Posted on 10/08/2007 4:07:25 PM PDT by ChocChipCookie
Home schooling appears to improve the academic performance of children from families with low levels of education, according to a report on home schooling released today by independent research organization The Fraser Institute.
"The evidence is particularly interesting for students who traditionally fall through the cracks in the public system," said Claudia Hepburn, co-author of Home Schooling: From the Extreme to the Mainstream, 2nd edition and Director of Education Policy with The Fraser Institute.
"Poorly educated parents who choose to teach their children at home produce better academic results for their children than public schools do. One study we reviewed found that students taught at home by mothers who never finished high school scored a full 55 percentage points higher than public school students from families with comparable education levels."
The peer-reviewed report, co-written with Patrick Basham and John Merrifield, builds on a 2001 study with new research and data. It examines the educational phenomenon of home schooling in Canada and the United States, its regulation, history, growth, and the characteristics of practitioners, before reviewing the findings on the academic and social effects of home schooling. The full report is available at www.fraserinstitute.org.
Hepburn said evidence clearly demonstrates that home education may help reduce the negative effects of some background factors that many educators believe affects a child's ability to learn, such as low family income, low parental educational attainment, parents not having formal training as teachers, race or ethnicity of the student, gender of the student, not having a computer in the home, and infrequent usage of public libraries.
"The research shows that the level of education of a child's parents, gender of the child, and income of family has less to do with a child's academic achievement than it does in public schools."
The study also reports that students educated at home outperform their peers on most academic tests and are involved in a broad mix of social activities outside the home.
Research shows that almost 25 per cent of home schooled students in the United States perform one or more grades above their age-level peers in public and private schools. Grades 1 to 4 home school students perform one grade level higher than their public- and private-school peers. By Grade 8, the average home schooled student performs four grade levels above the national average.
Hepburn said a growing body of new research also calls into question the belief that home schooled children are not adequately socialized.
"The average Canadian home schooled student is regularly involved in eight social activities outside the home. Canadian home schooled children watch less television than other children, and they show significantly fewer problems than public school children when observed in free play," she said.
The report concludes that home schooling is not only a viable educational choice for parents, but can also be provided at a much lower cost than public schooling. The report notes that in the U.S., home schooling families spend less than $4,000 per year on home schooling while public schooling in the U.S. costs about $9,600 per child.
"Canadian and American policymakers should recognize the ability of parents to meet the educational needs of their children at home, without government involvement," Hepburn said.
"While home schooling may be impractical for many families, it has proven to be a successful and relatively inexpensive educational alternative. It merits the respect of policy makers, the attention of researchers, and the consideration of parents."
The complete report, Home Schooling: From the Extreme to the Mainstream 2nd edition is available in PDF format at www.fraserinstitute.org.
The Fraser Institute is an independent research and educational organization based in Canada. Its mission is to measure, study, and communicate the impact of competitive markets and government intervention on the welfare of individuals. To protect the Institute's independence, it does not accept grants from governments or contracts for research. Visit www.fraserinstitute.org.
Memorization is the lowest level, the foundation, for education. However, one important element of computer education I didn’t mention so far is that it can strongly improve memorization, collation of that information, and retention.
Right now, natural memorization is of poor quality and is inefficiently linear. It rapidly reaches a point of information overload even in elementary school, and the students end up with an unpleasant organizational mess in their heads. Students also have widely varying attention spans, a short one being a terrible impediment to learning.
This is why, at even the lowest grades, a new curriculum of knowledge management has to be taught. A lot of this is simple and fun, more like games, but can radically expand a student’s memorization abilities, ordering of those memories, and retention over time. A solid foundation is much better than a weak one.
For example, Benjamin Franklin’s memorization game should be taught and practiced at a very early age. But there are many such games, each teaching different learning skills. There are also many game-like skills that increase a students ability to stay focused on what they are doing for greater lengths of time. Good focus alone is like having 25 additional IQ points.
Students should have their orderly lessons presented in a two or three dimensional matrix instead of a linear one. This gives students a means of cross-checking what they have memorized, which strongly reinforces it.
