Homeschooling vs failing school systems

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Big_Willie_Styles:

Lil devils x:

Big_Willie_Styles:

Home schooling being bad is something a lot of us are pretty well ingrained to believe, due to what people claim to be the lack of socialization a kid gets in such an environment. I don't see it that way, but I haven't actually seen the effects of somebody home schooled to know this for a fact.

I also object to the OT's contention of "hillbilly schools," since NYC and Chicago have some of the worst schools in the country. And the city of Reading has the nation's worst literacy rate. Reading is in PA, a state above the Mason-Dixon line. Inner cities have some of the nation's worst high school graduation rates, especially for black males.

If the OT is from a country that is not America, then I can excuse his lack of knowledge about this. But somebody who lives here should know the South isn't the worst place for education. (You really have to break it down by city as each has a different school district and, thus, a different school board that sets standards.)

She* and from Texas. The school district I was discussing is actually a "hillbilly" school. I was not using that as a term to describe all "failing schools" in general, but rather directly to describe a school that has pastors teaching the bible in class, all grades in one school, an excused absence is going to a stock show or rodeo, but an unexcused absence is if your child has head lice. Where the teachers are not only not certified, but some did not even graduate from high school themselves. Where they keep their doors open if there is no running water or sanitation but close for harvest festival. I also do understand the issues facing the inner city schools to be a separate issue, and also have had the unfortunate experience to endure those myself first hand in the ghetto. With ghetto schools the children have far more to worry about than grades, they are more concerned about being targeted and how they are going to eat.

The issues facing rural areas are they do not have the manpower and resources to have a functioning school district in the first place and their only alternative besides homeschool is to send their children to schools 3-4 hours away. when they have no qualified teachers in the area to take the jobs due to their location, and do not have the resources to offer pay high enough to get teachers to relocate to the area, their options for improving the school district are greatly diminished. The area I was discussing only has a total population of around 5,000 people, and the vast majority of those work on the oil rigs. The state may very well shut down the only existing public schools in the area in the next 5 years as they have been threatening to for a while now.

Well, that area seems to be one of the agricultural/rancher type areas(but clearly near an ocean or refinery) in transition away from those two professions (Texas being a very high growth state quickly adapting to the realities of the 21st century faster than a lot of other states.) It is a developing area, which will have bad schools for a while, but such kids will probably have little chance of escaping their zip code to begin with. Rural kids of insanely low population density over a large area typically don't. But they'll get good jobs doing oil rig stuff and other well-paying physical labor jobs. Those are not bad jobs, they're necessary. While I wouldn't dream of my kid becoming an oil rig technician, it is a job that needs to exist right now.

I just find it interesting that even with all those bad things going on, a suburban/urban city near Philadelphia still has the worst literacy rate in the country instead of a random Southern or Midwest town in the middle of nowhere.

Actually the town is shrinking not growing. It is in west Texas (desert not ocean) in the middle of nowhere. Basically the kids in those schools feel that they will either work on an oil rig or go on welfare. However, I think that can be changed in this age of online opportunities, they can get themselves out of that situation utilizing tools made available online, and their education does not have to be restricted simply because of their location. I feel in their current public school system they are more isolated and more limited than they would be in a homeschool online learning environment. They have access to free readily available quality information and an international online community for support they would not receive otherwise. I feel the focus when they are dealing with such limited funding and "old fogies" unwilling to change in charge of everything out there, would be to instead invest in computers for the kids to utilize at home to give them a life line to assist them with the skills and tools they need.

When you look at the revolution in education MIT and Harvard are trying to start with https://www.edx.org/ this could very well become a reality for kids no matter whether they are in the middle of nowhere, or in the middle of the ghetto to improve their situation.

Lil devils x:

Big_Willie_Styles:

Lil devils x:

She* and from Texas. The school district I was discussing is actually a "hillbilly" school. I was not using that as a term to describe all "failing schools" in general, but rather directly to describe a school that has pastors teaching the bible in class, all grades in one school, an excused absence is going to a stock show or rodeo, but an unexcused absence is if your child has head lice. Where the teachers are not only not certified, but some did not even graduate from high school themselves. Where they keep their doors open if there is no running water or sanitation but close for harvest festival. I also do understand the issues facing the inner city schools to be a separate issue, and also have had the unfortunate experience to endure those myself first hand in the ghetto. With ghetto schools the children have far more to worry about than grades, they are more concerned about being targeted and how they are going to eat.

The issues facing rural areas are they do not have the manpower and resources to have a functioning school district in the first place and their only alternative besides homeschool is to send their children to schools 3-4 hours away. when they have no qualified teachers in the area to take the jobs due to their location, and do not have the resources to offer pay high enough to get teachers to relocate to the area, their options for improving the school district are greatly diminished. The area I was discussing only has a total population of around 5,000 people, and the vast majority of those work on the oil rigs. The state may very well shut down the only existing public schools in the area in the next 5 years as they have been threatening to for a while now.

