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.
There are a lot of things in life to worry about. I worry about my friend's son who has sensory issues the public school chooses to ignore. I worry about drugs in schools (and out of schools). I worry about sex and guns and terrorism. I worry about child abuse and molestation. There is room for improvement in every aspect of the lives of our children. Those should be the controversial issues up for discussion and how to improve upon.
Those are all valid things to worry about, but I think worrying that all children have access to a decent education - in whatever form that may be - is a pretty significant thing and worth discussing. Figuring out how to guarantee that homeschooled kids are getting what they deserve and need is a worthy concern, just as figuring out how to guarantee that public (or private) school kids are also getting what they need and deserve. Not all parents are up for the job of teaching their kids, and there should be some checks and balances to make sure that children aren't falling through the cracks. The argument shouldn't be "some public schools fail children, so it's okay if some homeschooled children fail, too." Kids shouldn't be failing in any of these settings, and we should be looking for solutions that both allow flexibility as well as ensure that the needs of the students are being served.
There is an undercurrent of disdain for women who do not enter the workforce in Ivory's posts that I find deeply disturbing.
What do you expect from someone who writes something like this and truly believes it? DELUSIONAL.
"More itelligent than most and more educated than most and both my intelligence and my education tell me I'm not qualified to teach all subects in all grades. If I'm in the upper 3% of the population (raw IQ wise) and I have more education than 85% of the people out there and I'm not qualified, why are they?"
I would like to see the data in writing how this person knows they have more education than 85% of the people "out there." Even if it were so, formal education is not the only factor that makes one highly intelligent. In fact, I know lots of people who have Masters Degrees and not a lick of common sense. I felt it is OK to say I know lots of people and make generalized statements as this seems to be the vein of this thread.
Those are all valid things to worry about, but I think worrying that all children have access to a decent education - in whatever form that may be - is a pretty significant thing and worth discussing. Figuring out how to guarantee that homeschooled kids are getting what they deserve and need is a worthy concern, just as figuring out how to guarantee that public (or private) school kids are also getting what they need and deserve. Not all parents are up for the job of teaching their kids, and there should be some checks and balances to make sure that children aren't falling through the cracks. The argument shouldn't be "some public schools fail children, so it's okay if some homeschooled children fail, too." Kids shouldn't be failing in any of these settings, and we should be looking for solutions that both allow flexibility as well as ensure that the needs of the students are being served.
That's where I disagree. Homeschooling is a personal choice and private matter, not up to anyone else to be concerned about except the parents. Who gets to decide which parents are "up" for teaching their kids? Who gets to decide which parents feed their kids a proper diet and not a ton of junk? No one.
We have a local private school. I have met several kids who attend this school and I find them all to be rude and misbehaved. When you speak to them, they look at you with a blank stare. But it's not up to me to tell their parents where their children should go to school, is it?
What do you expect from someone who writes something like this and truly believes it? DELUSIONAL.
"More itelligent than most and more educated than most and both my intelligence and my education tell me I'm not qualified to teach all subects in all grades. If I'm in the upper 3% of the population (raw IQ wise) and I have more education than 85% of the people out there and I'm not qualified, why are they?"
I would like to see the data in writing how this person knows they have more education than 85% of the people "out there." Even if it were so, formal education is not the only factor that makes one highly intelligent. In fact, I know lots of people who have Masters Degrees and not a lick of common sense. I felt it is OK to say I know lots of people and make generalized statements as this seems to be the vein of this thread.
Actually, that's conservative. I simply picked a number I knew I was better than. I looked it up. It's 90% of the population for one masters degree or better. I have two masters degrees. That's unusual enough that it won't be found in stats so I'll have to go with more educated than 90% of the population.
No, formal education isn't what makes one intelligent. That's why I also noted my intelligence separately. Education means you have learned things. If you're going to teach, wouldn't you have to learn first? I know I would have been up in arms if I'd ever had a teacher who was intelligent but unlearned.
My mother was intelligent but unlearned. She only had a high school diploma. I can't imagine her homeschooling us. How much can you learn with a teacher who is unlearned. Even with one that is, it's limited. Few teachers are masters of all grade levels and all subjects. Which explains why the state certifies the different grades and subjects separately. High school certification is different than elementary school certification.
Yes, I repeat what I believe is right and until someone proves me wrong, I'll continue to do so. Truth is truth.
I've given you my argument for why I don't think homeschooling is so great. Demographics alone would predict that homeschooled children do well. Very well but when all is said and done, they're barely outscoring public school graduates on the big tests like ACT that are used for college admissions. I'd expect better scores from them for all the reasons I've repeated over and over and feel no need to repeat now. Therefore, there is no proof that homeschooling is delivering better results. It's just a bunch of people saying it is because they want to believe it is. I'm willing to bet if you compared the same demographic within the public schools you'd find homeschooling isn't so hot. It's just too bad the data isn't broken out that way.
Research says that SES matters, maternal education matters, having involved parents matters, being in a two parent home matters and it's simple logic that only those for whom homeschooling works stick with it until graduation. These kids should be scoring a lot better than their public school counterparts that include kids from all walks of life, with and without involved parents, from broken homes and horrible home situations, with parents who may or may not be literate and who are more likely to be poor.
