Posted on 05/22/2003 1:58:58 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
WASHINGTON -- The competition went to a second tiebreaker before James Williams, a 14-year-old from Vancouver, Wash., claimed victory Wednesday in the 15th annual National Geographic Bee.
"I wasn't expecting this at all, it's really exciting," the soft-spoken James, oldest of six children, said after besting 55 finalists in two days of competition.
The deciding question: "Goa, a state in southwestern India, was a possession of which country until 1961?"
Portugal was James' correct answer, netting a $25,000 college scholarship, a lifetime subscription to National Geographic magazine and a week at SeaWorld and Busch Gardens Adventure Camp.
Dallas Simons, a 13-year-old student at Martin Luther King Magnet School in Nashville, Tenn., placed second and collected a $15,000 college scholarship. Taking third, and a $10,000 scholarship, was Sean Rao, 14, a student at St. Gabriel School in Hubertus, Wis.
It was the second straight year a home-schooler has won the bee.
Ann Williams, the winner's mother, said she and husband Craig had decided on home schooling before they had any children.
"We wanted to make learning a lifestyle rather than something you have to do," she said. It allows the children to concentrate on areas they enjoy and the family isn't tied to a school schedule, she added.
James credited that flexibility with allowing him to spend time on geography, but that isn't his only interest. The family came to the nation's capital from Ohio, where he participated in a science olympiad, and later this year he will compete as a member of the Washington-Oregon Science Bowl team.
Runner-up Dallas Simons is a computer buff, swims on a year-round swim team, enjoys basketball and says he'd like to be a National Geographic photographer so he can travel around the world.
Third-place finisher Sean Rao -- who also represented his state in the national competition in 2001 -- plays the flute, enjoys hiking and biking and told host Alex Trebek he'd like to be ambassador to the United Kingdom someday.
The 55 state competitors -- the best of more than 5 million participants who entered local contests -- were narrowed to 10 finalists who faced off Wednesday.
Other finalists were Jacob Felts, 14, Hardy, Ark.; Kathryn Prose, 13, Denver; Thomas Meyerson, 13, Washington; David Goldman, 14, Fort Lauderdale, Fla.; Christopher Butler, 13, Shaker Heights, Ohio; Samuel Brandt, 11, Eugene, Ore.; and Karan Takhar, 12, East Providence, R.I.
But however much the NEA and its affiliates may try to disguise it, they are union to the core. Indeed, they are among the most successful unions in US history. The Manhattan Institute's Sol Stern observes in ''Breaking Free,'' his engrossing new book on why so many public schools are dysfunctional, that ''teacher unions now dominate the American trade union movement, accounting for almost 50 percent of all unionized government employees and more than 20 percent of all union members.''
Teachers unions ''cast a giant shadow over American politics,'' Stern writes, donating tens of millions of dollars directly to Democratic candidates and supporting them indirectly through independent media buys, union-paid campaign workers, and in-kind services. And this massive investment in political influence is supplemented by lavish advertising campaigns. I wrote on Sunday about the Massachusetts Teachers Association, which budgets more than $2.3 million a year for radio and TV commercials that advocate more public spending on education.
The unions do not spend all this money out of the goodness of their hearts. Their goals are not better schools or improved student performance. What they want is more income for themselves, and teachers unions only collect more income when public-school payrolls increase. That is why they constantly clamor for hiring more teachers.
And what they clamor for, they usually get. According to the Department of Education, the number of public school teachers in Massachusetts soared from 33,629 in 1991 to 70,236 in 2002, a 108 percent rise. During roughly the same period, public school enrollment in Massachusetts grew by only 17 percent. The explosion in teacher payrolls may not have led to better grades or more effective schools, but it certainly gave a boost to the union's bottom line.
