Home School

I do think yer experience was anomalous, Boss, and i consider that you were very lucky indeed . . .

I really can't be convinced that there is some sort of special value in socialization provided in the modern public school system. To me, these institutions are mills which manufacture ill-educated, ill-informed voters, who will be ripe for media manipulation]
What's the reason that in your opinion the 'modern public school system'
is failing?

As i mentioned in another thread, political rectitude has insisted upon warping interpretations of what ought to constitute the educational experience. What were formally known as "the great books" have been rejected out of hand as the productions of dead white european (thanks fer the redundancy) males, and i believe this has diluted the quality of reading and critical skills. Additionally, there was movement in the late 1960's to end the in loco parentis status of universities, and a great deal of latitude was introduced into the elective choices of students. As is so often the case in human affairs, this trend was carried too far, and also infected secondary, and eventually even primary schools. It has been noted in this thread that the habit of "social promotion" also grew up at about this time--sending the child on to the next grade without that child having mastered the subjects at that level.

I have always believed that public education in our country deteriorated in the post-civil war era into a means of providing voters sufficiently literate to read the yellow press, while not possessing sufficient skills to make informed judgments about their political and social choices. In the period before the second world war, it was by no means certain that a child in elementary school would attend secondary schools, often considered preparatory schools for university--when i was child, it was still common for Latin to be taught in high schools, and that this did not fulfill the foreign language requirement. Many schools today have no foreign language requirement, and Latin is now truly dead. It seems now that secondary schools just manage, or, as often as not, fail--to provide that standard of education which was once inculcated in primary schools. This is not necessarily the fault of the staff, who find themselves increasingly in the role of babysitter to the children of uninterested parents. Ironically, i think more is now expected of students than was the case in the 1970's & -80's, so i may well alter my judgment in years to come.

setanta, I don't know where you are from, but you seem to have a stereotypical view of public schools. Sozobe is from Minnesota and I am from Iowa, two states that have consistently lead the nation in all measures of public education. I must confess that I am a product of parochial education, but I was a public school teacher for a short time. My two boys attended public school. I believe in public education. I think it is what makes this country great. We attempt to educate everyone. Granted we are not always successful, but everyone in this country has the opportunity to learn. That said, I also believe that we are asking too much of our schools. Schools are now daycare centers and for many kids, the only place where they get a hot meal.

But the subject is home schooling. I don't have anything against the concept of home schooling as long as the parent is qualified and allows the kids to be exposed to people who have different views than their own. Around here, many parents home school for religious reasons. I worry that they may be insulating their children from the world.

My experience, my worry.

BTW Setanta, how can you be dictator if I'm dictator? he he

Swimpy, i've read in more than one source in the last few years that Iowa has the highest literacy rate in the nation, and, although this is subjective judgment call, that they have the best public school system in the country. What i referred to was the trend in public school education after the american civil war to provide the minimum necessary to produce a literate student, and then rely upon secondary education to produce those fit to attend university. Immigration took a big up-swing just before the civil war, and continued to grow during and after. Many of those making the decisions in public education funding had no inclination to fund primary schools for those whom they despised. Thomas Nast, who is celebrated in our country for his political cartoons attacking the Tweed political machine in New York, is not as well known for his vicious attacks on catholics and catholic schools and orphanages. He, and many others in this country, saw catholic immigration and jewish immigration as a direct assault on the "protestant" values which "had made our nation great." There was a definite shift in emphasis to making secondary education the "magnet" school system for those who had received a good supplemental education at home, and leave the rest of the population behind at the primary level. This back-fired, since catholic and jewish immigrants were just as likely to read and study at home with their children as were the "true american" protestants, but there was a lingering effect of giving "the three r's" to everyone, and making secondary education an elitist option.

The extent to which other factors, such as racism and civic pride, have modified this are significant--but you can't address a subject with such range, and so vague a title as "public education" without dealing in generalities.

I acknowledge that the origins of the public school system in this country are far from exemplar. If Iowa and Minnesota and several other states can produce well-educated students, there is hope that a solution exists for places where the schllo systems are struggling. That was my reason for bringing them up.

This may be true. However, is it really dilution if great books includes authors that are not white, male or dead?


This is still happening. Where else but public schools are we going to help immigrant children assimilate?

."I don't have anything against the concept of home schooling as long as the parent is qualified and allows the kids to be exposed to people who have different views than their own. "

Absolutely.
Just the second part seems very difficult.

setanta,
I have no insight in the American public school system, but I really can't believe that it is all that bad.
What I notice here is that people start to ask more from schools than schools can give. First a sound education, second social skills, like being able working in teams, personality, and being as soon as possible ready for the job market. Also parents seem to export their responsibility to schools.
Times have changed- and so schools have to change too.
I don't think that homeschooling can be the solution.
So ' uninterested parents' send their children to public schools- the others to private schools or do homeschooling. Doesn't that mean that there will be soon a two class society?
Children are the future of every society- they all should get a good start. That means improving the school system.

Swimpy, i guess i'm objecting to those who are "throwing the baby out with the bath water." Rather than reject the "western canon" out of hand, i think it shoul simply be expanded. When i entered university, i was given a list of 200 books i would be expected to have read by the time of my graduation (bachelor of arts program)--and i'd already read everything on the list, many of them more than once. I don't think it unreasonable to expand the list of "great books" to include the Gilgamesh Epic, the Egyptian and Tibetan Books of the Dead, Lao-Tse, Sun Tsu, Confucian tracts, Veddas, Rubiyats--nor am i by any means holding out for male authors, the "western canon" does and should include women. Make it no longer the western canon, but the human canon--expect more, not less of university students.

I agree Ul. And i believe that home schooling can be good for the child and the parent as well. I personally feel the best thing about humans is the range of possibilities, and reject any restriction thereof.

I'll continue to vote for public education for all. I will also continue to be involved in campaigns against public funding for any other form of education. I believe it's the only decent chance for a level playing field for children growing up these days.

I think we agree on not throwing the baby out with the bathwater, Setanta.

ehBeth, Here here. <cute antlers, BTW>

Just so, ehBeth.

I think we all are for lack of restrictions. I don't see how it has to be an either/or proposition. I plan to "homeschool" my child in most practical ways, in her (substantial) time at home -- have been since she was born. I think that's a good thing, and happy that I have the chance to be a full-time mom. I'm sad that not all have that chance, sad that some have that chance and blow it, sad that not all kids have optimal educational opportunities, and would like to do whatever I can to make sure they do.

sozobe: So what will you do when your lessons are diametrically opposite of what the lil darlin' is getting at the old PS?

People, we need to stop waxing nostalgic about "our public school education" and realize that it is light years away from what is presently available.

There is a reason (and it isn't religious zealotry) home schooling is growing by leaps and bounds.

There is a vacuum in the educational system in this country and parents are merely filling that very obvious void.

Yeah but let's fill the void THERE. Let's make public schools BETTER.

I don't think much will be diametrically opposed. I believe in evolution, I believe 2 + 2 = 4. As her first and primary teacher, with her dad, I'm not too worried about the more subjective stuff.

EDIT -- I don't think that the public schools will necessarily be great, and I do worry about that. But my focus will be on doing what I can to improve the school rather than just hightailing it out of there.

sozobe: I understand your optimism. But to many parents it is nothing more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic where public schools are concerned.

I agree with Setanta, the dumbing down of the curriculum to appeal to the lowest common denominator, the emphasis on self esteem, etc. has combined to make a heady cocktail that many parents will not consume on the behalf of their children.

If your school is one of the salvageable ones then consider yourself fortunate, but the realization that these are in the minority is no longer the spin of the private school admissions office, it is cold hard fact.

I do hope no one thinks what i say is an assault on public schooling. I have noted that standards are changing, and i hope for the better, and that i may very well change my opinion in the future. When you consider what public schools have been through in the last fifty years--the implementation of a requirement for secondary education in all fifty states, desegregation (or an attempt at it), the "trickle-down" effects of radical changes in higher educational choices, the introduction of radical changes in curriculum, the sex-education embroglio--it's amazing that teachers are able to cope. Obviously, public education is essential, and the fact of such a debate as ours is evidence that this is a public institution of the first significance for all of us.

I was attempting to respond to a question about home schooling, and then responding to what i considered to be fallacious--the assumption that children can only be "socialized" in the public school milieu. I heartily endorse the best support of public education which we can, as responsible citizens, give to our local institutions. I have contributed to political campaigns for school-bond referenda (these canvassing efforts can by law only be supported by private donation), and would do more had i the money and time. No one has here noted the crucial and vexed issue of funding; but, then, this was originally a question about home schooling. I also want to take issue with the remarks made about religious "indoctrination." It is unjust to assume that religious teaching in the home, or even in a private school, is at base harmful, or constitutes indoctrination. It presumes a danger in religious instruction, and it presumes an inability on the part of the child to make a reasonable judgment with age and maturity. I'm no supporter of organized religion; i've written elsewhere at this board that i consider it one of the greatest disasters in human history. I am an atheist--i.e., without god--for the simple reason that there are no gods nor goddesses. I am also the proud citizen of a pluralistic republic, and will always be willing to defend the right of any other citizen of this republic to personal religious expression--just as readily as i will fight tooth and nail against any person's attempt to foist religious belief onto others.

