How do you feel about homeschooling?
It is unethical in almost all cases
20% (23)
20% (23)
It is unethical in many cases
20.9% (24)
20.9% (24)
It is not usually unethical
45.2% (52)
45.2% (52)
Sending kids to public schools is unethical
11.3% (13)
11.3% (13)
Want to vote? Register now or Sign Up with Facebook
Poll: Is homeschooling unethical?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

PercyBoleyn:

Ultratwinkie:
So a building full of stupid kids

Statements like these show just how clueless you are about social interactions.

Ultratwinkie:
represents society better... than society itself?!

I have never made that claim. Please stop using fallacies to support your claims.

Ultratwinkie:
You move goal posts, you refuse to acknowledge anything that isn't your own view, and you refuse to see past your own idealized version of school. I have repeatedly said homeschoolers are not tied into their homes, yet you keep saying they don't see society because they are in their homes.

Again, I have never made that claim.

Ultratwinkie:
Its the same fucking excuses I have repeatedly disproven. Hell, you refuse to even see the fucking process.

You haven't disproven anything. The only thing you did was strawman my arguments and claim victory.

Ultratwinkie:
You don't turn in your work in a class, you turn in your work at an office and wait while they finish grading and filing it. After about 30 minutes to an hour depending on the workload, they tell you to leave and come back next week with another packet of work to submit to the state. If you have issues with the work like unclear instructions, you call the office and they will fix it. No matter how many times you say its not homeschooling, it is homeschooling in the eyes of the state.

...

Yet again you prove just how incapable you are of doing something as simple as reading. The only thing I did was point out that the only difference between public school and state sponsored homeschooling is that you don't have to attend class.

Ultratwinkie:
You learn and do all the work at home. The only reason the state has offices is so the students can submit their work to the office so they can reliably send their work to the state and get grades. No matter how many times you say "its not homeschool" both the definition and the government disagree with you.

Are you seriously that desperate to prove your point of view that you'd resort to using fallacies over and over again?

Ultratwinkie:
If society is the same inside and outside of a school, it makes no sense to sit in a room doing nothing instead of educating yourself more efficiently.

Why would it make no sense? In fact, how would you go about educating yourself "more efficiently" without having the knowledge to do so? There's a reason we use teachers and not housewives to teach children.

Ultratwinkie:
School is not society, school is school. Society is the world outside your own little bubble.

The social interactions in school are in essence no different than the ones you experience as an adult. As I've said before, the venue might change but the play remains the same.

Ultratwinkie:
Just because your high school was one way, doesn't mean everyone else's was the same.

I have acknowledged that and even suggested that if a particular individual does not integrate well they should pursue alternative forms of education, like homeschooling.

Fine, ill go ahead and take direct quotes then.

"Because high school exposes you to society whereas homeschooling does not." - claiming homeschool doesn't expose you to anything, ie tied to your home.

"I don't remember anyone caring about whatever gadget someone owned. Then again, I was a metalhead and the metalhead crowd didn't particularly care about anything except for pot and other unrelated stuff."

"The social aspect of school is unmatched." -claiming it makes a better representation.

"So homeschooling shows you to real world by not exposing you to it? How does that work?" -another claim it doesn't show you reality.

Me:"As for "what I am talking about" sometimes high schools don't show the real world, only immature bullshit."
You:"Uhm, that is the real world." -claiming high school and society are the same, effectively nullifying your own point saying school exposes you to society better.

See all these quotes? Time and time again you claim homeschool fails to expose you to the real world yet turn around and say the real world only comes from public schools. Never mind the fact that the real world is larger than the four walls of a class room. Since Homeschooling takes place outside the school and in real life, it exposes you to society at its most raw level, uncensored. You keep flip flopping on this very subject. You say how society in high school is the same as outside, so why bother taking a less effective route at education just to do a microcosm of society? Why? Especially since homeschooling offers a higher sample size than high school ever will?

Not to mention the metal head quote. That is the reason I said you should realize your version of high school doesn't work for all high schools. Especially since demographics change from area to area and not all cliches are represented in every school. Schools only represent what is around them. I seen schools full of nothing but religious zealots, how is that a representation of society's "varieties of ideas?" I seen schools in middle class neighborhoods whose student body only cared about who had what gadgets. I seen poor neighborhood schools where kids re-enact the fucked up relationships of their parents not realizing its not normal to beat and cheat on your partner after a day of going out. Nor do they realize having kids before you're even 16 is not responsible.

How is any of this representative of reality as a whole? How is this going to expand their horizons to new ideas instead of the mentality of just their neighborhood? It acts like a bubble for children, representing only the small community around them and the limited ideas of the kids. Society is larger than a single neighborhood of varying values. The public school method of socialization only works when the neighborhood is diversified, which is not always the case nor always possible. More often than not the neighborhoods are segregated by class, race, and ideaology. This creates a set mentality that is filtered down to schools which creates the misunderstandings in teens and children like examples above.

Ultratwinkie:
One of the students in my program is a teen actor, he cant work and be at school every day so he chose the homeschool program. Others choose it because its easier and much better than public school.

Then why does a study quoted by a proponent of homeschooling show that homeschooled kids perform much worse then kids who attended an underfunded public school?

And in such a case, school should prevail over work, because acting is an uncertain future in which most people are struggling to get by. If he becomes one of the millions who fail to become a superstar, and he has no education because he was homeschooled, he's fucked for life. If he has an education and his acting takes a backseat for 2-3 years, he's much better off and has paperwork that stays with him as an advantage for the rest of his life, not to mention the additional skills.

Ultratwinkie:
How can you not understand this? Homeschool doesn't mean you never leave the house, it just means you are not tied to a classroom for an entire day. It allows you so much more freedom with better results than public school.

Uhm, no, because it lacks the structure needed to work. Schools teach discipline, homeschooling only in a few exceptions where parents are on top of things without becoming suppressing.

And again: the results of homeschooled kids are shown to be worse, even in tests that favour them in their setup. A much better indicator would be to draw a random sample across well-funded schools and compare it to a random sample of homeschooled kids.

The Dutch government for instance did a much much better research which involved all homeschooled children in this entire country (only 170) and compared them to the average school. The records of which can be found here.

Translation of some conclusions:
-People released from the mandatory education on grounds of being physically or mentally unable to attend a school, do not homeschool, but ussually set up alternative arrangements with schools like remote learning.
-The vast majority of children were kept away from an education for religious reasons, because parents couldn't find a school bigoted enough to their taste
-The number of homeschooled kids is less than 0,01% of the total number of children of schoolgoing age.
-The minister didn't want to set quality standards for homeschooling into law because this 'could cause people to regard homeschooling as an alternative to actual education'

Ultratwinkie:
"Because high school exposes you to society whereas homeschooling does not." - claiming homeschool doesn't expose you to anything, ie tied to your home.

Please point out the part in that quote where I claimed homeschooling expoes you to nothing and ties you to your home.

Ultratwinkie:
"The social aspect of school is unmatched." -claiming it makes a better representation.

No, I claimed the social aspect is unmatched. If you want more clarification it's because it forces you to socialize. I never claimed what you think I did. Please get your shit together.

Ultratwinkie:
"So homeschooling shows you to real world by not exposing you to it? How does that work?" -another claim it doesn't show you reality.

That was a response to your claim that teenage jobs and clubs expose you to the real world whereas high school does not. Way to take it out of context.

Ultratwinkie:
claiming high school and society are the same, effectively nullifying your own point saying school exposes you to society better.

And if you bothered to read what I wrote after that it should be quite obvious why I said that.

Ultratwinkie:
Time and time again you claim homeschool fails to expose you to the real world yet turn around and say the real world only comes from public schools.

I never said that. My claim was that high school forces you to socialize the same way you'll do as an adult.

Ultratwinkie:
Never mind the fact that the real world is larger than the four walls of a class room.

You again show your complete lack of knowledge regarding the subject of social interactions.

Ultratwinkie:
Since Homeschooling takes place outside the school and in real life, it exposes you to society at its most raw level, uncensored.

And how does it do that, specifically?

Ultratwinkie:
Especially since homeschooling offers a higher sample size than high school ever will?

How does it do that again?

Ultratwinkie:
Not to mention the metal head quote. That is the reason I said you should realize your version of high school doesn't work for all high schools. Especially since demographics change from area to area and not all cliches are represented in every school.

And I said that if a person cannot integrate well with the communities present in high school alternative forms of education should be sought. You keep omitting that for some reason.

Ultratwinkie:
I seen schools full of nothing but religious zealots, how is that a representation of society's "varieties of ideas?"

Are you saying the US isn't full of religious zealots? Also, see above.

Ultratwinkie:
I seen poor neighborhood schools where kids re-enact the fucked up relationships of their parents not realizing its not normal to beat and cheat on your partner after a day of going out. Nor do they realize having kids before you're even 16 is not responsible.

See above and then again.

Ultratwinkie:
How is any of this representative of reality as a whole? How is this going to expand their horizons to new ideas instead of the mentality of just their neighborhood?

And how is homeschooling representative of reality as a whole? How is it going to expand their horizons to new ideas instead of the mentality of just their parents? It acts like a buble for children, representing only the small family around them and the limited ideas of their parents. Society is larger than a single family unit of varying values and beliefs. The homeschooling method only works when the parents are willing to instil values other than those they believe in, which is not always the case. This creates a set mentality that is filtered down by parents which creates a misunderstanding of the world around them and a distinct lack of social interactions.

PercyBoleyn:

Kendarik:

Engineering is a science, teaching is an art.

Going to school to make you an art teacher doesn't necessarily make you a better art teacher than someone who never went to school for art.

Except in order to teach you need to have a comprehensive knowledge of certain subjects, be it mathematics, physics, chemistry and so on and so forth which you can only attain through higher education.

Except that's not true. At least not in Canada and the US where you can be certified to teach a subject in a summer course.

Also, in Ontario (not sure about elsewhere), you can teach in a subject you have NO training in as long as the school wants you to teach it. I recall one ex-phys ed instructor who was teaching math by reading a text book to the class.

Katatori-kun:

Kendarik:

PercyBoleyn:

Yes, and specializing in engineering doesn't prove you're better at teaching engineering than someone who didn't.

Engineering is a science, teaching is an art.

Going to school to make you an art teacher doesn't necessarily make you a better art teacher than someone who never went to school for art.