Well, that area seems to be one of the agricultural/rancher type areas(but clearly near an ocean or refinery) in transition away from those two professions (Texas being a very high growth state quickly adapting to the realities of the 21st century faster than a lot of other states.) It is a developing area, which will have bad schools for a while, but such kids will probably have little chance of escaping their zip code to begin with. Rural kids of insanely low population density over a large area typically don't. But they'll get good jobs doing oil rig stuff and other well-paying physical labor jobs. Those are not bad jobs, they're necessary. While I wouldn't dream of my kid becoming an oil rig technician, it is a job that needs to exist right now.

I just find it interesting that even with all those bad things going on, a suburban/urban city near Philadelphia still has the worst literacy rate in the country instead of a random Southern or Midwest town in the middle of nowhere.

Actually the town is shrinking not growing. It is in west Texas (desert not ocean) in the middle of nowhere. Basically the kids in those schools feel that they will either work on an oil rig or go on welfare. However, I think that can be changed in this age of online opportunities, they can get themselves out of that situation utilizing tools made available online, and their education does not have to be restricted simply because of their location. I feel in their current public school system they are more isolated and more limited than they would be in a homeschool online learning environment. They have access to free readily available quality information and an international online community for support they would not receive otherwise. I feel the focus when they are dealing with such limited funding and "old fogies" unwilling to change in charge of everything out there, would be to instead invest in computers for the kids to utilize at home to give them a life line to assist them with the skills and tools they need.

When you look at the revolution in education MIT and Harvard are trying to start with https://www.edx.org/ this could very well become a reality for kids no matter whether they are in the middle of nowhere, or in the middle of the ghetto to improve their situation.

West Texas. Yeah, that's a dying segment of Texas. Like the rural areas of PA are dying slowly as the population gets older and older there.

But that assumes access to high speed Internet, something rural areas of low population density have trouble accessing. America has a lot of land area for the amount of people that live here, which leads to a few problems like this. Western Europe has the reverse problem: Far too little land area.

Big_Willie_Styles:

Lil devils x:

Big_Willie_Styles:

Well, that area seems to be one of the agricultural/rancher type areas(but clearly near an ocean or refinery) in transition away from those two professions (Texas being a very high growth state quickly adapting to the realities of the 21st century faster than a lot of other states.) It is a developing area, which will have bad schools for a while, but such kids will probably have little chance of escaping their zip code to begin with. Rural kids of insanely low population density over a large area typically don't. But they'll get good jobs doing oil rig stuff and other well-paying physical labor jobs. Those are not bad jobs, they're necessary. While I wouldn't dream of my kid becoming an oil rig technician, it is a job that needs to exist right now.

I just find it interesting that even with all those bad things going on, a suburban/urban city near Philadelphia still has the worst literacy rate in the country instead of a random Southern or Midwest town in the middle of nowhere.

Actually the town is shrinking not growing. It is in west Texas (desert not ocean) in the middle of nowhere. Basically the kids in those schools feel that they will either work on an oil rig or go on welfare. However, I think that can be changed in this age of online opportunities, they can get themselves out of that situation utilizing tools made available online, and their education does not have to be restricted simply because of their location. I feel in their current public school system they are more isolated and more limited than they would be in a homeschool online learning environment. They have access to free readily available quality information and an international online community for support they would not receive otherwise. I feel the focus when they are dealing with such limited funding and "old fogies" unwilling to change in charge of everything out there, would be to instead invest in computers for the kids to utilize at home to give them a life line to assist them with the skills and tools they need.

When you look at the revolution in education MIT and Harvard are trying to start with https://www.edx.org/ this could very well become a reality for kids no matter whether they are in the middle of nowhere, or in the middle of the ghetto to improve their situation.

West Texas. Yeah, that's a dying segment of Texas. Like the rural areas of PA are dying slowly as the population gets older and older there.

But that assumes access to high speed Internet, something rural areas of low population density have trouble accessing. America has a lot of land area for the amount of people that live here, which leads to a few problems like this. Western Europe has the reverse problem: Far too little land area.

The one plus of the oil companies being present out there is they do have access to affordable highspeed internet due to the oil companies needing them. I think that IS their best resource they can utilize for education and bring the smaller rural communities into better education and also help them by utilizing web cams, chats and forums to assist them with the issues also related to social issues associated with thier physical isolation. If edx continues to expand, they really can have access to the best educational tools regardless of where they happen to be. I also think this could be useful in overpopulated areas as well. If Harvard and MIT actually do meet their goal of revolutionizing education, I can see these programs being implemented not only in community colleges as they have started, but also in our public K-12 systems and homeschool environment as well and reduce education costs so they can invest in more resources for the students.

Lil devils x:

Big_Willie_Styles:

Lil devils x:

Actually the town is shrinking not growing. It is in west Texas (desert not ocean) in the middle of nowhere. Basically the kids in those schools feel that they will either work on an oil rig or go on welfare. However, I think that can be changed in this age of online opportunities, they can get themselves out of that situation utilizing tools made available online, and their education does not have to be restricted simply because of their location. I feel in their current public school system they are more isolated and more limited than they would be in a homeschool online learning environment. They have access to free readily available quality information and an international online community for support they would not receive otherwise. I feel the focus when they are dealing with such limited funding and "old fogies" unwilling to change in charge of everything out there, would be to instead invest in computers for the kids to utilize at home to give them a life line to assist them with the skills and tools they need.