Teachers unions, like all unions, want to make money and amass power. Those are the motives behind everything they say and do. They're not in business ''for the children.'' They're in business for themselves. ***
St. Gabriel School/ St. Hubertus***During his incumbency, which lasted from August 15, 1887, to June, 1890, the Rev. B. Weyer built St. Hubertus parochial school, and the Rev. P. Pape, who assumed the pastorate in 1892, built a steeple on the church, had the interior of the building frescoed throughout and made a number of other much needed improvements. In 1880 there were seventy families in the congregation. In 2002, St. Columbia (Lake Five), St. Hubert (Hubertus), and St. Mary (Richfeld) will be merged forming the new congregation St. Gabriel. ***
Somehow, I wish I could've learned my lesson in a kindler, gentler way. I'll bet if anyone is still there from the inaugural year, they won't have forgetten me.
By Helen Cordes
June 6, 2000 | [Full Text] The past few weeks have been mighty sweet for home schoolers.
Home-schooled kids hogged the headlines as finalists and winners at both the National Spelling Bee and National Geographic Bee. And more acclaim may be ahead: One of the home-schooled spelling bee finalists is off to a national math competition in which she was a finalist last year. The past few months also brought a New York Times puff piece on unschooling -- a child-led approach to home schooling -- and the Wall Street Journal published a paean to the home-schooled wunderkinders who are scooping up academic distinction and elite college spots galore.
But along with the accolades has come an ugly undercurrent of resentment from critics of home schooling. Last week, a St. Paul Pioneer Press columnist suggested that the current crop of home school contest winners came from families who are home schooling expressly to groom future competition winners.
A Fox News Channel report pondered whether "the odds are stacked in favor" of home-schooled spelling whizzes who spend hours a day poring over dictionaries, unencumbered by school bells. The program warned that recent home school triumphs, such as the record number of home-schooled spelling bee finalists, and studies showing that home schoolers score higher than regular schoolers on the SAT/ACT, may "reignite the home schooling debate."
But the debate was ignited and burning nicely before Brit Hume started rubbing two stats together on Fox News. Home school e-mail newsletters often are loaded with slights and skewerings culled from the papers that seek to expose the unfair advantages of learning at home. My personal favorite? Not long ago a Tucson Weekly sports columnist charged that home-schooled kids shouldn't be allowed to compete with other kids in sports because they have more time to practice.
Meanwhile, the National Spelling Bee folks already have taken steps to placate the parents of conventional schoolers with regulations that require youngsters to have "a full school schedule and varied academic course load" in order to compete.
Well, speaking as an outraged home schooling mom of two, I'm here to say that the home school critics are ... absolutely right. And they're absolutely wrong.
Yes, home-schooled children have plenty of time and flexibility to focus on a talent or interest. No way around it -- home schooling can allow kids to spend hours on any given passion, to zip through certain material and move on to more challenging stuff, to take advantage of opportunities like apprenticeships, early college classes and volunteering. And, if they choose, home schoolers can, and will, produce impressive portfolios to wow Ivy League admissions officials. (Note to self: Pursue online bumper sticker biz -- "My home-schooled kid just squeezed your schooled kid out of Stanford.")
But a lot of home schooling advantages aren't necessarily off-limits to schooled kids. Do you honestly believe that spelling champ George Thampy was the only finalist who spent three hours a day studying for the competition? They all did, regardless of where they went to school. All kids who compete at high levels find the time to pursue their goals. Some who end up in competitions or elite universities attend pricey private schools or charter schools where polishing an individual talent is incorporated into the school day.
And let's be honest: The folks most likely to cry "foul" about successful home-schooled kids are competitive parents who expect their kids to always win first place. Sour grapes, anyone?
I don't buy that schooled kids don't have opportunities to wax creative or follow a talent or passion. The problem isn't that they aren't schooled at home; it is what they do at home after they leave school. The latest statistics show that 8- to 13-year-olds spend an average of 6.5 hours daily in front of a screen. There's no way kids can even discover what their strengths are, much less indulge them, with their creative juices sucked dry by passive staring.
And then there is the stuff they are doing instead of hanging out at home after school. Do kids really need to be in 97 extracurricular activities? Even in my little town, I was shocked to hear the elementary school counselor tell me that the major source of stress for her students is over-scheduling. And I know from researching and writing articles about over-scheduling that it's an American epidemic. Think what might happen if kids had time to do what really intrigued them and not simply what all their friends are doing or what parents think kids "need" to do to get into a swell college.
The phenomenal success that home-schooled high schoolers are having getting into great colleges suggests that many admissions officials are looking for different "right stuff" these days. Home schoolers are getting into top universities, say officials such as Stanford's Jon Reider, because they tend to be more emotionally mature (they hang out with more adults) and are inclined to be independent learners who "take responsibility for their education." This year at Stanford, home schoolers were accepted at twice the rate of schoolers.
Do critics of home schooling really believe that, in the interest of "fairness," accomplished children should either submit to an educational system that even proponents admit is flawed, or foreswear any advantages proferred by an alternative learning system?
"Maybe we shouldn't allow people who live near libraries to participate in contests because they can spend more time at the library," jibes home school advocate Michael Moy. "Perhaps tall people shouldn't play basketball because they have an unfair advantage." Adds Helen Hegener, who with her husband Mark publishes Home Education Magazine, "What is our real goal here? To protect a system or to raise creative, focused, passionate kids?"
Home school critics are right about one thing: Eight hours daily in the classroom puts a big dent in a kid's day. It's not like home schoolers do nothing for eight hours a day -- it's just that most kids can get the "school work" out of the way in a few focused hours, and then concentrate on what excites them.
And I am seriously sorry that most folks can't or don't want to home school. As Hegener points out, the truly unfair situation about home schooling is that every child could excel if given the same level of individual attention, freedom and support most home schoolers get.
For my part, I have to admit to being a fairly lackadaisical home teacher. I try to put in the hours that I think I should, but writing projects are constantly in the way. Our curriculum -- that motley amalgam of used texts, library books and videos, Internet stuff and whatever else I grab -- is anything but organized and rigorous. There are entire topic chunks I've avoided so far -- sorry, I'm just not excited by physical science, but I will get to it. And I've got files full of intriguing but unexplored educational Web sites as well as still dormant fabulous field trip plans.
Mostly my husband and I talk with our kids about the world and all of our interests and favorite reading. We encourage their opinions and analysis. And we see the rewards every day as they make spontaneous, cross-topic connections. We see their world expand as they have time to make friends with a fertile mixture of people of different ages, ethnicities and economic classes that they meet in our neighborhood and community, on the campus where my husband teaches and in the inclusive local home school groups we socialize with once or twice a week.
Haphazard as it may seem, this approach appears to be working -- at least by conventional school standards. We just received the results of the seventh-grade Stanford Achievement Test for our 12-year-old. My jaw dropped when I found that she "rated" PHS (post-high school) in 11 of 12 test areas.
Don't get me wrong -- we're happy to know that our eldest daughter "tests well" (and in fact home schoolers do generally score higher in standardized tests), but our goal is most definitely not to create a supercompetitor. Not that it matters. We have not gone unpunished. Upon hearing about my daughter's test scores, several friends have quickly followed their praise with scolding -- not for maintaining an unfair advantages but for depriving the local public school of such a bright, and high-scoring, student.
I guess as a home-schooling parent, you can't win -- but your kids sure can. - - - - - - - - - - - -
About the writer Helen Cordes home schools two daughters in Georgetown, Texas, and writes for Utne Reader, Child, The Nation, Family Life and other magazines. She is author of "Girl Power in the Mirror" and "Girl Power in the Classroom."
Related stories School is out The important thing about home schooling isn't getting away from school. It's getting back into your home. - Denis Johnson
Or that this is the second year that a homeschooled kid won.
They just ended the segment with the line "Only seven out of the nation's fifty states require geography to be taught as a seperate course."
I find it interesting that they chose to include that statement, yet completely ignore the homeschool aspect.
But then again... this is National Public Radio we're talking about.
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.