I'm going to agree with the letter of your post but not the spirit. Going to school to be a teacher doesn't necessarily make people better teachers, but that is more a statement on teaching programs than it is anything else. Case in point, it is entirely possible that someone in my program could earn a MA specifically geared toward teaching with no more than IIRC 6 hours spent in front of a classroom, with that 6 hours being observed by only one other education professional, and in all of their studies only taking two courses that directly relate to actual teaching, which may or may not actually teach effective teacher behavior (as opposed to research into various theoretical methodologies). I have interviewed applicants for teaching positions who earned their qualifications in programs that don't even require any direct experience with teaching. Apparently the standard practice in one program was that any time the English-teachers-to-be needed to demonstrate actual teaching skills, the other teachers-students in the class just pretended to be non-native learners of English.

But on the other hand, when you say "teaching is an art" that puts to people's minds an image of teaching being like painting or sculpting- where it doesn't really matter what the teacher does as long as the final result is pleasing. And that's utter nonsense.

Actually that's your understanding of art that is nonsense. There are techniques and skills that can be learned or taught in the fine arts, just as there are in teaching.

While no, a diploma isn't really worth any more than the paper it's printed on until the teacher can actually be observed in action (preferably several times), there is some predictive validity to the degree.

I agree with this. That's why I have repeatedly said that I wouldn't home school. (Plus the social issues of course and issues relating to parent/child relationships) However, that doesn't mean there aren't parents quite capable of homeschooling. To blanket say its wrong or inferior, or even unethical as this thread does, is close minded and wrong.

And once again, there is the question "what if the parent was also a certified teacher"? Once you allow that a parent who is a teacher could do it, then you are open to saying anyone could theoretically do it.

Kendarik:

Except that's not true. At least not in Canada and the US where you can be certified to teach a subject in a summer course.

Also, in Ontario (not sure about elsewhere), you can teach in a subject you have NO training in as long as the school wants you to teach it. I recall one ex-phys ed instructor who was teaching math by reading a text book to the class.

Then they should revamp the educational system, at least in the US. I'm not familiar with the Canadian one.

In short, I'm mainly against home schooling, it's good for kids to be around other kids regularly.

However, parents SHOULD take an interest in educating their children and take some time beyond school hours to help them along.

Beyond hiring 30 teachers for a class of 30 kids, there's no way to have an ideal teaching environment for every kid. What you can do is supply a decent education and hope the parents care enough to work on the weaknesses you inform them of during meetings, report cards etc.

Blablahb:

Lil devils x:
(Links to those studies were already posted in this thread)

No they were not. We saw some vague youtube link and an activist who didn't deliver a solid argument, a wikipedia quote of data not relevant to this discussion and a reference to a link in a Canadian pediatricts journal which found some exceptions among homeschooled get good grades compared to kids attending underfunded poor quality public schools (so these do not compare to good schools), but, and I quote the abstract: "Exploratory analyses also suggest that the unstructured homeschoolers are achieving the lowest standardized scores across the 3 groups."

image

http://www.nheri.org/research/research-facts-on-homeschooling.html

you either can't read, or you refuse to follow the data.

further more, the US and Switzerland have the highest spending of any country in terms of education

image

and yet according the Programme for International Student Assessment 2009 study

www.oecd.org/dataoecd/31/28/46660259.pdf

Spending more money does not correlate with better education outcomes (check page 15 for the statistics)

I should say in the realms of teaching, also, I volunteered at an adult education centre, and while I'm no expert at all in IT, windows, or MS office, I found that I tended to bond with the students and explain concepts more clearly than some of the professionals.

I think sometimes you can be too far into a subject, and lose a little of what makes you connect with those outside it.

For instance, when teaching an 80 year old granny about files and folders and saving and loading, instead of explaining the minutae of windows operations, I simply explained that 'it's a bit like a family tree, with A: being your floppy disc's father folder, 'Documents' being the son, and 'April' being the grandson. Applying it to a real world scenario helps those who never grew up with anything 'virtual' far more than any genuine description.

SenseOfTumour:
I should say in the realms of teaching, also, I volunteered at an adult education centre, and while I'm no expert at all in IT, windows, or MS office, I found that I tended to bond with the students and explain concepts more clearly than some of the professionals.

I think sometimes you can be too far into a subject, and lose a little of what makes you connect with those outside it.

For instance, when teaching an 80 year old granny about files and folders and saving and loading, instead of explaining the minutae of windows operations, I simply explained that 'it's a bit like a family tree, with A: being your floppy disc's father folder, 'Documents' being the son, and 'April' being the grandson. Applying it to a real world scenario helps those who never grew up with anything 'virtual' far more than any genuine description.

That is actually one of the other great benefits from home schooling. When you have a question, you can ask your peers via chat or even a teacher whenever you feel like it without being told to sit down and be quiet. The groups they have available allow for these students to collaborate on anything they wish, whenever they feel like it without being told to stop talking. When you do that in the traditional classroom setting you would receive disciplinary marks for talking in class. With the great many groups and resources made available to the home student, they are not as limited as to who they can ask for help.

Lil devils x:

SenseOfTumour:
I [snip].

That is actually one of the other great benefits from home schooling. When you have a question, you can ask your peers via chat or even a teacher whenever you feel like it without being told to sit down and be quiet. The groups they have available allow for these students to collaborate on anything they wish, whenever they feel like it without being told to stop talking. When you do that in the traditional classroom setting you would receive disciplinary marks for talking in class.

That's why, I should make it clearer, I'm not against home schooling, just against it INSTEAD of normal schooling, it should be an additional extra from parents as a matter of course. However, teaching in schools would be better if there was time for 'Q&A style sessions at the end of some classes.

