Thoughts on homeschooling

[youthere]

An earlier homeschooling thread inspired me to post this.

1. Parents that homeschool their kids are all right wing wacko fundies/god hating liberals/racist/greedy/selfish/ violent/other.

That’s like saying all lesbians hate men or all catholic priests are pedophiles. It is a broad brush generalization that is not based in reality. Some choose homeschooling because they are dissatisfied with the public school system. Some choose it because of political beliefs. For other families it may be due to special work circumstances. Another family may decide to homeschool because they just don’t want to be separated from their children for that long during the day. Some want to shield their children from what they perceive to be harmful effects of the public school system ( teasing,bullying etc.)I t may be because particular classes or resources are not available in the public school. And yes, some families choose to homeschool their children for religious reasons. As many reasons as I’ve listed for choosing homeschooling there are many, many more.

2. Homeschooled children don’t receive as good an education as publicly educated children.

Good is a pretty subjective term. For every “Janey Homeschooler Can’t Read” example you come up with I’ll match you with public school student that can’t read, or write, or compute basic facts. Both systems have their loopholes, their pitfalls and their “cracks” for students to fall through. And yes, BOTH systems have some incompetent teachers. I can give you examples of plenty of kids that have excelled from both public schools and homeschooling. Some homeschooled kids learn (besides the basic skills) foreign language, philosophy, chemistry, art, history, advanced mathematics. In some cases (especially if there is a homeschool assistance program available) there are dances and team sports, field trips, contests, concerts…the list is endless. I could say that some homeschooled kids have the opportunity for a BETTER education- but then BETTER is another one of those subjective terms, isn't it?


3. Homeschooled kids don’t get tested like they due in public school.

In some cases they are tested more thoroughly. It depends on the state you live in and/or the choice of the parents. Each state has it’s own regulations pertaining to homeschooling. Some are stricter than others. Most states require the child to be evaluated yearly in some manner. It might be through the same basic skills test that are administered to the public school students. It might be through a state certified teacher that supervises the family. It might be through a portfolio of the child’s work that is monitored by state approved officials. Each state is different. Some states can intervene and demand the child return to public (or accredited) education if the performance is low. Check the legislation in your state.

4. Homeschoolers cheat the public school out of money! OR Homeschoolers have turned their backs on the public school system!


In most cases the school does not get charged or fined or penalized for students that are not there. Students not "in the seat" also aren't using some of the resources the other students are. No textbooks, paper, glue, clay...teacher's time. In some states the child must still be enrolled in the district. The school still receives money for that child even though they are not officially “attending” the school. It all depends on where you live.
In my community homeschoolers pay taxes, and they vote in the school board elections and on school bond issues. We volunteer for bake sales, carnivals, and fundraisers. We work the concession stand at the school football games and we volunteer on field trips. We often provide after school care or free babysitting for certain school events. We are even members of the PTA. Do all homeschooling parents do this? No. But neither do all public school parents.


5. Homeschoolers without a GED or diploma have difficulty entering college.

Not true. There is no lack of colleges that will enroll homeschooled students. Colleges are interested in capable, motivated learners and responsible people. They find both in homeschooled , and public schooled students alike.

5. Home schooled kids lack “real world” experience.

Homeschooled kids live very much in the real world. Children are “in school” while daily life goes on around them. Dishes must be washed, bills must be paid, errands must be run, phones rings, dogs bark and babies cry, all during an average homeschooler’s typical day. How many adults live in the same structure of the elementary school classroom?


Now I’m sure that I forgot a plenty of arguments against homeschooling that some DU’er will be more than happy to point out. You know, maybe I'm naive but I’m always surprised when I encounter vehement opposition against homeschooling, just as I am shocked when I encounter total disdain for public education-especially on DU. Homeschooling is as effective as the individuals participating and the support structure surrounding it. As varied and diverse as homeschooling families are, there seems to be one constant. Parents choose homeschooling because they want the best for their child, and they believe homeschooling to be it. Some do a great job with it and the children thrive. That’s awesome. Some suck at it and the children fall behind. That’s unfortunate.
But the exact same is true for the public school system. Neither is all good, or bad.

As for me, I will continue to homeschool my three, despite the criticism. I believe in my choice and I'm damned glad I've got it to make.

That is all.

[Orsino]

1. As long as...

...you're not lobbying to reduce your tax burden because of your choice, and as long as you're providing a well-rounded education to your kids, you'll get no adminishment from me. Enjoy that liberty, and the company of your children. Raise good ones who won't help to dismantle public education.

