Homeschooling (CIA, international, certification, difference)

[Ivorytickler]

Originally Posted by littlefamily

So if I understand what you are saying, in the public schools you will get teachers that may or may not be effective. A child in elementary school who has the same teacher all day for the entire year, may in fact end up with an ineffective teacher.

Won't that alter the academic progress the child is making? Surely a child with an experienced, enthusiastic teacher will have a better learning experience than a child with a teacher that is tired/bored/burnt-out/inexperienced. The public school experience can vary greatly. And unfortunately, as you have found out with your Everyday Math experience, public schools are rigid and not at all flexible in responding to parents' concerns - even a group of parents that have concerns/complaints.

Families that homeschool make the decision for their family only. I have goals that I feel are important for my children. As long as we are meeting those goals, I will continue homeschooling. Public school goals are not the same as my goals, (and they should not be - public schools have a very different end-goal than I do) so I choose a different route for educating my children.

But I also do not make the assumption that every parent should have the same goals I do, so I don't question other people's choices. Isn't it a wonderful thing that we do have those choices? It would be a very dull world if we all followed the same path.

This is just one of the reasons I homeschool.....

Colleges coveting home-schooled students - Boston.com (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/09/30/colleges_coveting_home_schooled_students/ - broken link)

A quote from the article about why colleges are actively seeking homeschool students:

Such assets include intellectual curiosity, independent study habits and critical thinking skills, she said.

"It's one of the fastest-growing college pools in the nation," she said. "And they tend to be some of the best prepared."

Yes but there's a difference between a novice teacher and homeschooling you're missing. The teacher is, at least, a subject matter expert. Her issus will be in how to apply what she knows. The homeschooler is not a subject matter expert. Holes in her own education will repeat on to her children AND, like the novice teacher, she'll need to learn how to teach the material. You can't teach what you don't know exists and books won't do it for you. The novice teacher, can explain the why behind the what to the student who questions. The parent can only explain what they know and I can tell you from first hand experience that some parents are way off base. I've had kids come in and tell me "My dad told me ______" and blank is dead wrong.

I do not struggle with my subject. It's pedagogy I struggle with. It will take a few years to straighten that out because there's just no replacement for experience there. The homeschooler, who isn't a subject matter expert, will struggle against their own limited knowledge of the subject AND pedagogy.

Fortunately, children don't seem to fare any worse for having the occaisional novice teacher. I'd only expect to see a difference if they had novice teachers year over year, like homeschoolers do. Perhaps this is why homeschooling doesn't yeild the results you'd expect based on demographics alone. You can't teach what you don't know and books can only do so much. I have a good chemistry text and I spend 20% of my time teaching outside of it. Fortunately, I recognize the 20% I need to supplement because I know my subject.

[TouchOfWhimsy]

I think one of the main problems here is that people are taking the term "homeschooling" too literally. Really, it should be called "real life learning," because that's what it is. When my kids are ready for chemistry and physics courses, they will go to the community college, or I will find a tutor. Is that strict "homeschooling?" I guess it depends on your definition of homeschooling. To me, it's about finding the best possible environments for learning different topics. My kids didn't learn to swim at home; they learned in my MIL's pool. Last week, my son learned about gargoyles at a program put on by the library. He took a Civil War class at a historical society during the spring. My daughter learned ballet at a ballet studio. She's taking a class about mythology and unicorns this afternoon. It's not about sitting home with mom... it's about mom facilitating the child's learning. Some homeschoolers send their kids to public school for certain classes... that's not available in my state, but if it were, I might consider it for higher science and possibly higher math classes when they get to that level.

Public schooled children do not do all of their learning in public school (at least I hope not!). They learn from their family members, from reading books, from visiting the library, from playing with friends. We don't say, "well, gee, is that really public schooling, when you're paying for music lessons separately?" It's equally absurd to assume that all learning in homeschooling takes place in the home, and that the only teacher is mom.