There's nothing worse as a kid than being told 'because I said so' or 'just because', it's infuriating, especially as you're showing that you want to learn more.

SenseOfTumour:

Lil devils x:

SenseOfTumour:
I [snip].

That is actually one of the other great benefits from home schooling. When you have a question, you can ask your peers via chat or even a teacher whenever you feel like it without being told to sit down and be quiet. The groups they have available allow for these students to collaborate on anything they wish, whenever they feel like it without being told to stop talking. When you do that in the traditional classroom setting you would receive disciplinary marks for talking in class.

That's why, I should make it clearer, I'm not against home schooling, just against it INSTEAD of normal schooling, it should be an additional extra from parents as a matter of course. However, teaching in schools would be better if there was time for 'Q&A style sessions at the end of some classes.

There's nothing worse as a kid than being told 'because I said so' or 'just because', it's infuriating, especially as you're showing that you want to learn more.

Yes, and when you have overburdened teachers, they tend to not have time for that one on one that students really do need. The way they have homeschooling now, it is actually a better alternative than public schooling, and you can even have children take indivdual classes at colleges as well. There are so many groups and activities made available now they really do not need to go to the public school at all due to the resources being better than what is available in the school, they have competitive sports, academic competitions, and dances just as the public schools do as well now.

What we need to see is a transformation of our schools to better fit the resources and methods available. They really need to change the entire way they have it structured and create a new model. It is long overdue.

Why would they waste all those mandatory hours in a public school when they can take quality courses of their selection at the local community colleges in their area to compliment their home program? If public schools allowed them to be selective of taking individual classes, that would allow for both, but unless that changes, I see no reason why they would want to waste so much time doing that, when the resources they have available outside the rigid structure are superior than what the public schools have to offer.

I think it isnt the same study at home than studay at the school.

Kendarik:

Katatori-kun:
But on the other hand, when you say "teaching is an art" that puts to people's minds an image of teaching being like painting or sculpting- where it doesn't really matter what the teacher does as long as the final result is pleasing. And that's utter nonsense.

Actually that's your understanding of art that is nonsense. There are techniques and skills that can be learned or taught in the fine arts, just as there are in teaching.

Seeing as how I have a fine arts degree, I'm going to call shenanigans on that claim.

When "techniques" are taught in the fine arts, they are literally techniques. They are simple methods for achieving a goal- but no goal is ever nor can ever be dictated by the teacher. A teacher can teach me everything there is to know about the technique of stippling with my paintbrush, but in the end learning the technique does not result in a good or bad painting because the quality of a painting is entirely subjective. My creativity and the context in which the audience views it is what determines the quality. And no art teacher can ever teach these things.

Teaching is very different in this regard. Specific teacher behaviors that are analogous to stippling (like for example, an approach to handling classroom discipline) can be taught, but since the quality of a lesson can be objectively determined, it is less important to teach individual techniques than it is to teach methods for goal-setting, determining objectives, and devising approaches for meeting them. It doesn't all come from the teacher's creativity- there is a method ("method" meant in a logical sense, not a pedagogical sense) to producing a good class that can be taught and requires a LOT of expertise to really get good at.

However, that doesn't mean there aren't parents quite capable of homeschooling.

I never said there weren't.

And once again, there is the question "what if the parent was also a certified teacher"? Once you allow that a parent who is a teacher could do it, then you are open to saying anyone could theoretically do it.

That's a premise that does not follow from its conclusion. No, allowing a parent who is also a qualified teacher to teach does not mean that theoretically anyone could teach. It just means a qualified person could teach.

Blablahb:

Ultratwinkie:
One of the students in my program is a teen actor, he cant work and be at school every day so he chose the homeschool program. Others choose it because its easier and much better than public school.

Then why does a study quoted by a proponent of homeschooling show that homeschooled kids perform much worse then kids who attended an underfunded public school?

And in such a case, school should prevail over work, because acting is an uncertain future in which most people are struggling to get by. If he becomes one of the millions who fail to become a superstar, and he has no education because he was homeschooled, he's fucked for life. If he has an education and his acting takes a backseat for 2-3 years, he's much better off and has paperwork that stays with him as an advantage for the rest of his life, not to mention the additional skills.

Ultratwinkie:
How can you not understand this? Homeschool doesn't mean you never leave the house, it just means you are not tied to a classroom for an entire day. It allows you so much more freedom with better results than public school.

Uhm, no, because it lacks the structure needed to work. Schools teach discipline, homeschooling only in a few exceptions where parents are on top of things without becoming suppressing.

And again: the results of homeschooled kids are shown to be worse, even in tests that favour them in their setup. A much better indicator would be to draw a random sample across well-funded schools and compare it to a random sample of homeschooled kids.

The Dutch government for instance did a much much better research which involved all homeschooled children in this entire country (only 170) and compared them to the average school. The records of which can be found here.

Translation of some conclusions:
-People released from the mandatory education on grounds of being physically or mentally unable to attend a school, do not homeschool, but ussually set up alternative arrangements with schools like remote learning.
-The vast majority of children were kept away from an education for religious reasons, because parents couldn't find a school bigoted enough to their taste
-The number of homeschooled kids is less than 0,01% of the total number of children of schoolgoing age.
-The minister didn't want to set quality standards for homeschooling into law because this 'could cause people to regard homeschooling as an alternative to actual education'

Again, you assume your under-regulated dutch system applies to the world. Other countries can and do regulate homeschooling and THEY DO GIVE OUT GRADES WHERE HE LIVES. Secondly, the homeschool division is regulated enough they get funding too. All the books, packets you get all come from the school district itself.

Secondly, the discipline aspect is bullshit. Because by highschool you should know how to behave and shouldn't have to keep being reminded. The people in homeschool either:

A) weren't socially compatible with the student body, did better without all the bullshit.
B) had lives that normal schooling couldn't handle. Such as teen actors.

I have told you that time and time again. I guess reading comprehension isn't part of the dutch education curriculum.

The ethics of homeschooling are dependent on the means and intentions of the parents. If it is--as many public schooled idiots seem to assume of all homeschooling--done for the purpose of religious indoctrination, then it is obviously unethical regardless of other circumstances.

If however, you have the time to properly educate your child and the intent to make them a happy, intelligent individual with their own opinions, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with homeschooling.

Godavari:
Homeschooling can work, but it most often doesn't.

...

Unfortunately, most homeschooling is for the purpose of insulating a child and instilling religious dogma.

Do you have proof of this? My personal experiences indicate otherwise.

In my childhood I was a part of several different homeschooling groups, and only encountered a scant handful of people that match the mainstream media's highly politicized portrayal of homeschooling as religious brainwashing. (That's not to say that most of the other members of the group weren't religious--they were. But the vast majority of them weren't any different from the rest of those in the world who identify as religious, i.e. normal people.)

Off-topic: Really starting to get sick of typing out Chevrolet ads every time I want to post. These new captchas piss me off.

Vuljatar:
The ethics of homeschooling are dependent on the means and intentions of the parents. If it is--as many public schooled idiots seem to assume of all homeschooling--done for the purpose of religious indoctrination, then it is obviously unethical regardless of other circumstances.

If however, you have the time to properly educate your child and the intent to make them a happy, intelligent individual with their own opinions, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with homeschooling.

Godavari:
Homeschooling can work, but it most often doesn't.

...

Unfortunately, most homeschooling is for the purpose of insulating a child and instilling religious dogma.

Do you have proof of this? My personal experiences indicate otherwise.

In my childhood I was a part of several different homeschooling groups, and only encountered a scant handful of people that match the mainstream media's highly politicized portrayal of homeschooling as religious brainwashing. (That's not to say that most of the other members of the group weren't religious--they were. But the vast majority of them weren't any different from the rest of those in the world who identify as religious, i.e. normal people.)

Off-topic: Really starting to get sick of typing out Chevrolet ads every time I want to post. These new captchas piss me off.

Just a quick Google search yielded this. It's not the most-cited reason, but it's cited by a large number (almost 3/4) of parents. And almost thirty percent call religious/moral instruction their "primary reason" for homeschooling.

Now, I'm not arguing that they're necessarily instilling extremist views in their children. You can instruct a child in your religious dogma even if that dogma is rather moderate. I'm simply opposed to it on principle because I think children should be exposed to alternative points of view, which they usually are not in homeschooling.

Godavari:

Vuljatar:
The ethics of homeschooling are dependent on the means and intentions of the parents. If it is--as many public schooled idiots seem to assume of all homeschooling--done for the purpose of religious indoctrination, then it is obviously unethical regardless of other circumstances.

If however, you have the time to properly educate your child and the intent to make them a happy, intelligent individual with their own opinions, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with homeschooling.

Godavari:
Homeschooling can work, but it most often doesn't.

...

Unfortunately, most homeschooling is for the purpose of insulating a child and instilling religious dogma.

Do you have proof of this? My personal experiences indicate otherwise.

In my childhood I was a part of several different homeschooling groups, and only encountered a scant handful of people that match the mainstream media's highly politicized portrayal of homeschooling as religious brainwashing. (That's not to say that most of the other members of the group weren't religious--they were. But the vast majority of them weren't any different from the rest of those in the world who identify as religious, i.e. normal people.)

Off-topic: Really starting to get sick of typing out Chevrolet ads every time I want to post. These new captchas piss me off.

Just a quick Google search yielded this. It's not the most-cited reason, but it's cited by a large number (almost 3/4) of parents. And almost thirty percent call religious/moral instruction their "primary reason" for homeschooling.

Now, I'm not arguing that they're necessarily instilling extremist views in their children. You can instruct a child in your religious dogma even if that dogma is rather moderate. I'm simply opposed to it on principle because I think children should be exposed to alternative points of view, which they usually are not in homeschooling.

Well the reason my parents gave for removing me from the private school that had placed a board over my arms and made me read the bible aloud was for " religious reasons" as well. To get away from it. LOL

Not that the public school is much better, as I dealt with people trying to convert me every day there as well, some of those " religious reasons" may be the opposite of what you might think. They may be running away from the religious zealots trying to convert their children in school rather than being the zealots themselves.

I_am_acting:
http://www.nheri.org/research/research-facts-on-homeschooling.html
you either can't read, or you refuse to follow the data.

The latter case, because as you should have seen before posting it, that is an organisation that was founded as a lobby group to defend homeschooling.

Obviously they are not trustworthy.

The rest of your post didn't relate to mine in any way, so I don't see where you were going with that. Were you trying to show that education in the US is of good quality, so homeschooling is even more bollocks?

Lil devils x:
Well the reason my parents gave for removing me from the private school that had placed a board over my arms and made me read the bible aloud was for " religious reasons" as well. To get away from it. LOL

Not that the public school is much better, as I dealt with people trying to convert me every day there as well, some of those " religious reasons" may be the opposite of what you might think. They may be running away from the religious zealots trying to convert their children in school rather than being the zealots themselves.

I suppose that's technically possible, but I don't find it very likely. Too bad the study doesn't have that data. :/

Godavari:

Lil devils x:
Well the reason my parents gave for removing me from the private school that had placed a board over my arms and made me read the bible aloud was for " religious reasons" as well. To get away from it. LOL

Not that the public school is much better, as I dealt with people trying to convert me every day there as well, some of those " religious reasons" may be the opposite of what you might think. They may be running away from the religious zealots trying to convert their children in school rather than being the zealots themselves.

I suppose that's technically possible, but I don't find it very likely. Too bad the study doesn't have that data. :/

I can assure you with my experience in Public schools in the bible belt, I am sure it happens more often than you would think. Anyone non christian in those schools can have a very difficult time. It would be in the best interest of the child in many cases to find alternative schooling. Being called the devil, evil or a demon everyday by your peers can have a very negative affect on a child. It is not healthy for a child to be told by their peers they are going to hell for being of a different religion.

I only thought I had it bad, but for many muslim children in the US, I could not imagine what they have to deal with in public schools. When the entire town or city is of one religion, it can be very difficult for those who are not.

PercyBoleyn:

Ultratwinkie:
"Because high school exposes you to society whereas homeschooling does not." - claiming homeschool doesn't expose you to anything, ie tied to your home.

Please point out the part in that quote where I claimed homeschooling expoes you to nothing and ties you to your home.

Ultratwinkie:
"The social aspect of school is unmatched." -claiming it makes a better representation.

No, I claimed the social aspect is unmatched. If you want more clarification it's because it forces you to socialize. I never claimed what you think I did. Please get your shit together.

Ultratwinkie:
"So homeschooling shows you to real world by not exposing you to it? How does that work?" -another claim it doesn't show you reality.

That was a response to your claim that teenage jobs and clubs expose you to the real world whereas high school does not. Way to take it out of context.

Ultratwinkie:
claiming high school and society are the same, effectively nullifying your own point saying school exposes you to society better.

And if you bothered to read what I wrote after that it should be quite obvious why I said that.

Ultratwinkie:
Time and time again you claim homeschool fails to expose you to the real world yet turn around and say the real world only comes from public schools.

I never said that. My claim was that high school forces you to socialize the same way you'll do as an adult.

Ultratwinkie:
Never mind the fact that the real world is larger than the four walls of a class room.

You again show your complete lack of knowledge regarding the subject of social interactions.

Ultratwinkie:
Since Homeschooling takes place outside the school and in real life, it exposes you to society at its most raw level, uncensored.

And how does it do that, specifically?

Ultratwinkie:
Especially since homeschooling offers a higher sample size than high school ever will?

How does it do that again?

Ultratwinkie:
Not to mention the metal head quote. That is the reason I said you should realize your version of high school doesn't work for all high schools. Especially since demographics change from area to area and not all cliches are represented in every school.

And I said that if a person cannot integrate well with the communities present in high school alternative forms of education should be sought. You keep omitting that for some reason.

Ultratwinkie:
I seen schools full of nothing but religious zealots, how is that a representation of society's "varieties of ideas?"

Are you saying the US isn't full of religious zealots? Also, see above.

Ultratwinkie:
I seen poor neighborhood schools where kids re-enact the fucked up relationships of their parents not realizing its not normal to beat and cheat on your partner after a day of going out. Nor do they realize having kids before you're even 16 is not responsible.

See above and then again.

Ultratwinkie:
How is any of this representative of reality as a whole? How is this going to expand their horizons to new ideas instead of the mentality of just their neighborhood?

And how is homeschooling representative of reality as a whole? How is it going to expand their horizons to new ideas instead of the mentality of just their parents? It acts like a buble for children, representing only the small family around them and the limited ideas of their parents. Society is larger than a single family unit of varying values and beliefs. The homeschooling method only works when the parents are willing to instil values other than those they believe in, which is not always the case. This creates a set mentality that is filtered down by parents which creates a misunderstanding of the world around them and a distinct lack of social interactions.

The reason why people go into homeschool programs in the first place is because they have outside lives already. Ie jobs, things to do, etc. There was even a girl in my program that went to Russia to compete in some competition (I think it was figure skating). How man y public schools do that? I know very few private schools allow for it, and those are expensive. Hell, even the state gives special treatment to child actors so they can get an education too. You cant go to school then head out onto a set. The movie industry needs you when it needs you, not when schools let you out. Since some productions require you to show up every day for months at different times, school no longer becomes an option.

They also have tutoring, various things they have to do, clubs, etc. Homeschool extends into outside the home, in the city. It even allows you to meet new people every day instead of seeing the same tired faces every morning talking about COD.

How is this not being exposed to greater society? Where you have to head out every day to a job, tutoring, a club, etc. Hell, kids may even have to run errands like driving a car to be fixed at a mechanic if they can drive, or run other errands. They can even go partying if they wish. There was a party girl who ran off to certain raves in my program, yet she still was able to get her work done.

The "religious and political" indoctrination doesn't work when all material comes from the state. So the "religious boogeyman" isn't going to work here. if religious people wanted to indoctrinate their kids, they would have to go a christian school. The only place where it can apply would be the deep south, but since the school system there is so steeped in religion there is no reason to take out a kid from the school on account of religion. Because every school there would be a parochial school.

Ultratwinkie:
The reason why people go into homeschool programs in the first place is because they have outside lives already. Ie jobs, things to do, etc. There was even a girl in my program that went to Russia to compete in some competition (I think it was figure skating). How man y public schools do that?

How many times do I have to repeat myself?

If a person cannot integrate well with the communities present in high school alternative forms of education should be sought.

Ultratwinkie:
They also have tutoring, various things they have to do, clubs, etc. Homeschool extends into outside the home, in the city. It even allows you to meet new people every day instead of seeing the same tired faces every morning talking about COD.

And in clubs you don't see the exact same tired faces everyday talking about whatever bullshit they feel like, not at all. It's not like people who go to clubs are part of a specific community, just like high school. In fact, you've criticized high school specifically because of this.

Not every high school is the same. Not every community talks about Call of Duty. Please hammer this into your head until you get it.

Ultratwinkie:
How is this not being exposed to greater society? Where you have to head out every day to a job, tutoring, a club, etc. Hell, kids may even have to run errands like driving a car to be fixed at a mechanic if they can drive, or run other errands. They can even go partying if they wish. There was a party girl who ran off to certain raves in my program, yet she still was able to get her work done.

It's the exact same thing as going to high school except you don't have to go to class. Also, raves are stupid.

Ultratwinkie:
The "religious and political" indoctrination doesn't work when all material comes from the state. So the "religious boogeyman" isn't going to work here. if religious people wanted to indoctrinate their kids, they would have to go a christian school. The only place where it can apply would be the deep south, but since the school system there is so steeped in religion there is no reason to take out a kid from the school on account of religion. Because every school there would be a parochial school.

So what's the point of homeschooling then?

PercyBoleyn:

Ultratwinkie:
The reason why people go into homeschool programs in the first place is because they have outside lives already. Ie jobs, things to do, etc. There was even a girl in my program that went to Russia to compete in some competition (I think it was figure skating). How man y public schools do that?

How many times do I have to repeat myself?

If a person cannot integrate well with the communities present in high school alternative forms of education should be sought.

Ultratwinkie:
They also have tutoring, various things they have to do, clubs, etc. Homeschool extends into outside the home, in the city. It even allows you to meet new people every day instead of seeing the same tired faces every morning talking about COD.

And in clubs you don't see the exact same tired faces everyday talking about whatever bullshit they feel like, not at all. It's not like people who go to clubs are part of a specific community, just like high school. In fact, you've criticized high school specifically because of this.

Not every high school is the same. Not every community talks about Call of Duty. Please hammer this into your head until you get it.

Ultratwinkie:
How is this not being exposed to greater society? Where you have to head out every day to a job, tutoring, a club, etc. Hell, kids may even have to run errands like driving a car to be fixed at a mechanic if they can drive, or run other errands. They can even go partying if they wish. There was a party girl who ran off to certain raves in my program, yet she still was able to get her work done.

It's the exact same thing as going to high school except you don't have to go to class. Also, raves are stupid.

Ultratwinkie:
The "religious and political" indoctrination doesn't work when all material comes from the state. So the "religious boogeyman" isn't going to work here. if religious people wanted to indoctrinate their kids, they would have to go a christian school. The only place where it can apply would be the deep south, but since the school system there is so steeped in religion there is no reason to take out a kid from the school on account of religion. Because every school there would be a parochial school.

So what's the point of homeschooling then?

what do you think? To educate you and allow freedom. Homeschool doesn't necessarily mean religious. That is now called unschooling. Only in the past was homeschooling regarded as religious. When the state stepped in and began to regulate it, the public and private schools became religious. Hell, some American schools treat you poorly if your non-christian. The religious head elsewhere for parochial education, hell church schools dot California when homeschool became completely regulated by demands of Hollywood for more flexible child stars.

Secondly, I am not talking about homeschool as a first choice. I was waiting for you to get that. I am arguing against your incessant need to claim homeschool inherently separates you from society. Due to the common reasons for heading into the program, that isn't the case. Especially since free reign over an entire city (and sometimes the whole state) is far better than a small sample size of a single class.

Third, high schools tend to be pretty strict when it comes to how far you live. Schools want people who live in their district. If a kid no longer lives in the district, they will try their hardest to kick the kid out and send him to the closest school. This is why its harder for poor kids to go to the good public schools, because the poor communities are far away from any quality public school. The school will have none of it and send him back to the bad school he was trying to escape from.

Ultratwinkie:
Secondly, I am not talking about homeschool as a first choice. I was waiting for you to get that. I am arguing against your incessant need to claim homeschool inherently separates you from society. Due to the common reasons for heading into the program, that isn't the case. Especially since free reign over an entire city (and sometimes the whole state) is far better than a small sample size of a single class.

Yes, because if you go to public school it is impossible for you to attend clubs or, you know, go anywhere you'd like in the city.

Ultratwinkie:
Third, high schools tend to be pretty strict when it comes to how far you live. Schools want people who live in their district. If a kid no longer lives in the district, they will try their hardest to kick the kid out and send him to the closest school. This is why its harder for poor kids to go to the good public schools, because the poor communities are far away from any quality public school. The school will have none of it and send him back to the bad school he was trying to escape from.

If a person cannot integrate well with the communities present in high school alternative forms of education should be sought.

PercyBoleyn:

Ultratwinkie:
Secondly, I am not talking about homeschool as a first choice. I was waiting for you to get that. I am arguing against your incessant need to claim homeschool inherently separates you from society. Due to the common reasons for heading into the program, that isn't the case. Especially since free reign over an entire city (and sometimes the whole state) is far better than a small sample size of a single class.

Yes, because if you go to public school it is impossible for you to attend clubs or, you know, go anywhere you'd like in the city.

Ultratwinkie:
Third, high schools tend to be pretty strict when it comes to how far you live. Schools want people who live in their district. If a kid no longer lives in the district, they will try their hardest to kick the kid out and send him to the closest school. This is why its harder for poor kids to go to the good public schools, because the poor communities are far away from any quality public school. The school will have none of it and send him back to the bad school he was trying to escape from.

If a person cannot integrate well with the communities present in high school alternative forms of education should be sought.

1. I was going to say this was another reason for homeschool, on the last paragraph, but I forgot to add it due to constant interruptions.

2. During the week, yes. Being stuck in a building 5 days a week for hours on end doesn't allow you to go out. However, in homeschool your schedule is much more flexible. Especially if your the kind of child who is physically, and psychologically drained to do anything else but go home after school. Some are so drained they don't want to talk about anything.

When your only free time is the week end, it leaves you a much smaller window for anything.

Ultratwinkie:
I was going to say this was another reason for homeschool, on the last paragraph, but I forgot to add it due to constant interruptions.

Most of the students in my class went to sports clubs. I don't know where you get the idea that going to public school means you can't go anywhere else during the week.

Ultratwinkie:
During the week, yes. Being stuck in a building 5 days a week for hours on end doesn't allow you to go out.

Says who? Everyone went out during the week. We didn't get drunk or anything, well sometimes, but we did go out and do stuff. I'm not saying there weren't times when I couldn't go out, usually right before the major examinations, but other than that we had free reign to do whatever the fuck we wanted.

Ultratwinkie:
Especially if your the kind of child who is physically, and psychologically drained to do anything else but go home after school. Some are so drained they don't want to talk about anything.

Just because you were that way doesn't mean everyone else was.

PercyBoleyn:

Ultratwinkie:
I was going to say this was another reason for homeschool, on the last paragraph, but I forgot to add it due to constant interruptions.

Most of the students in my class went to sports clubs. I don't know where you get the idea that going to public school means you can't go anywhere else during the week.

Ultratwinkie:
During the week, yes. Being stuck in a building 5 days a week for hours on end doesn't allow you to go out.

Says who? Everyone went out during the week. We didn't get drunk or anything, well sometimes, but we did go out and do stuff. I'm not saying there weren't times when I couldn't go out, usually right before the major examinations, but other than that we had free reign to do whatever the fuck we wanted.

Ultratwinkie:
Especially if your the kind of child who is physically, and psychologically drained to do anything else but go home after school. Some are so drained they don't want to talk about anything.

Just because you were that way doesn't mean everyone else was.

That's strange since everyone I ever met in any school (6 of them with some with 3,000 students) were so drained leaving school they never had any sort of interaction outside weekends. Even the ones who actually went to raves was drained.

Ultratwinkie:

That's strange since everyone I ever met in any school (6 of them with some with 3,000 students) were so drained leaving school they never had any sort of interaction outside weekends. Even the ones who actually went to raves was drained.

You said the ones who went to raves were part of your homeschooling program.

PercyBoleyn:

Ultratwinkie:

That's strange since everyone I ever met in any school (6 of them with some with 3,000 students) were so drained leaving school they never had any sort of interaction outside weekends. Even the ones who actually went to raves was drained.

You said the ones who went to raves were part of your homeschooling program.

I said ONE girl, not all.

I know more people who went to raves and parties than just the one in the program.

Ultratwinkie:

I said ONE girl, not all.

I know more people who went to raves and parties than just the one in the program.

So your school mates were Call of Duty fanatics who bashed on people without an xbox and also attended raves? I smell bullshit.

PercyBoleyn:

Ultratwinkie:

I said ONE girl, not all.

I know more people who went to raves and parties than just the one in the program.

So your school mates were Call of Duty fanatics who bashed on people without an xbox and also attended raves? I smell bullshit.

Those were the boys. The girls were the ones who partied. Since the highschool I went to was a particularly bad one in the middle class area of the city. These students were either:

A. Drug users (most were arrested including a drug dealer on campus before I left).
B. Loose party girls (one even knew a porn star).
C. COD fanboys.

Before you ask, it was a charter highschool. California didn't regulate these until after multiple cases of fraud took place in 2010. This school tried to pass off as a mini-harvard. However, the student body was less than quality as you could see above.

Its a messy situation requiring paragraphs of backstory as to why the charter schools of that time were so bad.

Ultratwinkie:
snip

So basically, your perception of public school is based upon your experience going to a charter school? That's... not really a point in your favor.

PercyBoleyn:

Ultratwinkie:
snip

So basically, your perception of public school is based upon your experience going to a charter school? That's... not really a point in your favor.

I went to multiple public schools before the charter, the charter was just the last before finding the program.

Charter schools and public were treated the same at first. However, they were actually favored by the populace because they had leeway in terms of regulation. It didn't take long before parents ran to every charter school they could find and fill backlogs as much as 3,000 students.

Ultratwinkie:
I went to multiple public schools before the charter, the charter was just the last before finding the program.

Good for you then.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked