Home schooling ambush

Nygdan,

You're certianly entitled to your own opinions in this thread.

I'm a bit surprised at your vehemence, though. Statements like "Makes me doubt the value of any home schooling," and so on make it sound like your pretty dead set against it.

Without having any survey results, I suspect that parents who choose to go to the effort and expense of home schooling are doing so becaue they are MORE committed to their children's education than the general public is.

It doesn't surprise me that homeschooled kids might do better on exams; their parents are more invested in their performance, which any public school teacher will tell you is critical for ANY educational process to succeed.

What bothers me, and I suspect many of the "Pro" posters, is that there is such a level of suspicion and contempt for people who want to "do it themselves."

Would you be as suspicious of people who grow their own food, or build their own homes? Wouldn't you think they have a basic right to do so, particularly if they are farmers or contractors?

Are you a public school teacher????

Due to early "homeschooling" I knew how to read and write in kindergarden way before school. None of the children there were mature or educated like me in the beginnings of elementary school. Too bad I wasn't homeschooled after that...

Homeschooling clearly produces smarter, more educated children.
When you have lots of children in public system together, most of the time they learn from each other how to be stupid since their brains aren't very developed yet. That's why it is best to have children grow up learning from an adult without annoyances from other kids.

I know what you're thinking of, megaquad. I have done some volunteer work with jr. high kids in an after-school program.

It reminded me most of my primate behavior lab units when working on my anthropology degree. The kids, particularly males, form a dominance hierarchy at school. One of my personal goals was to subvert the hierarchy in the afterschool program, by choosing the smallest/youngest kids for team captains, emphasizing cooperative games over competitve ones, etc.

Unless your kid is gonna be a dominant in their peer-group, I don't see that " at-school socialization" is necesarrily a positive thing for young children, unless it is pretty closely monitored by adults.

Looking back, my own teachers used the hierarchy of kids to enforce discipline. They picked the popular kids at recess to organize games, hand out snacks, etc. "teacher's pets." I don't know that my kids need to either participate in or be victimized by that social setting. They can learn about it, without suffering from it, by watching the "Godfather" movies. . .

In music, the cute little red-haired girl always got to play the tambourine. The cute blonde boy got the cowbell. Us fat kids were on the back row with the "two red sticks."

On a more serious note, they put all the poor/fat/problem kids in a remedial reading program, beginning in the first grade! My mom raised hell about it, and it was 6 weeks before I got moved to the accelerated class. My crime? being left-handed (This was 1975. . .)

I still remember one of my best friends, whom I taught the Hebrew alphabet as a code, being sent to the remedial class by the first grade teacher, who told him (in front of the class), "Bobbie, it's not your fault that you can't read, your older sister got all the brains in your family." Of course, he got sent to the office with me for passing notes in hebrew characters that the teachers couldn't read (they couldn't use an encyclopedia, apparently, either.)

The last time I saw "Bob," at our class reunion, he was working as a janitor in Dallas.

Yeah. And to think that my kids might miss out on such experiences . . .

Originally posted by Nygdan

No, lets not. They are not relevant to the situation. We are talking about the american public at large. They are -barely- educated as is. Letting them not go to school and expecting their parents to teach them and thinking that they'll be well educated is entirely and completely absurd.

Perhaps you should read your words? You just defended every homeschoolers choice of doing such..........."We are talking about the american public at large. They are -barely- educated as is"..........where did these "barely-educated" ppl go to school - public schools.

Misfit

What really gets on my nerves about this topic is people injectiing unwarrented opinions. You cant judge home school education by reading a few articles. You have to be exposed to it in some form. I know of no parent who home schools that doesnt put more time into there childs education than parents of public school educated children. Thats not to say that public school parents are less compitent, but that hame school parents are willing to go the extra step for thier childs education and saftey. I had two main reasons for wanting to do home school.