[TouchOfWhimsy]

Perhaps this is why homeschooling doesn't yeild the results you'd expect based on demographics alone.

You have said this over, and over, and over, and over again during this thread, but have neglected to explain what results you are looking for. You have been provided with studies showing that homeschoolers score in the top 20% of those useless standardized testing assessments. You are giving the impression that you have no idea what you are talking about, but since you say that you have researched this subject, perhaps you could cite some sources, give some numbers, and show some type of proof behind your own theory?

[sunshineann]

When is this going to end? I mean really. i stopped along time ago, and happened to notice that this thread was still going.. If it has not been noticed by now, that no matter what anyone contributes, there is going to be that one who will debate and debate and continue the discussion/debate just to prove a point that those who homeschool are grasping at straws. (in that persons opinion) Not mine, i homeschooled my girls for a while. And it does not matter what you say, that one person will have done it better, taught it better, made the better decisions, ect...(of course in their own little world)

[flik_becky]

This is one reason I would never home school. Every year, every subject would be an experiment WRT my teaching ability. My kids would never have the advantage of a seasoned teacher who knows what works and what doesn't. I think those teachers are too valuable in my children's lives and I think first year teachers are more likely to be below average that first year. The decision to move my kids back to the public school in my area stems from the teacher turn over rate at our school.

What is great about homeschooling is that we are not held down by the chains that teachers are held down by. Because we know our children so well to begin with, we start of developing a program that will work. The only thing I can relate with that could possibily support your idea, however it did the opposite in the end, was teaching my daughter spelling. Because we believe that she has the same rare form of dyslexia that her father has, I dropped spelling in year one (kindergarten for most kids) and then dropped it again in first half of the second year (1st grade for most kids her age). I then looked at what she did well...math. Since her mind sees well in patterns, I began to search for a spelling program that taught in patterns. Sequential spelling was developed by a dyslexic it turned out and the we started up spelling again, working double to get caught up.

So to start with, this may seem to support your theory. Had she gone to public school however, it would be a subject she would struggle with for all 13 years. The school would never be able to help her so there is another benefit to homeschooling.

One of my issues with homeschooling is you can only teach what you yourself know. I guarantee I know a lot more chemistry than the average homeschooling parent and it takes a few years of teaching a subject to get good at it. I can't imagine teaching english to my kids well. I'm not a subject matter expert in english. Nor could I teach spanish. I don't speak it. I could do all math, chemistry, physics and organic. Can't do analytical without an analyitical lab so that's out. There's a reason they limit the subjects teachers can teach. They know that you have to know your subject to teach it and it would be very rare to find a teacher who knows them all.

You could say that homeschoolers are obssessed with education. Since it is SO important to them, they either learn the material or they make dang sure their child is paired up with the teacher can teach the subject, whether that be another homeschooling parent or the public school.

[flik_becky]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

Yes but there's a difference between a novice teacher and homeschooling you're missing. The teacher is, at least, a subject matter expert. Her issus will be in how to apply what she knows. The homeschooler is not a subject matter expert. Holes in her own education will repeat on to her children AND, like the novice teacher, she'll need to learn how to teach the material. You can't teach what you don't know exists and books won't do it for you. The novice teacher, can explain the why behind the what to the student who questions. The parent can only explain what they know and I can tell you from first hand experience that some parents are way off base. I've had kids come in and tell me "My dad told me ______" and blank is dead wrong.

I do not struggle with my subject. It's pedagogy I struggle with. It will take a few years to straighten that out because there's just no replacement for experience there. The homeschooler, who isn't a subject matter expert, will struggle against their own limited knowledge of the subject AND pedagogy.

Fortunately, children don't seem to fare any worse for having the occaisional novice teacher. I'd only expect to see a difference if they had novice teachers year over year, like homeschoolers do. Perhaps this is why homeschooling doesn't yeild the results you'd expect based on demographics alone. You can't teach what you don't know and books can only do so much. I have a good chemistry text and I spend 20% of my time teaching outside of it. Fortunately, I recognize the 20% I need to supplement because I know my subject.

