What Makes People Think They Are Qualified To Teach Their Own Kids?

[we can do it]

I am not talking about people with teaching degrees if they do. What am I missing here? Especially those with only a high school education or less?

[Drale]

1. People who don't have a strong education

don't value a strong education. They think everything they know, is everything anyone should ever need to know. Its also the reason why if your parents didn't go to college, you are statistically not likely to go to college either.

[lumberjack_jeff]

4. False.

My dad quit formal school at age 10, and was one of the best read people I've ever known.

The stuff that students learn in school which can't be replicated at home has nothing to do with teachers; it is a byproduct of being around peers.

[we can do it]

13. Being Able To Read Does Not Mean You Are Able to Teach

[lumberjack_jeff]

26. Being educated to teach does not mean you are motivated to teach.

...or to use a shift key appropriately.

[Drahthaardogs]

53. So your father understands and can teach everything?

Does he understand the quadratic equation? When to apply it?

How about vectors and Newton's laws of motion?

Thermodynamics?

Photosynthesis and C3 vs. C4 metabolic pathways? The Kreb's cycle?

How about gerunds, participles, and elliptical clauses?


My high school teacher's taught me all of that. I had some great teachers. However, none of them could have taught me EVERYTHING! It is why teacher's specialize. My grandfather dropped out of school at 13 because his father was killed in a coal mine, and he had to work to support his brothers and sisters. He was an incredibly smart man who made sure all of his children were college educated. However, he could not have taught because there were things he simply did not know due to his own lack of education.

[lumberjack_jeff]

61. Everything of any importance. Yes.

I worked as an engineer for 20 years and used a quadratic equation exactly once. A half hour with Marks handbook cleared up that gap in my knowledge.

The main lesson? The one you'll never get from any teacher? Think for yourself. In every meaningful way, you are your own teacher, you are the only one who has an unconflicted interest in you.

[abelenkpe]

70. The lesson learned from teachers and school

is to think for yourself. My nieces being brought up and home schooled by my high school drop out mother who doesn't want them indoctrinated by public schools who teach (gasp!) evolution, protecting the environment and actual history are not learning to think for themselves. They are little parrots of my bigoted, close minded mother.
Homeschooling is child abuse when the aim is to cut off children from learning things that don't mesh with one's world view.
Can children be home schooled and learn to think for themselves? Sure. But all those that I know who home school are doing it to keep their children away from those with differing opinions and back grounds fearing indoctrination. I've heard that not all families who choose to home school are like that, but have yet to meet any. Surely my mom is an example of how it should not be done.

[lumberjack_jeff]

74. Two things

1) The grade you get in school is largely a reflection of your ability to guess what teacher wants and provide it. That's not independent thinking.
2) Homeschooling in practice probably has a regional effect. In the bible belt, homeschooling parents probably have a different set of motivations than those on the coasts.

[abelenkpe]

82. Parroting my mother isn't independent thinking

Maybe there are regional differences but it doesn't explain their situation as they live in DC. Again I'm sure there are home schooling parents who do a great job and raise intelligent children. I'm just saying in my experience those who choose to home school are doing so for all the wrong reasons and are really not qualified. And they give home schoolers a bad name. That said I do think my hubby would do a great job homeschooling our children if we were ever to go that route. He has taught them to read music and my five and seven year old can both play piano, drums and the kogiri. I've taught them both to draw very well, as I make my living as an artist. But they attend a Montessori school during the day. I love Maria Montessori. Her whole goal was to teach children to love learning...and to think for themselves. See, you can learn that from school.

[WinniSkipper]

99. And that is absolutely the goal...

....to think for themselves.

However - in general do you think those conditions still exist for the majority of kids? Do you think the same environment exists today where kids are afforded the luxury to have time to think for themselves that (for example) I had in the 70s?

In the last 8 years (unlimited text and picture messaging, Facebook, Twitter, Smartphones) kids have gone to taking in information to becoming their own little TV stations. Taking "school learning" out of the equation - kids today take in and put out more info socially than I did in class. How much room do you think is in there at 10?

I cannot imagine how hard it is to be a teacher now. A 3rd grader has all the answers to my high school tests in his pocket and can find them quickly. Can you imagine how hard that generation is to teach?

Home school parents control the environment their kids learn in. Sometimes that's not a good thing - but I would imagine any people you would talk to on this board who homeschool their kids can probably give you a great example of what good Democrats see in it.

[we can do it]

72. sO aRE yOU aN eNGINEER oR a lUMBERJACK?

just askin'

[lumberjack_jeff]

76. I AM a person.

I have done many things, including engineering.

[TeamsterDem]

130. Your dad knows "everything of any importance"?

WOW. That's one hell of a statement. Does he know how to perform open heart surgery? Create a PHP database class? Fly a plane? Man, this guy's a regular "most interesting man in the world." Do you find him often saying "stay thirsty, my friends"?

Dude your dad doesn't know everything of any importance. He may be a wise man, but knowing "everything of any importance" is a claim so broad it's astounding you feel free later in this same thread to dismiss someone else for using an overly-broad brush.

I have no idea why you're taking such obvious offense to the OP, but what she or he was very likely driving at was Rick Santorum's anti-intellectual arguments which seem tinged with an anti public education zeal - bringing the very reasonable question as to just how many parents are either intellectually or time-suited to educate their own children. Of course some can. I don't think the OP said no one can. But the right wing push seems to be trending towards an anti-education platform which silently but intrinsically states that - absent the funding for education - wouldn't we be forcing already time-constrained and in MANY cases unable parents to then somehow educate their kids?

How that point eluded you is somewhat curious. But perhaps we could call your dad. Surely he'll know.

[lumberjack_jeff]

131. He knew the fallacy of the straw man.

For purposes of this conversation with you, that's all that's important.

FWIW, no teacher I've ever known could perform open heart surgery either, but they all knew where to find a phone book.

"Anti-intellectualism" as the term is used here is generally people objecting to elitist jackassery.

[TeamsterDem]

139. Unfortunately he didn't seem able to teach at least one of his kids about bombast

That's unfortunate.

You can try and spin this back on me if you like; it only deflates your credibility further. The fact is you claimed the man knew "everything of any importance." Your words, not mine. I'd try to back away from 'em too if I ever got caught blasting my mouth off like that, so while it's no real surprise that's your current enterprise, it's nonetheless enlightening if not a bit pathetic.

The reality is that the OP - while perhaps not adequately narrowly-enough stated - is something of an interesting, vexing question: While exceptions do exist, the fact remains that the broad majority of American parents simply don't have the time, resources, and/or in some cases capabilities to home school their children. And as the anti-intellectualism ramps up - a "debate" now engulfing even time-honored goals such as sending kids to college (as opposed to your self-serving, narrow definition which, by the way, is not the most general definition "used here&quot is now under attack. I strongly suspect it was that - not the "qualifications" of some bombastic ex lumberjack - at which the OP was driving.

Shocking your pops didn't teach you the fine art of reading something to get its general idea as opposed to narrowly reading it and presuming the author had directed it singularly at you. He did, after all, know "everything of any importance," and wouldn't 'cha know that happens to also be a useful skill.

[lumberjack_jeff]

150. Which high school teacher taught you open heart surgery?

Either that wasn't an "important" bit, or your public school education is didn't give you the skills you need.

Those parents who don't have the aptitude, desire, skills or motivation to homeschool their kids generally don't. They defer to "the professionals". Sadly, this doesn't insulate them from the unilateral responsibility to deal with the consequences when the professionals fail.

Parents think they are "qualified" to teach their children k-12 because most of them are. The relevant question is if they individually have the motivation, aptitude, support and resources to do better than the alternative.

[TeamsterDem]

166. Which surgeon was home schooled on the art or surgery?

None of the modern-day US surgeons, that's for sure. And there's a big reason for that: A university is simply much better suited to provide that critical training (obviously, in the case of surgeons, that and a heaping ton of residency and other real-world application). However, aside from a few bailiwick-specific barriers to home schooling - for example - a surgeon, I suppose in some cases it might be possible (presuming one could come across cadavers ... legally). That is, if one's parent is a world-renowned surgeon (and with such fame one would assume a decent amount of capital with which to impart the more costly side of the training), yes, I'd bet that theoretically at least one could home school a surgeon. But does that mean it's advisable for the masses? I'd suggest not - mostly because we don't all have world-renowned (or, at least in my case, qualified) surgeon parents.

But I digress.

Whether a high school teacher is or is not a heart surgeon isn't the issue. What's at issue - what you're flailing about desperately trying to sweep under the rug - is that your dad didn't "know everything of any importance" because, of course, I can point to probably hundreds of very useful skills your dad doesn't have. Am I calling him stupid or under-educated? Absolutely not. I don't even know him. But without even knowing him I'm absolutely 100% sure that he doesn't "know everything of any importance" because no one does, sir. No one, despite your preposterous bombast to the contrary. And let's remember, it was YOUR bombast. I didn't put the words in your mouth. You did just fine doing that on your own. Here's a link in case you don't recall: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002378186#post61

What's also at issue is that you're the one arguing straw men, as the OP never said that no one anywhere should ever home school their kids. As she or he has already admitted in a response to my post (in which I said that I suspected their motives were more directed towards the anti-intellectual movement in this country and she or he agreed with me), the issue was the anti-education, anti-intellectualism running rampant in this country. So if you're so darned concerned about straw men I suggest you quit setting them up, for you're becoming the utter epitome - the manifestation - of hypocrisy at light speed.

Regarding parents being "qualified" to teach k-12, I see that once again - despite your stated disdain for "broad brushes" - you're once again the hypocritical Picasso. You cite literally no verifiable evidence of parents being qualified to teach k-12, yet inexplicably feel unbound to the regular norms of making arguments inasmuch as you simply state something - a rather dubious claim, no less - and offer literally nothing in support of it. Worse, though, is that you presume to know that - despite all of the myriad surveys showing adults becoming increasingly ignorant of things most of us learned in school (e.g. civics, mathematics, English, etc.), you somehow state that *most* are qualified to teach children. I've gotta tell ya, if you've ever been, say, outside of your house where you might interact with these beuts, you'd quickly realize that the average Joe/Jane is most certainly not qualified to teach ... to anyone about anything. I cite as evidence of that the percentage lacking *ANY* recognized teaching credentials of any kind. Perhaps in your world where pa' knew "everything of any importance," recognized teaching credentials are just "pieces of paper" and nuisances which stand in the way of the world's eventual recognition of your dad as knower of all knowable things, but the rest of us are a bit more grounded and would appreciate some sort of verifiable, independent analysis of said "qualifications."

With respect to unqualified homeschooling parents "generally" not doing so, I once again ask just where you're pulling this from. Dad again? The fear, I think, is that the anti-education, anti-intellectual bent of the current Republican Party MIGHT cause unqualified parents to teach their children, thus foisting upon society an unnecessarily under-educated group which - ironically considering the anti-social bent of the parent in this hypothetical - would then become effective burdens of the state, bound to welfare and legitimate (taxpayer-funded) training programs to make up for the shortfall - one needlessly created out of political paranoia. That is to say that while our current educational system needs to somehow churn out more competitive minds, tossing the keys over to a group which - by and large - barely has enough time to sleep and eat owing to work schedules isn't necessarily the answer either - unless the EXCEPTIONAL parent can adequately do so. And make no mistake, those who can adequately (or above adequately) home school their kids ARE the exception, not the rule. How do I know that? Well for starters, the number of dual income households is more than double that of single-income families with kids, so that alone makes one wonder just when this fantastic education would occur. I'd also point to the percentage of Americans lacking any formal training of any kind on education, obviously raising the question of just where in the world you're divining that they're "qualified" to do so.

Bottom line is this: If you want to home school your kids that should be your right. But let's not piss on each other's feet and call it rain, either. Just because YOU home school your kids doesn't mean you're actually qualified to do so, nor does it mean - simply by dint of you or some interested third party "interest group" saying so - that the education is either equal to or greater than a formal education. It may well be, and I'm sure that in some cases it is. But given that there are countless and sometimes immeasurable variables associated with education - not the least of which is productivity and capability in terms of job performance and socialization - let's just say that the jury's not quite as "in" as you'd like to pretend it is. In fact, the studies are still ongoing.

[we can do it]

134. Wow thanks, you've hit the nail on the head.

Yes, the anti-public school noise is getting to be a bit much.

[Drahthaardogs]

153. Are you a P.E.?

I ask because I work with a ton of engineers, chemists, and other scientists and I see a lot of people (especially IT guys) call themselves engineers when, in fact, they are NOT engineers. I know the difference.

[lumberjack_jeff]

154. The piece of paper is very important to you is it?

If you think it obviates the need to evaluate the skills that the paper is meant to guarantee, then you don't know the difference - all you know how to do is read a certificate hanging on a wall.

[U4ikLefty]

157. Fail.

The lack of a PE means that you are good at engineering a load of BS on an internet messageboard.

[lumberjack_jeff]

160. You're entitled to your opinion.

But you're not entitled to be right.

I know what I'm talking about kiddo, and I know the difference between those to whom I need to demonstrate skill and you.

[Drahthaardogs]

176. Actually, I know what the law usually requires

and the law says that a stamp that goes on the bottom of design specifications that says reviewed by a licensed professional engineer. Sorry buddy, but "I'm not a real doctor, but I play one on tv" just does not work in the real world.

[lumberjack_jeff]

178. There are lots of PE's who just wield a stamp.

They don't have time, the inclination or the specialized knowledge to get into the details, nor is anyone going to pay them to get that far into the weeds.

Most engineering is done by non-PEs, and little of it needs a stamp. That's the real world.

[Drahthaardogs]

179. Most specs are REVIEWED and STAMPED by a P.E.!

You talk pure silliness.

[lumberjack_jeff]

181. You're just wrong. n/t

[Drahthaardogs]

182. No no, I got it.

Teachers cannot teach children correctly.

Engineers cannot engineer correctly.

The only guys who can get it done correctly are people with non-formal education.

Everyone else is just spinning their wheels.


Have let NASA know this yet? I am sure they would be interested.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

183. What specific degree would one have to hold

to be a 'network engineer' in your book? Because I can tell you from experience, that piece of paper might get you in the door but it means precisely 'dick' until you have done some real work.

I was educated as an educator. I studied history. I taught in public schools in Georgia. After that, I went into network engineering for a living...and while I don't have a piece of paper with the word engineer on it you can damn sure bet I am one. Your piece of paper with BS in Network Engineering or even MS is worthless in about six months...the tech just changes too fast.

sP

[Drahthaardogs]

187. Engineering is a degree.

Sorry. A physician's assistant is NOT a medical doctor. You're not an engineer, you're not an engineer-in-training, and you are not a professional engineer. You may do similar work, but you cannot stamp a piece of paper that says it has been approved by a state licensed engineer.

Fact of life.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

200. there is no 'stamp' for a network design

wow...you're really in deep. no requirement that a PE have anything to do with it.

sad for you to believe that only a piece of paper makes you an engineer. maybe in some worlds...but not all.

sP

[Drahthaardogs]

210. That is because network engineering is not really engineering in a classical sense.

It is a coin phrase that caught on. They are also known as network analysts. You do not need calculus through quadratic equations, thermodynamics, physics through quantum mechanics, nor do they take other classical engineering courses to be a network engineer. There is a large overlap in most engineering disciplines which is why you might see a civil engineer doing structural engineering work. Not so for network engineers.

It is changing though. A lot of curriculums are now calling for the basic engineering courses. In ten years, they will be classically trained engineers.

And yes, I do believe a piece of paper makes you an engineer, a physicist, a physician, or a sociologist.

[lumberjack_jeff]

225. If the piece of paper brings meaning to your life, I'm happy for you.

I'll simply do my job by fixing the mistakes which result from (sniff) real engineers who believe that their superior understanding of quantum mechanics confers some practical benefit to the product.

A real engineer will design a machine with 30 different sizes of fastener, each with different material and design properties optimized to the strength required. A good engineer will figure out how strong a fastener is required in the worst case, and reuse that bolt 30 times.

Colleges turn out engineers by the boatload who have no practical hands-on experience whatsoever - they've never turned a wrench. These are the people who run the PE examination boards and write the tests.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

230. that's funny about what we did and did not learn

we were having to learn very specific items regarding thermodynamics and physics and very complex calculations regarding propagation velocities and signal reflection. but you're right...no civil engineer or structural engineer could hope to do any work on today's complex networks...so I guess that means network engineers are just not YOUR idea of what an engineer is. maybe professional network certifications would count in your book? maybe even EE wouldn't count in your book...

sP

[kemah]

218. But you need to know where to look up the information and what to look up.

Today we live in a world of specialization and constant change. People change careers quite often because of necessity.

[XemaSab]

222. I learned the quadratic equation in high school

All the other stuff I learned in college.

I went to a "good" high school, too.

[roguevalley]

57. Okay. Stop all of you. Broad brush is going to kill us here.

Not everyone can teach. It is a rare case in my experience where a home school kid comes out with a really full round education. Everyone who thinks they can do this Try it. Find out. Most come back to school right away. Once most kids hit third grade their parents are done. This is a hard job and so much of it is observing, adjusting, changing, moving around. I wrote plans for the week and they were never followed. Sometimes the moment demands change. Most people don't know how to pivot and can't see the intuitive moment when things need to change, when a kid is right on the edge of knowing and what to do to help them get there.

Its a hard job and I would hope that people who try it do it right. There are many bright people out there that want to do this and some succeed pretty well but teaching kids is a hard thing and doing it right takes skill. Not everyone has it.

And I know ... SOME TEACHERS SUCK AND SHIT! Yadda-yadda-yadda. But most do and they do it right even in the face of raging hatred.

RV, old teacher who wouldn't do it again if I had to teach in the world as it is now,

[lumberjack_jeff]

67. Direct your "broad brush" ire at the OP

I think I'm qualified to teach because I have more than a financial interest in doing it well.

That said, my kids all attend(ed) public school because I'm not temperamentally suited to it - it has nothing to do with my education.

My youngest has developmental needs that make peer interaction the most important component of his education, I can't replicate that at home. In actual practice, he does almost all of his school work at home under my guidance and teaching because teachers can't, won't or don't tailor their lesson delivery in a way that he can apprehend it.

"Right in the face of raging hatred"? Thy name is irony.

[we can do it]

71. Wow You Really Think Teachers Do It Just For the Money

[lumberjack_jeff]

78. Of course.

"For the money" is why anyone works. This is what I mean about critical thinking.

They may have chosen teaching as a career because they felt they had a special aptitude for it, but very few will choose to continue doing it for other people's kids even if the paychecks go away.

[we can do it]

81. I said "just for the money"

as far as people with masters degrees teaching is a low paying profession. Most do it because they want to help improve the lives of others.


http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacquelynsmith/2011/06/06/the-best-and-worst-masters-degrees-for-jobs/

[lumberjack_jeff]

84. People choose a career for many reasons. They work for only one reason. Money. n/t

[11 Bravo]

132. You are ignorant in the extreme. I've been a public school teacher for over 35 years.

I routinely stay after school to work with children requesting extra instruction. Some of those children are low-achieving children seeking remediation, and some are honor students seeking enrichment. I don't receive a plugged nickel for that extra work. Your blanket statement that people work only for money is, not to put too fine a point on it, a load of fucking horseshit.

[lumberjack_jeff]

133. You would find another gig if the paychecks dried up.

That's not horseshit.

Everyone "puts in extra work". Welcome to the 21st century workplace.

People only work for one reason. Compensation.

[11 Bravo]

156. You flatly stated that "People work for only one reason. Money."

I have shown that to be demonstrably untrue. I am under no compunction whatsoever to work after hours, and my contract forbids that I be mandated to do so. I do it because I want to. Ignoring that, you now attempt to pass off another bit of broad-brush wisdom ... ie: "Everyone puts in extra work." This is also patently false. I know people who work only their contract hours, and never take work home with them. I'm not sure how they manage it, but they do. In any case, they manifestly do not "put in extra work". Got anything else?

[lumberjack_jeff]

159. Get back to me when you choose to work for zero.

There's a big logical gulf between putting in extra effort on your paid job and "working for nothing".

If teachers aren't working in exchange for compensation, then what's all the complaining about?

I volunteer in my spare time too, but if it interfered with my need to earn a living, the volunteerism would be the first thing abandoned.

[roguevalley]

90. drop down. it was meant for someone else. I never said education.

raging hatred is accurate. You never taught. You never had to face it. Look around you. Teachers are being crushed under the boot of asshatery. so, it isn't you that needs the points I made. So what. Drop downs on this board happen. as for pointing out irony to me, ha!

Teach ten minutes and you will learn more about that and the human nature than you will ever want to know. as for your baby, god speed. may they soar like eagles. that is what I wish for all my kids and yours too.

And thinking you are qualified and thinking that helping your kid with their work because you feel teachers are being inadequate DOES NOT make you qualified. It doesn't but then you aren't the first non-teacher to think so and say it out loud.

I think I'm pretty compassionate and useful for caretaking but pray to god you get a real doctor rather than someone who feels they are qualified because they once helped their mom and dad through illnesses. Irony, it applies to me than me. truly.

[lumberjack_jeff]

111. If I didn't take an active role in my kids education, they would fail.

Teachers would lay that failure at my feet.

So don't tell me I'm not qualified in the same breath as reminding me that I'm ultimately responsible for the outcomes.

Home schooled students can succeed, given hard work by parents. Traditional school students with limited parental support can also succeed, given hard work by teachers.

Sometimes hard work by parents or teachers isn't enough to mitigate for shitty counterparts.

I know that some teachers feel devalued, but attacking parents - particularly those who are most involved, isn't a good solution.

Irony, it applies to me than me. truly.

Can you please rephrase this? I don't understand your meaning.

[roguevalley]

220. I applaud parents that help. That is key but it doesn't make you 'qualified' to be a teacher

It makes you a good parent. I don't think people understand how technical this profession is and how you only get better with the job.

Try doing what you do for your son with this configuration:

1 high functioning autistic girl
2 juvenile delinquent boys with police records
ten kids sub grade level ranging from first through third grade levels of reading and math
five kids functioning at grade level
seven kids who are certified special education all manner of disabilities

That was just ONE year for me.

I got every manner of kids up to 36 at a time and I had to teach each of them as an individual. That didn't count the disruptors that were 'mainstreamed' into my class and ate up my life and the children who managed themselves.

You aren't qualified to be a teacher because you are excellent with your son. He is one child. One. I am SICK of people who feel that they would be awesome in the classroom and even though they never had four years of college to be a teacher and ONE DAY in public school trying to teach that somehow they are 'qualified'. You said that you were but you weren't 'temperamentally' suited. I am not aware that you have a teaching degree, a credential to teach and even one day in a classroom like the rest of us.

You may feel that you are a friend of public schools but your comments don't show that to me. You don't, and correct me if I'm wrong, have a degree, a credential or a day of experience in the job but you feel as qualified as any teacher by your own confession. You are part of the problem for us who are being NUKED day and night by people who feel the same way, have nothing to back it up but the idea they were in fifth grade once so they 'know' teaching and are just as 'qualified' as anyone who has given their life to the profession.

I didn't attack parents in my statement. You make a lot of assumptions about success and failure. Amazing. YOU ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO BE A TEACHER! You have one kid who you help. You are part of the ultimate outcome of responsibility for your child but the teacher in the end makes the biggest effort. They have your kid all day long. YOU do not have the same responsibility as the teacher and you are not their equal. Besides, I could put every kid handed to me into Harvard on a scholarship if I had ONE TO TEACH. But I had never less than 25 and often as many as 36. No, you are not as qualified as me and my colleagues. But if you want to feel that way knock yourself out.

You do not understand the insult you are implying to me and my colleagues at all. and no, teachers wouldn't lay that failure of your boy at your feet. we all know that it takes a lot more than that.

[Devil_Fish]

196. LOL.

[Incitatus]

219. Neither does being hired as a teacher. nt

[Igel]

29. Poorly put.

People without a good education have children who are much less likely to obtain a good education. There are lots of factors, all interrelated--low ed > low pay, low ed > low practical emphasis on education, low ed > low set of skills on helping kids achieve high. Etc.

Whatever the parents may say, the kids see the parents' behavior and are taught by their kids.

But "much less likely" doesn't mean "100% predetermined." This is pretty obvious if you think about it. There's a large cohort of fairly well-educated people. They're not to a person just the children, grand-children, and great-grandchildren of well-educated people.

Much of what kids learn from their peers is exactly the kind of stuff they learned from their peers before 12+ years of formal schooling was the norm. Another dollop is fairly new stuff, and it's only come about since kids were allowed to form packs and herds and set up one or more cultures at odds with the adult culture that they need to learn to live in and deal with. It means that when they hit the labor force at 18 or 22 they have a lot of adjusting to do because they've learned many of the wrong social skills from their equally untrained peers.

[lumberjack_jeff]

44. Sure.

People with well-educated grandparents probably have the resources to send their kids to the best schools - and legacy admissions is a big reason.

Home schooled students statistically outperform their peers.

http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp

In 1997, a study of 5,402 homeschool students from 1,657 families was released. It was entitled, "Strengths of Their Own: Home Schoolers Across America." The study demonstrated that homeschoolers, on the average, out-performed their counterparts in the public schools by 30 to 37 percentile points in all subjects. A significant finding when analyzing the data for 8th graders was the evidence that homeschoolers who are homeschooled two or more years score substantially higher than students who have been homeschooled one year or less. The new homeschoolers were scoring on the average in the 59th percentile compared to students homeschooled the last two or more years who scored between 86th and 92nd percentile.

The main difference between a parent who homeschools and a teacher in a school is that the parent is motivated enough about the issue to do it for free.

[tnvoter]

79. Were the homeschoolers pre-selected?

I don't trust a "study" that is sponsored or otherwise underwritten by the homeschooling industry.
the results do not match up with my personal experience, which includes relatives who homeschool.

[lumberjack_jeff]

83. "Homeschooling industry"? Is it profitable?

But your basic point is fair enough. The sponsors of the study have a point of view. Provide a study from those who have the opposite vested financial interest; teachers. Surely they have the resources to publish this study. The fact that they haven't suggests that the results wouldn't support their cause.

Compare the test results of students who have completed HS at home vs those who have completed HS in a public school.

Even so, it still raises the bar too high. The OP states that parents who aren't university educated as teachers are not qualified to teach their kids. If that were true, then there should be a zero success rate for homeschoolers.

[meaculpa2011]

87. I know three families that home-schooled...

their kids. Eight children in all.

Six have completed college. All six have also completed advanced degrees or are in the process. Two are still undergraduates.

With that said, all three sets of parents are extraordinary in their knowledge, dedication and mindset. None of them, however, has a teaching credential.

My wife and I are both college graduates and our kids attend public schools. They're both struggling. We often wonder if homeschooling would have made a difference. We still have our fingers crossed and we're giving them every resource and all the support and encouragement we can muster, but...

[2ndAmForComputers]

94. Did your dad homeschool you?

[jwirr]

109. Yes, my father was a self-educated man who quit school in the 8th grade to help his family farm

Last edited Sat Mar 3, 2012, 04:20 PM - Edit history (1)

during the depression. He read and listened to everything educational he could get his hands on. And he was very proud when two of his four children graduated with higher degrees. However there are people who are not like our dads and do think education is a waste of time.

[lumberjack_jeff]

113. "Education" means different things to different people.

"My boy's wicked smaht."

[we can do it]

15. I Agree and They Don't Feel It's Important Either

[mzteris]

24. I call bs

My dad never finished 3rd grade, my mom never went to college.

My brother has a Masters, I have a BA, and my sister a BS RN.

I know plenty of people who went to college whose parents did not.

[we can do it]

37. But apparently someone in your family found the value of an education.

Did your parents support your education or did they try to dissuade you from it?

[mzteris]

41. I didn't dissuade my homeschooled kid, either.

One hs'd out of three children. It was best for HIM.

YOU don't get to decide what is best for other people's children.

YOU don't have any experience or first-hand knowledge of hs'ing.

YOU don't have a CLUE what goes on in hs'ing households.

YOU don't understand one whit WHY it may be the absolute best - or ONLY - possible solution for some children.

So please, stop bashing hs'ers. You just don't know anything about it.

[we can do it]

50. Not Bashing, Just Questioning Because Not All Are Good or Competent

The same goes for other schools, too.

So are you a psychic? Exactly how do you know what I know or what my personal experience is?

[mzteris]

149. Please enlighten us on your personal experience.

Though based your post it seemed fairly evident you have had little or no exposure to homeschooling families or else you wouldn't have asked the question.

[malaise]

75. That depends on why your parents did not go to college

I know more than a few really smart folks who did not go to college for a variety of reasons and they have ensured that their kids went to college.

[Johnson20]

147. My, what drival Drale

[Maine-ah]

205. as a person with only a high school education

I take some serious offense to that particular statement. I have educated myself in the almost 20 years that I have been out of high school. My father went to college, he was also a teacher. My mother did not go to college and she is highly intelligent. My uncle did not go to college and opened his own business which turned into a million dollar business, hell, he didn't even finish high school. Yes, this is all anecdotal, but there are more people like us out there.

You have painted with a very broad brush.

[nadine_mn]

231. Sorry, no they sometimes value education more

My grandpa (a first generation Mexican-American) had to quit school in 8th grade after his dad died so he could work to provide for his mother and siblings. Despite that his English wasn't great, he read the newspaper front to back daily, read novels weekly until he died. His proudest moments were when I graduated from college, then law school. He made sure all his kids finished high school and put a high regard for education.

Please don't make sweeping generalizations...people who don't have a "strong education" can be well aware of the limitations and want more for their children.

[lumberjack_jeff]

2. It's funny how this works

Parents who want to teach their kids = unqualified.
Students who fail out of school? = it's the parents fault.

Which way do you want it? Are teachers the only ones qualified and thus responsible for the outcomes? Or should parents butt out of teach-y stuff?

[EFerrari]

6. Parents need to support their kid's classroom at a minimum.

Some parents aren't qualified to teach AND they don't pay attention to what is happening at school. It can be both.

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. Parents who are this uninterested in the issue rarely attempt homeschooling. n/t

[EFerrari]

33. And yet, it can be both. nt

[mzteris]

28. and you know what?

some "teachers" aren't QUALIFIED to teach either - regardless of what that little piece of paper they have says.

[EFerrari]

35. Degrees are just "little pieces of paper"?

It's always sort of shocking to see open anti-intellectualism at DU.

[mzteris]

36. I have a little piece of paper, too.

And that was NOT what I was saying. Nice try, though.

The point I was making is just because they have a "teaching certificate" does NOT mean they belong anywhere NEAR a classroom!

[Bluerthanblue]

97. some people can earn a degree, but not be able to teach.

I've experienced a few in my lifetime. So has one of my children. Teaching isn't all about taking courses and earning degrees. It's about imparting knowledge to others. You can know a LOT and be a really bad teacher. Being able to find a way to have what 'you' know make sense to someone else isn't something that is easily 'taught'- some people are naturally good at it, some aren't.

There are many kinds of intellect- a college education doesn't always mean that someone is smarter than someone without one.

[EFerrari]

104. But denigrating a college education out of hand

is nothing like the nuance you are suggesting, is it? And that is what I was responding to.

[Bluerthanblue]

114. I can see

your point. It seems that there is quite abit of denegrating people 'out of hand' going on here- both those who have a college education and those who don't.

I think that assuming that someone without a college degree is incapabile of teaching based solely on the fact that they don't have a 'degree' is pretty unfair. And I also think that saying that a college degree is "nothing but a piece of paper" also unfair.

Thanks for clarifing this for me.

[mzteris]

213. Actually I wasn't referring to the "degree"

I was referring to the "little piece of paper" that says they're a "teacher". As if that qualifies them to "teach".

[Bluerthanblue]

223. oh, ok- I got it now.

thanks for clarifing.

That is different than a diploma.

[lumberjack_jeff]

118. Straw man.

The opposite of your argument is the entire basis of this thread.

To the OP, the piece of paper is the only important factor.

[EFerrari]

121. Nope. Not only did the OP not say what you claim

but that "little piece of paper" was denigrated.

[mzteris]

212. I didn't.

I was denigrating that "teaching certificate" that supposedly qualifies a person to "teach".

[cherokeeprogressive]

138. "It's about imparting knowledge to others." This is the Thread Winner.

No more needs to be said.

[lumberjack_jeff]

116. Absent evidence to the contrary, yes.

GWB has a couple of really fancy degrees.

[boppers]

193. A degree is not a measure of intellect.

Sometimes, it's quite contrary.

[we can do it]

7. Helping Kids with Homework and Work Ethic Is One Thing

doing it all is another.

Maybe anybody could be a doctor for just their own family, or hell just rent a plane to take the family on vacation, no school lernin necessary fer me n my kin...

[Goblinmonger]

9. As a high school English and communication teacher

I think that I bring to the table a set of skills which allow me to teach the understanding of literature, the craft of writing, and the ability to communicate that someone without my training, degrees, and years of experience has to offer.

I also realize that the home situation is going to have a much bigger effect than I on the process. What goes on at home greatly affects their ability to perform.

You have a false equivalency. The home life may well be responsible for the students dropping out yet that does not translate into the parents being able to teach one to write a coherent sentence.

[JDPriestly]

22. The crucial period in a child's development and therefore education

is in very early childhood, between the ages of 1-3 or 1-4.

The preparation a child receives during that period, whether by a parent who is uneducated but very interested in teaching the child basic skills like using their hands, talking, observing and thinking about what they see, counting, putting things together, solving problems, being patient, being thoughtful of others, putting things away, enjoying order, etc. to a great extent determines the child's behavior and success later in life including in school.

If a parent neglects a child or abuses the child or simply does not help the child develop the skills it needs during that period, the best classroom teachers in the world won't be able to help enough to insure the child's success at school.

[Igel]

86. You're making it simpler than possible.

It's okay to simplify as long as you and your listeners know the complexity masked by simple statements.
---------------------------

Some parents can homeschool. 4th graders. Some can't. Odds are most parents could manage the 4th grade curriculum, stripped of trendy buzzwords and reduced to the actual core content. This I say as a parent who focuses on the role schools have to play in imparting knowledge. (Some teachers, esp. in elementary school, really believe that kids won't learn how to make friends or work together unless they're taught this for 12 years in public schools. If you only look at the "proper" kinds of socialization then, no, no parent can homeschool because you really need to be trained in the right way to raise kids, and the kids need to be in groups of 20 or more.)

Some parents can homeschool high school juniors and seniors in AP English and physics. I could do AP physical science, calculus, Russian, and Spanish, and level history, geography; my wife could handle AP English and AP life sciences and level history. I might have trouble with some lab equipment, but we'd manage. We could even manage basic music and art (or perhaps a bit more than basic.) Just don't ask us to teach our kid sports. You do dribble the football across home plate to score a touchdown, don't you? Or is that Australian-rules frisbee?

The point being that some parents are more than qualified. If not, they can often buy and procure knowledge elsewhere. I've known more than a few parents who homeschooled and knew they couldn't do it themselves past a certain grade level. I know one ex-math teacher who has a homeschooling group--a few times a week homeschooling parents bring their kids over for algebra or geometry lessons. Others buy pre-packaged curricula with online support. "Mom, I don't understand the difference between molarity and molality!" "That's okay, just login and ask the online tutor." No different from hiring a violin teacher or logging in for online support in troubleshooting software.


Some parents need to homeschool because when there are 180 kids being seen in the course of a day by 7 teachers some kids can't be managed well. Okay, you make them sit in class and be quiet. They cross their arms and do nothing. Or they write random answers because they don't care. You can't force a kid to learn--and they're the quieter ones. But between parents and teachers, often parents have more leverage. If they're home. Nothing makes these parents think they can homeschool. They just have no better option. They certainly won't do worse. Better to get a D in level history being taught by parents unqualified to teach level history than get an F in level history when taught by a person with a PhD in history. Behavior comes before knowledge. Teachers can manage some bad behavior; but ultimately it has to be the parents' responsibility.

How well the homeschooled kid does depends on the parents' education level, competence, diligence, self-discipline. It depends on the child's learning abilities, discipline, and compliance with parental structure. Often it's not the amount of knowledge the parent has that matters it's the ability to provide structure--structure that is lacking in a lot of classrooms, esp. with the increased class size. (Most teachers are at least competent in their content knowledge.)


A lot of homeschooled parents do it for cultural reasons. Some do it for religious reasons. Everything that I've said still applies. Fundie Xians aren't all idiots. Many have out of control kids. I've known UU homeschoolers and fundie Xian ones, Episcopal and Methodist. And Muslim. And Buddhist. There's a skew to the stats, but there's still no 100% accurate generalization for them.

About 1/2 of homeschoolers (as of the late '90s) weren't doing it for religious reasons. In fact, conservatives are late-comers to homeschooling. Used to be more folks far left of center, but that's when I was a kid, when dinosaurs roamed the Earth.

A few years ago there was a bit of an Afrocentric homeschooling trend.

---------

Usually when you find a failing student you find failing parents. Not always. And the word "failing" can have a bunch of different meanings.

Some kids just go bad because of peers or some horrendous event. By 9th grade you can predict with reasonable certainty a student's final GPA and likelihood of dropping out. In elementary school mid/high SES kids gain months of education over the summer. Leave 2nd grade on-level at 2.0 and return in August at 2.2. Low SES kids that leave 2nd grade on-level at 2.0 return in August at 1.8 or thereabouts. On average. No teachers in July. Sorry, this is pretty much all parent. Uneducated parents can't fill in details that are the basis for later formal education, and they spend many summers not filling in the details. Result? Their kids are behind. Such parents use to be rich in wisdom and manual skills.

Now we have not only uneducated parents but parents who can't do anything--they've not taught their kids to sew or cook, repair engines or build a treehouse. The kids socialize, listen to music, and have virtual experiences that they can ignore because, well, they're virtual. The parents' lives are roughly the same: work, tv, premade dinners (or ethnic cuisines that the kids don't learn to prepare), social networking.

A lot of the attention given kids is also screwed up. One girl in my class is allowed to sleep in. Class starts a bit after 9. She often gets out of bed after 9. Oh, well. "But she's so tired when she gets home, it's hard for her to get out of bed in time for school." Gee. Royalty. I was told about one kid a few years ago who would go to his room at 11 PM and stay up all night playing video games. Parent's solution? Drugs. In the morning they gave him a drug prescribed to keep him alert--hyper, even--all day; it lasted about 9 hours. When he got home it would wear off and he'd crash. Can't keep your kid disciplined and his life structured? Drug him. Woo-hoo. I missed that one in the parenting manuals.

Then there's the opposite. One parent turned to her child in conference and called her names I won't repeat, utterly humiliating her. The kid's expression said it all: "I hear you, bitch, and I'm looking down so you think I'm being obedient but really you can't see my usual smirk. I really don't give a f**k what you have to say, asshole." The kid is still out of control and has utter contempt for everybody but her friends. Good going, mom.

The kids in jr high and high school that are troublemakers or tuned out often have troubled home lives. Often they haven't been taught school culture and how to act in school. Or they don't see enough of a downside to acting out. Their parents don't have them do homework, so the kids figure it doesn't matter. In some cases the parents have actually told their kids that because they're black/Latino/etc. it doesn't matter, society's so stacked against them they'll never get into college or get a job. (It's a nice cop-out for their parents.)

Often the parents don't notice when the kid's in in-school suspension until he's in out-of-school suspension and the parent has to come in for a conference. Hell, I've seen kids in different classes all act out on the same day so they all get suspended and can hang out together. The parents long ago abdicated responsibility.

Low SES is just correlated with this kind of behavior. Some high SES families are just as troubled. Many low SES households have no trouble rearing decent kids. It's just that when high SES parents offer excuses we dismiss them; when low SES parents offer excuses, we gush with sympathy and say, "Yes, little dears, you can't help it. Let us assume responsibility for your life, we know so much better than you."

[lumberjack_jeff]

88. "Some parents can homeschool. Some can't."

And yet... you made it even simpler.

Either way, the OP is bullshit.

I'm unsympathetic to the mutually-exclusive argument on display in this thread; "Parents are unqualified to teach their kids but are solely responsible for any failures of education."

[The Straight Story]

3. They have done it for centuries before it became a business where you had to apply

I teach my daughter. I am 46 years old, feel pretty qualified.

Every day is a teaching day in life and I don't need someone who has never met me judge me on my ability to raise and educate my own children.

[lumberjack_jeff]

5. +100

[we can do it]

10. Well of Course You Do...

[The Straight Story]

12. Besides, people who send kids to public schools are freaks

And don't bother alerting on that, when the same sentence had homeschooling in it the jury let it stand.

[joeglow3]

8. What Makes People Think Others Are Not Qualified to Teach Their Own Kids?

Methinks it is job security.

[we can do it]

11. I Am NOT a Teacher, Just Someone Who Values Education

want to try again?

[The Straight Story]

14. Maybe you can explain to us all what YOU think makes someone qualified? (nt)

Last edited Sat Mar 3, 2012, 12:53 PM - Edit history (1)

[we can do it]

16. Apparently You Think Being 46 Years Old Is Good Enough

[lumberjack_jeff]

32. Are you a parent? n/t

[joeglow3]

106. Imagine that. You did not answer the question.

[we can do it]

42. (hehe)

[we can do it]

58. Did you notice its been changed?

hehe

[The Straight Story]

64. Yeah, it was kind of funny :) (nt)

[JDPriestly]

43. Do you teach your child science?

Do you have a chemistry lab? How about a high speed computer with the programs to do advanced studies in chemistry?

That's what my daughter had when she took chemistry in a public high school in a relatively poor urban area. She did not have access to the computer because the government paid for it. She had that access thanks to an extremely dedicated public school teacher who gave his all to his students. He was willing to sacrifice anything for their success. And indeed his sacrifice was worth it.

The problem with teaching in the home is that your child will not have the variety, the breadth of practical experience that a child in a public school has, especially at the high school level.

Singing in a choir or playing in an orchestra in high school -- every day -- is a great experience that a home-schooled child will not have. Playing on a playground with classmates of the same age every day is also an experience that a home-schooled child will not have.

In some cases home-schooling is a good idea, but how does a home-schooled child learn to be independent in the way a classroom-school child learns. Mama or papa is always there -- watching to make sure the child does what he or she is supposed to. When a child goes to school, he or she has to develop self-discipline, and that is a big gain.

Not all, but some parents home-school because they want to control their children. That is very sad. Some home-school because they want to live vicariously through their children. Also very sad.

Some home-school because their child has special needs that are best fulfilled by a loving parent. Lucky kid; lucky parent.

Finally, home-schooling is a choice only for families in which one parent can afford to stay at home and not work.

Home-schooling can be good, can be bad, but there are a lot of advantages to public school educations that people overlook.

And public schools, community schools, have been around a long time. Maria Theresa started educating all Austrian children back in the 18th century.

In the 1760s, smallpox claimed several victims in the royal family. Maria Theresa was infected and received last rites in 1767, although she recovered. Afterward, Maria Theresa became a strong supporter of inoculation (a predecessor immunization method to smallpox vaccination), setting a strong example by requiring all of her children to be inoculated.

In the later years of her reign, Maria Theresa focused on reforming laws as an enlightened monarch. Many historians agree that she did not solely act out of care for her population, but rather to strengthen the economy of the Habsburg territories, especially after the loss of Silesia.

In 1771, she and Joseph II issued the Robot Patent, a reform that regulated a serf's labor payments in her lands, which provided some relief. Other important reforms included outlawing witch-burning and torture, and, for the first time in Austrian history, taking capital punishment off the penal code, as it was replaced with forced labor. It was later reintroduced, but the progressive nature of these reforms remains noted. Mandatory education was introduced in 1774; the goal was to form an educated class from which civil servants could be recruited.

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Maria_Theresa_of_Austria

Please note that public school education was first organized in order to insure citizens capable of governing -- and that was in a monarchy.

Public education became a requirement in the US because we are a democracy, and we need to be certain that our citizens are well enough educated to vote and govern themselves. The ultimate purpose of education has been forgotten by many -- strengthening our ability to govern ourselves.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

47. And you feel public education doing well?

Public education, by the way, is NOT a requirement. And just for giggles, we are not a democracy (kind of important to know the difference for a populace that plans on governing themselves).

You, like so many others opposed to homeschooling, have no idea how someone can homeschool their kids and yet provide all these items you mention. And you have no desire to SEE how they do it. It has been discussed many times on this very board and I feel confident that you have read those threads...but somehow you're still worried about them not being able to cope because they don't get crammed in a room with 35 other kids and a teacher so distracted by their bureaucratic requirements that they cannot properly do their job.

You mention what homeschooling families overlook while continuing to do exactly the same 'overlooking' when it comes to a homeschool provided education...

sP

[JDPriestly]

143. I am not totally opposed to homeschooling, but generally, I am very happy with

the public school educations my children received. They have done very, very well in life and did very, very well in university and graduate school.

I think that parents should be much more proactive in their relationships and playtime with their children in the first three-four years of life. That is when a child learns the basic skills they need.

The problems with homeschooling are precisely what I described. Too often, the homeschooling parent is overprotective of the child, fearful and living vicariously through the child. The parents have to make a special effort to get a decent science lab. Personally, I would not be nearly capable of teaching my children basic geology, biology, botany, chemistry and physics as a public school teacher who specializes in science. And I certainly would not a decent chemistry lab in my house. First of all, I could not tolerate the smells.

I was a music teacher. It is kind of a cliche among music teachers that you shouldn't try to teach your own child. I tried it. In spite of my success with many other children, I did not feel pleased with my teaching of my own child. Too many distractions.

Most important, as I said, homeschooling is a luxury for the elite few. Most of us could not afford it if we wanted to.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

161. we are hardly elite...

and I went to public school as well and did well...25 years ago. But it IS different now. Much. I am from a family of teachers and they frequently lament the way the schools are run now. And while some homeschooling people are living in and with the problems you mention related to schooling...they are NOT problems for all homeschooling families.

sP

[Snake Alchemist]

191. Your kids go to JFK in the Bronx? nt

[JDPriestly]

194. No beginning in second and fourth grades respectively, they went to public

schools in LA -- magnet schools but public schools. The teachers were great. My children were bilingual, German and English. That was a big challenge for the teachers.

On edit, they did not always go to magnet schools -- just part of the time. I think so highly of LA teachers because of the professionalism and dedication I saw in our local schools.

[Snake Alchemist]

202. Transfer then to JFK for a few years and get back

To us with a new assessment.

[JDPriestly]

233. My children are out of college now.

We do not live in a wealthy neighborhood. In fact, our schools were, at the time my children attended them at least, considered to be sub-standard. I found them to be great. A lot depends on the child. Teachers delight in children who want to learn and are self-disciplined. Problem is that too many American children don't want to learn and cannot bring themselves to work at much of anything.

[we can do it]

55. Thanks for expanding on this. Quite a few excellent points.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

56. No, the points made are from the perspective of someone

who has no desire to understand the dedicated homeschooling family and how they could possibly offer a comparable or better education experience.

sP

[we can do it]

59. Your situation sounds fantastic. It does not apply to every other situtaion.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

62. You're right...it IS fantastic and undoubtedly unusual

however, a dedicated parent CAN be a hell of an educator for their children. There are many people on this board and all around that just think there is no way that homeschooling your children can be done well...and it burns me up a little bit and does put me on the defensive of those who ARE doing that fantastic job.

sP

[we can do it]

69. That was not my intention with my post.

Your kids sound extremely lucky. I know of a couple other families that are doing a horrible disservice to their kids, focusing on religious nutbaggary instead of science and math because end times are a comin'......

[JDPriestly]

145. I love my parents, and my mother was a teacher, but I would not

have wanted to spend the entire schoolday with either or both of my parents. It would not have been good for me. Horrors!

And my parents would have been utterly frustrated with the situation.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

162. Does that mean you are projecting your difficulties

onto the rest of the homeschooling community? Is that one of your reasons for being so against it? My kids LOVE being here and learning in this environment and the extended environment we provide...

sP

[joeglow3]

107. Do you fight to prevent homeschools from experiencing these things?

Not too long ago, someone posted a city that ruled homeschooled kids can participate in extracurricular activites at their local public high school. The majority on here blasted it and said it was shit.

Gotta say, this works out great for you. Fight like hell to prevent kids from doing these things and then use that as an excuse as to why home-schooling is bad.

[lumberjack_jeff]

115. That's gonna leave a mark.

+1

[JDPriestly]

140. Actually, I remember that post and I wrote in favor of allowing homeschooled

kids to play in public school teamsports. I would also favor allowing homeschooled kids to take specific courses but not others in local junior high schools and high schools.

[The Straight Story]

120. Yes, we have chemistry lab supplied by the place we do home schooling through

And when it comes to computers - my daughter is 10 and has created her own web server, done basic programming, and actually helps other people on message boards with their computer issues.

She was in a public school and played on playgrounds - and was bullied because was one of only a few white kids in the school (which to some here that is probably OK because she is white and in the majority overall, so she has 'power').

There are home schooling co-ops where parents and kids go bowling, go to museums, etc and so on. She is also in girl scouts.

She knows how to talk to people of all ages and the public schooled kids here of all ages in the hood flock to her, she is not locked into one age group and cliques and gets along well with them all.

3 of my kids went to public school, I had no problem with that.

Being a dem, and a progressive, I believe in choice.

Something I see less and less here on DU (with one exception, abortion).

[WinniSkipper]

168. That last line is why I joined

...and decided to throw my 2c in after reading for so long.

Here is a question - why would any dem be against homeschooling? What is the core issue with the antis?

[The Straight Story]

170. Welcome to DU

and thank you

[WinniSkipper]

172. Thanks nt

[we can do it]

186. For what its worth I'm not against home school if the parents are qualified,

the kids deserve a good education. Just saying "I know everything" does not make one qualified. I have family and friends who teach and know how much work is involved. Teaching K-12 is quite a stretch for anyone, if it weren't teachers wouldn't need to specialize.

[WinniSkipper]

188. There we agree - kids do deserve a good education

And it seems that there a good number of parents who for legitimate reasons have removed their children from public schools because they do not feel that is the correct environment for them. And many have probably done this thinking "how in the heck am I going to pull this off. I am not qualified". And yet the kids survive and do fine.

The type of thinking that makes teachers who they are - the ability to teach another human how to critically analyze facts and turn them into thoughts - is virtually impossible to achieve these days. Teachers are not given a chance to practice their craft in a fair environment. And they are thus unfairly judged on their skills.

What is your issue with homeschooling? I can't figure it out. I don't think people who choose to homeschool do it because they feel the quality of teachers is low. I would venture they would say the opposite.

[FarCenter]

163. Prussia intruduced compulsory education in 1763; they started teaching to the test in 1788

Prussian Lutheranism wanted to teach children to read the bible and to instill piety. The monarch wanted to instill loyalty to the crown and to provide literate and numerate non-commisioned officers for the army.

Compulsory public education developed in the US during the second half of the 18th century. It was not required for the early American democracy, since the minority that could vote were usually educated privately.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prussian_education_system

Compulsory educationA series of edicts made clear for the first time that education was a task of the state. This evolution finally culminated in 1763, when Frederick II made schooling compulsory for all children between ages five and 13.

Prussian General Land LawThough Prussian ministers, particularly Karl Abraham Freiherr von Zedlitz, sought to replace local control over schooling with a centralized, uniform system administered by the state during the eighteenth century, not until the implementation of the Prussian General Land Law of 1794 did the state first attempt to take responsibility for educational institutions. All schools and universities were made institutions of the state.

Institution of the final examination, AbiturThe final examination, Abitur, was introduced in 1788, implemented in all Prussian secondary schools by 1812, and extended to all of Germany in 1871. Passing the Abitur was a pre-requisite to entering the learned professions and the civil service.

[treestar]

177. Teaching is a profession

Your post dismisses it as unnecessary and that anyone can do it. Society has decided otherwise long ago.

[joeglow3]

192. Guess how many of my college professors had education degrees...

zero.

I went to a college prep high school and less than half of my teachers had education degrees (almost all had Masters, with quite a few having their phd's.

I agree that teaching is a nobel profession. However, there are cases abound where people without education degrees can teach children with great success. To use this as an argument to dismiss all (or most) cases of home-schooling is ignorant, at best.

[WinniSkipper]

216. It is a priority

Society did decide a long time ago that education was a priority. Nobody here, certainly not the parents who take the extra time, forego (potentially) extra income to stay home and teach, would likely disagree with you. You could probably take a vote of HS parents and ask them where education was on their priority list. They are walking the walk.

Does that mean that only teachers can teach? That seems to be the crux of the issue here. There seems to be a great concern on the part of people who are anti-homeschooling that the biggest issue is "people who are unqualified are teaching kids". Do I have that right? I think we all agree the fundie HS is a separate animal. The concern here does not seem to be for them. It seems to be for the dems on the board who have opted to HS.

Let me ask you this. I'm late 40s. When I went to college I saw my first ATM machine. When I got married in the late 90s I got my first cell phone. Very basic - cost a fortune to call or txt.

Then about 8 years ago for all practical purposes access to any piece of information, sharing of said information, and personally broadcasting every bit of my social experience growing up became free, and "the norm". Everything that was taught, memorized, etc, is now instantly available. How hard do you think it is to teach to that generation? They don't know what they don't know (as someone so aptly put it earlier in the thread about the parents) - but they think they do. And they walk out of class and check if the teacher said anything wrong during class. And if they did - credibility shot. Tough job. And unfair.

You think the same methods used to educate us, and more or less the same content, is still applicable as the best way to educate today? Because really, any teacher who got their degree pre-2005 has certainly not been trained in the current social and learning environment of the kids. They can't be - it didn't exist. So really - they are getting on the job training. That's not a teacher's fault - it's just the way it is.

This is where Gates and charters will kill public schools. They are adept enough and have the money to pump technology into the schools and design curriculum to adapt to technology. And it will look great, and appealing.

Administrators, who have neither the funds or really the knowledge to exploit technology properly (why would they - they are administrators), are handcuffed and can never catch up to the changes. Teachers forced by programs like NCLB to practice their craft in way it was not meant to be (teaching to a test vs. thinking critically). It's a no win situation for public education. By its design, it cannot adapt fast enough.

The one thing the antis keep forgetting - HS parents have a very small window where they have to make their decision. They won't sit around for a few years thinking "John's bullied - let's see how that works out next year". "There are 35 kids in my son's class, and maybe next year he'll have 20". They don't have a second chance for their kids. So while we can all discuss the merits of public education - these parents don't have the luxury to wait.

[treestar]

224. Professionals keep up with their profession

If one does not study it, perhaps it looks easy. People went through college and taught for years and went to continuing education classes. This should not be dismissed as nothing. Anyone can figure out how to use technology like ATM machines - we're talking about academic subjects.

Some people just seem to think that they could do any profession with what they know - all those other people who actually studied for that profession are stupider and need that training, I guess is their attitude.

[WinniSkipper]

227. That's sort of making my point - but through another door

You are going on the pretext that what they have learned, and continued to learn, throughout their careers, even has the ability to be applied now. That's where I disagree. The 1 teacher-to-20 students model is ideal and had served us well. And it was designed in an environment that does not exist today. Where in reality - the teachers word was law. That was a good thing for the most part. It taught us hierarchy in the learning process. I think today, the learning process is much more horizontal.

Kids also today take in more extraneous information (and retain it) from outside of class than I ever did for my classes alone. If we accept that as true - we have to also consider that I could have packed twice as much info into my head and finished high school in 8th grade. I don't think our system underestimated our capabilities so much. Yet most of todays teachers are trained with my style of student in mind. And how can teachers train and keep up on an environment that is being written as we go?

I don't think teachers get (or ever will again get) the chance to implement their skills they way they should be. How does this relate to qualifications? If anything, today's homeschool parents have resources available, and probably design a lot of their curriculum, communally. Just like we here at DU3 are communally sharing our experiences and debating, many of the kids in HS programs are actually on the forefront of how education, or at least certain segments of it, will be in the future.

[treestar]

228. I seriously doubt that all teacher training is now obsolete

There's been even more change in medicine, so you think you'd make as good a doctor as someone who has an MD, passed the boards, and practiced for the past 25 years? And there are continuing ed requirements in almost every profession.

If anything, it requires even more professional judgment with the rate of change in the world. These are academic disciplines that build on previous knowledge, which is how the advance came about in the first place.

People who are so ignorant of even of the existence of bodies of knowledge and their application need to tone down the arrogance - the smarter one is the more one realizes how much there is to know - I guess the more ignorant one is, the more one thinks one knows everything or could learn it in a day.

[WinniSkipper]

229. I'll try to address - but I have to bring you back to what we were talking about

..for this to make sense.

We are talking about kids, generally ages 6-18, who are in the demographic of the OP and everything I have been talking about. In your example, that's the patient, the teacher is the doctor.

Doctors can study all they want - but the patient is different. It has a similar DNA, but it's environment is foreign. The rules are different.

And that is the part the homeschool parents, especially those you are talking to hear at DU, might tell you. It's the environment they don't like. It's not the teachers, and it's not the concept of public education. And in this day and age, parents at home, through the resources available to them, have a very high likelihood of being able to tailor an educational program more directly suited to their child's needs than an overcrowded classroom.

It can't be both ways. Are teachers overworked, underpaid, and have too many students to be able to teach properly? Like I often hear, and always agree with? If that is the case is their no way I at home, with incredible resources at my fingertips can do a good job in comparison?

[dynasaw]

17. One Word: Anosognosia

Anosognosia /æˌnɒsɒgˈnəʊsɪə/ is a condition in which a person who suffers disability seems unaware of the existence of his or her disability or in simple English: You don't know what you don't know.

I've found that people with limited education usually think they know it all, whereas those with a great deal of education are usually aware of how much else there is to know.

[we can do it]

25. Best Answer.

and we definitely don't want the kids to know more than we do.

[SalviaBlue]

19. If he thinks it will get him more attention... Yes.

He is a pig.

[mzteris]

20. Because quite frankly

in a one-on-one situation - you don't HAVE to know "pedagogy" - you KNOW your child.

There are millions of resources out there. All you have to do is look for them and provide them to an inquiring mind. You don't have to have a lock-step learn this and then that and then we're going to sit for an hour and go over THIS - when the kid learns it in five minutes or already knows it! Or you can review the material for TWO hours - explain it with twenty seven eight-by-ten colour glossy photographs with circles
and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explaining what each one was - if that's what it takes, instead of the "approved methodology" or curriculum.

For some kids, the traditional environment is an anathema. For some kids it's like death to be locked up in that room with 37 other kids +/- one year of age, both sex and racially "balanced" and a teacher who may or may not understand how THAT kid learns, or even if they do, are ALLOWED to individualize the instructional method, nor indeed CAN because there are 37 other kids in the room who just WOULDN"T GET IT presented THAT way and she just doesn't have the damn time anyway.

My dad had a 3rd grade education and when he retired he had men with Master's degrees and PhD's working FOR HIM. Sometimes a school "education" isn't all it's cracked up to be.

You don't have to be an "expert" - you can find the "expert" or the "expert" materials. There are co-ops and online learning opportunities (NOT talking about online "schools!&quot , there are local classes, the other moms you know may have their Masters in Math, or have been a Chemist or Physicist or an Electrical Engineer before they felt like they HAD to remove their child from what was - for them - a toxic environment - and homeschool.

Some of the smartest people I know never graduated from high school, btw.

[JoePhilly]

21. I know 2 home school families very well ... and they are like night and day.

The first family is one in which the mother had a degree in teaching and had been teaching elementary school for about 5 years or so. She decided to stay home with her first child, got into home schooling, and then had a second child, and continued home schooling both. Their kids are nice, well behaved, they play with other kids in the neighborhood, they are very sociable. You's never know they were home schooled. The wife plans to return to teaching when their kids get a little older.

The second family is different. The mother in this family has a degree in communications. No prior teaching education or experience. My wife and I knew this couple before any of us had kids. She hated her job. She tended to have a bad work attitude. Everything was some one else's fault. When they had their first child, she took a leave and started to home school. They had a second child a little over a year after the first. They continued to home school. I learned from the husband that the mother had decided to have a "family bed", so they all slept together. She'd read that you could teach a child sign language long before they could read or talk ... and so she developed a sign language that only she and the first child "knew". When we saw them, every random move of the infant was actually a "sign", and usually the "sign" meant that the infant needed to be picked up. She decided that the child was afraid of the ceiling fan in his room, so the dad had to remove it. The blinds on the windows might have lead in them ... they replaced all of them (she though my suggestion of moving the crib away from the window was absurd). The child can't walk or talk at this point. She breast fed both children well past the age of 5. She dressed them both exactly the same even though one was a boy and the other a girl. She gave them the same hair cut, a lot like her own. When they played with other kids, she would take them aside if the kids began to do anything active, running games like tag and so on, she'd stop them ... she didn't want them to get hurt ... and she could "tell" they weren't really having fun. These kids don't speak, except to her, and then only in whispers. I can't even imagine how they will respond out in the real world. They are kind of creepy.

So the first family is very normal, a home schooling success story ... the second family is (in my opinion), and example in which a control freak is micro managing every second of her childrens' lives.

[we can do it]

31. Thanks For the Great Examples.

[mzteris]

39. no they're not "great examples"

They are TWO examples - neither one "typical" examples.

I know hundreds and have talked (online) with thousands of homeschoolers of every stripe shape color creed religion philosophy and nationality - and you - and the other posters - DON"T HAVE A CLUE.

[we can do it]

63. Speak for yourself please.

[joeglow3]

108. Your posting in this threads makes it clear you don't have a clue.

You do however, have a clear opinion. I always find it odd how people can form an opinion when they have clearly not sought out evidence.

[JoePhilly]

73. Did I say either example was "typical"??

I simply gave two examples from my own experience and said they were "like night and day".

Which is true a true statement.

Your screaming that other posters "DON'T HAVE A CLUE" (by using all caps) simply because their experience does not align with your apparently vast experience seems not only defensive, but also quite dismissive.

If that's your approach to promoting home schooling, its not terribly effective.

[mzteris]

151. I can assure you my hs'ing

was quite effective.

I don't use all caps for screaming but for Emphasis. I'm afraid my keyboarding days precedes html tags by quite some years and old habits die hard - especially when it involves removing one's hands from the home row of keys. (I despise function keys and the mouse, too for keyboarding), in case you're curious, which you're probably not. lol)

[JoePhilly]

171. That's fine ... but I did not claim your home schooling was ineffective ...

If you reread what I wrote, I said that your approach to promoting home schooling seemed to be ineffective. Let me explain.

Homeschooling is neither good or bad per se. Some folks are very good at it, some are not so good at it. Some would never want to do it. Some would never do anything else.

In addition to the two examples I gave, I also know a few other families who do it, I just don't know those families as well.

In one case (not one of the two examples I gave earlier), I'm pretty sure that the underlying reason for their doing it is purely religious. At any neighborhood gathering, this couple will bring Jesus into absolutely every discussion. They are very nice people, but its clear that the last thing they want their kids to learn about is evolution. And I'd suggest that they are one of the reasons that home schooling gets a bad rap.

For instance, when I have heard them "promote" home schooling, they reference how the public schools removed prayer and God from school. They brought this up at a backyard BBQ that another neighbor had. Most of the neighbors won't touch this topic, but that night, I did. And so I asked, "Which prayer should be used ... can I be the one to pick?" ... this kind of stopped them cold. In the silence that followed, I asked ... "Would we rotate the prayer so that one day it was from the Catholic tradition, one day Protestant, one day Hebrew, one day Hindu" (we have plenty of families from India here). The discussion remained friendly, but it was clear that they were not in favor of that kind of diversity of prayer.

These folks don't help promote home schooling ... well ... not in the way you would probably want. Other neighbors have said things like "I'm glad they home school, we don't don't need creationism taught in the public school."

I'm not sure how best the "not crazy" home school folks can make themselves more visible ... but the crazy ones tend "stand out" ... Santorum, who recently attacked higher education as elitist had a bunch of home school folks standing behind him.

They make the larger home school community look insane.

In the first example I gave ... the family is so normal that they do not stand out. Which I think is what effective home schooling should be. Home schooling is a simple choice, and its a non-issue.

But there is a segment of the HS community that does "stand out" ... and not in a positive way. IMHO.

[mzteris]

208. here's the problem -

well a couple really - okay - quite a few!

1) just because there are "bad homeschoolers" (and trust me there are some very bad ones), and
2) just because SOME of them are doing it for all the WRONG reasons - like religion, racism, etc, and
3) just because some people homeschool does NOT mean they all "hate public schools", (two of my three were/are public schooled - even the hs'er attended "some" public school - but that's another long story),

does NOT mean we should BAN homeschooling. That would deny the rest of those who are hs'ing for the RIGHT reasons and who ARE good at it the opportunity to hs. And that would be interfering with their rights to raise their child as they see fit.

I struggle with the oversight and controls issue because I know it would really hamstring some quite brilliant approaches to hs'ing (for some kids) that wouldn't pass the "committee". However, I sometimes wish there were a LITTLE more control because I know there are people who are claiming to hs, when in fact they are not.

The hs bashing that goes on BECAUSE of these bad examples is quite infuriating and insulting to the rest of the hs'ing familes who ARE doing it "right".

Do you realize that for some children a traditional school setting is truly NOT an option? What would happen to all those children who were forced into that situation?

One other point - and I make it reluctantly - a lot of those religious hs'ing families are giving their children a superb "education" - in every other way - math, etc . . . Granted their history is a little skewed (but so is most public school textbooks!), and their science a little screwy in some areas, and they use the freaking Bible as a resource (though a whole lot of public school children are raised with the Bible as the center of their existence and also taught screwy ideas at home) but otherwise - they're actually doing an excellent job.

Another point I'd like to make is just because a family is religious, does not mean they're intolerant, teaching evolution, or hs'ing for religious reasons. We had a number of people in our inclusive group who were churchgoing, but their impetus to hs had NOTHING to do with that fact. It was what was best for their kids. We also had a couple of pagans and some atheists in our group. We all got along fine. The only ones who didn't fit were the Republicans! lol...

Do you know there are an inordinate number of aspie/autistic kids in the hs community? A large number whose "gender identity" is not acceptable by society at large? That there is a huge population of gifted/learning disabled children whose needs can't be met by most public schools? That there are vast numbers of hs children suffering from other disorders and/or mental health issues that prohibit them from working effectively in a typical public school setting?

People need to get off this hs bashing kick. It's like calling all girls sluts who take birth control, if you know what I mean. We used to have a lot of hs'ers here on DU but most have left. The majority of those still here don't bother with these hs bashing threads anymore. To try and have honest discourse with people who insult and ridicule you based on a few anecdotal experiences is tiresome and discouraging - especially coming from so-called liberals who supposedly support the rights of individuals.

[we can do it]

184. One thing I should have mentioned initially - who protects the kids

from the unqualified nutbag "teachers". The ones who basically keep the kids home for control? or who couldn't pass 9th grade science and math if their lives depended on it, but they can recite pages and pages of scripture. The ones out at the mall during school hours running around while the "teachers" are having coffee.

Again, this was not aimed at well prepared parents.

[treestar]

23. I agree, I would not consider it

If Little House on the Prairie was historically correct, there already were teacher exams in the 19th century.

Maybe just teaching the child to read and write and cipher, in centuries prior to the 20th - that might have been sufficient in those times. But the very reason schools exist - there is more to it than parent just passing on their knowledge - would tend to argue again home schooling.

I could understand it for the so fanatically religious that they don't want their kids to learn anything else or how to think but just to follow the religion's authorities, or people who honestly feel their school system is so bad that it's not teaching anything, or people who live in such a remote place that it is not practical to attend school. Or maybe those few for whom the student is too smart and gets bored at school - but modern schools would have programs for that.

[Fumesucker]

52. What if your kid is getting bullied at school?

Bullying is obviously still a problem in American schools, often the administration does little or nothing to stop it and even sometimes they encourage it..

What then, send your child to school where you *know* they will be assaulted?

The bullying that was inflicted on me in school has colored my entire life, I wouldn't wish it on another person.

[treestar]

54. That would be a good reason to do it, I suppose

Though maybe a transfer would help. But that might not be feasible.

[WinniSkipper]

80. And this would be the responsibility of the parents - why?

I have lurked for about 5 years here - many times thought about posting - but this issue hits close to home.

My cousins eventually moved to homeschooling their entire family (for non-religious reasons). It was originally because eldest was bullied, school did nothing. Another has a medical condition that the school did not do a good job of monitoring. So it started with one. Then two. The other kids joined homeschooling out of their own choice. And I am sure that statement will be derided in good time.

And your suggestion might be that transferring is an option?

Are you suggesting that homeschoolers somehow take away from the educational opportunities of kids in public schools? Are you worried that they won't get a good education? (BTW - I don't disagree that there is potential for "poor teachers" for homeschool)

However - do you think they are doing this for "an easy way out"? And if they are - aren't those the type of parents everyone complains about not being involved in their kids education? I think that's contradictory.

Score so far - One Big State University, 3 private liberal arts colleges, one JC with intentions to transfer.

[jeff47]

102. Because they're the parents

Being a parent means you chose to do an awful lot of crappy jobs. Many of them could or should be handled by others. But at the end of the day, everything to do with your kid is your job.

[WinniSkipper]

103. I meant why is it the responsibility of the parent....

.....to look at a transfer of schools because their child is being bullied at school. I agree agree that it is first and foremost the responsibility of the parent to protect their child - and that is why they may homeschool them. If they cannot get any help from the school, why should they transfer to another school?

[jeff47]

117. Because that might be in their kid's best interest

In some situations, making enough of a fuss for the current school to do something would be best.
In some situations, a transfer to another school would be best.
In some situations, homeschooling would be best.

We can't even come up with a single right answer for which way to put a baby in a crib. So we're sure as hell not going to be able to come up with a single right answer to deal with bullying.

[WinniSkipper]

123. I think we are agreeing

If I sounded like I was saying "one size fits all" that was not my intent

I think that many (and could it be "most"?) people who do homeschool would have preferred, given the right environment, to send their kids to public school. I venture most of the folks on this board who HS would have.

My intent was only to point out that those who choose to HS are not necessarily driven by religion

[treestar]

175. I thought the issue was, are the parents sure they are qualified to teach

but that bullying might be a good reason to take that risk. I was not implying all that much - it is up to the parents in each case to decide what is best for their children. I would not want to homeschool a child because I think I am not qualified to teach, but there are circumstances where I might still consider it, which are the situations I described. I would not try to tell anyone for whom it really hits home what to do.

[Rod Mollise]

27. Simple

Most of the people who consider doing such a thing don't know what they don't know--they don't have much education themselves--and they usually don't place much value on a good education, anyway.

[FarCenter]

30. The student teacher ratio is a lot lower

In the classroom, much of the teacher's time and effort is expended on the fraction of the students who are disruptive or slow.

In elementary grades the challenges are to make sure the kid is doing the work (instead of playing computer games), helping them with concepts or materials that they aren't understanding, reviewing worksheets and tests, and making sure that progress is on target.

It's basically what the teacher did in the one room, eight grade schoolhouse that I went to. But with computers and a lot more available material.

Of course, if the parent doesn't control the child, the child may not do the work or learn anything.

[Odin2005]

38. Oh great, more anti-homeschooling BS.

[mzteris]

40. Don't you love how

they have all these opinions and absolutely no facts nor first-hand experience to back it up?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

45. our homeschooling experience

involves a five year old who :

is learning latin
knows the difference between electrons, proton and neutrons
knows and can point out all fifty states on a map (and several countries) and also their capitals
can read
can read music (albeit simple scores) and can play on the piano what she reads
can't wait to snuggle up with mommy for reading time
is learning basic household tasks
has her multiplication tables currently through 6's
plays very well with her peers
plays very well with older kids
plays very well with younger kids
will speak intelligently with adults
and so on
and so on
and so on

And my wife, her teacher? Well, no degree in education...just a deep desire to provide her with the best education and opportunities she can.

sP

[Odin2005]

49. Awesome! Your daughter is SOOOOO lucky!

[ProdigalJunkMail]

51. There are actually three of them

and they have all been taught in very much the same way, but I mention munchkin number three because what she is receiving is the culmination of all the 'lessons' learned with the two older siblings. They are so wonderful...and I have to thank my wife for being so dedicated to the program...more than once I have suggested putting them into school because she works SOOOO hard for them.

I am afraid on one point we might be doing them a disservice. I love to cook and clean and generally take care of the house...so I do. I am worried that they will fall in love with and marry someone who DOESN'T do what I do...and that it will cause strife. Guess we need to start teaching them now also how to look for a partner...

sP

[Odin2005]

92. You are a great parent! I wish I had been homeschooled.

I am 25 and still trying to teach myself Latin and Spanish!

[ProdigalJunkMail]

95. i am just the provider in this equation

i am lucky enough to have a good stable job that affords my wife the luxury of staying home and doing what she loves more than life itself. so in my eyes, SHE is the great parent and I am just totting the load to enable it. she is higher educated than i am...she's an architect by trade/training. she could tote that load better than me from a monetary standpoint...but i could never do what she does here.

latin is tough cause no one speaks it...but it's very beneficial. spanish is tough because so many people speak it...incorrectly!

sP

[Prometheus Bound]

167. Do you, or will you, homeschool them all the way through high school?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

174. That is a decision we will make when we get there

and I think it will require evaluating the curriculum and our knowledge to present it but also how our girls are faring. If they want to go to public or private high school at that time, I think they should be old enough to contribute to the decision making process and that will certainly be a factor.

sP

[Odin2005]

48. It's the HSing = Religious Nut-Job assumption.

Everything flows from that, IMO. And also the BS "Socialization" argument, as if homeschooled kids have no friends.

[abelenkpe]

77. My nieces and nephew live in my mothers basement

are schooled in my mothers basement and have no friends. Truly. There are no other kids in my parents neighborhood as it's mostly full of those who are elderly. And my mom is crazy hard core catholic and a total bigot. Maybe that's not the case for other home schooled children but it is truly applicable in their situation.

[Odin2005]

93. Those nuts are the exception, not the rule.

Even the religious homeschoolers let their kids socialize with the outside world.

[abelenkpe]

98. I figured they were a bad example

but if you ever wonder why some question or demonize homeschooling it's because of people like them.
Feel bad for my little nieces, but hopeful that they will grow up, move away and discover new learning experiences.

[WinniSkipper]

101. So we demonize groups for stereotypes now? nt

[abelenkpe]

105. Some do

stereotypes are pretty powerful and in order to break through them you need to find out where they come from.

[WinniSkipper]

112. Couldn't agree more

There are absolutely a small (my guess) number of far right religious fundamentalists doing more damage to their kids by homeschooling them rather than putting them in public school. No argument.

They are probably a group that is pretty easy to pick out. Ask any of the parents here (I am not a parent - homeschool or otherwise) who are part of homeschool groups. They can probably name the families. So we have that group - the one we are calling stereotypical.

They are not religious fundamentalists because they are home schooled. Vice versa. And no social system they are exposed to will change their beliefs.

Now - the interesting part of the discussion. Why do you think there are a LARGE number of homeschool parents who are democrats and in all likelihood would choose to send their kids to public school if it were the best option for their children?

[joeglow3]

110. Can I blast all public schools because of suicides of gay students

because of all the bullying they receive? Is this the kind of "socializiation" I should strive for my kids to have? The knife cuts both ways.

[mzteris]

142. extremist examples

do not undermine the concept as a whole.

The woman would be batsh*t crazy whether or not they were in a traditional public school or no. The vast majority of abused kids attend traditional public school every day.

You're right that some parents have no business hs'ing. In fact, there are many who have no right being parents. I might add there are a whole lotta damn teachers out there who have no right being anywhere near a classroom or a child, either.

[Puzzledtraveller]

85. I hear you.

I find it really odd that the allegiance to government is so strong for some on the left. I'm not talking about the limited government vs. more government debate and those that believe we have just the right amount, like myself. But those for who complete faith in the government overrides all else. Without a doubt there are many parents who can educate their children far better than what can be provided through compulsory public education. Many of my teachers were dunces. I have co-workers and clients, likewise who have come from education or are working towards it that absolutely frighten me. The ease afforded those seeking educations in teaching has also eroded the integrity of the system. I don't mean financial aid for those who want to be teachers, but schools that are all but handing out the degrees for just showing up.

[mzteris]

146. no one likes to talk about it, but

statistics show in what percentage of their high school graduating class that they fell in that *most* teachers come from. . . and it definitely isn't the top 10%.

Not even the top 50%.

And it should be.

Most teachers may be "educated" and most teachers may be dedicated. But they're rarely the smartest one on the room. (At least in my personal experience. My own, my siblings, my nieces and nephews, my three, and the foster children I had. . . Sad. )

Now I'll be attacked for teacher bashing, though bashing ME for hsing one of my children through-out a good bit of his school years seems to be just fine. Some of my best friends are teachers. Some teachers I've been exposed to are absolutely wonderful and on top of their game, but the majority? Sorry - not even close.

[tridim]

46. I have a homeschooling cousin that claims Gawd tells her they are qualified

Of course she never even mentioned gawd in the 20 some-odd years before she met her fundy husband.

He changed her into a teabagger. So sad.

[cbayer]

65. I have met a lot of families who are raising their kids

while exploring the world by boat.

These kids are almost always very interesting, well read, articulate and a joy to be around.

The parents take their education very seriously and I think these are some of the luckiest families in the world.

Why in the world would a parent not be qualified to teach their own kids?

[Voice for Peace]

66. do you have kids?

[Johnny Rico]

68. Robert A. Heinlein on education:

From "Have Spacesuit, Will Travel" (1958)

I felt shocked. "Why, Dad, Center is a swell school." I remembered things they had told us in PTA Auxiliary. "It's run along the latest, most scientific lines, approved by psychologists, and —"
"— paying excellent salaries," he interrupted, "for a staff highly trained in modern pedagogy. Study projects emphasize practical human problems to orient the child in democratic social living, to fit him for the vital, meaningful tests of adult life in our complex modern culture. Excuse me, son; I've talked with Mr Hanley. Mr Hanley is sincere – and to achieve these noble purposes we are spending more per student than any other state save California and New York."
"Well... what's wrong with that?"
"What's a dangling participle?"
I didn't answer. He went on, "Why did Van Buren fail of re-election? How do you extract the cube root of eighty-seven?"
Van Buren had been a president; that was all I remembered. But I could answer the other one. "If you want a cube root, you look in a table in the back of the book."
Dad sighed. "Kip, do you think that table was brought down from on high by an archangel?" He shook his head sadly. "It's my fault, not yours. I should have looked into this years ago –I had assumed, simply because you liked to read and were quick at figures and clever with your hands, that you were getting an education."
"You think I'm not?"
"I know you are not. Son Centerville High is a delightful place, well equipped, smoothly administered, beautifully kept. Not a 'blackboard jungle,' oh, no! –I think you kids love the place. You should. But this" Dad slapped the curriculum chart down angrily. "Twaddle! Beetle tracking! Occupational therapy for morons!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To remedy the problem, Kip's Dad starts him on an intense course of self study. Kip begins to learn Latin, solid geometry, trigonometry, calculus, physics and chemistry. He doesn't have a lab, but he has the use of the barn behind the house, so he does his own experiments. "Mother was perturbed when I blew out the windows and set fire to the barn –just a small fire– but Dad was not. He simply suggested that I not manufacture explosives in a frame building."

(more on the novel at http://roborant42.appspot.com/show/entry/6024;jsessionid=1a573nrhi12cz)

[TexasBill]

137. But Kip was a genius

I see Heinlein quoted so often, from the Notebooks of Lazarus Long to the "an armed society is a polite society" from Beyond This Horizon to "grok" from Stranger in a Strange Land.

Robert Heinlein was a master storyteller and a very intelligent man. However, he and his wife, Virginia, were not able to have children. As a result, his "children," who were more often adolescents or young adults were constructs, budding John Galts. Perhaps Podkayne, from Podkayne of Mars, was somewhat more of a typical teenager, but she had her supergenius brother Clark for balance.

Kip Russell was a genius: At the end of the book, Professor Reisfeld, Pee Wee's father, describes Kip's father as one of the great minds of the age, says Kip's mother was his father's star student and opines that Kip is no less gifted.

And, don't forget, Dr. Russell did not pull Kip out of Center. Kip got the "occupational therapy for morons" along with the advanced topics he studied at home.

As Mark Twain put it, "I never let my schooling interfere with my education."

Successful education depends on two things: a teacher and one or more parents with a dedication to learning. There's nothing in the rule book at says they have to be different people. Conversely, there's nothing that says they have to be the same.

The important thing is the educated child capable of functioning well in society and interested in continuing to learn on his or her own. With that goal in mind, outcome should matter more than delivery. Yes, there may be subjects in which the parent may be weak: there are resources online and usually tutors can be found to take care of those gaps. In fact, if the parent is as interested in learning as the they are in the child learning, home schooling can be a richly rewarding experience with a likely successful outcome.

On the other hand, being in with other children and exposed to the differences found in most modern classrooms, can be a very good experience for a child, as can learning to coexist in a group governed by rules that apply to all. If the scholastic program isn't all the parents would desire, Dr. Russell's method is always available. My parents taught me an awful lot that I would never have learned in school. So I had the benefit of some good teachers and parents interested in my education.

So what makes parents think they are qualified to home-school? All sorts of reasons: a poor public school system, a belief they can deliver a higher-quality of education that is suited to the child's ability and needs or the necessity of protecting their child from the evil coterie of Satan-worshippers running the school district without daily prayer and a curriculum that includes sex education. This last group might be a subject for concern as they will leave the child ill-prepared to deal with the Godless world outside, but that's not up to us.

In the final analysis, parents think they are qualified because they are the parents and they are willing to take the responsibility for educating their child at least to the point the child can pass the standardized tests most states require.

And what's the real objection? We are already accustomed to distributed learning at the college level: look at the University of Phoenix. Similar resources can be made available for any grade. The curricula are already in place, it's a matter of transferring them to systems that can handle many connections with enough bandwidth for the traffic.

Rather than referencing Heinlein's work, I would recommend a short story written by Isaac Asimov (who did have children) about seven years before Have Spacesuit, Will Travel. It's called "The Fun They Had." It's worth a read because the future Asimov envisioned for 150 years from now is already here.

[FirstLight]

89. before reading all the other comments, let me answer this

I have a few 'friends' who I know that homeschool, it is a JOB and they do it for many reasons. they have a cirriculum, they have materials and they also use their imaginations... I recognize that the few examples i know of are mostly choosing this as a religious thing, but that's their angle, the kids would be indoctrinated by the church and friends of the family anyway, school or not... However, i also have to say i admire a parent who chooses to give their kids that kids of time, to teach them skills like time management and basic home economics - things i NEVER learned in HS but should have...They do have homeschooling outings with other students in the area and events, so there's also more social outlets than one would think, as well as sports, etc...

My kids were just whining to me about wanting to be homeschooled...now i have every reason NOT to homeschool...we don't have the financial means, and there's none of the religious weirdness with me...BUT this is what I told them

If I were going to homeschool, you'd be learning things like "how many seeds to plant on the row when they are spaced at 12" apart...?" and How many cups of milk do you get from a goat each day? or how do you fix the tractor? and Business bartering at the farmers market... see, if i had MY way, we'd be living on our farm and doing the whole hippie, organic, energy conscious thing... there's plenty of things to teach about REAL LIFE that will never be covered by public school...and personally, algebra can suck my ....

My kids are 9 & 10 and they are sharp, they even read DU here with me sometimes, they know what's going on on the planet, they understand the Egypt uprising and war in afganistan on a level that is beyond their years, and it isn't just parroting my liberal views, they really have emotions about saving the planet and caring for the homeless. That can't be taught in 'regular' school. In fact their teachers have told me how impressed they are with my kids "global viewpoint" ...

so ya, I may not be "qualified" to teach my kids, but if I could...I would sure be teaching them more than what they get in their school now...I guess I already am.

[Enrique]

96. the person who posted the OP doesn't deserve such a thoughtful response

that person is a bigot and probably a troll, based on this post they made on another thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=370686

3. Good. Let the Freaks Stay at Home and Play In Their Safe Yards

[FirstLight]

100. thanks...

just thought some reasoning would help

[we can do it]

125. Troll??hahahah Bigot - Um-No

I am just very tired of the public school kids' being denied more and more, to give more and more to those who already have more than enough. (and yes, you are right that was a very poor word choice spewed in frustration, for which I am sorry for).
I am also tired of hearing teachers torn down and how they are just over paid babysitters.

[hughee99]

119. Is this why homeschooled kids are usually way behind

public school students when it comes to reading, writing, math, science and history? Obviously, these people don't have the proper education to impart knowledge upon their own children.

[lumberjack_jeff]

124. link please

the studies I've seen show the opposite. By a huge margin, homeschooled students perform better on standardized tests.

http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp

[hughee99]

127. Will this do?

I've seen those same studies, but since the OP obviously went in with an "axe to grind" (a little lumberjack lingo), I figured I'd play along. I'm not sure what makes parents think they're capable of teaching their own children, but the evidence certainly seems to suggest most ARE capable of doing it, at least to a certain point.

[lumberjack_jeff]

135. That helps a great deal.

[mzteris]

215. Is this why hs'd kids are sought by Universities

such as Harvard and Stanford?

Second question: How many PUBLIC school kids are behind, eh?

Some parents have no business trying to hs. Some teachers have no business in a classroom.

[B Calm]

122. My home school college diploma

didn't help me!

[etherealtruth]

126. What makes you think they are not capable?

I have three children ... none have been 'home-schooled' ... but, none of my children have been mercilessly bullied, the community schools I have sent my children to are "safe," my children do not have "special health" or learning concerns (actually not true my youngest is visually impaired...but is Mr Popular with peers and teachers).

Last year my daughter's AP calc teacher was definitely not capable of teaching that class (the former very competent teacher moved on over the summer) ... I came home from work everyday and taught her what she needed to know ... she was one of two kids that acceptably passed the AP exam ... so I guess I did home school her.

There are many things I want my children to receive from a public education ... if those things are absent I would do what was best for my children.

I've known three families that home schooled ... two definitely weren't religious zealots ... I can't state that with certainty for the third ... all raised children that are doing quite well at universities.

[we can do it]

129. I didn't say or imply all are not capable.

There are bad teachers, but how many parents really have the knowledge and time to adequately teach advanced classes like AP anything? A teaching certificate isn't the be all end all, certainly a good liberal arts education would help. I am most curious how someone who barely finished high school could adequately prepare someone else for today's tough job market. How many are able to teach languages, writing, economics, civics, health, math and science? Not just one subject but all.

[etherealtruth]

136. My preference is that my children receive a public education

... my point is (from where I sit and perhaps from where you sit) that's an easy choice for me ... our schools are safe, my children are/were not bullied, their treks to and from school are "safe" ... what if the things we consider necessary were absent ... what if some of the things were absent?

Its easy to agree that the "religiously insane" are probably not doing a service to their children, in most cases, by home schooling them ... and they may fall into the barely literate category ... but, is that all that comprise home schooled children ... I don't think so.

I have a niece with multiple health problems ... additionally, she is mercilessly bullied. My brother and his wife both have advanced degrees (my SIL is a "stay at home mom&quot ... I wish they would home school her.

[we can do it]

141. All good reasons, yet many whose kids have safety issues don't have the resources to home school.

I believe ALL kids regardless of where they live deserve a good education. Kids in poorer areas just keeping getting less and less and its just not right. They deserve a safe, clean environment to learn the same as those with money.

[etherealtruth]

144. Now that is a fight that I am willing to participate in!

"I believe ALL kids regardless of where they live deserve a good education. Kids in poorer areas just keeping getting less and less and its just not right. They deserve a safe, clean environment to learn the same as those with money."

Frankly, I don't care about the 'home school' issue ... the issue related to the inequities in the education children in poor districts receive vs. children in more affluent areas is a national embarrassment and a moral outrage.

[lumberjack_jeff]

152. Yes you did.

Unless you're experiencing an unfortunate bout of Tourettes syndrome, that's clearly what you were saying.

paraphrased; 'Parents who aren't university trained teachers have no business attempting to teach their kids.'

I can understand backpedaling, but don't try to pretend that you didn't say it.

[we can do it]

180. I did not say that, try reading for comprehension

[frazzled]

128. My main objection to it

is that I think it's too parent dependent, which in my opinion is unhealthy, whether you are providing excellent academics (and even extracurriculars) for your children or not. We try to control so many aspects of our children's lives that to become the authority figure of the teacher and school as well seems ... well ... somewhat overbearing to me.

I was lucky to have excellent public schools for my children (though of course there were the rare years when they had a bad teacher ... a very good learning experience for them, actually). We of course supplemented it with all kinds of books and activities and outings and lessons. Perhaps if I lived in some retrograde, out-of-the-way, backwards place I might have felt differently about home schooling. But here's how I felt for myself:

1. I always had to fight mightily against what I thought I wanted my kids to be and accept what they actually wanted to be. To assume the entirety of their education, I felt, would be satisfying my own ego more than their needs. I had enough problems with ruling their lives as it was.

2. My kids would have rebelled against me. (As well they should have.)

3. Both my kids outgrew our (post-graduate) knowledge by about 5th or 6th grade in certain areas. My son outgrew the school in mathematics by that age, but fortunately there was a program at the state University starting at that age in which he was able to move on to high school math and complete it in two years, moving on from there. There's no way we could have satisfied his needs in this area.

4. I felt that we were best at supplementing and implementing the teachers' assignments and making sure that the kids had all the help they needed or extra materials.

5. What my kids lacked most was ease in social situations. They went to inner-city, multicultural schools where they learned to get along with kids of all races, nationalities, and socio-economic backgrounds, which was important to us.

6. My daughter was hearing impaired, and she had to learn how to function in the real world, not in the quiet of our house, and not where we would always cater to her needs.

All this said, I will not judge other people's decisions. I am basing my opinions my own feelings and my own family situation. And home schooling was very rare in my kids' era (they're now in mid-20s to 30). But if you and your kids are happy with home schooling, I'm not going to criticize you for it. Just tread lightly in one area: don't try to make your kids into what you envision them to be. Make sure you let them be themselves.

[pitohui]

148. arrogance and racism

this just isn't that hard, if you think you are the only person who is pure enough and who knows it all, then of course a mere "teacher" or "professor" cannot compare to your inherent greatness

look, these idiots who want to home school so their kid never meets a black kid are fools and racists, it really is that simple

there may be legit reasons to homeschool but when you're talking about someone w. no credentials in education, who barely has a high school degree, thinking they're qualified to teach...that isn't legit, it's hate and emotion based

[Snake Alchemist]

204. what if they want to homeschool because their

School district is just awful?

[mzteris]

155. You know, I'm surprised

you're not advocating taking babies from their parents.

After all - they're not TRAINED (not yelling - emphasizing) in how to be "a parent". They've never been to school and received a degree in how to teach a child how to walk, talk, use the potty, utensils, interact with others socially like a human being, socialization skills, how to color, use scissors, or play appropriately with other children.

It simply amazes me that all those "unqualified parents" manage to raise human beings at all. How do they do that?

[we can do it]

185. It seems you've never met or heard of neglectful or abusive parents?

How about kids who seem like they've just been hatched out on a stump and left to fend for themselves (at no fault of their own)?

[mzteris]

209. As a former foster mom,

I can assure you, I have.

You conveniently side-stepped the point, however. So noted.

[Nye Bevan]

158. Unfortunately, in my experience there is little correlation between "people with teaching degrees"

and people who are good teachers.

[glinda]

164. And what makes people think they will have the time working two jobs or

do they expect to be paid for it through tax breaks or other means.....

[ProdigalJunkMail]

173. you think homeschoolers get tax breaks??? HAHAHAHAHA! n/t

[glinda]

195. they will want them

[FarCenter]

165. Homeschooling is probably good for kids who would be the youngest in their class

In his book "Outliers: The Story of Success", Malcolm Gladwell presents statistics that show that the older students in a class have a significant advantage. Homeschooling can remove much of that disadvantage for the younger kids.

Note that the effect is particularly strong in the earliest years, since the differences in maturity for kids born within a year is the greatest. If we waited until kids were 6 or 7 before they started school, as do some other countries, the effect would be less pronounced.

[samfarkus]

169. Instinct!

The fact is that probably the most important teaching of your child occurs at a time when they are not yet in school. Ages 0-5.
All children are born geniusses. As we get older we rely more and more on accumulated knowledge, and less on actual learning. Yes, us fogeys like to think our recitation of facts is an indicator of great intelligence, but the fact is that the ability to recognize a 3 dimensional shape and utter the word 'mama' requires an incredible amount of processing power. The pace at which a toddler absorbs new information is almost frightening.

Psychologists will back this up, they focus mostly on early childhood if they want to truly understand a mind.

[FarCenter]

189. Is is not true that "All children are born geniusses."

About 60% of IQ is determined genetically and inherited from the parents. The condition of the mother and the intrauterine environment during pregnancy also play a role, as does trauma during birth.

[Jennicut]

190. As someone who substitutes in schools and volunteers in both my daughters's classes,

I could do homeschooling no problem. The math would suck a bit but even with subbing my math is getting much better. Fractions, algebra, etc. make me want to tear my hair out, but that is about it. Seriously, anyone who went to college can do it. Anyone with a degree can sub, and anyone can teach their own kids. It is not rocket science. It takes a parent who loves learning themselves. Not all homeschooling is about religious nuts. I wish I had been home schooled. My high school social experience was terrible but I loved to learn. Learning was the easy part.

[joshcryer]

197. OK, I'll bite. What makes people think institutional learning is the best way...

...to teach all children?

[Withywindle]

198. After reading this thread, I am so glad I wasn't homeschooled.

My parents are very smart, very well-read progressive people....but I would never have learned how to stand up for myself in an argument if I hadn't gone to an Appalachian public school full of fundies.

And coming from literally the only atheist family in my whole town (pop. 260 as of 2010, per Wikipedia) I started arguing YOUNG, like 2nd grade. With my peers *and* my teachers, who were all "dinosaur bones are tricks of the devil" at the time.


The important thing was that I knew my parents would usually back me up on factual/indoctrination issues against my teachers--but not necessarily on issues related to discipline or homework.

I learned the difference early on between when one is being penalized for one's beliefs vs. when one is being penalized due to slacking.

I'm very glad my parents weren't the ONLY disciplinarians/source of conflict that I had to face, and that I was taught at a young age to recognize the difference between legitimate vs. illegitimate uses of authority.

I had to face different kinds of adults with conflicting power agendas early on, and had my parents' help in sorting out WHICH "because I say so" was fair, and WHICH "because I say so" was fascist.

If the only adult authority figures I'd ever known were my parents, if I'd never been exposed to power-tripping grade-school martinet figures, I don't think I would have understood until too late in my development why QUESTION AUTHORITY as a concept is so vitally important.

And yes, I got in trouble a lot for not "respecting" adults just because they were adults. But my parents taught me that respect is something that must be earned and age has nothing to do with it. Gods bless them for that, it is 100% true.

[mzteris]

211. hs kids are not kept in a closet

you know. In fact, generally speaking, their socialization has a much BROADER range than the typically schooled kid. They are not sitting in a room with 30 other kids +/1 one year of age with ONE teacher dictating everything to them that they should know.

They interact with the REAL world, with myriad adults and children of varying ages and backgrounds. There are co-ops, learning centers and classes, field trips, museum proctors & guides, and just plain old play groups, and many many opportunities to interact with various social and economic strata, religious backgrounds, and political leanings.

They go with you EVERYWHERE. They go to the grocery - it's a great place to learn about fruits & vegetables and distribution systems. Fractions, cost/per, economics and just math in general. They interact with the stocking clerks, the cashier, the manager on occasion - asking questions. They go to the doctor, the museum, the utility companies, the post office. Interacting with adults who are working or visiting there.

It used to be a joke in our house, my son would come up to ask a question, "Mom, don't make this a whole homeschool thing, I just need to ask a quick question." rofl... The Socratic method CAN take quite a chunk of time.

FWIW - every single thing you "do" can be a "learning experience". Every person you meet an opportunity to learn something you "didn't know". Adults - and children - were to be treated with respect - whether they "deserved it" or not. No bullying allowed or tolerated in the hs community. No stereotyping. No ridiculing. IF it happens (usually by newbs who haven't unlearned "school yard behaviour" yet) it gets stopped in a hurry. You dressed how you wanted. No peer pressure. You listened to the music you liked, not what others said you should like. You read the books you wanted to read, not just the "popular ones".

One of the best things about hs'ing, they stay children longer. They aren't sexualized at 9 or 10. They still play pretend up until they go through puberty. Find a ps kid still playing "pretend" at 10 or 12. It's just not tolerated in the public school system. You're a "baby" or "weird". Just put on those booty shorts and learn the lyrics to the latest misogynistic lewd & crude song. Go along to get along. Follow the crowd. Don't think for yourself. Do what everyone else does or you're a pariah. Then you become a target for bullies and teasing and shunning.

Look, what works for one does not work for another. You have no first hand experience with the hs world so you're really not in a position to comment on what does or does not go on there. I'm not trying to put you down or anything, just trying to explain that your preconceptions are incorrect.

[rebecca_herman]

199. Sometimes homeschooling is the better alternative

I was homeschooled for four years in high school. School was basically becoming a toxic environment for me and making my mental health issues worse. I've always been a self learner in many subjects (I understand a lot just from reading something, typically) and I feel my parents were qualified enough. Both of my parents had a college degree, my mother also went to graduate school and worked as a substitue teacher for a couple of years. My father, who had to teach me the math (since neither I nor my mother are naturally good at that subject!) had I believe some kind of math degree (I'd have to ask him, but he was a volunteer math tutor at one point and his job involves a confusing mess of numbers that I will never understand!). So I absolutely believe they were qualified to teach me and my mental health problems were a lot better once I was at home in a better environment. I was accepted at college, completed a 2 year degree then decided to stop. So I don't think it harmed me any.

[quaker bill]

201. Because we all do it

It is unavoidable. The education system would have a far bigger job if we didn't. Some people believe that they can extend this natural role into higher academics, it is likely some can and also likely others cannot.

[saras]

203. There is more than one good answer, and then there's my sig line

If you SURVIVE with less than high school, presumably you live a lifestyle where that's practical, rather than being one in a million. Sucky though it is, America has always had that "good enough for us" standard as part of its heritage. And then there's that homeless woman who went to prison for trying to get her kid into a good school...

There are people who don't finish high school because they see through it and can't stomach the bullshit. Some are stronger that way than others, and people with allergic reactions to bullshit aren't necessarily dumb. That's what GEDs are for - to acknowledge the competence without the social training. My stepdaughter got into primo law school and attorney jobs that way, so I'm biased.

Once you're out of high school, the main reason for successful people not going further is success. If you're successful out of high school, and you know or can learn all you need to stay successful, college is a bad financial and social decision. It's more about belonging than learning, unless you're doing hard science, and even that's changing.

And anyone who's been exposed to the military's older programs for kids in parts of the world where good education wasn't available knows how easy it is, and what a high level of results can be reasonably expected.

Now on top of this, add people with similar ideas about education but radically different ideas about society.

Now add to this a whole bunch of people who don't quite understand it but imitate successful people.

Now add to this a whole bunch of people who don't quite understand success but imitate the people around them.

Oh, and then there's the real wack jobs who know that Everything YOU Know Is Wrong, and have complete alternative explanations of the entire universe, from creation to present science and law. Who ELSE is qualified to teach their theories?

But before you throw too many people into that last category, consider this:

You know how dumb the average person is? Half of them are even dumber than that.
If moving towards the average looks good to you, that shows which half you're in.

[TBF]

206. I have a friend who is doing it and it's working -

Interestingly I am the one with the Master's degree and she is a college drop out. She's a smart and curious individual who is tech-savvy and probably would likely finish college with excellent grades if she returns (early 30s - that could still happen). She is a democrat and an atheist, FWIW, and did not make this decision based upon religious issues.

One of her daughters has some learning issues so she pulled them both out and is doing it at home. She has found all kinds of resources and is blogging about it as she goes. So I've come to the conclusion that it depends on the individual. If you have the motivation to seek out knowledge/resources, master them yourselves, and then teach others all the power to you. I don't know if she'll do this for their entire school career or if it will be something she does to help her daughter get back up to speed (she was seriously falling behind in one subject and this personalized attention may really help). The younger daughter was a good student in public school but is blossoming further because she can now go at her own pace.

Right now my own daughter is dealing with a practically illiterate substitute (her notes home are atrocious) while her regular teacher is out on maternity leave and I really do believe my friend's girls are having the better educational experience at the moment. So, you never know!

[rucky]

207. Most of us would do okay with 1 or 2 kids.

The degree certainly comes in handy when you're facing 20-30 kids at a time. Whole different story.

[Iggo]

214. Ten thousand years of success?

[NYC_SKP]

236. Great answer. (nt)

[Incitatus]

217. Maybe looking at the crop some high schools have been producing lately. nt

[cleanhippie]

221. What makes people think they are qualified to HAVE kids?

[Mendocino]

226. Knowledge doesn't equal ability to teach.

My father was very intelligent- Mechanical engineer, 16 patents, published, peer reviewed etc.
But he was the last person in the world that could be an effective educator.

My son had professional teachers in a public school. He earned excellent grades and a full tuition scholarship to college.

He is a now a teacher.

[dionysus]

232. some people are, some people aren't it's no black and white issue.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

234. Believe it or not, there are homeschool programs out there that offer step-by-step instructions.

The homeschool course we use employs education counselors who are skilled at offering advice to parents when the need arises. Parents have the option of subscribing to an advisory teaching service, which monitors tests. And for middle-school kids there is a "virtual classroom" option, where kids can complete their work online and have their work assessed by one of the school's instructors. In addition to this, they have a program designed specifically for kids who struggle with reading and spelling.

Remember that a substantial part of the art of teaching a classroom of kids involves dealing with about 30 at a time, which means the kids who are on either end of the "average" spectrum require additional attention in order to have their educational needs met. Homeschooling offers each student the individual attention that will help them work their best and be as intellectually challenged as they need to be.

I'm not suggesting that homeschooling is better than the other options. I'm just saying it's good to have all kinds of options available when it comes to educating our children.

[WovenGems]

235. The reason why

is because of religion. A young Christian mind would get corrupted being around all those heathens. Notice those who homeschool never give a good concrete reason why. And when one vacillates it is because the truth is embarrassing.