Posted on 03/11/2007 11:50:14 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
Exactly -- and how many kids are exposed to drugs because of peer pressure at a government school -- peers they never would have met if they had not attended these schools. In fact, the cultural atmosphere of any public school is much more likely to involve peer acceptance of drugs, alcohol, and reckless sexual behaviors. When you're homeschooled your parents have much better control of who your peers are.
I agree. A HUGE WELCOME ABOARD! (Especially a fan of one of the greatest thinkers in The United States of America.)
I agree that it by no means fits MY definition of homeschooling but the parents in question described themselves as homeschoolers and the kids said they were being homeschooled and when the parent removed their child from the public school system it was to provide a home school education. I guess it depends on whose definition you utilize - even though it sounds like you and I would agree that they were NOT providing an appropriate education legally they were considered homeschoolers.
No of course he wasn't attacking homeschooling. Why he was probably supporting the troops........ *sigh*
It sounds like you're a GREAT parent! Obviously you provided your son with a fabulous education and I'm glad to hear he's doing so well. I too have several friends who home school and are amazing educators - I truly marvel at their abilities and their children are miles ahead of where they would be in the public system.
For better or worse I have spent my professional career working with various types of dysfunctional families and my perspective is influenced by my experiences. Mother's who are so illiterate they can't spell their child's first name or who are so intellectually impaired they don't know their child's birthday. And those aren't the parents who lost custody of their kids due to horrific abuse or neglect.
A fair question. The review should be deferential. Is the subject addressed? If the answer of yes, the inquiry regarding sufficiency of the curriculum is over.
For instance, when I was homeschooled, my parents used the A Beka curriculum. Now, personally speaking, I think those curricula are little better than propaganda. I would not select them for my children. Even so, NY did not complain that those textbooks were used - nor should they. Parents have wide discretion, and should not be interfered with just because they made educational choices with which one disagrees. That said, parents should not have the option to say math or science or reading should not be addressed at all.
Think carefully before you answer, because parochial and private religious schools don't have to submit to that kind of oversight.
Actually, most of them have the same level of regulation. They must cover certain subjects. They have broad latitude to select religion-based texts, but they must use ***a*** text.
How odious would a deferential review like this be?
You have anything substantive to add to this coversation, or just brainless insults?
"The review should be deferential. If the answer of yes, the inquiry regarding sufficiency of the curriculum is over."
Are you that naive?
You really think that is as far as it would go? It might be deferential to begin with, but as time progressed it would be more and more controlled and prescribed.
Are you bitter for being homeschooled? You don't seem happy about your experience.
Bureaucrats tend to be less than enthusiastic about adding work. They won't want to add the job of reviewing curricula. These sorts of reviews tend to become more cursory as time goes on.
Are you bitter for being homeschooled? You don't seem happy about your experience.
Nope. I got lucky, and it worked well for me - but I honestly think mine was an exceptional case. I had two PhD's teaching me. Even so, having also attended a public high school, I can confidently say that there were things my parents could not compete with, good as they were.
At the same time, having been homeschooled, I knew a lot of homeschooled kids. Most received an adequate education. Some received a superior one. Some families had no business homeschooling at all. I'm sure you've seen a few of each, if you've moved in those circles for any length of time.
"Bureaucrats tend to be less than enthusiastic about adding work. "
Baloney. It just gives them more of an excuse to hire more people and expand their budgets. And if it gets too onerous to review curricula then they will just legislate only certain ones are approved.
You are a very trusting soul when it comes to bureaucrats.
"I'm sure you've seen a few of each, if you've moved in those circles for any length of time."
Yep. Overall, though, the stats show that they do better than public schools. For now that should give guidance on how to proceed.
Ever work in an over-worked bureaucracy? Things just don't work that way. Bureaucracies will tend to focus only on the egregious problems, and tend to do a cursory job otherwise. Furthermore, it's trivial to establish a deferential standard of review in the procedures. Any second-year law student can do it.
Overall, though, the stats show that they do better than public schools. For now that should give guidance on how to proceed.
The way you cite those statistics is fallacious. Statistical averages tell us just that - the average. It counter-balances the low-performers with the high-performers. The distribution curve of the scores almost certainly shows that there are high-performers that would do well in any half-way decent school, middle-level performers who are thriving under individualized attention, and low-end performers who may struggle in any environment, or whose parents have no business homeschooling. An average gives no information about how many fall in each category.
On the other hand, the stats do tell us one thing - homeschooling does work and should be a viable option for some. Anything beyond that is conjecture.
"Ever work in an over-worked bureaucracy? Things just don't work that way. Bureaucracies will tend to focus only on the egregious problems, and tend to do a cursory job otherwise."
Show me a situation where the gov't has returned the power of choice to the electorate because it was too much trouble to maintain or do the work. IOW, show me a bureacracy that got smaller because the bureaucrats said some of their function was not necessary.
"Furthermore, it's trivial to establish a deferential standard of review in the procedures. "
I wasn't arguing that establishing a deferential review would be trivial -- it's just that there is no guarantee that it would remain deferential. Gov't grows and grows and grows like a weed. Since we are talking about education, look at the Dept. of Education. It's the perfect example.
"The way you cite those statistics is fallacious. "
No, it's just that the average can tell alot. If the average homeschooler does better than the average public school child then that tells you that the system is overall better. The distribution might be narrow, wide, or skewed one way or another, but to have an average that is centered that much higher is very significant.
There's so much wrong even with the first sentence that it's hard to know where to begin.
Who defines abuse?
Don't they consider it abuse to rip a child from the only family he's ever known and make him go live with a bunch of strangers?
Who's going to *protect* the kids from abuse at the hands of the public school system? From foster families?
What about families who send their kids to the public school system who abuse their kids? And there's lots of them.
Who made this judge God?
It's a self-appointment.
I guess the judge never saw these results:
SAT/ACT homeschoolers:
http://www.hslda.org/docs/news/hslda/200105070.asp
Standardized test scores homeschoolers:
http://www.hslda.org/docs/nche/000010/200410250.asp
I am a single mother who homeschools four precious children, and it is God-send for us as a family. Each one is learning above grade-level (just because they're ready to move on to the next skill, once they master the one they're on), and are happy, not stressed out, not bullied, and loving childhood. I don't compare our style or pace to other homeschool families (although the temptation is ever present). I have friends who teach their kids at home who have 10 year old kids who still don't read "because they're not interested". I think that's ridiculous.
Homeschooling has saved our family, and is perfect for my children, all four of them. Being a former teacher gives me more credibility for what i'm doing, but it's almost a downside when talking with other parents, since many do not have college degrees, nor do they need them. When they don't know a subject at a certain level, they usually hire tutors or co-op with other families whose children are studying the same thing.
Homeschooling is extremely mainstream in our area, and widely accepted. Thank God for us....I know it's not the case for many people.
Which goes to show that kids do NOT have to attend a public school for abuse to be detected. Shoots down his arguement.
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.