The problem with this theory is the statistics that prove that most homeschoolers have equal or higher educations than that of most teachers.

[Aconite]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

Yes, but it still takes three years of mentoring to grow an efficient teacher. The first year, you don't know what questions to ask until after the fact. Some of the things that stymied my students stymied me. What I guessed they'd struggle with wasn't what they struggled with. Approaches I thought were good and taught the subject well had to be redone because they didn't get it.

It would be a full time job for the mentor to review every lesson plan and make corrections before the teacher taught. Plus, what you learn in pain you do retain. There are mistakes I will not make again next year.

My mentor concerned herself with classroom management, this past year. She did not get into efficiency of teaching. She never even looked at what I taught or how I taught it. Because classroom management is a bigger issue that's what she focused on. Looking back, I can see why. You can recover from using a method of teaching something that didn't work. There are classroom management issues that can cause problems the entire year if not handled right the first time.

A mentor is just that, a mentor. It still takes time for the person they are mentoring to become profficient. You don't get instant effectiveness because you have a mentor. If only it were that easy.

This is one reason I would never home school. Every year, every subject would be an experiment WRT my teaching ability. My kids would never have the advantage of a seasoned teacher who knows what works and what doesn't. I think those teachers are too valuable in my children's lives and I think first year teachers are more likely to be below average that first year. The decision to move my kids back to the public school in my area stems from the teacher turn over rate at our school.

Teachers seem to stay about 2-4 years and move on. We have only a handful who have more than 5 years experience. The school has been open 11 years and we have zero teachers who have been there the entire time (a few have moved into administration so they're still there just not in the classroom). It is because I don't want my dd to face new teachers with high frequency (this is not as big an issue in our elementary schools) that I'm moving her next year (or maybe the following. She really wants to stay and it's looking like it's the only job offer I'm going to have). Why would I consider making me her only teacher and guaranteeing she has a first year teacher every year WRT subject matter?

The thing is, with homeschooling you don't take three years to become an efficient teacher. You've been teaching your child since birth (or whenever you got him, for adoptive or step-parents). You don't have to waste time learning thirty (or 150) names, abilities, and motivations. You don't waste time experimenting with classroom management, or dealing with transient staffing, or personality clashes. You aren't stuck with ineffective or unwieldy curricula, or a schedule developed to serve the transportation office rather than the individuals in the class. There's no time lost to illness because you are all on the same page when the cold or flu or chicken pox has gone. Same with religious holidays and family vacations. There's no need for ESE (extended school year) because there is no specific school year. And you certainly don't have a child who may be unlucky enough to get the inefficient, incompetent, or crispy-fried teacher four years in a row.

You say every year, every subject would be an experiment-- why? Do you suddenly unlearn things as the child progresses? I don't find that to be the case at all. For example, this year we've studied the parts of a novel, and practiced rewriting novels with individual parts changed to see how that affects the whole. This summer we're writing short stories to see how those parts fit into a 2000-to-5000 word framework. In the fall we're writing a novel. After that, we'll look at how one goes about publishing (though I certainly don't expect anyone but maybe PublishAmerica or that ilk to be interested). We'll probably touch on e-zines and fan sites in the process. That's not experimenting, that's a logical outgrowth of the previous lesson. IME, learning organically is far preferable to randomly producing an unrelated topic 9 months out of every year.

You're trying to make homeschooling into a clone of schoolteaching, only set in a different venue. It isn't that way. Each has its own joys, its own horrorshows, its own challenges, and its own rhythms. And each is appropriate for different individuals, at different times, under different circumstances.

There's that diversity thing again. It applies to a lot of things, not just colors in a band-aid box.