This is for orderly information, such as math, history, etc. Idiosyncratic information needs a different technique. But in a short time, students should be able to learn and remember enormous amounts of information that they would only be able to assimilate over the course of years in a linear and haphazard fashion.
But as well as having a solid foundation of memorization, elementary students are quite capable and should be able to apply some higher levels of learning as well. For example, it is vital that they learn discrimination of information, to help them “separate the wheat from the chaff.”
Memorization is meaningless if what you memorize is crapola, contradictory or trivial. Children need to be able to spot such things as errors and be able to fact check.
They must also be able to interpolate and extrapolate information, not be totally reliant on having all the data to draw a conclusion.
Being taught on an individual level opens up many possibilities not available in group studies. And while a single teacher can teach some of them, sometimes, an advantage of a computerized education is that all of them can be used all the time. So it truly is up to the student themselves how much they can learn.
Saxon Math, I hear, has DVDs that explain the problems, that go with the books. There’s some very good stuff out there. And then tutors, of course.
Saxon Math, I hear, has DVDs that explain the problems, that go with the books. There’s some very good stuff out there. And then tutors, of course.
That all sounds marvelous, but you have to admit, lots of us have done quite well without it. My three graduates have all gone to college with academic scholarships - one a national merit scholar and the other two presidential scholars at a top tier liberal arts college. We manage(d) at home, with co-ops, and with dual-enrollment. Homeschooling works, not because of the skill of the parents or the fabulous curriculum they buy, but because it can be tailored to meet the needs and interests of the student.
One way of reading this which is less flattering to homeschooling, and certainly may have value, is simply to note that parents who homeschool are committed to their children's educations. Whether they are in affluent suburbs or in inner cities. From that POV the existence of the homeschool is simply a symptom of the failure of some public schools, especially prevalent where low parental education is most common.I.e., everyone is, on average, getting the kind of public school they demand, and deserve - "everyone is concerned about the public schools but satisfied with their own school." And if your demand is higher than that of your neighbors, your only recourse is to use some educational option other than public school.
That’s called “Switched on Schoolhouse”. A cd-rom based curriculum.
We love it.
The distinguishing difference is that generally you don't homeschool unless you are passionate about your kids becoming educated (I'm leaving out the parents who falsely claim they are "homeschooling" because they can't control the kid and are tired of getting dinged over the kids chronic truancy)
Also, kids of moms who never finished high school are generally in neighborhoods of other academic low-achievers, which means the local school will generally not be an environment that fosters learning
Perhaps it is some of what I propose, but I would hope to take it much, much further. Instead of approaching it at the student level, let me tempt you with the idea of the infrastructure behind such a system.
To begin with, such as system should have its own national intraweb. This would be so that the content providers could pipe the continually improving information stream to nodes around the country for distribution. Every school district would have such a node with equal access for public, private, religious, and home schooling access.
Importantly, the large number of content providers would create wildly different curricula for students, but all using the same basic production scheme (think html, but for multimedia). Underlying it all would be mandatory State educational requirements, such as math and English.
But how even math and English were taught would be different based on the parent selected content provider.
The administrative character of the content would also be standardized, so that all content would teach, review, evaluate, correct, and rate individual student performance.
Anonymous statistics would also be used to justify content—if students on a particular program were not doing well on periodic testing by objective third parties, it would cost the content provider a lot. That is, content would be rated for how well it prepared students for tests like the SATs, based on actual student performance on SATs.
This would weed out content providers that are not giving students the best education. Parents could still choose a less than stellar content provider, say based on religious reasons, but student performance had to remain above minimums set by the State, or they would lose their content provision license.
As I said before, such as system would not limit students to the available curriculum, but would allow them to pursue their inspirations far beyond their grade level for a while, if they so chose.
In any case, efficiency is what matters. If a student completes their studies and time remains, there is no reason for them not to have other topics instantly added to their curriculum, from table manners, cooking, home repair, auto maintenance, electronics, etc.
Always pushing the educational envelope.