Coming in late here (as usual). Both of my kids are highly gifted. My son and daughter both test off the charts in virtually all subjects. He started reading at 18 months of age. I would have never have attempted to home school either of them because 1) I don't feel qualified, and 2) students like this need desperately to be around other kids who are like themselves. A lot of these kids are way too advanced intellectually to relate to kids in their own grade or age group and find it more comfortable to hang with adults. If this isn't addressed, it can cause problems.

Because of this, the public schools in this area have special self-contained classrooms for the highly gifted students. The teachers in these classes have been specially trained in ways to keep these students challenged as well as teaching them socialization skills. If these kids were home schooled, I think a lot of them would be forever lost in books and studies, never enjoying the normal things that kids do together. They need a balance in their lives, and without it I feel that they'd really miss out on a lot.

There was a family that lived very near us who had five kids and the mom was home schooling the older ones. This, I believe, was done because of religious beliefs. Her kids were polite, but always seemed to be missing out on things that the other kids in the neighborhood were doing and learning. I always wondered how she found the time to teach her kids all she needed to because the two youngest kids were still in diapers.

I know there are success stories re home schooling, but I really believe that if you're going to do it, you need to consider whether or not you'll have the time and dedication needed, and you need to consider whether or not you'll have access to all of the outside support you'll need, including other home schooling families, well stocked libraries and universities.

I am homeschooled. I have been homeschooled my whole life, by my mom.
I do have a social life, a very active one. I am a part of a homeschool community and there are atleat 60 teens in the group, so I have alot of friends.
I have learned just as much for my age group as any kid that goes to school, the main difference is that I can go at my own pace. and make sure I understand everyhitng before I am pushed into the next chapter of the teachings. Also, I am horrible at math and science but good at english and art. So I am able to play to my strengths (ex: learning 2 languages and having many art classes and spending most of my time on that, and going slowly on math and science to make sure i grasp the concepts)... my mom is perfectly capable for teaching me, she has the right materials, knows her stuff and if she is bad at a subject and can't xplain something I can call another homeschooling mom who is good at that subject and ask her.
also, going to school you have more pressures, from peers and teachers, u get up at 6 and get home at 3... dont see your family as much, have alot of unneeded teen drama... get either low self esteem because of grades or believe everyhitng you're taught and never judge anyhting for yourself.
school doesn't teach us to create masterpieces it teaches us to conform.
also, when you go to school you mostly hangout with your age group... and you are stereotyped more.
when you are homeschooled, you don't have as many kids in your grade so you hangout with people 2 years older and younger then you, also. and it gives you more respect and understanding for different ways of thinking because of different levels of ages.

i could go on but my fingers hurt... so i'll be back later


btw, i am fourteen and i live in ohio and i have been going to school for two periods this year, just to see what its like.. because i have never been before! i am taking honors english and french

innie - that's cool - thanks for sharing! what do you think about the school env. ?

husker, from what i have experienced of school... it is really lonely. the kids with friends gang up on the kids without friends, and the teachers are out of touch with what it means to stop talking because your embaressing someone.
of course, it has it's good parts... you can have some great group discussions about books, and if you have friends you get to see them everyday.
also, i noticed alot of the kids are insensitive when it comes to other people's things. for example, some of the kids in the lunchroom took their friend's homework and ripped it up, just laughs. and i watched a girl walk up to her classmate and grab the classmate's books and throw them all over the floor. i was suprised to see everyone act like it never happened.

i wanted to go to school so i could have a locker, ride the bus, sit in a desk and do homework. i had read about all these things but never experienced them...

my grades really pull dow my self esteem, too. with my homeschool friends there was never any competition to see who could do the best or what everyone's grades were. no one cared because we were all at different levels and none of us had the same tests or teachers.
with school, i never feel like i'm good enough. i broke down when i got a 97% on a test... like no matter how well you do someone else is always better, and it matters.

i have alot of passions that don't invlolve school... like writing small novels (but not nessasarily novellas), writing poetry and researching information about psychology...

if i went to school full time i wouldn't have as much time or energy to pursue the things that mattered the most to me... whereas with homeschool i can make my passions part of my school and grow from it.