[Aconite]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

Problem is, there isn't a rining endorsement for any type of schooling right now. We need change. But we don't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

One of my issues with homeschooling is you can only teach what you yourself know. I guarantee I know a lot more chemistry than the average homeschooling parent and it takes a few years of teaching a subject to get good at it. I can't imagine teaching english to my kids well. I'm not a subject matter expert in english. Nor could I teach spanish. I don't speak it. I could do all math, chemistry, physics and organic. Can't do analytical without an analyitical lab so that's out. There's a reason they limit the subjects teachers can teach. They know that you have to know your subject to teach it and it would be very rare to find a teacher who knows them all.

You're assuming, again, that homeschool is only Mommy and Junior and Juniorette at the kitchen table. I assure you, while that may be the case in a few instances, it is not amongst most of the homeschool community.

And even Junior and Juniorette probably are taking online classes in Shakespeare or using Rosetta Stone to learn Chinese.

[AnywhereElse]

I home-schooled my son with special needs out of necessity. All this everything progressive these days had turned out not to be true. The school wanted to have him medicated into a trance to make it easier for them, they locked him in a small closet for punishment - until I found out, strapped him in his chair - until I found out and complained all the time about him because of their incompetence. They never taught him anything and at home he did so well. If the parents are not capable of home-schooling a child, then you have trouble. The argument about the children needing socializing is a bunch of crap since, let's face it, those few of us that are actually putting effort into raising our children don't need them socializing with those children who if suddenly their parents were replaced with wolves would have an improvement in their family life. I swear that neither of my children ever learned anything positive from the other children and it was a constant struggle to keep reinforcing the rules but both kids turned out great and able to stand on their own and not count on the approval of others but to do the "right" thing as they were taught. Most school teachers now are not what they used to be. I worked for awhile in a large district - these people did not set the examples that I wanted to have for my children. At home, you can probably accomplish more with your children in two hours than they can in six hours or more at school.

[littlefamily]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

Problem is, there isn't a rining endorsement for any type of schooling right now. We need change. But we don't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

One of my issues with homeschooling is you can only teach what you yourself know. I guarantee I know a lot more chemistry than the average homeschooling parent and it takes a few years of teaching a subject to get good at it. I can't imagine teaching english to my kids well. I'm not a subject matter expert in english. Nor could I teach spanish. I don't speak it. I could do all math, chemistry, physics and organic. Can't do analytical without an analyitical lab so that's out. There's a reason they limit the subjects teachers can teach. They know that you have to know your subject to teach it and it would be very rare to find a teacher who knows them all.

You are correct that few teachers can teach all subjects well. Unfortunately, our local school system asks teachers to do just that kindergarten through 6th grade.

You said that you run into kids who have been given bad information by their parents all the time? How about my child's third grade teacher who marked it incorrect when my child said that "you" is both singular and plural. My child then showed the teacher her test was marked incorrectly and the teacher said "no you is just singular". I then e-mailed and she again said that it was singular. I had to show her the dictionary to get her to understand that it was indeed plural. I guess "youse guys" is the plural of you....

Or how about my child's 5th grade math teacher who didn't know how to solve one of the many challenging math problems in the advanced math course? Most elementary kids get short changed in math because few teachers really enjoy the subject matter. And there is plenty of research to document that fact....

For every anecdotal incident of a parent giving misinformation, I'm sure someone can come up with a teacher doing the same.

Also, I would love to know how you plan to be an effective teacher 10 years from now. If you argue that a homeschool parent can't use resources to learn subject matter, how are you going to keep up with an ever changing subject matter? Science evolves quickly, I'm guessing you plan to keep up by reading periodicals/journals and taking a refresher class or two. All things that are available to homeschooling parents.

And when my child is old enough to be taking chemistry and physics, if I don't feel like I can teach the subject, she can enroll in community college, take the course with a co-op or we can hire a tutor.

Public school was created to education masses of individuals. Statistically speaking, it can't work for everyone. So again, aren't you glad that choices exist? You yourself are making choices that you feel are right for your child. Why question choices that others make?

Perhaps after seeing the inside of public schools as an employee.... "The lady doth protest too much...."