[youthere]

3. I'm on it!

:toast:

[SmokingJacket]

2. Homeschooled kids can get a wonderful education.

And for some kids, with some families, it's the best choice.

However... I believe very, very strongly in the importance of the public school system. I wish more of our creative energy, more of our best minds, were invested in them.

Democracy is *not possible* without strong public schools. Without public schools, our literacy rates will drop precipitiously, and so will any hope for an educated electorate.

I'm happy my kids go to public schools. They meet all kinds of kids they'd never meet otherwise, and get to know adults that I don't know -- they begin to create their own lives apart from me, and I love that. They learn to deal with boredom, learn how to "buck the system" just as I did.

Still, if my local schools sucked, I'd homeschool -- I'm an idealist, sure, but when push comes to shove I'm not going to sacrifice my kids for my ideals.

[youthere]

4. From one idealist to another

:toast:

It's the best choice for our family. I also believe in the importance of the public schools...if I didn't that would be like saying homeschooling should be the ONLY option.

I'm happy your family has a strong public school and that it's a positive influence in your community.

[Nite Owl]

5. Both my sons were

homeschooled and they are now fine young, liberal and politically active men. Both did well when they went to college and professors have found them well prepared for college work. We started to homeschool because of illness and it worked out so well that we continued right through high school. It is not for all, it is very time consuming and a huge responsibility but it was for us the best thing for our family. The homeschooling movement started as a liberal movement not at all what it is today. It was not the escape from reality that the right wing has morphed it into but a way for children to be excited about learning.

Best of luck on your journey. It was more than worth the work.

[youthere]

6. There is so much misinformation..

and negative assumptions about homeschooling. I'm glad that parents have the option to homeschool and I'm glad that we have the public school system as well because clearly it's not for everyone.

[Greyhound]

7. If I had kids, I wouldn't even think of subjecting them to the horrors

of public "education". I know that there are large numbers of, what I can only describe as, religious wackos, home schooling their kids here, but I don't think that they are anywhere near a majority. Almost everything important that I know, I learned on my own, in spite of school, and I still carry the physical and emotional scars of being subjected to, what amounts to, 12 years of physical and psychological torture.

One of the saddest indictments of the system is that my story is not at all unusual.

[Perky]

8. Kick and reccdoment/ very good post.

I don't have the wherewithall to homeschoold and we actually have a very good public school system....If we didn't It would a much harder choice.

[youthere]

13. Thank you...

Public education-when it is good, it is very good. Same with homeschooling.

But when they are bad.....well, you know.

[LWolf]

9. There are positive and negatives

to both homeschooling and public schooling. Both hinge on who is doing the "schooling," based on the underlying philosophy, methodology, and agenda.

The "not tested" argument is ridiculous. We should be demanding that the massive testing movement be kicked out of public ed.

As someone who's spent a professional lifetime on the front lines in public ed, I wish to hell I'd hear less criticism, and more "what do you need to offer every student abundant opportunities to succeed?" from people, whether they are touting homeschooling, vouchers, private schooling, or just bitching about public ed in general.

I've taught many former homeschooled children; usually when their parents reach the end of whatever expertise they have, and need people with better subject knowledge to give instruction. Some have come to me in pretty good shape. The majority come to me well behind, sometimes years behind, their peers. I know there are more, successful or not, who do not enter the system at any point.

Here is one thing that the public school system can never offer, that homeschools can, under the current structure:

Small group, one-on-one, experiental learning to make up the bulk of the education. This is the way kids learn; they learn quite naturally and easily in a setting that allows them to DO, to interact, to move, to have extended conversations with the teacher and with each other. When public ed drops class size down to the research-supported 15 or less, all the way through high school, and allows for individualized curriculum, instruction, and assessment, and provides abundant resources to address all learners' needs, then I think public ed will consistently do an even better job over homeschooling than we already do for most. I won't hold my breath, though.

How's this? I challenge every person on this thread, or other ed-related threads on DU today, to start writing, phoning, and faxing congress people and state reps, hounding them incessantly over as many years as it takes, to make the changes I outlined above. Pour the time and energy into positive change instead of into criticizing. Parents, make whatever choices you think best serve your kids; but, if you think we can't best serve them, do something to help us create the needed change. Not every child in America has a parent qualified to homeschool him/her, and without every American caring enough to effect needed changes, we are left attempting to meet their needs with minimal support, derision, and disdain from the rest of the population.

[youthere]

11. beautiful post. I agree..

so much of the sucess of homeschooling depends on the "who". And you're absolutely right, it's not about proving one is better than the other, it's about working hard to make all education options the best for our kids. Thank you.

[goddess40]

10. I just wish there were checks in place

to make sure the kids are getting an education. Pedophiles and abusers have found it is a useful tool to hide their sick behavior. Also some people just suck at teaching or like my sister they are too lazy to even get the kids to school much less actually teach them.

[youthere]

12. There are checks in place.

and all I can say is that some states are stricter than others. We see abuse and pedophilia in the public education system as well. Not all states require background checks for public school employees. Gaps in legislation exist on both sides of the coin, and that's why it's so important for parents to partner with their community re: education-private or public.

[goddess40]

14. Wisconsin has zero checks for home schoolers

Once a year parents just sign a paper saying they will be responsible for their child's education and that's it. No one ever sees the kids nor tests them nothing. If you call and report that nothing is being taught no one can do anything about it.

[youthere]

16. I believe they also have to provide..

a minimum number of hours of "education" in the basic areas of study (A moot point if no one is following up on it.) But compare that to New York:


Parents must maintain attendance records (must make available for inspection upon request of the local superintendent); file, with the local superintendent, quarterly reports listing the number of hours of instruction during quarter, description of material covered in each subject, and a grade or narrative evaluation in each subject
Testing:
File, with the local superintendent, an annual assessment by June 30; must be from a standardized test every other year in grades 4-8, and every year in grades 9-12; the child should score above the 33rd percentile or their home instruction program could be placed on probation; other years can be satisfied by either another standardized test or a written narrative evaluation prepared by a certified teacher, a home instruction peer review panel, or other person chosen by the parent with the consent of the superintendent.

So again, I say there are checks but it depends on the state you live. Perhaps there needs to be some federal minimum guidelines. I don't know. I know that homeschooling is a very valuable option for many families.

I do kow that Wisconsin has a pretty large lobby group for homeschooling (WPA) that fight tooth and nail against stricter legislation of any kind re: homeschooling (kind of the NRA of homeschooling-just kidding). I'm not condoning or condemming it, it just makes me wonder how many other lobby groups are there for EDUCATION-not for homeschool "rights" or public education "rights" -in Wisconsin. Maybe you can tell me.

[goddess40]

18. I don't know of any other lobby groups here in WI

I do know from talking (and writing) to my reps in Madison that it would be next to impossible to get a stricter law passed here.

As for Federal guidelines, that would work for me but not until the fundies are gone. It would be nice to have some type of minimum.

[youthere]

22. That's the problem when groups put all their energy into

a personal agenda as opposed to what will really benefit education. It doesn't mean that there aren't sucessful families that homeschool, it just means it's harder to advocate for ALL the kids.

I think it's great that you work towards better legislation- a lot of people just don't-for whatever reason. Keep up the good fight!
:patriot:

[goddess40]

24. I always ask these people when I meet them...

...If submitting their kids to a yearly check would be so bad if that meant protecting other kids from getting no education or from child/sexual abuse. The answer is always the same - not my problem. Makes me wonder what they are trying to hide or if they are simply that arrogant and mean spirited.

edit: spell check doesn't help when you use the wrong word

[youthere]

28. Ignorant as well...

We see the same resistance to what you and I would consider "common sense" guidelines when it comes to something as simple as background checks in churches and schools for employees-some support it, some fight it with everything they have.Why? It seems like it should be a no-brainer that every responsible person in society would want to take steps to protect children across the nation.

[goddess40]

29. The priest they caught diddling with boys near here got loads of support

There was absolutely no question as to guilt but quite a few members just refused to believe it. So it goes well beyond ignorant.

It's known that some people home school to avoid detection or because they are too lazy to get their kids to school. I know because my sister is the latter, she did put her kids in school for one year because of a financial agreement made with her in-laws, the kids were so far behind they qualified for special ed. Which is difficult to do - my kids are both autism spectrum disordered and can't get an IEP. My sister's kids are average to bright but coloring in coloring books all day does not an education make.

[youthere]

30. There's a lot of states that wouldn't fly..

and it's due to the controls the state has in place. As a homeschooler I understand the "theory" behind fighting stricter legislation, but not when it is to the detriment of the child. In Iowa we have fairly stringent requirements, but not so much so that it restricts or prohibits personal teaching strategies or curriculum that the parent chooses-again, so long as they are not to the detriment of the child. The problem isn't just lazy parenting..it's lazy legislating too.