When you look at the revolution in education MIT and Harvard are trying to start with https://www.edx.org/ this could very well become a reality for kids no matter whether they are in the middle of nowhere, or in the middle of the ghetto to improve their situation.

West Texas. Yeah, that's a dying segment of Texas. Like the rural areas of PA are dying slowly as the population gets older and older there.

But that assumes access to high speed Internet, something rural areas of low population density have trouble accessing. America has a lot of land area for the amount of people that live here, which leads to a few problems like this. Western Europe has the reverse problem: Far too little land area.

The one plus of the oil companies being present out there is they do have access to affordable highspeed internet due to the oil companies needing them. I think that IS their best resource they can utilize for education and bring the smaller rural communities into better education and also help them by utilizing web cams, chats and forums to assist them with the issues also related to social issues associated with thier physical isolation. If edx continues to expand, they really can have access to the best education tools regardless of where they happen to be. I also think this could be useful in overpopulated areas as well. If Harvard and MIT actually do meet their goal of revolutionizing education, I can see these programs being implemented not only in community colleges as they have started, but also in our public K-12 systems and homeschool environment as well and reduce education costs so they can invest in more resources for the students.

Well, we'll see how the Internet develops. The Higher Education Bubble is going to pop in the next decade. The reverberations of it are not the most predictable at this point, but it popping is all but assured any year now.

Big_Willie_Styles:

Lil devils x:

Big_Willie_Styles:

West Texas. Yeah, that's a dying segment of Texas. Like the rural areas of PA are dying slowly as the population gets older and older there.

But that assumes access to high speed Internet, something rural areas of low population density have trouble accessing. America has a lot of land area for the amount of people that live here, which leads to a few problems like this. Western Europe has the reverse problem: Far too little land area.

The one plus of the oil companies being present out there is they do have access to affordable highspeed internet due to the oil companies needing them. I think that IS their best resource they can utilize for education and bring the smaller rural communities into better education and also help them by utilizing web cams, chats and forums to assist them with the issues also related to social issues associated with thier physical isolation. If edx continues to expand, they really can have access to the best education tools regardless of where they happen to be. I also think this could be useful in overpopulated areas as well. If Harvard and MIT actually do meet their goal of revolutionizing education, I can see these programs being implemented not only in community colleges as they have started, but also in our public K-12 systems and homeschool environment as well and reduce education costs so they can invest in more resources for the students.

Well, we'll see how the Internet develops. The Higher Education Bubble is going to pop in the next decade. The reverberations of it are not the most predictable at this point, but it popping is all but assured any year now.

http://business.time.com/2013/03/07/viewpoint-stop-calling-student-loans-a-bubble/
This may be helpful. :)

The biggest problem I see isn't the need of degrees, it is people are choosing to get degrees in the wrong area. While we have a mass shortage of internal medicine doctors, endocrinologist, engineers and staticians in the areas we need them, we have too many people thinking they can get an english literature degree, or psychology degrees thinking they are going to find a job when there are already too many people doing that. People have to adjust and get degrees where they are needed rather than " well I like this better". We need MORE people strong in math and science and less in the other areas. From everything I heard from the economic development committee on this subject, it isn't that there aren't enough jobs, it is there are not enough people with the proper skills for the jobs available, and massively too many people in areas they don't. They have a 22 million overflow of people in the unskilled and underskilled area, and that is not expected to improve, while at the same time they expect the shortages in medical and engineering to increase as well.

Big_Willie_Styles:

LetalisK:

Batou667:

Well, obviously I'm not advocating a poor school over a capable parent, and it sounds like your school had some very poor teachers in it.

Crappy state legislature, actually. They dictate what the schools teach and how they teach it. When we started learning about evolution we had to waste an entire class giving a great big disclaimer so as not to offend the sensitivities of the religiously inclined. We even had to have our parents sign waivers saying it was okay for him to teach us about evolution. It was obvious our biology teacher thought it was complete bullshit to go through all this.

I like how a discussion about failing schools always ends up harping on the evolution debate when the crowd is largely liberal.

Considering my state is the one of the reddest of the red, it's inevitably going to be because of conservatives. There are no liberals in power to fuck it up.

Lil devils x:
http://business.time.com/2013/03/07/viewpoint-stop-calling-student-loans-a-bubble/
This may be helpful. :)

The biggest problem I see isn't the need of degrees, it is people are choosing to get degrees in the wrong area. While we have a mass shortage of internal medicine doctors, endocrinologist, engineers and staticians in the areas we need them, we have too many people thinking they can get an english literature degree, or psychology degrees thinking they are going to find a job when there are already too many people doing that. People have to adjust and get degrees where they are needed rather than " well I like this better". We need MORE people strong in math and science and less in the other areas. From everything I heard from the economic development committee on this subject, it isn't that there aren't enough jobs, it is there are not enough people with the proper skills for the jobs available, and massively too many people in areas they don't. They have a 22 million overflow of people in the unskilled and underskilled area, and that is not expected to improve, while at the same time they expect the shortages in medical and engineering to increase as well.

It is a bubble, but the student loans part isn't the whole bubble. It's the whole structure of higher education. It's a massive problem that runs far deeper than student loans. Getting degrees in fields with no real chance of employment is also an issue within the larger bubble.