1. I want a higher standard of education than public schools allow for.

2. I dont want my daughter to be pregnate by the time she is fourteen.

I went to a public school most of my life, and I know what being a student in a public school entails. How many of you who went to public schools that are male actually put your classes before booty chasing? My grades sucked in highschool cause I was always trying to get laid! As were most of the othe rmales I knew. There were some guys I went to school that could maintain the grades and still be Don Wan, but not many. That is just a stress I dont want my daughter to have to go through. Its unnecessary, and unwarranted.

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
I'm a bit surprised at your vehemence, though.

I'm just shocked that anyone can think that the public school system is a 'bad' thing for society and should be done away with. Look at all the countries that don't have public school systems right now. They produce some very intelligent and important people. But they aren't the societies that people are flocking too.

Without having any survey results, I suspect that parents who choose to go to the effort and expense of home schooling are doing so becaue they are MORE committed to their children's education than the general public is.

Again, I do not dispute that. You said that you and your wife hold multiple degrees and are doing a very good job, even a better job, of educating your kids at home than the public school system would. I don't disagree. I don't disagree at all. And, in so far as anyone is saying that a parent who genuinely is qualified to do this and honestly can put forth the effort can do a better job than either the average public school teacher or even some of the better school teachers, I wouldn't, in general, disagree there either. But it is not a solution for society as a whole. And there has to be a set of standards that homeschoolers must meet. Where I am, there are standards that everyschool is required to meet, and every student is required to meet in order to get a particular type of diploma. My concern is that there are numerous people who are not qualified to teach their own children who are doing so because they have 'disagreements' with the sort of material that is taught in schools (usually because of religious problems). But, agian, I don't doubt that homeschool can be better than a 'public school' education. I just seriously doubt the claim that it will allways, or even generaly, or even in a sufficiently large number of instances, result in a better education.

Would you be as suspicious of people who grow their own food, or build their own homes?

Yes, I am highly suspicious of the Amish, yes.
All kidding aside, yes, I would tend to look at someone who went thru all that when perfectly fine and reasonable products are publically available a little strangely.

Wouldn't you think they have a basic right to do so, particularly if they are farmers or contractors?

Sure they have that right. Similarly, parents have the right to take their kids out of public schools and teach them on their own if they so choose. I have no problem with that either. I merely take issue at the suggestion that public schools should be abolished, which is something that, if its not being explicitly stated in the thread, its definitely lurking beneath the surface.

Are you a public school teacher

No.

kidfinger
I am VERY offended by this remark

I do not care if I offend you and will not change my statements merely because they are offensive. Even if you capitalize every word in that sentence I still won't change my mind.

My daughter is BETTER educated than any public school child. And that is NOT absurd

Gee, thats nice. If you would read for content, you'd notice that I wasn't talking about your child, and that i've been re-iterating that I am not talking about any one particular instance of any particular kids. This inability to read for comprehension on your part makes me question this 'homeschooling' thing greatly.

megasquad
Homeschooling clearly produces smarter, more educated children.

This statement and the anecdote you present as support for it are nonesense. The fact that you were educated properly and that it just so happened to be at home does not mean that all parents will produce children that are better educated and smarter than what is currently being produced. By the logic used in your statement all one would have to do is cite a public school kid who was better educated than you. That is simply not good logic.

misfit
where did these "barely-educated" ppl go to school - public schools.

Granted, that is true. Its an arguement for having higher school standards, better paid teachers, and better funded schools tho, not necessarily for eradication of public schools and homeschooling.

[edit on 15-10-2004 by Nygdan]

I dont believe I have seen here any advocating of abolishing the PS system

I AM seeing what the thread started as - the defense of homeschooling.

Misfit

I didn't say anyone explicity stated it. If oyu think homeschooling allways results in better students, then why aren't you advocating the abolition of public schools?

Originally posted by Nygdan
I didn't say anyone explicity stated it. If oyu think homeschooling allways results in better students, then why aren't you advocating the abolition of public schools?

Because to a sad major number of people the PS is the babysitter. To another major number, there is simply NOT the choice of homeschooling.
To abolish the PS system would be detrimental. And I agree, the PS sys WAY needs to be brought up in standards, becuase it IS just a big government funded baby-sitting service as is.

I simply am in defense of the right of homeschooling.

BTW - there ARE tests in place the home-student has to take. They are the same standard tests the kids in PS receive.

Misfit

Originally posted by Misfit
BTW - there ARE tests in place the home-student has to take. They are the same standard tests the kids in PS receive.

Actually it depends on which state you live in as to whether homeschoolers are tested or not. My children had no testing of any kind until I put them back in public school. And all 3 of them were more advanced than their peers. The truth is public schools are of value in our society but there is quite a need for improvement. Home schooling is of value in our society but there will always be those few parents who teach their children at home to satisfy an agenda not based on the benefits to their children. For example: Bubba who wont let his children go to school because there is too much work to do on the farm. Or Rocko who hates the government and therefore wont allow his children into the system. Both public schools and home schooling have benefits and drawbacks as with anything else. Every situation and each child is different. The deciding factor between home schooling and public schooling has to be judged accordingly based on what is best for the individul children.

Speaking of Technology--Did you know that Alexander Graham Bell, (the man who invented the telephone) didn't attend school because his father wanted him to work on their farm. Hmm, interesting to know he worked on a farm and had enough motivation and fortitude to invent something so intricate as the telephone.

One more tid-bit on non-indoctrinated educated legends--In 1854, Reverend G. B. Engle belittled one of his students, seven-year-old Thomas Alva Edison, as "addled." This out-raged the youngster, and he stormed out of the Port Huron, Michigan school, the first formal school he had ever attended. His mother, Nancy Edison, brought him back the next day to discuss the situation with Reverend Engle, but she became angry at his rigid ways. Everything was forced on the kids. She withdrew her son from the school where he had been for only three months and resolved to educate him at home. Al though he seems to have briefly attended two more schools, nearly all his childhood learning took place at home.

See the problem I have with what you said in your last post Nygdan is that you have everything twisted--today's public school kids couldn't hold a candle to the dreamers/accomplisher of yesteryear--because the kids today have absolutely no windmills to tilt, that is unless someone challenges them. I see no challenges in the public school system, it has been deliberately dumbed down.

[edit on 15-10-2004 by Anti_Federalist]

Originally posted by Nygdan

But, agian, I don't doubt that homeschool can be better than a 'public school' education. I just seriously doubt the claim that it will allways, or even generaly, or even in a sufficiently large number of instances, result in a better education.

Funny, that a paragraph before this, you agreed that parents who homeschool are probably moe committed to their kids' education. Then, you go back and say that most of them probably can't do a better job after all, in a "sufficiently large number of instances."

I guess there's the real difference, right there. your use of the term "sufficiently large" says it all. The implication is that home schooling must justify itself. As if it should be abolished if not enough people can do it well enough to suit you. They obvioiusly do an excellent job in the states where homeschooled kids must pass the same aptitude tests. In my state, they score better as a group than the P.S. kids do. Of course, my state is always in the bottom fifth of the US in education.

What is rubbing me the wrong way (and I suspect a lot of others, too) is that you don't see home schooling as an option, a viable alternative, for those families that choose to persue it.

You make it sound like it is a regrettable choice, like the parents who choose it are suspect, and should be monitored more closely for other 'questionable' behavior. So what if they choose it for religious reasons? As long as they can keep up with the public schools, why is that a crime?

The best four high schools in my state all happen to be religious schools.

I think that this discussion at the core is an arguement over values. I personally trust American parents, not always as individuals, but as a group, to make the best choices for their families. It seems like you trust Americans who have a teaching certificate more.

That's why I asked whether you are a teacher. You haven't said anything about your own kids, but you seem to stand for public schools at all costs.

I know you don't care, Nygdan, but the way you pose your arguments, which often seemed designed to inflame and offend, seems pretty troll-like.

I think your getting a chubby off of just saying anything that hacks people off. Your arguments seem to be focused on alienating people.

Troll.

So many things that are so wrong in this thread....

Firstly, I would say that I would support the abolishment of the public school system. Why? Because people deserve to get what they earn. Parents should parent; what is the most important part of parenting? Teaching your child. Oh, but parents don't have the time/education, you say? If they don't have the time, because they work, then why did they have children? If their SUV, big screen TV, etc., is more important to them than their child, again, why did they have children?
But what about the "disadvantaged?" Guess what? Everyone starts with a level playing field. Go earn it. You want to get a great paying job, a degree, etc? That's great. But what is it worth when the curriculum is dumbed down so the majority can pass? Should a slip of paper that says you were educated in a particular subject to the lowest common denominator mean something to me? I run a business, and guess what? It doesn't. Almost anyone can get a degree. This doesn�t speak to our educated society. Instead it emphasizes that lack of education in our society. Why is this so hard to see? Public schools process societies children to be intellectual clones, differentiated only by what degrees and titles they hold. It's easy to classify, organize, control. It is also disgusting.
Secondly, a good number of posters on this thread, who have no experience with home schooling, are showing however that they are fine examples of the public school process. They cry out for "group mind" and "group identity." Individualism and independence were primary factors in the establishment of the United States. Doesn't it alarm anyone that these values are shunned so? I was homeschooled. I like socializing. By and large, I like people. But I don't need anyone. Unlike the majority of my peers, I learned to be self-sufficient, self-reliant, and self-regulated. Take a look at society, at yourself and the people around you. What do you see? Think about it.

Originally posted by Anti_Federalist
Speaking of Technology--Did you know that Alexander Graham Bell, (the man who invented the telephone) didn't attend school because his father wanted him to work on their farm. Hmm, interesting to know he worked on a farm and had enough motivation and fortitude to invent something so intricate as the telephone.

Wow interesting. In public School they taugh that Marconi actually invented the telephone.

Dr S
Funny, that a paragraph before this, you agreed that parents who homeschool are probably moe committed to their kids' education. Then, you go back and say that most of them probably can't do a better job

You had said, and I agreed that " parents who choose to go to the effort and expense of home schooling are doing so becaue they are MORE committed". This clearly refers to parents doing it right now. This is a minority of the public. Most of the general public doesn't have the time, ability, or resources to homeschool their children.

As if it should be abolished if not enough people can do it well enough to suit you.

I am completely confounded as to how you think I am saying that. I never said anything like that, at all, at anypoint, any where in the thread.

So what if they choose it for religious reasons?

Ah. In that particular instance I was thinking about parents who don't want their kids learning about evolution or anything that they think contradicts the bible.

It seems like you trust Americans who have a teaching certificate more.

Your pretty fixatde on this whole 'anti-teachers' thing. I couldn't give a crap about whether a person has a teaching certificate. I know that the general public simply can not handle homeschooling their children. The general public often seems like it can't handle their kids to begin with. And if it isn't bad enough that there are so many latchkey kids now, well, I can't imagine how much worse it will be when these kids are waiting for their parents to come home from work to teach them. An enourmous number of families now have both parents working, and often both are working very long hours. What are these kids supposed to do while the parents are at work? The parents certainly can't quite their jobs?

Again, for the umpteenth time, I am merely stating that homeschooling is not a viable alternative for american society as a whole, and that the public school system is, well, somewhat like what Churchill said about democracy.

you seem to stand for public schools at all costs.[/quot]
Because I can see the extraordinary benefits that public schools have on society.

Troll.

I have gone thru the trouble of patiently explaining my postion and concerns on the subject and have listened to yours. I have not come here looking for an arguement, in fact I've found this particular thread somewhat tiresome at times. I haven't posted things delibrately to provoke a particular response which is what you jsut did, which is the very definition of a troll. If I am not 'sensitive enough to your needs', you can 'suck it' as they say in public schools. I don't give a damn about your needs, or if you are offended, or anything else. I came to this board for the purpose of finding people with interesting viewpoints that were also capable of holding an intelligent conversation. Even though I've done the equivalent of spe-aking-verrry-slo-wly throughout this thread, repeating myself endlessly, you and several others here have been incredibly incapable of comprehending. If that is an example of the calibre of 'homeschoolers' then I am even more disdainful of it than I was before. I have done absolutely nothing that is consistent with being a troll, even tho my tendecies are considered offensive by some. If my methods are too garrish for you and other people in this thread, fine, I shall leave this thread.

Like I said, a troll.

Check out these two excerpts:

Originally posted by Nygdan

I haven't posted things delibrately to provoke a particular response . . .

and then in the next sentence:

Originally posted by Nygdan

. . .you can 'suck it' as they say in public schools.

The prosecution rests its case, your honors.

Dont worry about Either Home or Public, the rate this government spends money, You, Your Spouse, And your Third Grader will be holding down jobs to make ends meet!!
How else are we going pay their Cushy 75% of Salary TAX FREE Fully Benefited Retirement They Unanimously and Painfully Voted in for themselves.. "Your Tax Dollars At Work!"

[edit on 16-10-2004 by Iwunder]

Originally posted by Nygdan

I have not come here looking for an arguement, in fact I've found this particular thread somewhat tiresome at times.

Then why do you consistantly do just this?

If I am not 'sensitive enough to your needs', you can 'suck it' as they say in public schools. I don't give a damn about your needs, or if you are offended, or anything else.

You dont have to be sensitive, just sensible in you comments

I came to this board for the purpose of finding people with interesting viewpoints that were also capable of holding an intelligent conversation.

There is more intelligence on this thread then you realize obviously. Must be a reason on your part.

Even though I've done the equivalent of spe-aking-verrry-slo-wly throughout this thread, repeating myself endlessly, you and several others here have been incredibly incapable of comprehending.

More troll talk

If that is an example of the calibre of 'homeschoolers' then I am even more disdainful of it than I was before.

You must be reffering to your own post.

If my methods are too garrish for you and other people in this thread, fine, I shall leave this thread.

Please, dont let the door hit you where the dog should have bit you!

[edit on 10/16/04 by Kidfinger]

Originally posted by Anti_Federalist
Speaking of Technology--Did you know that Alexander Graham Bell, (the man who invented the telephone) didn't attend school because his father wanted him to work on their farm. Hmm, interesting to know he worked on a farm and had enough motivation and fortitude to invent something so intricate as the telephone.

Wow interesting. In public School they taugh that Marconi actually invented the telephone.

After doing some research and being a good Italian myself, I will concede that Antonio Meucci (not Marconi) deserves credit-- where credit is due.

www.esanet.it...

This has also been ascribed to my home school curriculum. It is a true adage: those who crave knowledge--never stop learning. Knowledge is Power.


[edit on 16-10-2004 by Anti_Federalist]

Originally posted by Nygdan
Wow interesting. In public School they taugh that Marconi actually invented the telephone.

i believe they also credit marconi with the invention of the radio...although a court has ruled that tesla actually invented the radio.

Now, if you want an interesting "science conspiracies" thread, you're off to a raging start.

The Smithsonian has had great power in "making" certain scientists, ascribing "originator" status to some but not others.

Edison and Marconi are outstanding examples. They donated purportedly 'original' materials to the smithsonian, and their financial backers gave lavishly to the smithsonian and its various projects.

The same goes for the Wright brothers. Their work was based on prior research by the then-curator of the Smithsonian, S.P. Langley, on condition that they would donate their "flyer" to the Smithsonian collection. Some reconstructers have asserted that the flyer in the smithsonian is actually incapable of powered flight, even with the catapult that actually launched it. (so much for 'powered' flight at Kittyhawk). Many others, like New Zealander Richard Pearse, can be asserted as successful aviators before the wrights.

Tesla would be the most famous example. Don't look for an exhibit on him at the Smith. Westinghouse never funded an exhibit. But GE and and Edison were only too happy to build on the edison mystique.

Same with Bill Gates. A household word, right? How much code did he ever write?

Maybe we should refrain from historical examples altogether, since public school revisionism is one of the arguments made on this thread . . .