[proud2BlibKansan]

35. Same here

And the homeschooling parents lobby hard when the state considers any legislation that would hold them accountable. So who knows which homeschooled kids are being educated and which ones are not?

[youthere]

58. Well..

It's important to understand that not all states are that lax, and most have pretty reasonable guidelines. Personally I'd like to see a federal minimum requirement that would make up for the shortfall of those states. Some homeschoolers may disagree with me on that, but when there is little or no legislation, it's too easy for kids to fall through the cracks.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

15. My main worry is parents who are control freaks

Although I hated my public school experience after elementary school, I'm glad I wasn't home schooled, because frankly, my mother and grandmother were control freaks and terrified of the then-prevailing pop culture. Essentially, they didn't approve of any other teenager. If I hadn't gone to school every day, I would have been extremely isolated socially.

A year or two ago, the Minneapolis paper carried an article on a homeschooling family (fundies) where the parents were such control freaks that they were making their 18-year-old take correspondence and online courses instead of going to college, even a Bible college. Since there are fundie colleges whose rules of behavior are strict enough to suit anyone short of the Taliban, this says to me that the parents' main concern was to keep the children under their thumb and not let them develop individual identities.

On the other hand, my family was highly literate, filled the house with interesting books, and took us on enjoyable and educational trips during the summer, so even if your kids are in public school, there are ways to enrich their experience.

[youthere]

17. I worry about those parents too,

both in homeschooling and in public education (who hasn't been to a little league game with one of them sitting in the stands?)
But how do you legislate "overbearing"?

[bmbmd]

19. You might want to edit point number three

before people question your ability to write.

[youthere]

23. Thanks for pointing that out.. DO not DUE...

Unfortunately the editing period is past-so I'll just have to let people think I'm fallible.:hi:

[Beelzebud]

20. If the parent is qualified to teach it's fine. Most aren't....

[youthere]

25. I would simply argue SOME not MOST.

Remember that MOST homeschooling parents are products of the public education system themselves. If they are not qualified to teach their own children the same subjects THEY learned in public school and that are still currently taught, how does that reflect on public education?


Edited for clarification.

[Longhorn]

36. You're assuming that knowledge of a subject is the same thing

as the ability to TEACH it. They are not necessarily one in the same. Teachers are trained how to teach and they learn even more by years of experience.

I would say that SOME parents are qualified to teach but not MOST. This is especially true in mathematics, which is what I teach. In fact, many elementary teachers are also not qualified to teach mathematics and many would be the first to admit it.

[youthere]

41. What makes one "qualified" to teach?

"Teachers are trained how to teach and they learn even more by years of experience."

(for the most part)Teachers are trained how to teach GROUPS of children. They are taught common styles and strategies. Not individual need-based ("custom" if you will) strategies. In many cases (again depending on the state)the schooling is overseen by a supervising teacher. Most homeschool parents take their children's education very seriously and work hard to provide well-planned, challenging, organized and CUSTOMIZED lessons for our children. We draw on a variety of resources, and may choose from different methods or curriculum depending on that particular child's needs and learning style. In public school a curriculum, or method is chosen and that's it.
Teachers learn the best way to teach a variety of children, and as you stated they get better with years of experience, and even those years of experience may not help a teacher learn the strategies that will help every child. Parents learn the best way to teach an individual CHILD.

[BigMcLargehuge]

42. Parents who home school should be required to attain provisional

certification at the state level and take PRAXIS tests to ensure they have the basic skills knowledge to teach at the elementary level, and the PRAXIS targetted curriculum tests (English, Math, Science, History) to make sure they have the skills necessary to teach at the high school level. Home school teachers should also have a mentor in the regular school system. Effectively making them provisionally certified teachers. The only step I'd dispense with at the home level are the requirements for provisionally certified teachers in the public school system to advance their certification/Masters Degree via additional classes.

As long as the qualifications for being a home school teacher are essentially the same for a regular joe like me to get into the school system as a teacher, I won't argue against it. But I've had enough experience with "home schooled" relatives in my extended family to know that if the parents aren't up to the job, the kid suffers, and in the case of my neices, suffers considerably.

[youthere]

43. Disagree.

"...But I've had enough experience with "home schooled" relatives in my extended family to know that if the parents aren't up to the job, the kid suffers, and in the case of my neices, suffers considerably"

The fitness of parents to teach is determined by each state. Some require the mentoring that you suggested above, some don't. Some require annual testing, some don't (and it's a pretty good bet that if a child is performing on the state testing that the parent is competent).

Parents are qualified to feed their children-without being certified dieticians. They clothe them with out a cetificate in fashion or textile manufacturing.They nurture them without the benefit of a child psychology background. They are trusted to instill values and morals without training in sociology. They choose a religious and/or political foundation in their upbringing without an education in divinity or poly-sci.You assert, they should not be allowed to teach them 2+2=4 without a master's degree. I disagree, I think parents (in MOST cases) are more than capable of overseeing their children's education, especially with the GUIDANCE and SUPPORT of trained professionals rather than their acrimony.

"As long as the qualifications for being a home school teacher are essentially the same for a regular joe like me to get into the school system as a teacher, I won't argue against it."

Homeschooling is not public education. Homeschoolers do not (normally) take responsibility for other people's children and should not have to meet the same certification and education requirements as their public school counterparts.
Is it not possible for there to be value in BOTH systems? Not every child can benefit from homeschooling-just as not every child can benefit from the public school system. I see the pitfalls in homeschooling, and believe me when I say that some states do an incredible disservice to education with how lax they are re:homeschooling legislation. Homeschoolers (both good and bad) deal with suspicion, broad-brush smears, anger and resentment from strangers, neighbors and family who are advocates of public school. I welcome the support, advice and encouragement of the professional teachers both in my local school district and I respect the hell out of them, and so do MOST homeschoolers I know.


Edit: Changed sentence wording that came across bitchy.

[kiahzero]

44. This would seem to presume it's OK to neglect your own children

Homeschooling is not public education. Homeschoolers do not (normally) take responsibility for other people's children and should not have to meet the same certification and education requirements as their public school counterparts.

This seems to be saying that it's OK to deprive your own children of an education, just so long as it's only your kids and not someone else's.

[youthere]

45. Not at all..

I should not have to be certified because I am not teaching a group of children that I do not know, and that are not mine. I am taking personal responsibility for my own children and their education. How is that neglectful?
The only way I would administer medication to another person's child is if I were a trained, licensed physcian and the child were a patient of mine.
I administer medicine to my own children frequently.
The only way I would preach religious principle to another person's child is if I were an ordained clergyperson and that child were a member of my church, yet I talk to my children of God and faith and religion all the time.
Neglectful? No. Responsible.

[BigMcLargehuge]

47. the medicine argument...

Administering medicine and performing a medical examination are two vastly different tasks.
Administering medicine and prescribing medicine are two vastly different things.

[youthere]

51. As a parent..

There are times that you "prescribe" medication. When my child has a cough or a runny nose I go to the pharmacy and buy a medication that I believe will work. When my daughter has a headache I prescribe an Ibuprofen tablet.

[kiahzero]

48. Because your child has a right to a good education

Should you be able to perform surgery on your own child, even if you're not a trained, licensed surgeon? No.

Ultimately, the parent isn't the one that's going to bear the cost if the education of the child is lacking - the child is. Therefore, it's impossible for a parent to take full personal responsibility for the education of the child.

[youthere]

50. And my children are receiving a good education..

I know because I am personally overseeing it. The supervising teacher that comes to our home every 3 weeks to help me outline their lessons and research curriculum certifies it. The standardized tests that my children take (not required but provided by) the state affirms it.
Impossible? Not in the least.

[kiahzero]

54. That doesn't address my point

Therefore, it's impossible for a parent to take full personal responsibility for the education of the child.

It's impossible for you to take full personal responsibility, because taking full responsibility means that you accept all the negative consequences that could result. You cannot accept all of the negative consequences, because you can't undo damage caused if your child isn't educated properly.

I'm not talking about you personally, nor am I saying that homeschooling cannot work. What I'm saying is that giving full discretion to the parents, on the grounds that "they are taking full responsibility," is not acceptable. There still need to be standards, and there still needs to be a way of ensuring that the child in question is learning.

[youthere]

56. It's not IMPOSSIBLE

"It's impossible for you to take full personal responsibility, because taking full responsibility means that you accept all the negative consequences that could result. You cannot accept all of the negative consequences, because you can't undo damage caused if your child isn't educated properly"

How does the public school system accept responsibility and undo "damage" if a child is not properly educated? I guarantee that if one of my children is struggling in a specific area that I can recognize it and remedy it much quicker than a teacher with a class of 28 or more students is able to. I have the resources to help my child the moment they start slipping, rather than trying to distribute limited resources to an a number of struggling students on a "worst case" basis.

"I'm not talking about you personally, nor am I saying that homeschooling cannot work. What I'm saying is that giving full discretion to the parents, on the grounds that "they are taking full responsibility," is not acceptable. There still need to be standards, and there still needs to be a way of ensuring that the child in question is learning."

No one on this thread is advocating giving parents full discretion-although there ARE homeschoolers who want that. There are standards in place in each state-some are better than others. Personally I'd like to see a federal minimum guideline for homeschooling that would breach the gap for those states with particularly lax rules.
And as for assuring that "every student is learning" I'd love to see that happen..in the public school system as well as home schooling.

[kiahzero]

59. The public school system doesn't accept full responsibility

How does the public school system accept responsibility and undo "damage" if a child is not properly educated? I guarantee that if one of my children is struggling in a specific area that I can recognize it and remedy it much quicker than a teacher with a class of 28 or more students is able to. I have the resources to help my child the moment they start slipping, rather than trying to distribute limited resources to an a number of struggling students on a "worst case" basis.

Public school teachers aren't expected to take full responsibility for their student's learning. Let me be as precise as I can: the reason "full responsibility" is important is because the argument was made that a parent has a right to pull their child out of public education and educate the child themselves, taking "full responsibility" for the outcome. However, the child is an human being, not property, and it is impossible for any person, including parents, to take full responsibility from them for their education and the consequences of failure. If the parent fails to educate their child, it is the child that will suffer the consequences.

This arose out of a question of licensure for homeschool teachers. Why shouldn't the State have some say in ensuring that the child is taught by someone competent, enforcing the child's right to an education? There may well be a good answer, but it is not that the parent is taking "full responsibility."

No one on this thread is advocating giving parents full discretion-although there ARE homeschoolers who want that. There are standards in place in each state-some are better than others. Personally I'd like to see a federal minimum guideline for homeschooling that would breach the gap for those states with particularly lax rules.
And as for assuring that "every student is learning" I'd love to see that happen..in the public school system as well as home schooling.

If you agree that parents do not have a right to educate their child however they see fit, then we're agreeing that limitations are justified, and it's just a question of what limitations are appropriate. If you believe that licensure is justified for most teachers, what is the relevant difference that would justify not requiring licensure for teachers who teach only their own children?

[youthere]

60. Well...

First of all let me be clear..I believe a parent has the absolute right to choose the curriculum, strategies and subject matter of their child's education. I support minimum guidelines that ensure no parent is WITHHOLDING education from a child.I don't know that it should be "standards of education" but there should be some measures in place for the schools, or the state to keep in contact with the families. It shouldn't be possible for any state to allow a child to just "drop off the map"-homeschooled or otherwise.


"If you believe that licensure is justified for most teachers, what is the relevant difference that would justify not requiring licensure for teachers who teach only their own children?"


I justify no licensure because I am not teaching state mandated curriculum nor am I receiving state funding to teach that "approved" material. I am not representing myself to be an expert on subject matter or methodology presented to the public, in a public facility, paid for with taxpayer money.Rather than partaking in the knowledge of the "experts" provided to me by my school district in part through my tax dollars, I seek out my own "experts" at my own expense through the curriculum, resources, and collaborating teaching professionals I select for my children.

Good points..very thought provoking.

[BigMcLargehuge]

46. further...

Parents are qualified to feed their children-without being certified dieticians.

Parents eat everyday, and have eaten everyday since they were kids. Kids aren't expected to get a job where all they do is eat or go to college and major in eating. Parents don't teach history everyday, or algebra/trigonometry/calculus. Parent's don't write in clear concise English everyday (if at all in many cases).

They clothe them with out a cetificate in fashion or textile manufacturing.

Parents get dressed everyday, and have gotten dressed everyday since they were kids. Parents don't teach history everyday, or algebra/trigonometry/calculus. Parent's don't write in clear concise English everyday (if at all in many cases).

They nurture them without the benefit of a child psychology background.

I don't remember every taking a final exam on "being nurtured". This is a straw man. Parents breathe everyday too yet they don't need to wear a respirator.

They are trusted to instill values and morals without training in sociology.

Another straw man. Let's not confuse regular parental responsibilities with formally educating a child.

They choose a religious and/or political foundation in their upbringing without an education in divinity or poly-sci.

This isn't even a sentence, yet I'll venture an answer anyway. This isn't about choosing a religion or a polticial affiliation, I am assuming you mean a civics course. Ask ten parents to name the first ten ammendments to The Constitution. Ask ten parents to specify the three branches of government. Ask ten parents what "separation of powers" means. As ten parents to describe the process of authoring a bill and getting it passed into law. The vast majority of them will have NO IDEA what the hell you're talking about. And the few that do, ask them to put it into historical context for 1780's world politics. See what you'll have left. I predict, none.

You assert, they should not be allowed to teach them 2+2=4 without a master's degree.

I assert no such thing. Reread my post. I say they should be provisionally certified, that's several orders of magnitude less than having a Masters Degree.

I disagree, I think parents (in MOST cases) are more than capable of overseeing their children's education, especially with the GUIDANCE and SUPPORT of trained professionals rather than their acrimony.

You're wrong.

[youthere]

49. NO..

The statistics show that you are wrong.

1. 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.

2. in another study by Dr. Lawrence Rudner of 20,760 homeschooled students which found the homeschoolers who have homeschooled all their school aged years had the highest academic achievement. This was especially apparent in the higher grades. ii This is a good encouragement to families catch the long-range vision and homeschool through high school.

3. In 1991, a survey of standardized test scores was performed by the Home School Legal Defense Association in cooperation with the Psychological Corporation, which publishes the Stanford Achievement Test. The study involved the administering of the Stanford Achievement Test (8th Edition, Form J) to 5,124 homeschooled students. These students represented all 50 states and their grades ranged from K-12. This testing was administered in Spring 1991 under controlled test conditions in accordance with the test publisher's standards. All test administers were screened, trained, and approved pursuant to the publisher's requirements. All tests were machine-scored by the Psychological Corporation.

These 5,124 homeschoolers' composite scores on the basic battery of tests in reading, math, and language arts ranked 18 to 28 percentile points above public school averages. For instance, 692 homeschooled 4th graders averaged in the 77th percentile in reading, the 63rd percentile in math, and the 70th percentile in language arts. Sixth-grade homeschoolers, of 505 tested, scored in the 76th percentile in reading, the 65th percentile in math, and the 72nd percentile in language arts.


4. Statistics also demonstrate that homeschoolers tend to score above the national average on both their SAT and ACT scores.

For example, the 2,219 students reporting their homeschool status on the SAT in 1999 scored an average of 1083 (verbal 548, math 535), 67 points above the national average of 1016. In 2004 the 7,858 homeschool students taking the ACT scored an average of 22.6, compared to the national average of 20.9.

According to the 1998 ACT High School Profile Report, 2,610 graduating homeschoolers took the ACT and scored an average of 22.8 out of a possible 36 points. This score is slightly higher that the 1997 report released on the results of 1,926 homeschool graduates and founding homeschoolers maintained the average of 22.5. This is higher than the national average, which was 21.0 in both 1997 and 1998.

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

5.Test score data from states requiring testing or from homeschooling associations, while not totally representative, suggest that tested homeschooled children are above average (Lines 2001). According to two Time reporters (Cloud and Morse 2001), "the average SAT score for home schoolers in 2000 was 1100, compared with 1019 for the general population."

Ray's report shows that "home-schooled pupils who took the Iowa Test of Basic Skills outscored public school students by 37 percentile points" (Viadero, March 19, 1997). On the Stanford Achievement Test, the advantage was 30 percentile points. The longer kids had been educated at home, the better their test scores. Also, "students whose parents had teaching certificates scored only slightly higher than the children of nonteachers" (Viadero, March 19, 1997).

6.Results were similar in Lawrence Rudner's (1999) large-scale, noncontrolled study of 20,760 K-12 homeschoolers from 11,900 families who subscribe to Bob Jones University's Testing and Evaluation Service. Students' median scores on the Iowa Tests of Basic Skills or Tests of Achievement Proficiency (TAP) fell between the 70th and 80th percentiles. While urging caution in interpreting results (especially in light of participating families' white, middle-class demographics), Rudner concludes that a homeschool setting has proved academically beneficial for these kids. This observation holds true even though "not all home schoolers take standardized tests" and not all homeschools have well-structured curricula and dedicated parents (Cloud and Morse 2001).

http://eric.uoregon.edu/trends_issues/choice/home_schooling.html

And from wikipedia:

Academic findings

Some studies have suggested the academic integrity of home education programs, demonstrating that on average, home-educated students outperform their publicly-run school peers by 30 to 37 percentile points across all subjects. Moreover, the performance gaps between minorities and gender that plague publicly-run schools are virtually non-existent amongst home-educated students.<19>

Some critics argue that while home-educated students generally do extremely well on standardized tests<20>, such students are a self-selected group whose parents care strongly about their education and would also do well in a conventional school environment.

Some opponents argue that parents with little training in education are less effective in teaching. However, some studies do indicate that parental income and education level affect home-educated student performance on standardized tests very little.

Home-educated student curricula often include many subjects not included in traditional curricula. Some colleges find this an advantage in creating a more academically diverse student body, and proponents argue this creates a more well-rounded and self-sufficient adult. Increasingly, colleges are recruiting home-educated students; many colleges accept equivalency diplomas as well as parent statements and portfolios of student work as admission criteria; others also require SATs or other standardized tests. Some opponents argue that home education curricula often exclude critical subjects and isolate the student from the rest of society, or presents them with their parents' ideological world views - especially religious ones - rather than the publicly sanctioned worldviews taught at state schools.

The results of home education with gifted and learning-disabled children have not been as thoroughly studied.

[aikoaiko]

52. nice post. thank you. nt

[youthere]

53. You bet. Thank YOU.

:hi:

[Akoto]

21. I finished school at home due to some health problems.

I'd like to think that I've turned out alright.

I'm going through college presently to get my degree in a career I love. That I'm approaching one thousand posts here would seem to indicate that I didn't turn out a right-wing nutcase.

[emdee]

26. I'm sorry I came in too late...

to recommend you for the greatest page!!
emdee

[youthere]

27. Thanks emdee!

[youthere]

31. just want to add that I enjoyed your insightful posts on..

the OTHER homeschool thread.

[emdee]

32. Thanks!

hopefully it's a dead-thread now.
But, thankfully it didn't bother me at all --- See: :freak:

:rofl:

emdee

[youthere]

33. Wish I could say the same...

I'm still :banghead:

[emdee]

34. Boy, can I relate!

:donut: There - a little sugar and caffeine always works wonders!
Haha
emdee

[barb162]

37. would you homeschool for high school?

[youthere]

39. I think it depends on the child and the district that you're in,

the abilities of the parent,and what is in the best interest of the child at that point. If you are asking me personally if I would homeschool for highschool I can tell you that I most assuredly would BUT I am also fortunate enough to have the resources of a large, well-funded homeschooling assistance program with a wide variety of enrichment courses and other resources that most public high schools don't have access too...so in that regard, I have an advantage (I believe) over other homeschoolers.
For myself, I don't have concerns about teaching my (potential)high schooler something I don't have a clue about like say, chemistry, because I can send him/her to our HSAP for an enrichment course in that field of study-but not all homeschoolers have that available. So again I say, it depends.

[lostnfound]

38. There's a lot of brainwashing going on in the school system

I reading 'Dumbing Us Down" and it was intriguing. But the biggest proof are the history & government classes.

Especially now, kids are being taught to be passive and just go with the flow. Bell rings? Time to drop what you are doing and move to the next task. The kids are being whittled into homogenized worker-bees and consumers.

[youthere]

40. I can tell you:

That the passivity we saw in our oldest was PART of the reason we chose to homeschool. By second grade we just saw no spark or thrill of learning in her. She knew exactly "how many" she had to get right on a test to pull a good grade and would not do a lick more. She just didn't care, and it was heartbreaking to see it happen (especially when this child was so thrilled and excited about going to school when she started kindergarten). My son was in kindergarten at the time. He is a really smart boy with tons of energy. His kindergarten teacher insisted he had ADD because he had such a hard time sitting still. We took him to THREE specialists and all three determined the same thing...he just has a lot of energy. Our school didn't WANT a child with a lot of energy. Children with a lot of energy fidget, and they giggle in class, and they speak out of turn. They are out of their seats a lot. They require a lot of attention and quite frankly the school didn't have the resources to devote to him (and honestly it would be incredibly unfair to the school to expect them to), and I was NOT willing to medicate him so that he could "perform adequately". A standard classroom was simply not going to be the best way for my son to learn. So we pulled him and his sister out. Three years later they are both doing tremendously..in fact, my kids took the Iowa test of basic skills last year, and my daughter scored in the top 2% of students in the state and my son in the top 4%. (The youngest-who has never been to public school-will take the test for the first time this year.) More importantly than that, I see a genuine love of learning, a sincere questioning of the why and how, and that has made all the work (and it is hard work) of homeschooling worth it-and you know what? My son STILL can't sit still.

[lostnfound]

55. That high energy level will serve him well in the real world, most likely

Some of the most "successful" people I know are very high-energy. Kudos to you for bypassing the medication option which apparently he didn't truly need.

[youthere]

57. Thanks..I just wish..

I could tap into that energy once in awhile..but he's not sharing. ;-)