LetalisK:

Big_Willie_Styles:

LetalisK:
Crappy state legislature, actually. They dictate what the schools teach and how they teach it. When we started learning about evolution we had to waste an entire class giving a great big disclaimer so as not to offend the sensitivities of the religiously inclined. We even had to have our parents sign waivers saying it was okay for him to teach us about evolution. It was obvious our biology teacher thought it was complete bullshit to go through all this.

I like how a discussion about failing schools always ends up harping on the evolution debate when the crowd is largely liberal.

Considering my state is the one of the reddest of the red, it's inevitably going to be because of conservatives. There are no liberals in power to fuck it up.

Which state would that be?

I live in PA, a state controlled in all facets of the state government and both parties by unions of every stripe (almost every potential constituency has a union behind it.) And we still have state control of liquor, a dusty remnant of the Prohibition era. Highway construction projects take forever and run insanely over timeline and cost. Unions are strangling my state.

Big_Willie_Styles:
Which state would that be?

Utah. We liked Bush even more than Texas did. Even our "legendary" Democratic representative is pretty conservative. Still liberal on the Utah scale.

LetalisK:

Big_Willie_Styles:
Which state would that be?

Utah. We liked Bush even more than Texas did. Even our "legendary" Democratic representative is pretty conservative. Still liberal on the Utah scale.

Yep, pretty red. Texas has a larger population with large urban centers (where all the liberals in Texas seem to live.)

Utah has a certain history that I'm sure you know about. It was a state largely founded by religious outcasts (of the "violently thrown out by rioting mobs" kind,) but many colonies seemed to start this way actually, including Rhode Island.

The problem with schools is not that creationism is taught (although I don't like it being taught outside of religious classes,) but with the terrible Math and reading scores (religious ideology really wouldn't affect either of those) of our graduating high school seniors. I blame the unions.

Big_Willie_Styles:

The problem with schools is not that creationism is taught (although I don't like it being taught outside of religious classes,) but with the terrible Math and reading scores (religious ideology really wouldn't affect either of those) of our graduating high school seniors. I blame the unions.

Agreed, my school was damn near a Mormon convent and we were known for being academically competitive. I pointed that out to show that fears of some sort of "religious indoctrination" via homeschooling is small beans, if not largely unfounded, when compared to not only how a state legislature can set such an agenda itself, but also how any agenda set can be made irrelevant by involved parents, for good or ill.

I like how everyone against Homeschooling has nothing to back their claims up, whereas the pro-Homeschoolers have studies and statistics on their side.

PrinceOfShapeir:
I like how everyone against Homeschooling has nothing to back their claims up, whereas the pro-Homeschoolers have studies and statistics on their side.

http://www.allaboutparenting.org/disadvantages-of-home-schooling-faq.htm

The main argument against homeschooling is that the parents whom are told to do this are typically lower-class working longtime jobs and having little spare time. Whereas one of the p- No. REQUIREMENTS for homeschooling is that the parent is able to dedicate him/herself or at least hiring someone whom is to the task of schooling their kid.

What Homeschooling usually ends up as is parents finding the various math/language sites and leaving their child with it saying 'You have to make this much before I get home' and coming back from work eight hours later.

Without the time and dedication and passion, homeschooling is -not- gonna work. And without several degree's through a broad range of subjects its not gonna be of higher quality either. The perks of a public school (In any country with a working education system) is that each of the teachers are proficient in what they teach.

And even if the Parent 'does' have a higher degree of knowledge, as long as it is not in the broad range of subjects the child could end up with a very narrow view. Which is generally considered bad if they are to move onto highschool/university.

To top that off, while the number two reason for homeschooling is 'Econimical' the TOP ONE REASON FOR HOMESCHOOLING -

Is religion.

http://www.thelaboroflove.com/articles/is-america-the-largest-homeschooling-country

The fact of the matter is that the actual quality of the education that the child receives ranks low of the list of reasons that parents actually home-schools their child to begin with. Not to mention the lack of time those whom home school children for economical reasons have in the first place.

This means that the ones whom gets home-schooled well, are the ones with incredibly well educated parents, or parents rich enough to hire an incredibly well educated teacher. And in both cases sending the child off to a private-institution is usually the preferred choice.

With 2% of the American Students being home-schooled, and less than 50% being home-schooled for reasons of quality, we end up with lower than 1% of the American students being home-schooled for quality, and many of those having rich parents, the number of the poor whom take their kids out to give them quality education and has the time/effort/passion to give the kids what they need in terms of education is very, very, very 'small' certainly a number that's hard to work with.

I do not think homeschooling should be illegal, and I acknowledge it may be the best option for a relatively small population of disabled and special-needs kids. My own belief is that when it comes to the typical child, however, homeschooling does not the best choice make for a very significant part of the population, especially not the ones removed from the system entirely for 'Religious' reasons.

LetalisK:

Big_Willie_Styles:

The problem with schools is not that creationism is taught (although I don't like it being taught outside of religious classes,) but with the terrible Math and reading scores (religious ideology really wouldn't affect either of those) of our graduating high school seniors. I blame the unions.

Agreed, my school was damn near a Mormon convent and we were known for being academically competitive. I pointed that out to show that fears of some sort of "religious indoctrination" via homeschooling is small beans, if not largely unfounded, when compared to not only how a state legislature can set such an agenda itself, but also how any agenda set can be made irrelevant by involved parents, for good or ill.

The problem is the union mindset that allows terrible teachers to remain employed. That's why the schools are shit. Also, the good teachers are made targets by unions. "Stand and Deliver," the true story, actually had a terrible epilogue. The teacher got fired eventually for making the rest of the teachers look bad, essentially.

Ryotknife:

ClockworkPenguin:
Its something of a prisoners dilemma situation, and it is the same as the argument of public vs state schools. If the Parents with the resources to take those options do not participate in the state school system, the state school system suffers and becomes worse. When they do take get involved with the system, joining PTAs, putting their kids (who will tend to be more aspirational) through state schools, then the state school system improves and everybody wins.

But on an individual level, it can be perfectly rational to opt out of it.

You still have to pay the school taxes regardless. I went to a private school for a few years and my parents still had to pay school taxes for the public school we weren't using. So the public school loses nothing, in fact they gain resources as now they don't have to spend any on your child but you still have to pay them the full amount regardless.

Not all losses are financial. They lose out because the families with a culture of aspiration are absent, because the families with the time to engage with the school and improve/maintain the school experience for everyone are absent. There is a reason that schools like to select on merit whenever they get the chance, and its not just that those students boost the average slightly, but that they actually help bring everyone up with them.

There are also less parents able and willing to shell out for school trips and similar activities, which means that trips are less likely to happen.

(Sorry it took so long to reply. The Escapist website wouldn't load for me for most of yesterday.)

Take it from personal experience homeschooling is a very bad option. Now as for the education aspect if you get a good teacher then yes the kid can be smarter than the average person from the public schools. However with little contact with kids it really stunts the growth of someone's ability to interact with people. Took me years to get over my social awkwardness brought on by my not having socialized with anyone my age for 2 1\2 years once I finally went into private schooling.

ClockworkPenguin:

Ryotknife:

ClockworkPenguin:
Its something of a prisoners dilemma situation, and it is the same as the argument of public vs state schools. If the Parents with the resources to take those options do not participate in the state school system, the state school system suffers and becomes worse. When they do take get involved with the system, joining PTAs, putting their kids (who will tend to be more aspirational) through state schools, then the state school system improves and everybody wins.

But on an individual level, it can be perfectly rational to opt out of it.

You still have to pay the school taxes regardless. I went to a private school for a few years and my parents still had to pay school taxes for the public school we weren't using. So the public school loses nothing, in fact they gain resources as now they don't have to spend any on your child but you still have to pay them the full amount regardless.

Not all losses are financial. They lose out because the families with a culture of aspiration are absent, because the families with the time to engage with the school and improve/maintain the school experience for everyone are absent. There is a reason that schools like to select on merit whenever they get the chance, and its not just that those students boost the average slightly, but that they actually help bring everyone up with them.

There are also less parents able and willing to shell out for school trips and similar activities, which means that trips are less likely to happen.

(Sorry it took so long to reply. The Escapist website wouldn't load for me for most of yesterday.)

kinda

a lot of the activities are actually paid by the teacher (like an in-class mother's day celebration). The average teacher will spend 2-4k a year on her own students. School trips are paid by the school, at least at my sister's school where she teaches. Also, school trips are happening less and less due to budget constraints and...legal issues.

Second, parents are a major problem nowadays. You can have a class of 25 students, 24 of them can have amazing parents, and all it takes is ONE bad parent to drag everyone down and destroy the entire school year. Therefore, good parents matter significantly less unless they are ALL good parents, as one bad parent will negate all of the good ones.

Just an anecdote, but I'm a secondary school student in northern Canada who was home schooled through most of my "primary school" years, and I swear my classmates aren't nearly as educated as my old home schooled buddies (which is a real thing, by the way). It's the same problem, though: all of our parents were awesome, smart people with lots of time and money to spend on their kids, and I only encountered one broken family prior to secondary school. If you can't explain the finer points of ecology to your six-year-old while showing him how to build a fire, my experience isn't applicable to your situation. The benefits are manifold, though: none of us had a prescription for Ritalin, unlike 10% of American schoolchildren!

Ryotknife:
You can have a class of 25 students

Is there still such a thing as a class with only 25 students? Where do you live, Finland?

PrinceOfShapeir:
I like how everyone against Homeschooling has nothing to back their claims up, whereas the pro-Homeschoolers have studies and statistics on their side.

Children who were homeschooled tend to vote Conservative as adults and I guess that is a threat? Still No Child Left Behind was a terrible ideal. Its like they are trying to realize Harrison Bergeron, success and competence sacrificed for equality.

You don't pay private school to let your child in, you pay them to keep other children out.

Regardless the more I hear the OP talk the more obvious homeschooling is the lesser of two evils.

Nikolaz72:

What Homeschooling usually ends up as is parents finding the various math/language sites and leaving their child with it saying 'You have to make this much before I get home' and coming back from work eight hours later.

Even if this were the case, though it's probably not since you pulled that assertion out of thin air considering your own link didn't even suggest this, then that is evidently the method that leads to homeschooled children being more academically competent than their public school counterparts.

And without several degree's through a broad range of subjects its not gonna be of higher quality either.

Considering that homeschooled children do better academically than publicly schooled children, I'll have to doubt this.

Which is generally considered bad if they are to move onto highschool/university.

Yet homeschooled children go to college at a higher rate than publicly schooled children.

To top that off, while the number two reason for homeschooling is 'Econimical' the TOP ONE REASON FOR HOMESCHOOLING -

Is religion.

http://www.thelaboroflove.com/articles/is-america-the-largest-homeschooling-country

The fact of the matter is that the actual quality of the education that the child receives ranks low of the list of reasons that parents actually home-schools their child to begin with. Not to mention the lack of time those whom home school children for economical reasons have in the first place.

You couldn't possibly come to that conclusion using your link as it doesn't cite anything. "In one study" does not count if they do not tell us what study. But here is a study that says something similar. Not that religion is the number one factor, but rather that is a very significant factor.

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2006/homeschool/parentsreasons.asp

85.4 percent said concern about the school environment was a reason, with 72.3 having a religious motivation and 68.2 stating it was because of dissatisfaction with academic instruction at schools. I wouldn't consider over 2/3rds "low". Note that these aren't mutually exclusive. The "most important" section breaks down in a similar pattern. So we've established that religion is an important, though not only, factor. So? Unless you are going to show how this is destructive for the child, which you're going to have a hard time doing since, again(see previous post), homeschooled children outperform public schooled children in academic, social, and civic development, it's not relevant.

edit: double quoted

Sorry for the double post

ClockworkPenguin:

Not all losses are financial. They lose out because the families with a culture of aspiration are absent, because the families with the time to engage with the school and improve/maintain the school experience for everyone are absent. There is a reason that schools like to select on merit whenever they get the chance, and its not just that those students boost the average slightly, but that they actually help bring everyone up with them.

There are also less parents able and willing to shell out for school trips and similar activities, which means that trips are less likely to happen.

(Sorry it took so long to reply. The Escapist website wouldn't load for me for most of yesterday.)

Then the solution to that problem is to figure out why the "families with a culture of aspiration" are being driven away and fix it. A rising tide lifts all boats is no less of a myth when used by non-conservatives and a handful of families are not going to change the course of a dysfunctional system.

This is assuming the system in question is dysfunctional, as I don't consider it a foregone conclusion that public schools are inherently so.

Btw, Escapist was down for a few hours yesterday, so it's not just you.

Ugh, already a huge thread.
I'll add this, though it has possibly been mentioned already: Isn't one of the main problems with home-schooling that you miss out on the 'social learning and experience' as it is called? I.e actually learning how to function with others, in a social dynamic, as a group? All that shit that becomes really important later in life when you get a job?

Realitycrash:
Ugh, already a huge thread.
I'll add this, though it has possibly been mentioned already: Isn't one of the main problems with home-schooling that you miss out on the 'social learning and experience' as it is called? I.e actually learning how to function with others, in a social dynamic, as a group? All that shit that becomes really important later in life when you get a job?

Theoretically, as the stereotype goes. But, as has been pointed out previously, not only are there opportunities for socialization outside of school or even with local schools(ie it's not unheard of for public schools to allow local home schooled kids to participate in their extra curricular activities), but home schooled kids actually come out with better social skills(I have some guesses on why this happens, but it's nothing more than guesses). Even if the stereotype held true, you'd be left with your typical socially awkward nerd.

Snfinity:
Just an anecdote, but I'm a secondary school student in northern Canada who was home schooled through most of my "primary school" years, and I swear my classmates aren't nearly as educated as my old home schooled buddies (which is a real thing, by the way). It's the same problem, though: all of our parents were awesome, smart people with lots of time and money to spend on their kids, and I only encountered one broken family prior to secondary school. If you can't explain the finer points of ecology to your six-year-old while showing him how to build a fire, my experience isn't applicable to your situation. The benefits are manifold, though: none of us had a prescription for Ritalin, unlike 10% of American schoolchildren!

Ryotknife:
You can have a class of 25 students

Is there still such a thing as a class with only 25 students? Where do you live, Finland?

only?! Wow, i thought having more than 20 students in a class was a lot :/ I guess it's an issue of funds. What i seem to notice is that the public schooling system is often very underfunded.

Now more on the topic in general. I guess it depends on the situation. If the schools are shit and the parents are good at teaching, why not? But if the schools are good to begin with why risk not letting your child be a part of the school community. It's one of those issues which can't really be answered with a "yes" or "no" and has to be analyzed on a case by case basis.

LetalisK:

Realitycrash:
Ugh, already a huge thread.
I'll add this, though it has possibly been mentioned already: Isn't one of the main problems with home-schooling that you miss out on the 'social learning and experience' as it is called? I.e actually learning how to function with others, in a social dynamic, as a group? All that shit that becomes really important later in life when you get a job?

Theoretically, as the stereotype goes. But, as has been pointed out previously, not only are there opportunities for socialization outside of school or even with local schools(ie it's not unheard of for public schools to allow local home schooled kids to participate in their extra curricular activities), but home schooled kids actually come out with better social skills(I have some guesses on why this happens, but it's nothing more than guesses). Even if the stereotype held true, you'd be left with your typical socially awkward nerd.

Got any source for the claim that they come out with better social skills? Would be an interesting read.

generals3:

Snfinity:
Just an anecdote, but I'm a secondary school student in northern Canada who was home schooled through most of my "primary school" years, and I swear my classmates aren't nearly as educated as my old home schooled buddies (which is a real thing, by the way). It's the same problem, though: all of our parents were awesome, smart people with lots of time and money to spend on their kids, and I only encountered one broken family prior to secondary school. If you can't explain the finer points of ecology to your six-year-old while showing him how to build a fire, my experience isn't applicable to your situation. The benefits are manifold, though: none of us had a prescription for Ritalin, unlike 10% of American schoolchildren!

Ryotknife:
You can have a class of 25 students

Is there still such a thing as a class with only 25 students? Where do you live, Finland?

only?! Wow, i thought having more than 20 students in a class was a lot :/ I guess it's an issue of funds. What i seem to notice is that the public schooling system is often very underfunded.

Hi, welcome to Sweden, were we have socialized well-fare, medicine and free education, but the average class of elementary and up to high-school is 30+ students.

Yes, it's underfunded. It's been underfunded for awhile. Higher taxes would solve it, but that brings other problems. The usual problems.

Realitycrash:

Hi, welcome to Sweden, were we have socialized well-fare, medicine and free education, but the average class of elementary and up to high-school is 30+ students.

Yes, it's underfunded. It's been underfunded for awhile. Higher taxes would solve it, but that brings other problems. The usual problems.

Well damn, over here the average class size in primary schools is 19 students. And it's not always about taxes, sometimes it's about how the taxes are used. *looks at the US and its failing schooling system and huge defense budget*

generals3:

Realitycrash:

Hi, welcome to Sweden, were we have socialized well-fare, medicine and free education, but the average class of elementary and up to high-school is 30+ students.

Yes, it's underfunded. It's been underfunded for awhile. Higher taxes would solve it, but that brings other problems. The usual problems.

Well damn, over here the average class size in primary schools is 19 students. And it's not always about taxes, sometimes it's about how the taxes are used. *looks at the US and its failing schooling system and huge defense budget*

The US is churning out more scientists per capita than any other nation except India(though I got this from a Cracked article, which are notoriously poorly sourced), so maybe it's just tradition to say 'the school-system sucks'?
I've never even read any statistics on it, or compared it to any other nation.
In fact, every nation seem to think that their school-system sucks (I've talked with quite a few people from different nationalities).

Realitycrash:

generals3:

Realitycrash:

Hi, welcome to Sweden, were we have socialized well-fare, medicine and free education, but the average class of elementary and up to high-school is 30+ students.

Yes, it's underfunded. It's been underfunded for awhile. Higher taxes would solve it, but that brings other problems. The usual problems.

Well damn, over here the average class size in primary schools is 19 students. And it's not always about taxes, sometimes it's about how the taxes are used. *looks at the US and its failing schooling system and huge defense budget*

The US is churning out more scientists per capita than any other nation except India(though I got this from a Cracked article, which are notoriously poorly sourced), so maybe it's just tradition to say 'the school-system sucks'?
I've never even read any statistics on it, or compared it to any other nation.
In fact, every nation seem to think that their school-system sucks (I've talked with quite a few people from different nationalities).

Well it depends on how you look at it. Their elite universities are well known and many from other countries go/try to get there. And does that number also include people who gotten their degree elsewhere and went to the US for "money"?

generals3:

Realitycrash:

generals3:

Well damn, over here the average class size in primary schools is 19 students. And it's not always about taxes, sometimes it's about how the taxes are used. *looks at the US and its failing schooling system and huge defense budget*

The US is churning out more scientists per capita than any other nation except India(though I got this from a Cracked article, which are notoriously poorly sourced), so maybe it's just tradition to say 'the school-system sucks'?
I've never even read any statistics on it, or compared it to any other nation.
In fact, every nation seem to think that their school-system sucks (I've talked with quite a few people from different nationalities).

Well it depends on how you look at it. Their elite universities are well known and many from other countries go/try to get there. And does that number also include people who gotten their degree elsewhere and went to the US for "money"?

let's get back to basics first.
What makes a school-system 'fail'? What do we demand of them, at minimum?

Realitycrash:

let's get back to basics first.
What makes a school-system 'fail'? What do we demand of them, at minimum?

Well, i'd say giving people the proper tools to move on. From primary school we demand them to pass on enough knowledge for a pupil to go and succeed in secondary school and so on. As an example i've noticed that fellow uni students from certain schools had a much harder time in uni and often said things like "I've never seen that in high school" which makes me think "his/her high school failed him/her". That's basically what it is in my opinion. And from what i hear on this forum it seems that a lot of public schools in the US meet that criterium of failure.

generals3:

Realitycrash:

let's get back to basics first.
What makes a school-system 'fail'? What do we demand of them, at minimum?

Well, i'd say giving people the proper tools to move on. From primary school we demand them to pass on enough knowledge for a pupil to go and succeed in secondary school and so on. As an example i've noticed that fellow uni students from certain schools had a much harder time in uni and often said things like "I've never seen that in high school" which makes me think "his/her high school failed him/her". That's basically what it is in my opinion. And from what i hear on this forum it seems that a lot of public schools in the US meet that criterium of failure.

But what school doesn't, though? In Sweden, I think something like 15% of all Junior High-students aren't allowed into High School because they failed the core subjects (Math, English, Swedish). I guess that's a high-enough percent to say the system is failing, but is it the schools fault, or is it problems at home/integration with society/poorly focused students?
I hear most people quoting how good German schools are. Maybe Skeleon could show up and clarify.

Realitycrash:
Ugh, already a huge thread.
I'll add this, though it has possibly been mentioned already: Isn't one of the main problems with home-schooling that you miss out on the 'social learning and experience' as it is called? I.e actually learning how to function with others, in a social dynamic, as a group? All that shit that becomes really important later in life when you get a job?

They have addressed the social issues affecting homeschool students with a combination of homeschool networks and groups that do activities together. They utilize online chat, forums, voice programs and webcams for group discussion while at home, and also get together for projects and field trips frequently. Due to the state of public schools in Texas, there is a huge homeschooling network available here, and just from what I looked at, there are activities taking place every day in most areas that you can pick and choose which you wish to participate in. From what my neighbor told me, her daughter was doing too much and she had to make her cut back a bit because it was dificult for her to compete in tennis, swimming, dance, gymnastics and science competitions all at the same time. You actually get a wider variety of activities and competitions that are not offered at the public schools here, it is just a matter of utilizing them. The homeschool networks here also have dances, graduation ceremonies, recreational sports, national honors societies, national math honors societies, many national clubs to join, and community volunteer groups. Many participate in the volunteer groups to meet the "good citizenship" requirement of homeschoolers by the state of Texas. More homeschool and private school students volunteer here in the community than from public schools. Many students take individual courses and mix and match curriculum to suit their level allowing a student that is really good at math and science to take advanced courses in those areas and then also take more developmental classes where they need them. The vast majority of public school here is repetition, however, not everyone needs the same levels of repetition, and can move forward at their own pace if they master a subject and allow for further exploration as needed.

They actually have virtual online schools available here as well now, where you create a character and go into a virtual classroom that changes to the days subject to better ineract with what they are teaching. From what I have seen on that, it looks interesting.

Realitycrash:

LetalisK:

Realitycrash:
Ugh, already a huge thread.
I'll add this, though it has possibly been mentioned already: Isn't one of the main problems with home-schooling that you miss out on the 'social learning and experience' as it is called? I.e actually learning how to function with others, in a social dynamic, as a group? All that shit that becomes really important later in life when you get a job?

Theoretically, as the stereotype goes. But, as has been pointed out previously, not only are there opportunities for socialization outside of school or even with local schools(ie it's not unheard of for public schools to allow local home schooled kids to participate in their extra curricular activities), but home schooled kids actually come out with better social skills(I have some guesses on why this happens, but it's nothing more than guesses). Even if the stereotype held true, you'd be left with your typical socially awkward nerd.

Got any source for the claim that they come out with better social skills? Would be an interesting read.

Some of the links in the infographic are broke, so here's another one. http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000000/00000068.asp

Normally I'm loathe to use an advocacy site, but between its extensive citation and the collection of several different studies I'll make an exception. Most of the other sites give bits and pieces that essentially say the same thing while this site brings it all together. Also of note is that the Dr. Shyers research in there also won the national award in excellence in research from the Educational Research Information Clearinghouse, which operates under the US Department of Education in order to collect and organize educational research for easier consumption by the public.

If I may entertain baseless speculation, I think a possible reason for the divide in perception and reality could be due to the faster social development of home schooled children, particularly in the teenage years. Adults see a child that is developing faster towards the hopefully inevitable ideal of a fully realized, responsible, and mature adult. Public school peers, who are not developing as fast, see one of "them", one of the adults. A "square" to use an archaic term, thus leading to classifying them as socially awkward. Though there isn't reason to think even this is happening, I'm just expressing ideas.

It's very much up to the individual. Gifted children might benefit from homeschooling as it allows them to work in their own environment. A lot of 'gifted and talented' kids get bored at school because they aren't being challenged enough.

For kids in an area with nothing but crappy schools, a private school, internet school or a homeschool collective might be a better idea - as long as it's good quality (a parent without teacher training should ideally hire a tutor), and as long as kids are getting interaction with other kids their own age.

I was homeschooled for a year due to scolionophobia before I felt emotionally ready to return to school. It was definitely the right decision at the time - without the time out of school, I might never have developed my confidence enough to conquer my anxiety. However, the downside was that my family was only able to afford four hours of tuition per week, and I hadn't developed an appropriate work ethic to cope with that when I was 14. It greatly reduced the number of subjects I was able to take.

If you're going to homeschool a kid, you need:

    - Enough money to afford a tutor for sufficient hours per week, if you're not qualified yourself.
    - To be in a position where you can enforce a structure upon them.
    - To make sure they have plenty of opportunities to make friends and learn to work as part of a group.

On the whole, though, I wouldn't recommend that most people homeschool their kids through the entirety of their education if you can avoid it. If there aren't good schools in your area, try to move somewhere where there are good schools.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked