting in a classroom and listening to lectures is NOT the only way (or the best way) to learn, or to be taught. Asking the librarian to help you figure out the Dewey decimal system, attending a karate class, taking violin lessons, participating in a homeschool PE class, joining a soccer team, taking a workshop on the Civil War at the local historical society, going to a children's Bible study, going to Sunday School, volunteering at a food pantry, going on field trips to zoos, fire stations, farms, science museums, and factories... those are all typical "real life" ways that homeschooled kids learn. They are not learning from one parent, or from one teacher per year... they're learning how to participate in society from a large number of people, in a myriad of ways, in addition to their regular studies. I don't think that "home"schooling is really the best term for what many of us do... we're out and about more often than we're home, really.
If one cannot secure a position as an educator within the public or charter school systems, then what makes that individual qualified to teach mathematics, english, history, chemistry, etc. at all? If that person can or is a licensed educator, by all means they have the right to do as they wish, and boast about it for that matter.
If I cannot send my child to someone else's home to get an education without criminal penalty or accusation of neglect, or ability to attain the minimum credentials for worthy college acceptance, then that form of education shouldn't be allowed to exist. After all, we continue to pay our administrators to develop protocol that best serve our children AT SCHOOL.
I understand why someone would want an alternative form of education (mine is in a charter school), but to be so audacious as to think they can give a child the intellectual tools and social refinement that best prepares them for their admission to maturity, self-reliance, and satisfactory employment is beyond my comprehension of what the term "common sense" really means. Am I wrong here or is a child's social development not just as important as their intellectual development. It's perfectly OK for a child to act as a child. If they are obviously gifted, that gift should be exploited by that child for his or her benefit, and not for the parents. Children are not trophies, they are entrusted to us, on loan to us. I think sometimes in the pursuit of idealism and a desire for our children to have a better life than we have or had, we as parents forget the small things in life that children need and unknowingly embrace; common friendship, hope, creative expression through imagination, positive social interaction.
I know families that have home-schooled and now have young adults that are riddled with emotional unrest and uncertainty about their future. They've never had opportunities to make friends, involve themselves meaningfully in social networks, truly support a unified cause such as a ball game. Home-school definitely has its place; some kids have physical, emotional, or mental disorders that might make it necessary to stay at home.
If one cannot secure a position as an educator within the public or charter school systems, then what makes that individual qualified to teach mathematics, english, history, chemistry, etc. at all? If that person can or is a licensed educator, by all means they have the right to do as they wish, and boast about it for that matter. If I cannot send my child to someone else's home to get an education without criminal penalty or accusation of neglect, or ability to attain the minimum credentials for worthy college acceptance, then that form of education shouldn't be allowed to exist. After all, we continue to pay our administrators to develop protocol that best serve our children AT SCHOOL.
I understand why someone would want an alternative form of education (mine is in a charter school), but to be so audacious as to think they can give a child the intellectual tools and social refinement that best prepares them for their admission to maturity, self-reliance, and satisfactory employment is beyond my comprehension of what the term "common sense" really means. Am I wrong here or is a child's social development not just as important as their intellectual development. It's perfectly OK for a child to act as a child. If they are obviously gifted, that gift should be exploited by that child for his or her benefit, and not for the parents. Children are not trophies, they are entrusted to us, on loan to us. I think sometimes in the pursuit of idealism and a desire for our children to have a better life than we have or had, we as parents forget the small things in life that children need and unknowingly embrace; common friendship, hope, creative expression through imagination, positive social interaction.
I know families that have home-schooled and now have young adults that are riddled with emotional unrest and uncertainty about their future. They've never had opportunities to make friends, involve themselves meaningfully in social networks, truly support a unified cause such as a ball game. Home-school definitely has its place; some kids have physical, emotional, or mental disorders that might make it necessary to stay at home.
Actually, if you homeschool, you CAN send your child to someone else's house to learn specific subjects without fear of charges of criminal neglect. Homeschoolers are not doing anything illegal, and colleges actively recruit homeschoolers. Not quite sure where your ideas on that came from.
Have you even read the thread at all, or do you actually know *anything* about homeschooling other than the one or two families that you may or may not know who have homeschooled? I know hundreds of homeschoolers, and none of them are deprived of social contact with others. Stop making ridiculous and insulting assumptions. I know quite a few adults who are quite odd and don't function well in society, and guess what? They went to public school. That does not mean that all, most, or even many public schooled children will come out of it odd and dysfunctional.
If one cannot secure a position as an educator within the public or charter school systems, then what makes that individual qualified to teach mathematics, english, history, chemistry, etc. at all?
Well, I'm not necessarily convinced that a teaching credential guarantees the quality I know you're looking for. What I'm going to say doesn't apply to all teachers, of course, and many teachers exceed these very, very minimal expectations, but (for example) in the college to which I went, one needed only a 2.5 GPA in the coursework in which one wished to teach. That means that your child's English teacher (at the high school level) may not have been better than an average C student in English.
Obviously, many teachers do excel these very modest goals, but many do not. Fortunately, in my professional experience, I've met some outstanding teachers; I've also met some English teachers (at the high school level) who were self-admittedly incapable of teaching grammar and composition. Unfortunately, a teaching credential is not a guarantee of subject-area competence, I'm afraid. It should be, but it is not.
Sandpointian, you have presented some better arguments on this post. Thanks for refraining from stereotyping me as one of those upper middle-class, TV watching (don't do it), video game loving (don't own one), McDonald's eating (won't touch it), corporate-ladder climbing (we work for ourselves), annual Disneyworld vacationing (no interest), "trying to be street" suburban rap-music listening, Hanna Montana supporting kind of parent. Though I really have no problem with those kind of parents just with stereotyping all public school parents like this (which you have to admit you often do). That is really my biggest dispute with you. So, hopefully, we are past stereotyping (on my part as well as yours).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
Totally agree with everything you said...
>> since you make the statement, I'll hold you to the position that rnc76's words are your, va bene? Blanket statements include... "I think homeschooled children lack socialization to a large degree."
First, since you are asking me to defend every point from another person's post (RNC76), let me admit that I should not have exuberantly written I "totally agree with everything" (see, I'll admit mistakes). It was a quick reply and I should have written, "From my limited experience with the homeschoolers in my one state, I agree with much of your post."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
Why would any parent want the full range of kids, especially if some kids are in positions to impose their ill on others and materially affect not only their school years but their own view of Self?
I think you and I have had a completely opposite school experience growing up. Didn't you mention you went to an upper-middle-class, elite suburban CA public school and you seem to resent it. Is that correct? I had a different perspective. I went to a failing, gang-infested, crack-filled H.S. Many of my friends were pregnant at 16 and grandmas before 40. Several went to jail or were killed. A small handful went to college. I did get the "full range of kids" and many definitely wanted to "impose their ill" on me (it was not cool to be a smart kid in my H.S.). But I found my niche and grew stronger from it and managed to graduate from a great university and run a successful company.
I don't advocate sending kids to a dangerous H.S. and I know many do not have the parental support or chutzpah to get through a H.S. like mine, but I do believe I gained much knowledge from "the full range of kids." So perhaps, this "info set" has given me the opinion that you can expose your kids to the "full-range of kids" while, as a parent, teaching them how to handle the risks of this and grow from it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
Most public school parents in affluent school districts have resisted full integration of schools. These types don't seek real diversity. I laugh when I read this. What they seek is selectivity. This is why the demographic representation of elite public schools is anything but representative of the greater population, but rather representative of the affluent communities from whence they come. Why not admit it?
Sure, I'll admit it. You're preaching to the choir. I hate how most of the affluent schools with top programs (e.g. most AP, highest test scores, highest educated teachers, etc.) tend to be less racially and socioeconomically diverse. I wish there were more equality amongst public schools (esp. in Ill. where school quality is often dictated by local property tax base). Our current school does have some racial and socioeconomic diversity, but it could definitely do better. But this is much more than a public school vs. homeschool issue (it is about vouchers, false stereotypes, white-flight, school funding sources, elitism, racism, etc.).
Though just the sheer number of students and teachers with different personalities and viewpoints and the daily opportunities for teamwork can lend itself to more diversity than the homeschool situations I know. And though you may accuse me of being a DVD-watching pseudo-culturist, I do believe that volunteering and world travel also provides children with a great education in diversity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
"At some point, they have to leave the house and make it on their own. I saw a couple homeschooled children in college that had a real problem adjusting to unstructured, unsupervised life and went a little nuts"
LOL! Let's see the assumption is (a) HS kids are hopelessly joined to the hip to parents and (b) HS kids cannot function in the world. LOL!! Again, no stereotyping there. Maybe Chicago is the land of HS castoffs...
You're asking me to again defend what RNC76 posted (why not ask him yourself?). And I don't even think he's from Chicago, the "land of HS castoffs." He did qualify that he saw a "couple of kids" who had problems adjusting. He related one experience which I don't view as stereotyping (just sharing experiences). I really can't ellaborate on his experience as I don't know the details.
I did relate my experience with one homeschool co-op (and have repeatedly allowed that there are "probably better ones" out there). The kids did seem socially immature and disconnected. For example, we went to an ice-skating event where there were several 10 years old literally crying because they were frustrated they couldn't skate. IMO (from working with many kids over the years), this behaviour was socially immature. At a museum outing, many of the kids had problems interacting with the new children in the group. And by interaction, I don't mean running around with remnants of jelly on their cheeks knocking over Ming vases. What I mean, is making eye contact and showing initiative to start a conversation with another (child or adult) or ask a docent a question about an exhibit.
Perhaps that experience was a complete anomoly. However, when you hear a preponderous of similar experiences (from other appearingly rational and well-written posters), you start to form an opinion. E.g. like Katiana's experience w/shy homeschoolers at the pediatric office where she works. Or, the H.S. counselor who related how tough it was transitioning homeschoolers into college work and the work world. Or, RNC76's post about problems adjusting to college. I know not all homeschoolers have these social difficulties (and I know not all homeschoolers have college as a goal) but perhaps some do and they should assess this risk before homeschooling. Just as one should rigorously and continuously evaluate any formal school (before and while) their children are enrolled there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
Public school advocates are dismissive at even the thought that their dear and frightfully expensive public school (tax $$) might actually offer an inferior education. Funny.......
Again, please don't generalize. I'm only disagreeing that every H.S. in America offers an inferior education. Coming from a family filled with public school teachers, principals, board members and working for years as a volunteer, I know there are still many (though not all) public schools that can offer a superior education. Many homeschoolers on this thread refuse to believe it though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
Each point you make is simply too easy to refute and I am getting bored.
Along with stereotypes and personal attacks, trying to easily dismiss another's view and pompously proclaiming your boredom is yet another symptom of weak argument. If I bore you, why do you coninue so with your long-winded posts?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
Whereas the image I have is of kids coming of an afternoon sail, with Blackberry in hand, laptop at home, and a set of physics projects and chem experiments to design and analyze and a critical paper to write on literature or the American Enlightenment. You are getting me worried that my HS bretheren in the Chicago area have spun off to some form of bizarroland far way from any access to the modern HS movement. Given the nature of your info set, I can excuse a great deal of your assumptions and assertions. However, that you seem to unable to believe that there might be a vibrant HS community amongst the elite public and private school students you know is less forgiveable..
Finally, you evolk an image of a homeschooler who I could really emulate. Though it does seem that I keep running into the McGuffey Reader w/harmonica sorts (though I picture a flute in hand). The funny thing is, I also do personally know homeschoolers who fit your description.
Get ready for this (as it will surely shake your convenient stereotype of me and my middle-class, suburban tract-house living, SUV-driving, Rap listening "info set"): I also grew up on a small, little-known caribbean island (my hippy, professor parents moved us there one summer and I now own 2 homes there). I passed the time w/my parents sailing, fishing, and diving, growing crops like sugar cane/papaya/mango, bartering with island farmers at the market, hunting and cooking goats and iguana (tis true), building fresh-water pumps and filters, building forts in the canopy, learning to play (and make) a steel drum and bamboo fife, raising frogs, writing poems, learning French, reading Chaucer and The Great Books and yes, The American Enlightenment. I met many ex-pats who were homeschooling their children exactly as you described. I met a nuclear physicist with 3 towheaded boys who moored off our island. He had an 8 year old who knew every job on that boat. They were traveling the world and he was homeschooling.
I told you before - I get it. And I may even take a year off sabbatical to do this with my kids some day. I just don't (like you) bash all American public schools and believe that homeschooling is always the best way to educate at all times.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
The HS community does not do these things. We beat others into submission. Give 'em the rack, I always say.
So you say... Why do you speak for every H.S. in America? And for every public school parent who has found a successful balance in educating their children?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
Truly good schools are hard to replicate period. Truly good educational experiences are hard to replicate. Truly special teacher-student and student-student relationships are had to replicate. The format in which such quality education takes places is varied as are varieties of apples in the world. .......
Finally, finally, finally, I can say I agree 100%! Haven't I also been saying this all along?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
But alas, HS parents want none of this. They do not want teachers to score matches. Oh...sorry, that was an example from a public school. They want their kids to fail and love it. No excellence for you! .......
You again speak for all public schools? And all HS parents?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
Funny, though, what does it mean to master math? When I work with my homeschooled daughter, what she masters is the approach to problem solving she currently faces and the attitude she takes. I would never fool her into thinking she has "mastered" math. Must be a public school thing..........
I wrote "Master Math Facts." Not "master math." Please re-read. Math contains both computational skills and problem solving. Of course, my kids haven't "mastered math" but do you not think they can master their division facts, or their most efficient computational process for accurately (yes, accuracy does count in math) solving a multi-digit multiplication problem (my 1st grader does this in her head)? If you want to debate math instructional strategy, I will (and have on C-D). But it's really too much for this homeschool thread. And, BTW, thanks for throwing in another childish public school attack there at the end... Nice. Just when I thought we were starting to get along.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
Hmm....does not sound terribly public though. Are you not undermining the "all for one and one for all" spirit of public schools by seeking specialized and expensive classes to give to your child? ....
Again, it is a publicly-funded school open to students without regard to race or socioeconomic means. Because it is good or gifted, does not mean it is not public. Do you consider all specialized schools (e.g. a special-ed school or a Performing Arts HS or a Vocational H.S.) "not terribly public." I know of many schools like this in Illinois.
It is terrible there is such inequality across U.S. public schools. But I can still campaign (and I have) for more equal access, stronger natl. standards, etc. while keeping my kids enrolled in a program that works for them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
Unless you live in Lake Wobegon where all kids are above average..
No, but all the women are strong and the men are good-looking (couldn't resist, gotta lighten it up sometimes).
>>
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
Actually, I think you have a solid combination and have worked out a great agenda for your child. ..
Phew! I'm so glad that you approve....
>>
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandpointian
you do not seem to have any capacity to believe that there are viable alternatives and that people with more and better wealth, education and public school opportunities than you have might actually dare to choose homeschooling over your approach. ..
I feel that I've been telling you this all along though you choose not to accept it. I have repeatedly said there are many viable and excellent public, charter, private, homeschool choices available to parents. And I sense, again, a hint of stereotyping and arrogant judgment in your presumption that many have "more and better wealth, education and public school opportunities" than I do (I thought we were past this). Perhaps you're right, though you don't know my background. But do know that I don't make decisions on rumors, stereotypes, or what the "many" are doing to educate their children. I do what I think is best for my specific children working within the constraints of my, as you say, "info set" and it seems to be working great (though I suspect you doubt this).
I agree that that would be the case for a homeschooler who sat at home all day and learned only from his or her mother... but since 99% of homeschoolers are actually out learning from other people (yes, this is a made up number based on my own experience with homeschooling families, which is more vast than the typical non-homeschooling parent), this doesn't really apply.
I have found that sitting in a classroom and listening to lectures is NOT the only way (or the best way) to learn, or to be taught. Asking the librarian to help you figure out the Dewey decimal system, attending a karate class, taking violin lessons, participating in a homeschool PE class, joining a soccer team, taking a workshop on the Civil War at the local historical society, going to a children's Bible study, going to Sunday School, volunteering at a food pantry, going on field trips to zoos, fire stations, farms, science museums, and factories... those are all typical "real life" ways that homeschooled kids learn. They are not learning from one parent, or from one teacher per year... they're learning how to participate in society from a large number of people, in a myriad of ways, in addition to their regular studies. I don't think that "home"schooling is really the best term for what many of us do... we're out and about more often than we're home, really.
It sounds like you are excellent at taking your kids on field trips.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I know quite a few adults who are quite odd and don't function well in society, and guess what? They went to public school. That does not mean that all, most, or even many public schooled children will come out of it odd and dysfunctional.