Sorry but when I look at the data, I don't see anything to write home about WRT homeschooling. And that does not make me unintelligent or uneducated. In fact, I'm in top 3%, IQ wise, and the top 10% educationwise...and if that's not enough, I graduated at the top of my class three out of four times. Full time work, full time parenting and grad school took it's toll on my first masters degree. I only had a 3.6 GPA for that one. Yeah, I'm unintelligent and uneducated
And I never said public schools are great. I said that I don't see homeschooling data to indicate that homeschooling is better and it may be worse because the data is not split out in a way that makes it possible to compare the same demographic that is homeschool to their public school counterparts. Of course scores will be lower when you have one more exclusive group compared to a group that includes everyone including the local drug dealer's children.
I, personally, see no need for homeschooling with all the options we have for schools. If you don't like the one your child is in, there are plenty to pick from. I'd rather see parents lobbying for change.
Last edited by toobusytoday; 07-13-2009 at 04:10 PM..
I can understand your position given your strict emphasis on academic achievement, but as you've pointed out most home schoolers do not choose their path solely because of academics. They choose home schooling because they want to accomodate religion, travel, special talents or aptitudes, etc. Some may just enjoy studying with their children, and want the option to pursue a family-oriented learning experience. It's a completely different education paradigm that I think should be protected.
That's where I disagree. Homeschooling is a personal choice and private matter, not up to anyone else to be concerned about except the parents. Who gets to decide which parents are "up" for teaching their kids? Who gets to decide which parents feed their kids a proper diet and not a ton of junk? No one.
We have a local private school. I have met several kids who attend this school and I find them all to be rude and misbehaved. When you speak to them, they look at you with a blank stare. But it's not up to me to tell their parents where their children should go to school, is it?
I think parents have a right to have rude, misbehaved children (although I really, really wish they wouldn't...) and to do lots of other things that I don't agree with, but I think that because kids do have to legally have an education then there should be some oversight. I'm not sure what that oversight should be, as I think there should be flexibilty built-in for parents to do what is best for their children, but I also think that the kids have a right to be able to grow up and be able to compete with their peers. I would say that there are some parents who aren't up to educate their kids - those who have a limited education themselves, for example; if you have a barely literate parent teacher, how is that parent supposed to effectively teach her child? I'm not sure where to draw the line, but I think that while the parents have rights, the kids have rights, too.
number 1 being the parent felt they were more qualified to teach thier kids than the schools. I've always wondered what the measure of being qualified is for a homeschooler. How does one know they're more qualified to teach their kids than the teachers are when they don't even take the basic skills test needed to get into an ed program? Is it just a gut feeling? Or does being a parent automatically make one qualified?
I can't speak for anyone except myself, but I can say this as to your last question: every single parent of every single student I've ever taught knows their kid better than I do.
As far as your other questions, here are some ways we knew we were more qualified:
For one, our state standards are incoherent. Our state focuses a great deal of time on the history of one's own neighborhood, town, and state for history education at the elementary level. This ignores the fact that our state is not particularly important, but even if it were, the ten thousand years of human history that preceded the founding of this country is of some relative importance to put the achievements of this country in their context. Instead, at the Wallace School, we teach history in a coherent, organized way from the beginning: from the Big Bang chronologically through major periods of world civilization -- Sumeria, Egypt, Greece, Rome, India, China, et cetera. In our state, we expose students to world history primarily at the sophomore level of high school, and only for one year.
Next, many language teachers in our state are not well-trained in understanding grammar, sentence structure, or writing techniques. I have been told to my face by other language teachers -- actually, quite a few -- that they are not comfortable in giving instruction in grammar to their students. Color me old-fashioned if you will, but I find grammar to be of some importance in understanding how language -- our language and other ones -- works.
Ultimately, although I have definitely been impressed at the level of erudition and literacy I've encountered in some teachers, they're the exception in our area, not the rule.
I could go on, but I hope this has helped to answer your questions to some degree.
I just wanted to point out one glaring distortion in the article - the author claims that homeschooling averages only $400 per student, it's much cheaper than private school. That, of course, fails to take into account the likely loss of one parent's salary (it does mention "financial sacrifice"). I don't necessarily have a problem with homeschooling (I think in some case for some kids it is the best option) but this article is pretty biased, and left me with a rather bad taste in my mouth, in part because of the paragraph blaming Columbine in part on "government school culture."
You also fail to point out that the income provided from the sole income provider still lands that family into middle class standing financially. Not only that, more than not, the parent was a stay at home parent to start with and the income made no difference. The job qualifications are there when they need something to help them deal with empty nest syndrome later.
Yes governement school culture is really screwed up. All kinds of intellegent, highly gifted kids are disregarded in public schools. The fact that many do have at least one underlying disability, mental or academic, is completely disregarded as well. That just leaves them as a sitting time bomb from year to year until they either graduate, drop out, commit some crime, or commit suicide.
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.
