What if kids “homeschooled” because of COVID actually do better than going to school? Can we just pay parents? (high school, mathematics)

[tolovefromANFIELD]

Originally Posted by Spazkat9696

So are the parents going to develop the lessons? Also many parents want/need to work.

Are you aware that centrally planned government sanctioned schooling is only 100 years old or so? Schooling was in the hands of parents for a lot longer than that.

[Spazkat9696]

Originally Posted by tolovefromANFIELD

Are you aware that centrally planned government sanctioned schooling is only 100 years old or so? Schooling was in the hands of parents for a lot longer than that.

There were schools long before 100 years ago. Are you saying prior to 1920 parents provided all education?


FYI: a lot of parents don’t want to school their children. That’s why they’re so mad schools are closed.

[tolovefromANFIELD]

Originally Posted by Spazkat9696

There were schools long before 100 years ago. Are you saying prior to 1920 parents provided all education?


FYI: a lot of parents don’t want to school their children. That’s why they’re so mad schools are closed.

Please look at what I wrote. I never claimed there weren't schools prior to 100 years ago, I wrote that the government run centrally planned schooling didn't exist prior to 100 years or so. US Department of Education didn't exist prior to 1979.

[barneyg]

Originally Posted by ripkobe248

What if we look at aggregate data in the future and find out that kids doing online school without actually going to school do BETTER.

You know...like look at the data for say kindergarteners that never actually went to school...track their academic scores throughout their path.

I think once things get settled in these children will test as well or better than kids in the previous years who went to school 5 days a week.

Will this show the amount of waste in our education system?

I take it you don’t have much of a research background. Selection bias is a real thing. Google it sometime.

As for the rest of this thread, all of the pros and cons resurface regularly on this board. There is quite a bit of political ideology behind some of it. The most popular argument seems to be "schools today set the bar too low, so the solution is to get rid of schools altogether". I am not sure that line of thinking deserves any sort of debate.

I tend to think that any reasonably realistic proposition needs to start with the assumption that schools are not going to disappear, and that anyone with a simple "solution" to today’s schools cannot be trusted for any nuanced analysis of causes and effects (including unintended consequences).

[tolovefromANFIELD]

Originally Posted by barneyg

I take it you don’t have much of a research background. Selection bias is a real thing. Google it sometime.

As for the rest of this thread, all of the pros and cons resurface regularly on this board. There is quite a bit of political ideology behind some of it. The most popular argument seems to be "schools today set the bar too low, so the solution is to get rid of schools altogether". I am not sure that line of thinking deserves any sort of debate.

I tend to think that any reasonably realistic proposition needs to start with the assumption that schools are not going to disappear, and that anyone with a simple "solution" to today’s schools cannot be trusted for any nuanced analysis of causes and effects (including unintended consequences).

I do have a research background, and I love me some unintended consequences debate. In my wealthy, top 10 school district in my state as of last update from the district, only 58% of all students registered for the upcoming school year which will be as of now, all online. Wealthy parents, or middle upper class parents and to a certain degree middle class parents have options. They also understand the value of a dollar because they pay a disproportionate amount in property taxes, and 75% of our tax bill goes to schools.

Therefore, schooling, as it is today will only be appreciated and attended mostly by lower income kids whose parents have no other choice. Either way, money flowing into schools and/or quality of education will suffer. In the end, schools and lower income parents will suffer the most, ironically since the school restrictions are being put in place to protect the very same.

[barneyg]

Originally Posted by tolovefromANFIELD

I do have a research background, and I love me some unintended consequences debate. In my wealthy, top 10 school district in my state as of last update from the district, only 58% of all students registered for the upcoming school year which will be as of now, all online. Wealthy parents, or middle upper class parents and to a certain degree middle class parents have options. They also understand the value of a dollar because they pay a disproportionate amount in property taxes, and 75% of our tax bill goes to schools.

Therefore, schooling, as it is today will only be appreciated and attended mostly by lower income kids whose parents have no other choice. Either way, money flowing into schools and/or quality of education will suffer. In the end, schools and lower income parents will suffer the most, ironically since the school restrictions are being put in place to protect the very same.

Are you saying your top 10 school district is experiencing a 42% enrollment drop? Are homeschooling or private schools really picking up the slack or is there some proportion of students that are falling through the cracks?

I agree that changes in the quality of public schools mostly affect lower income students. But I don’t understand your point, what school restrictions are you talking about? My previous reply seems to have nothing to do with yours.

[tolovefromANFIELD]

Originally Posted by barneyg

Are you saying your top 10 school district is experiencing a 42% enrollment drop? Are homeschooling or private schools really picking up the slack or is there some proportion of students that are falling through the cracks?

I agree that changes in the quality of public schools mostly affect lower income students. But I don’t understand your point, what school restrictions are you talking about? My previous reply seems to have nothing to do with yours.

Yes, as of last update. That was a week ago or so, maybe ten days. School is set to start on 9/1. We homeschool, and my wife has homeschooled for the last nine years. Our oldest one, though wanted to go to a public HS.

My wife is part of a homeschooling co-op (which she ran for few years before stepping down two years ago), and they've had enormous interest. My neighbors (two of them) have asked my wife to take on their kids education, and they would pay. My wife, of course, declined. Our best friends--husband is a doctor have pulled their kids out of school, and the wife is homeschooling already.

As far as your question about my reply, that was concerning your point that schools will stick around and not disappear, and I agree. I just think it will be a slow and painful decline.

[keyman51]

In Alaska, there are many homeschooled kids that are "monitored" by a school district. This is called distance learning, and many of these programs not only send normal paperwork (or do some online work) but they may also send some other types of learning materials and some will also pay for local classes or do some reimbursement (up to $2000.00 at one time). This works for some kids that live in very remote areas and are not near a school, or in traditional districts that are just not right for the children. The district still receives money from the state - up to $7000 I think, students are regularly tested, and the district is able to use the extra money to help keep its brick and mortar school operating, as many remote schools would have a hard time keeping the doors open for local students. I am not saying that this is the best thing, I've been told that Alaskan kids tend to be less educated than their peers in lower 48 schools on average. I think the homeschooled kids do better though because the parent is more interested in their own childs education. There are kids in this district that parents will take them out for weeks on vacations and the child returns to school having done no schoolwork while they were gone. Districts are rarely allowed to hold back a child for not turning in little work. Meanwhile, teachers are expected to teach anything from sex ed, how to recognize abusive relationships, make sure that a child gets fed regularly, and just baby sit the child when the parent doesn't "parent". Parents are expecting the school to not only educate the child, but to also be the parent that they may not be.

[charolastra00]

Originally Posted by StealthRabbit

I find the most important difference is engagement of students in a broad variety of opportunities and responsibilities. (From a young age).

That can be done in many formats,
TIME and purpose to do this is critical. (Unschooling helped us as school was always way down on family priorities. - engaged kids are learning 24x7)
Leadership training and opportunities - (high impacts for students that I have experienced / witnessed) ALL available during Covid, maybe MORE available since soo much FREE time.

1. 4H "My heart to greater loyalty, My hands to larger service, My health to better living, For my club, my community, my country, and my world."
2. Peer Mentoring (at school or in organizations)
3. Scouting (of years gone by)
4. Camp positions for youth participation
5. Farm / ranch career kids (they have many responsibilities from a young age, and have watched a lot of their animals die (strong lesson of life)) I lost (5) farm friends / classmates from accidents BEFORE finishing High school
6. Family business participation
7. Internationally raised (Amazing capable kids and coworkers have come out of international boarding schools for missionaries, but same with a few basket cases) Everyone is different and responded differently.
8. Community volunteer kids (At homeless and battered women shelters)
9. Food Bank / benevolent volunteer kids.

One of my very good friends (now deceased at age 92 boo-hoo) sent all his kids FAR away (foreign countries) at age 18 with a one way ticket to grow up and figure out how to return home. He placed them with friends as a starter, but no funds, just time to grow up and fend for themselves. Not perfect and had it's faults, but another example of variety of options. Military works (or not) for many.


Covid offers so many unique opportunities. (tho reduces community volunteerism, thus I promote 'mentoring' peer-to-peer for younger ages) Protect the elder teachers, without excluding them or their students. GROW the responsibilities / capabilities of those students willing and able to mentor their peers.

My experience in 4H is partially where I got such a negative opinion of kids who were homeschooled! I was a very active 4Her and by high school, was one of the few public school kids who was active in my county's coop. I was competitive in 3 events (wildlife judging, consumer jamboree, all-state presentations) and very active with my local club, and almost everyone else was homeschooled. What stood out to me is that most of these kids were really insular. They followed a religious curriculum, only engaged with people within their faith, and didn't seem to know what to do when confronted with someone who came from a totally different background (i.e. me).



I think there's a lot of benefit to homeschooling if parents take the time to ensure that their children have access to people from all different ages, backgrounds, opinions, economic statuses, faiths, and traditions as well as educational opportunities that parents can't provide. And I think many homeschool parents do just that! If they don't, however, they are the ones that paint a dark stain. Intervention is more difficult for a homeschooled kid than a public school kid if the parent is slipping up. I have no doubt the girls who I did 4H with struggled if they tried to leave their ideological bubble and the education they were receiving would not prepare them for a traditional career or college had they wanted to go.



In any case, all that you listed -besides farm work and a family business - were things I accomplished through public school and college. 4H, mentoring/tutoring, Girl Scouts, camp, babysitting and other gig jobs, studied abroad in 3 different countries living on my own or in homestays (which would have been much harder had I not had access to 2 foreign languages in school!), significant volunteer activities... and I did that all with the benefit of exposure to people totally unlike me in public school and committing to public school activities like marching band, editor of the literary magazine, and foreign language competitions. My family was fairly low income and only speak English, so these would not have been opportunities that would have been available to me otherwise.



But whether it's through homeschooling, public schooling or some other educational offering, what matters is time, dedication, and a persistent focus on the value of being a self motivated, curious learner. If that's not modeled by parents and encouraged to take priority, it's much harder to develop as children get older. Covid doesn't make that any more possible and, in many cases, the financial strain or pressures of work make it harder for parents to model and enforce that behavior no matter what modality of education they pursue for their kids.

[Coloradomom22]

I was a teacher in Los Angeles, middle and high schools. There are many parents who barely want to see their children let alone have to teach them! If you leave kids' educations to these parents our society would feel the negative impact.