Good for now, but what of the future? If a method of instruction is so effective that elementary school students are learning high school level lessons, and high school students are performing at the level of graduate students, what will be left for students performing at “normal”, by today’s standards, levels?
On top of that, imagine the impact on society if elementary school students regularly learned skills not taught today, such as economics and investment, much more math and sciences, poetry and art, geography and map reading, electronics and computing, dance and martial arts?
Look into K12.
Bill Bennett did what you are talking about. It’s called a Virtual Elementary and is free in many states.
>>In any case, efficiency is what matters. If a student completes their studies and time remains, there is no reason for them not to have other topics instantly added to their curriculum, from table manners, cooking, home repair, auto maintenance, electronics, etc.<<
Have you homeschooled?
If my kids had more added to their curriculum when they finished, they would not finish.
My older daughter rushes to finish so she can read, the younger to draw.
We do what you suggest anyway without it being added to a curriculum. Homeschoolers don’t flip on the tv when the work is finished. I have one weaving and the other knitting right now. Make either of those school required and they wouldn’t do it.
“C’mon, everyone knew that the rich kids in the suburbs were doing just fine in public schools”
No, the “rich” kids in the suburbs need the kids in the poor schools for purposes of providing an irrelevant comparison; namely, to create the impression that the suburban kids are doing well. In fact they aren’t. The TIMSS shows that in math and science our best 12th graders, for example, do worse against their international competitors than average American 12th grader does against the international average student.
As for “rich” kids doing well in college, outside of engineering and hard sciences college today is less academic than ever. Moreover, the “rich” kids don’t show up in large numbers in rigorous engineering and science courses because they can’t hack the math or bring themselves to do the hard work.
The public schools, schools of education, and teachers’ unions are a large sector of the economy devoted to negative value-added performance. Goverment schools delenda est (too bad I don’t know more latin, but, then, I am a public school graduate ;-)
My best friend and my s-i-l recently graduated from a teaching college with a degree in teaching. It did not prepare them to teach, nor were they taught to teach. They told me that you were expected to learn as you go once you get a job.
Except that if you want to use it you have to pay again.
Let’s see public school parents pay twice and then it would be equitable.
Also, kids of moms who never finished high school are generally in neighborhoods of other academic low-achievers, which means the local school will generally not be an environment that fosters learning.
Your #48 is better writing than my #46, pretty much GMTA otherwise.
The people who founded the United States, wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, were primarily home-schooled.
I agree with you entirely. But what percentage of students in the US get such an opportunity? That is, while home schooling is great for students, the vast majority cannot get such an opportunity as things now stand.
Imagine many of the better elements of home schooling translated into such a way that public, private, religious, and home school students can benefit from it. That, by whatever means, should be the goal.
This is why a technology based system is the answer. Other educational experiments (such as Summerhill), were always based on setting up an ideal situation, then *assuming* that because it worked there, it could be extrapolated to work anywhere. But technology, unlike educational philosophy *can* work anywhere, like personal computers can work anywhere.
One “iron fact” that technology cannot circumvent, or anything else, for that matter, is that student performance will invariably fit the Standard Distribution (Bell) Curve.
This means that, whatever educational system that is used, 17% of students will perform below average and 5% will get little or nothing from it. However, this is in relation to each other, and applies to only a single system. And it is also a dynamic curve, student performance varying over time and subject.
Technology can adapt for some of this, first of all, because, like home schooling, it is adaptable for the individual. Second, technology has to be augmented with real teachers, who take up much of the slack. Students will still need a disciplined environment to study, and much guidance to get through the day.
However, as you said, and one of my main points, if we can just eliminate the wasted time from a student’s day, then there is a lot of time to study other things.
Noteworthy, you mentioned weaving and knitting at the conclusion of studies. This type of activity is essential to help students who are studying in an intense manner to maintain their equanimity and balance, a very good idea.
I never said it was “equitable.” I merely said it exists.
>>Noteworthy, you mentioned weaving and knitting at the conclusion of studies. This type of activity is essential to help students who are studying in an intense manner to maintain their equanimity and balance, a very good idea.<<
And they like it too.
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.