Posted on 01/11/2007 12:57:52 PM PST by goodnesswins
The social-service industry thinks otherwise. One of its principal lobbies, the Children's Alliance, paid a visit to The Seattle Times the other day to promote its proposals for the Legislature — a Legislature likely to be favorable. One of the group's proposals was that the state should pay for a free lunch to kids from families in the $26,000-to-$37,000 income bracket for a family of four. These kids have been offered a lunch that is reduced in price but not free.
(Excerpt) Read more at seattletimes.nwsource.com ...
Are you a comedy writer in your spare time. :^)
Public needs. That says it all. I'll do what's best for my child. You social scientists can craft your utopias with someone else's children. And you'll do it with my money until I get my school vouchers, or government schools close shop.
School Lunch Program = How many ways to serve your kids Pizza & Nachos.
I'll bite - what are the opportunity costs of widespread homeschooling?
My mother had a high school degree and a couple credits of college. She successfully homeschooled me - I ended up in grad school for computer science. My sisters - one about to start graduate work in history, the other on a full ride scholarship studying journalism. My first brother has just started his path to become an aerospace engineer and the next brother down, though only 14, is figuring out what he can do now that will prepare him to become a preacher. The next-to-youngest brother hasn't figured out what he wants to do yet but whatever he wants, he can learn.
I learned Spanish in school - my mother doesn't speak Spanish. Advanced mathematics that she couldn't help with. Advanced biology. And some subjects that she was really good with like writing and history. It's more about the dedication than the base knowledge.
So yes. Any parents can homeschool. They just need to put their child's interests before their own. Be interested in doing what it takes. Learn the patience and make the sacrifices. I'm not saying it's practical for everyone to homeschool. There are people who can't make the financial sacrifices. People who won't think about their kids best interest. But that doesn't mean that homeschooling is a solution only for the elite. High school graduates married to vaccuum cleaner repairmen can do as good a job as a couple with three doctorates.
I do not agree that "many" people who hs should not be doing so. However, I wholeheartedly agree that homeschooling is not right or possible or feasible for every child or every family.
As for your Advanced Physics example, I believe it is you who are weighing apples and oranges. It's not helpful to compare a handful of courses to an entire education---that is, to the educational experience as a whole.
Any child who wants to learn a subject (or whose parents believe study of a particular subject is appropriate) has opportunities and obstacles whether they are in public school or homeschooled. There are children in public schools who don't have access to such courses; they must look elsewhere (online, reciprocal institutions, etc.), just as many homeschool children do.
But to conclude that "many" cannot homeschool because parents, in your scenario, are not equipped to teach some advanced and specialized courses is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Many homeschoolers start community college in their senior (sometimes even junior) year of high school and have plenty of opportunity to take advanced courses. Under your logic, because a parent cannot teach a child piano, the child should go to public school.
Is it necessary or even appropriate for every child to study Advanced Physics or piano in school?
Even if you are correct that not "many" parents can provide their children excellent educations, that is not even the point. The point is this: can most parents whose circumstances permit them to homeschool provide at least as good an education as their children would be exposed to in public school?
The answer to that question is a resounding "yes."
And if you want to talk "opportunty cost," there again parents whose circumstances permit them to homeschool often can provide their children incredible learning opportunities.
You are so right.
The real skill learned in an education is *how* to learn.
When I was in law school, the professors constantly emphasized that there was more to learning the law than learning the law! One had to develop the skill to spot issues and analyze how to find out (teach oneself) the answer. Because the answers were always changing over time. And the contexts were infinite.
This is what I teach my kids: how to teach themselves (whether through study, research, consulting with those with knowledge) anything---even Advanced Physics.
I work at an urban public school in CA and all of our students are on the free lunch/free breakfast program. Sad but true.
Well, I'd like to be, but I'm getting the impression it's not yet time to quit my day job. =]
Maybe if the goobermint would cut taxes and abolish the Dept of Education many would and not many SHOULD even if they could.
This is something that a limosuine liberal would say.
The fact remains that the vast majority of people cannot home school...
If you are just stating opinion, you should say so. If you are going to claim facts, a link is needed to back up facts.
To claim that you only expressed opinions is not accurate. Maybe in your rush to heap scorn on homeschoolers who dare to think for themselves got to you.
Clarifying opinions on this subject does not result in discussion of thoughts, I have found. That just becomes dueling opinions. Not much better than dueling facts, but at least there are facts to deal with, opinions are just opinions.
The continued assertion that Parents are unqualified to teach their children is an opinion. Others, though experience have found your opinion faulty from their own experience. Your posts say nothing of any actual experience. That does not bode well for your opinion, sir.
Good day!
Sorry - missed your response there earlier!
These days schools are packed with junk food. Brand-name pizzas and other fast food places' "meals" and snacks galore. All at a nice cheap price, too.
Mom and Dad are too busy to pack real lunches, so the kids are now learning you don't have to do anything special to get food - just pick it up already prepared.
More kids now are buying their lunches. Back when I was in school more kids were bringing their lunches. The gradualization of a junk food nation. Teach 'em early that Taco Bell or whatever is the way to go.
I understand what you are saying, which is why I pay attention to what gets served in the school cafeteria. Especially at this time of the year, I am very happy to send lunch money with my daughter because she is getting a hot meal, as opposed to just a sandwich. The middle school and highschool may very well be different, but for now I am only familiar with the elementary school. And I even eat lunch there of occassion :)
When I was in grade school we went home for lunch - I was thrilled when I went to high school and could buy lunch because my choices of packing lunch from home were PB&J, bologna, or tuna.
Mom and Dad are too busy to pack real lunches, so the kids are now learning you don't have to do anything special to get food - just pick it up already prepared.
Again I understand where you are coming from, as that is the case in many, if not most instances. My husband packs his lunch nearly everyday, and so she has the opportunity to decide if she wants to pack or buy, depending on what daddy's fixing and what's on the menu at school that day :)
We do a tremendous amount of cooking in this house and so fortunately she has learned at a young age that having meal means more than just picking it up already prepared.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.