I am a community college professor in one of the most economically diverse areas of the country (seriously: 1+ million dollar homes in gated communities, tiny farming communities, and incredibly poor and gang- ridden communities are all within our boundaries).
I see quite a few home schooled students in my classes. I am a little biased because generally they are actually some of my best students. Many of them want to go into healthcare: primarily nursing, pharmacy, or physical therapy. Those aren't "desk jobs" but they sure are great for contributing to society! They are also incredibly polite, respectful, and get along great with others in their classes.
In terms of oversight: I definitely agree with it *in theory*. However, how they might implement it presents challenges. Requiring a yearly medical examination? Great! But what about quack "doctors" just signing forms, or forgeries? Furthermore, many of the students that are home schooled have special needs (ADHD, autism, etc) that the schools cannot adequately address. How would the government *appropriately* and *cheaply* assess learning other than solely written exams? Some students could knock your socks off if given an oral exam, others would so much better if allowed to submit a portfolio. Who is going to pay for the assessment? Families that are homeschooling? Ok maybe, but what about those below federal poverty guidelines? Do they effectively not get a choice to homeschool their children? Note- most of them in this area that are in that situation are in pretty terrible public school situations. Teachers spend way too much time on classroom management and not enough time on teaching. My source? The teachers themselves, along with students from those schools.
Just wanted to give a slightly different perspective in this very long thread!
As a SN's mom I'm the first to admit schools aren't always able to provide the best services to SN kids (mine attends a private ABA program for this reason) BUT you know what is worse for 95% of SN kids? Being homeschooled. IME these kids often end up with even fewer or no therapies and are not given the help they need to be able to function in society. School is the test run for society and SN kids need that push to learn expected social behaviors that can not be pushed in a homeschool setting without more work then most parents are willing/able to put in. Also I don't have the training to teach my kid I am fully willing to admit that. She needs someone who knows the various methods and techniques. For example at school my daughter will sit and do HWOT for 15 minutes at home? Getting her to practice that at home and stay on task for more then 5 minutes is a ridiculous struggle.
I am a community college professor in one of the most economically diverse areas of the country (seriously: 1+ million dollar homes in gated communities, tiny farming communities, and incredibly poor and gang- ridden communities are all within our boundaries).
I see quite a few home schooled students in my classes. I am a little biased because generally they are actually some of my best students. Many of them want to go into healthcare: primarily nursing, pharmacy, or physical therapy. Those aren't "desk jobs" but they sure are great for contributing to society! They are also incredibly polite, respectful, and get along great with others in their classes.
In terms of oversight: I definitely agree with it *in theory*. However, how they might implement it presents challenges. Requiring a yearly medical examination? Great! But what about quack "doctors" just signing forms, or forgeries? Furthermore, many of the students that are home schooled have special needs (ADHD, autism, etc) that the schools cannot adequately address. How would the government *appropriately* and *cheaply* assess learning other than solely written exams? Some students could knock your socks off if given an oral exam, others would so much better if allowed to submit a portfolio. Who is going to pay for the assessment? Families that are homeschooling? Ok maybe, but what about those below federal poverty guidelines? Do they effectively not get a choice to homeschool their children? Note- most of them in this area that are in that situation are in pretty terrible public school situations. Teachers spend way too much time on classroom management and not enough time on teaching. My source? The teachers themselves, along with students from those schools.
Just wanted to give a slightly different perspective in this very long thread!
As a SN's mom I'm the first to admit schools aren't always able to provide the best services to SN kids (mine attends a private ABA program for this reason) BUT you know what is worse for 95% of SN kids? Being homeschooled. IME these kids often end up with even fewer or no therapies and are not given the help they need to be able to function in society. School is the test run for society and SN kids need that push to learn expected social behaviors that can not be pushed in a homeschool setting without more work then most parents are willing/able to put in. Also I don't have the training to teach my kid I am fully willing to admit that. She needs someone who knows the various methods and techniques. For example at school my daughter will sit and do HWOT for 15 minutes at home? Getting her to practice that at home and stay on task for more then 5 minutes is a ridiculous struggle.
I agree with all of this, and wanted to add that as the mom of a kid on the spectrum, it has become very clear to me over time that while my DD1 may be most comfortable and therefore seems most typical/reachable when she's at home in a familiar environment, that it is NOT the environment most conducive to her learning skills that help her function outside the home. That environment, unsurprisingly, IS outside the home, around people (teachers and peers) who are not as used to her quirks and push her to communicate and conduct herself in ways that come naturally to most people but not naturally to my DD1 because of her disability. And she can succeed in that environment if given the proper supports.
It is all too easy for parents of kids with SN to -- sometimes very unconsciously -- accommodate their child rather than push them. It's easy to focus on addressing the most significant behaviors but ignore the little annoying ones, or just try to get through the day in a way that avoids meltdowns but doesn't ultimately force your child to be more resilient. The "I know my child best so I can provide the most appropriate education for his/her learning style", I think, can actually backfire in that sense -- in both kids with SN and to a lesser extent, IMO, for typical kids. The things I can live with as a parent are often very, very different than what would be acceptable in the classroom, among peer-aged friends or in the future workplace. Having other adults with different expectations, teaching styles and patience levels is actually invaluable to my child learning how to navigate the actual world, although I have no doubt she would be just as academically advanced or more if I were home-schooling at this point (grade 2).
I am still reading on page 4, so this may be covered in the next 17 pages... Just in case it is not I am asking and will read the answer when I catch up:
Without any sort of standard equivalency exam, how do homeschoolers whose kids are not college bound expect their kids to get a decent job? Most jobs require a high school diploma or GED from an accredited school. Almost all of the nearly 20000 jobs at my employer require it, except housekeeping and linen services. We have had some homeschooled folks apply and they cannot pass the background check because they can't verify their education qualifications. They learned the hard way that they had to go sit for the GED and that certainly is not seen as desirable as a diploma.
We are a data driven society. With data come benchmarks. Without benchmarks for comparisons how do you know you are educating "well enough?"
I have 3 friends who homeschool. One does it because her family living in OK brought them there and even after being educated in Texas she was horrified by the sorry schools in her area. But she is extremely smart and as the kids get older she is looking at coop options. Another is part of a well structured coop where there are a dozen parents who divide up the kids into grades and lessons and learning is done in a building they all rent. It is much like a tiny private school with people educated in the topics are doing the teaching and those who cannot teach either because they aren't good at it or the need they can fill is occupied do snack and lunch prep, oversee recess, etc. her kids are little super brains. A third has a Pinterest approved room for school in her house and is really organized, and she has a masters in child development, but her kids don't seem all that educated, are weird. And she is an antivaxxer which doesn't help my perception. She also complains about being poor all the time and cannot afford the mini van she needs for her and her foster kids' to all fit in one car. The kids do not seem as provided for as they could be if she just got a job using her masters degree outside the home and sent them to public school. But she thinks she is doing a bang up job.
So I know I some people can do it clearly others can't. But when it comes to competing in life for opportunities that may be severely limited of our economy goes the way of the Greeks, how can homeschoolers be opposed to even the basic assessments for benchmarking their child's success?
This opposition seems more about ego, power trips, brainwashing indoctrination, etc than the welfare of the child.
If the schools can't handle ADHD or autism, then how is a parent trained and skilled enough to do so?
Without oversight, nevermind the potential educational shortcomings, how is the state going to protect children from abuse like blanket training or worse?
katrana, you have good experiences from the kids who have left homeschool. I have no doubt they can be good students. I worry about those still at home.
I haven't been able to comment on the thread because I've been barely keeping up with it at all, and I am in favor of public school over homeschooling. However, some kids really struggle in large, over-stimulating environments. Unfortunately, sometimes teachers can't take the necessary time to address kids on the individual level that's needed, so in those cases, homeschooling is more beneficial than the chaos that can be public school.
That's not to say there shouldn't be oversight, and most states are severely lacking in sufficient oversight, but sometimes homeschooling really is the best or only viable option.
There are of posters on this board who would never send their children to a religious school or daycare.
Which posters?
Lol - Anecdote: L goes to a Lutheran daycare. Her teacher proudly showed me her "picture" of fire, because they told one of the stories about throwing non-believers in the fire. I solemnly turned to L and said, "Don't ever throw people into fires. It's not nice," to which she responded, "YEAH!"
@kateaggie excuse me, but I vaccinate my children. I just support a parent's right not to.
Read the commas, AW. Those are 3, separate descriptions.
Actually, had you left off the 2nd comma just before "or" it would have read more like a series of 3 examples. The way you wrote it sounds like you gave 2 examples, emphasizing AW as an antivaxxer.
I know the comma that comes immediately before the conjunction in a series is optional, and also a subject of debate among English majors; not trying to start a punctuation war.
Anyway, I find it amusing that this has become like working moms vs. SAHMs to the extreme. "You don't love your kid enough if you allow him to be raised by the daycare teachers" is now, "You're not a good/active enough parent if you let someone else control your child's education!"
Like I said, I know two people who were home schooled who now have college degrees. One at an ivy, but his dad went to the same school, so that counts for something. Anecdotes! A relatively small percentage of the overall population have 4 year college degrees. I have no idea what the stats are for exclusively home schooled students. But think about all the child actors who are privately tutored and get into top tier colleges. There's a benefit to highly individualized education. And also a downside. I WANT my kids to learn that they have to show up for chemistry an hour a day, like it or not.
Like I said, I know two people who were home schooled who now have college degrees. One at an ivy, but his dad went to the same school, so that counts for something. Anecdotes! A relatively small percentage of the overall population have 4 year college degrees. I have no idea what the stats are for exclusively home schooled students. But think about all the child actors who are privately tutored and get into top tier colleges. There's a benefit to highly individualized education. And also a downside. I WANT my kids to learn that they have to show up for chemistry an hour a day, like it or not.
I think that actors getting into top colleges has more to do with $$$ and their celebrity than academics.
katrana you make good points but the kid that has a loving mother and devoted father that helps them avoid bad schools etc is not what the article is about. Homeschool, go private, send them to bible camp but there has to be resources to protect the children from their parents. The bad parents. The ones that don't care and use homeschooling as a shield. There are stories about kids being found locked in the closet and fed once a week - one boy died of starvation. If he was forced to go to school, this could not have happened. Someone would have seen him. Someone would have noticed. Unfortunately the story I know is about a 3-4 yr old boy so too young for school but that doesn't mean we shouldn't care about the other kids. And it's not just poor kids. Look at those girls that were sold by some asshole politician to a pedophile. Maybe a teacher could have helped them. (No idea if they went to school)
Re: special needs education, I work at a school that is 100% special education. Every student has an IEP. They come to us when they haven't been successful in other school settings. The main way that we get students is through referrals from public school districts. I simply throw that out there to show that there are lots of different options even within the realm of public education to meet students' needs.
And we definitely are always on the lookout for signs of abuse. If a child were rapidly losing weight there would be all kinds of interventions. Again, I go back to not understanding how people can say "not my problem" about trying to prevent child abuse (or at least intervene earlier).
Well I skimmed and then got bored by page 17 or so. I'm both the product of public education and a millenial-ish. And a desk monkey. Go figure! I am currently in my PJs though!
But I hope AW teaches neither logic nor *racial studies, with a section on white privilege. She fails at both.
*lol forever that she would teach racial studies. She can't even history.
With those interests, I'm thinking that she'll create and lead some kind of Eco-cult. Or the next Ralph Waldo Emerson.
And no offense to the religious, but I don't exactly think of organized religion as a "make your own rules" kind of thing (and I realize one can study religion without being religious).
I read this whole thread because, well, we didn't have cable all weekend but did have wifi so it was a source of entertainment.
I'm really disappointed that there was so much mocking of lurkingaw instead of simply debating her position on various topics.
It is true that there was some dishing back, but honestly the personal ridicule directed at her lasted for several pages before she fought back in kind.
I read this whole thread because, well, we didn't have cable all weekend but did have wifi so it was a source of entertainment.
I'm really disappointed that there was so much mocking of lurkingaw instead of simply debating her position on various topics.
It is true that there was some dishing back, but honestly the personal ridicule directed at her lasted for several pages before she fought back in kind.
I wouldn't expect much more than that from you, toledo.
But I do hold a lot of the others here to a higher standard.
How can we continue to learn and grow from each other if we attack others with different opinions rather than just attacking their opinions? We can and should be better than that.
Post by downtoearth on Aug 31, 2015 11:02:46 GMT -5
Michelle - I don't think everyone came out swinging, but lurkingaw came out saying she wasn't even going to read the article b/c she "got the gist" and b/c "the government" can't tell her how to teach or even glance into her or other homeschooling people's homes. Also that she's sorry, not sorry, that some kids are abused, but she's not for more oversight on homeschooling to prevent these cases and that a lurking neighbor should call CPS if they see issues inside a homeschooler's home(See below and the first page of this). I think her immediate dismissal that the state or feds should have any interest in the health/well being and education of kids was what started the thread off to quick attack.
Only read the first part because I think I get the gist of the rest.
As a homeschooling parent, I am fortunate to live in a state that gives me options. The idea that the government has any say in how I choose to educate my children is contrary to my religious and political views. I am a proud HSLDA member and will fight for these rights if I have to. My children are not the property of the State and therefore it is none of their business how my children score on a test nor is it their right to "approve" my curricula or monitor what goes on in our home. I am thankful that my state allows me to opt out of that.
Do I care about the children that fall through the cracks? Absolutely. Do I think that limiting the freedom of law-abiding citizens is the solution? Absolutely not. I am glad I have HSLDA to fight on my behalf. It's a slippery slope and I'm not willing to go there for the sake of my children.
Her next post just two down says that she feels that knowing her own kids means that she is MORE vested and a better teacher than a career teacher in any public school, but she was clear that she uses the internet and other career teachers for resources. Plus, she did retract that a little later saying that "good teachers" were out there and they might be better equipped, but that she was still more well equipped than the rest.
AW is not and never will be worthy of engaging in a debate. She has no interest in facts or reality, and is so absorbed with her own homeschooling goals and her own fear/paranoia/rights with regards to oversight that she can't even understand why oversight is important for children and why the state should care.
She's a gross excuse for a person and I wish she'd just leave us for good because she adds nothing of value, unless you consider this entertaining. I suppose she might have some entertainment value.
I wouldn't expect much more than that from you, toledo.
But I do hold a lot of the others here to a higher standard.
How can we continue to learn and grow from each other if we attack others with different opinions rather than just attacking their opinions? We can and should be better than that.
One of aw's opinions is that climate change isn't happening. That there's no reason to conserve/reduce/recycle because God will provide. I'm fairly certain I don't need to learn from that opinion. I'm pretty damn sure I know what she's teaching her kids, just on that viewpoint. She's also said that they hang a paddle on the wall at their home which they use on their children, and that she's blanket trained her kids. Again, previous knowledge that gives us ALL a good perspective on AW that we don't really need to learn from.
Then again, I didn't engage in the thread, sooo....
Michelle - I don't think everyone came out swinging, but lurkingaw came out saying she wasn't even going to read the article b/c she "got the gist" and b/c "the government" can't tell her how to teach or even glance into her or other homeschooling people's homes. Also that she's sorry, not sorry, that some kids are abused, but she's not for more oversight on homeschooling to prevent these cases and that a lurking neighbor should call CPS if they see issues inside a homeschooler's home(See below and the first page of this). I think her immediate dismissal that the state or feds should have any interest in the health/well being and education of kids was what started the thread off to quick attack.
Only read the first part because I think I get the gist of the rest.
As a homeschooling parent, I am fortunate to live in a state that gives me options. The idea that the government has any say in how I choose to educate my children is contrary to my religious and political views. I am a proud HSLDA member and will fight for these rights if I have to. My children are not the property of the State and therefore it is none of their business how my children score on a test nor is it their right to "approve" my curricula or monitor what goes on in our home. I am thankful that my state allows me to opt out of that.
Do I care about the children that fall through the cracks? Absolutely. Do I think that limiting the freedom of law-abiding citizens is the solution? Absolutely not. I am glad I have HSLDA to fight on my behalf. It's a slippery slope and I'm not willing to go there for the sake of my children.
Her next post just two down says that she feels that knowing her own kids means that she is MORE vested and a better teacher than a career teacher in any public school, but she was clear that she uses the internet and other career teachers for resources. Plus, she did retract that a little later saying that "good teachers" were out there and they might be better equipped, but that she was still more well equipped than the rest.
[
Just want to clarify that I said I am the best teacher for MY own children. I am not saying I better than teachers at what they do. If you read what I wrote I clearly said I am not qualified to nor could I teach a room full of other people's kids. I simply said that I know MY child and what they need better than anyone else.
And yes, homeschool parents will use whatever resources necessary to teach their children. We aren't pretending to do brick and mortar school at home. We aren't pretending to be chemistry teachers saying we think we know as much as them and can teach our kids chemistry at home just like in the public schools. Homeschoolers believe in a different MODEL of education. We are facilitators for our children. If we can't teach the material it is our job to seek out other options for our kids. If that means outsourcing the chemistry, then we do it. It's all about giving what we feel is the best education for OUR children.
I get why people are defensive. I run across it in real life all the time. Teachers think that our choice to homeschool implies that we think we are or know better than them. Parents who don't honeschool think our choice implies that we think their choice is wrong. I don't really care what people choose to do with their kids. My choices only deals with MY family. I'm sick of people projecting things on us. Every homeschooler deals with this. The rude things people say to us, that we are unqualified and bad parents. They will say it to our faces. It's no wonder homeschoolers get just as defensive.
All of that is to say that I understand the defensiveness in this thread on both sides.
AW, serious question - Do you really believe that you are doing the best for you children and providing them enough viewpoints to make their own decisions? Every time you come here you are introduced to new concepts that open your eyes. Every.single.time. Yet you go away and come back more firmly cemented in your singular views that it's... frightening.
You are very isolated by your own choice. You exist in an echo chamber of your own making. I mean, your own church isn't conservative enough for you. You make your own rules for following God.
pixy0stix i'm not sure where the climate change stuff is coming from. I started a recycling program in my community when there wasn't one. I buy used becayse it is better for the eart. I compost and limit chemical use and buy organic because it helps the environment. I am a better steward of the earth than the majority of the climate change believers I know. One can believe that it is in God's hands yet still feel compelled to take care if His Creation.
I don't have the energy to respond to all of the hateful remarks. All I have to say is that I generally try to be respectful to people I disagree with, even when their opinions are blatantly disrespectful and offensive to me. I think that some people are blinded by their preconcieved ideas and stereotypes of people "like me" and therefore aren't even willing to listen. From most people I wouldn't think twice about it. It's par for the course when your lifestyle and opinions are usually in the minority. But when this kind of behavior comes from people who pat themselves on their backs for being so open to understanding and learning and embracing differences, I just don't get it. Or maybe I do - people want to be open to the differences that are popular to be open to. They don't want to be seen as racist or homophobic or whatever other label they fear. But when the person they disagree with is just one of those "religious fundamentalists" all rules they have for openness and understanding get chucked put the window. It's OK to hate someone like THAT.
Just calling it like I see it, as other posters have been willing to do while analyzing me. I will say that it is encouraging to see that there are a handful of posters on this board who see through the hypocrisy.
Now, feel free to let the insults fly. It's what you ladies are best at.
Oh, I've learned from Ofadam. I've learned that it's fucking scary that there's no oversight of homeschool, that it's no biggie to skip history and that paddling a child is totes ok.
pixy0stix i'm not sure where the climate change stuff is coming from. I started a recycling program in my community when there wasn't one. I buy used becayse it is better for the eart. I compost and limit chemical use and buy organic because it helps the environment. I am a better steward of the earth than the majority of the climate change believers I know. One can believe that it is in God's hands yet still feel compelled to take care if His Creation.
And yet you still buy whole cows to feed your family a very red meat rich diet. You end up conveniently glossing over the items that you don't want to change and cloaking it in your faith.
But whatever. I see you're still on your cross. Make sure to wax it so you don't get splinters.
But when the person they disagree with is just one of those "religious fundamentalists" all rules they have for openness and understanding get chucked put the window. It's OK to hate someone like THAT.
If you are unable to recognize the horrific atrocities perpetrated by religious fundamentalists of your ilk, then I don't even know how to talk to you. If you cannot possibly see what's going on IN YOUR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY, then how can we have a civil discussion about one of your religious choices?