Yesterday’s post on homeschooling turned into a fairly heated debate, with one of our readers (who I shall not name lest I incur her wrath) managing to insult McDonald’s employees, homeschoolers, and brgulker. So I thought this video might be fitting:
Somewhere in the range of 75% of American children that are home schooled are Evangelical Christians. That stat should tell you all you need to know about what, and how well, they are being taught.* You say home schooled, I say sheltered from reality.
* in most cases
shroodur, you need to broaden your horizons about what it means to be an Evangelical Christian.
This is a good place to start: http://www.amazon.com/Christian-America-What-Evangelicals-Really/dp/0520234707/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1252726089&sr=8-1
Somewhere in the range of 75% of American children that are home schooled are Evangelical Christians.
That’s the number given in “Jesus Camp.” But Robert Kunzman points out that we really don’t have good surveys of the movement yet. A lot of doubtful numbers come out of organizations like the Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA), which is right-wing even by evangelical standards.
I can’t pretend to know how I would have turned out if I had gone to public school. For all I know, I would have been even more of an ignorant sheep than I was when I was homeschooled (my mother actually did encourage independent thinking, except where the Bible was concerned).
But my parents did a crappy job homeschooling me. They bought me some school books and basically just turned me loose, expecting me to magically sprout the self-discipline required to get a decent amount of schooling. Well, having never actually BEEN to school to learn about things like assignments and deadlines, you can imagine how well that went. (Or, in case you can’t: I have very little self-discipline. I woke up two and a half hours ago, and while I could have fixed breakfast and started cleaning the kitchen, I’ve spent the entire time sitting at the computer reading blogs.) I have to struggle to haul my lazy rear end into action at any time; procrastination has become an art form.
Hey, is it possible that we are the same person?
Given that I can’t remember posting your response, and can’t think of a good reason to call myself “Ty,” I doubt it.
funny
“(Or, in case you can’t: I have very little self-discipline. I woke up two and a half hours ago, and while I could have fixed breakfast and started cleaning the kitchen, I’ve spent the entire time sitting at the computer reading blogs.) I have to struggle to haul my lazy rear end into action at any time; procrastination has become an art form.”
oddly describes me. And I went to school – lots of school. I’m pathetic… probably more so than you in that while you’re reading blogs I’m surfing porn.
As someone who was home-schooled (after being asked to leave from a private baptist school) and spending time in the cohorts built by home-schooling families to group teach certain classes, I find this song freaking hilarious.
That debate was retarded. Seriously, everyone involved was just being stupid there. And if you take offense to this, realize that I’M NOT ACTUALLY INSINUATING THAT YOU’RE MENTALLY INCAPABLE. You’re probably very smart. And pretty. Don’t sue please.
1. Home-Schooling CAN PUT YOU AT A DISADVANTAGE IF IMPROPERLY DONE. Clearly it wasn’t in your case br, so you’re experiences are irrelevant. No one ever said home schooling is always bad, just that when it is bad it makes people dumb. It probably should have been made a little clearer that nothing said was to be applied to every single circumstance.
2. McDonald’s is generally a pretty terrible place to work and is generally associated with stupid people. If you’ve graduated from college, or even from high school, and don’t have the credentials to get serious employment anywere else, chances are you’re going to be unsuccessful. Any jab taken at McDonald’s is totally fair game. Come on people, it’s a joke.
3. br, come up with better jokes about atheists. Here’s one you could have used.
What do you ask an atheist with a job?
How’s the pyramid scheme coming?
See? You’re insinuating that atheists are immoral while still being witty and subtle. The key to good puns is always being subtle.
Feel free to debate me about any of the above.
Aww, I used the wrong “Your.” Now I feel home-schooled…
;)
“McDonald’s is generally a pretty terrible place to work and is generally associated with stupid people.”
It’s true. I worked there a year during high school, and I’m as dumb as a sack of hammers.
It did pay for my car and a trip to Hawaii though.
But what if those hammers were wielded by dromedaries? What then?
Sounds trippy, man…
Thank you, mahousniper.
You know I’m just picking on you, right? ;)
Yes. :P Still feels good to get some back up tho.
@LRA – *I* knew what you meant. :-)
@Jabster – I totally cracked up at your: “Nope it’s definitely *spelt* humour. If you invent the language, you get to decide what’s right and wrong regardless of what some of the more uppity colonies think”
Thank you both for very entertaining reading last night.
Glad to have provided some amusement in such a tense debate …
The really big question is, will LRA ever be allowed to visit McDonald’s again. Is it truly possible to lead a full life know that you’ll never be able to have another Filet-O-Fish, to never again have the chance to say “no, if I wanted fries I would have said may I have a Big Mac and fries; on the grounds that I actually said just may I have a Big Mac then no I don’t want fries and before you ask I don’t want a drink either.”
I generally don’t eat at McD’s. We have Whataburger here and that is the BOMB!
Can’t say I go to hamburger places (or any fast food restaurants) very often at all. if we do have hamburgers I prefer to make them myself.
My favorite “burger” recipe… take ground lamb and mix in Montrachet and mint (and some green onion if you like that). YUM!
(fresh mint)
Fresh mint – goes with out saying and I’d chuck some lemon or lime zest in there instead of the montrachet!
Thanks!
Well, now that i think of it, religion is nothing more than a pyramid scheme…
Some have pyramids, some have cathedrals, some have mosques.
Some have a house at R’lyeh.
Some have stripper factories.
Cthulu eats stripper factories.
1. Home-Schooling CAN PUT YOU AT A DISADVANTAGE IF IMPROPERLY DONE. Clearly it wasn’t in your case br, so you’re experiences are irrelevant. No one ever said home schooling is always bad, just that when it is bad it makes people dumb. It probably should have been made a little clearer that nothing said was to be applied to every single circumstance.
Of course! I never disputed those facts. Public schools, private schools, charter schools, homeschooling — all of the above can put students at a disadvantage IF IMPROPERLY DONE. I merely took exception to two things:
1) That Jesus Camp defines homeschooling.
2) The McD’s (what I perceived to be) insult.
Nothing more, nothing less.
3. br, come up with better jokes about atheists. Here’s one you could have used.
What do you ask an atheist with a job?
How’s the pyramid scheme coming?
Hopefully, it’s clear that I was being sarcastic. I have no ill-will toward atheists (well, I don’t like a few of the commenters here much, and there’s a guy I know that I’d like to kick in the shins…). Hopefully, that comes across in my posts here.
But yeah, that’s a much wittier insult :)
Oh, I did also dispute the idea that having a comprehensive knowledge of science is necessary in order to be competitive in the job market. I’m glad I know about science, but my professional life would not be impacted in the slightest if I didn’t understand biology, chemistry, etc.
Lest I be misunderstood, I’m not saying science isn’t important, just that I don’t think it’s vital in order for one to be competitive economically.
I think it’s more vital politically. That is, as a voter, you should understand science, in order to be able to decide who should get your vote, as part of a larger need for informed voters in all areas. The fact that a lot of voters don’t know a lot about some subjects is a big problem for establishing a working democracy.
I don’t disagree, wazza. I think understanding science is important.
Well, that wasn’t the full extent of what I was saying, but I don’t want to argue here. :P
Well, one of the members of the Texas board of education was a creationist college dropout who home-schooled his kids, and a former Alaskan governor and vice-presidential nominee thought Africa was a country. So I’m not sure if you need to be qualified in anything to get a good job these days.
That’s what scares me, and that’s why I’m fighting. Ignorance is not acceptable when it comes to policy making.
Awww, we love our LRA.
:)
What a load of crap. I can’t stand it when ditto headed public schooled people attempt to discuss and judge the home schooled – something they know nothing about.
I was home schooled and am naturally autodidactic. I got a brilliant education that public school could and would have never given me.
Don’t judge things you know nothing about.
Don’t judge things you know nothing about.
You don’t know how much they know. You just assume you do because you don’t like their conclusions. Which leads to the larger point, which is…
It is necessary at many points in life to judge things you know nothing (or nearly nothing) about. It is necessary to make unfair, and in all probability inaccurate, generalizations. It is necessary to assume what is not in evidence.
And the crown jewel of hilarity is “I got a brilliant education that public school could and would have never given me. Which indicates only that you clearly know next-to-nothing about public school.
I went to public school. Then I got a full scholarship to Texas A&M. Then I went to Columbia. Beat that, Laurel.
I was home schooled. I was offered a full scholarship at A&M. I turned it down to go to the school I’m now going to (also full scholarship.) While I’m not at Columbia now, I am currently applying there.
…
Some of the above is true, and some of it is a lie. Hee hee hee…
*hugs*
I was offered full scholarships to other schools, but because I was 17 when I started college, I wanted to stay close to Houston, where my mother lives. In retrospect, I could have gone somewhere better, but I had my reasons.
Some of us have done both. That being the case, I feel I am justified at making observations of both sides…
I was public schooled, but my sister was home schooled. I feel like I have a valid opinion on both choices.
Today, Unreasonable Faith. Tomorrow, the world!
Another atheist homeschooler checking in.
It’s true, homeschooling has a bad reputation. But one only has to look around to see why. I know too many fundie homeschoolers with some very sweet kids who are also as dumb as a box of rocks. I also know a few fundie homeschoolers who learn the science, can accurately repeat it to you and will finish with, “But it’s only a theory.”
Having said that, I also know some that are not bible-thumpers, simply well-meaning parents who end up dropping the ball. Their intentions are to give their child what they feel would be the better option and simply become overwhelmed by the task. A couple years go by with the kid playing video games every day, then it’s back to public school, a couple years behind. These are the homeschoolers the majority of public school employees are exposed to. The others, that slam-dunk an amazing education at home and go straight to college from there, are never seen by the public school eye and are basically an ‘unknown.’
Religion based homeschoolers are the majority, thus they drive the formation of the state laws on homeschooling and they work to have as little intervention as possible. This does distress me. I believe there should be strict testing laws in every state. (some do – some don’t) Having your child tested for basic literacy concepts based on grade levels should not be a problem with any homeschool parent if they are actually doing their job.
I’d also like to address the idea that a parent is incapable of teaching their own child. This argument is really a contradiction of itself. Some insinuate that only a public school or certified teacher is capable of teaching properly. If a parent has graduated from a public school, like I have, then why would that parent not be able to teach what they were taught so well? I received a diploma, so I must have learned the information taught me. Then I would be perfectly capable of teaching it to someone else. If, however, I’m not educated well enough to teach the information to another, then the public school has failed to perform its task and thus is not a viable option for teaching children.
I’d also like to address the idea that Science knowledge is not important to an ‘average’ functioning citizen. This is quite inaccurate. We live in a country that is supposed to be for the people, by the people. And yet, in our highly technologically driven country, the majority of its citizens are too ignorant of the science to make educated decisions.
Whether it’s a discussion on health issues with their doctor, understanding what the mechanic says is wrong with your car, personal day-to-day choices for the better of the planet on up to political decisions that could affect all of the above. When the citizens are uninformed, the politicians run the country. That’s not the way it’s supposed to be.
Like Al Franken said in the video posted, “I’m going to vote the way I want to vote.” The woman looked taken aback and rightly she should, after all, he is their representative. But, unfortunately, he can’t go on their emotions and lack of facts to do his job. He has to do what he thinks is best for the people who can’t understand the situation well enough on their own. The politician is making the calls.
Alas, this is longer than I intended, sorry everyone. Love the blog, loved the jokes (especially the pyramid scheme one!) and cracked up at the homeschool video. Ignorance really is the root of all evil and ignorance is trying to take over this country. We must all stand together to fight it, not each other.
I’d also like to address the idea that Science knowledge is not important to an ‘average’ functioning citizen. This is quite inaccurate. We live in a country that is supposed to be for the people, by the people. And yet, in our highly technologically driven country, the majority of its citizens are too ignorant of the science to make educated decisions.
Most policy issues have very little to do with technical understanding of technology.
If you were here in the UK you could have added “regardless of whether technology was involved”.
You studied classics at Oxford so of course you’re make a good science minister and another thing, that internet thing you mentioned; have you got one in the office that I can have a play with? Right then lets just sort out that NHS IT budget and then it’s off to the Garrick for a couple of snifters with squidy, strangely brown and the goose worrier …
I remember an anecdote about the House of Lords from that epic barnburner, The Most Beautiful Molecule: The Discovery of the Buckyball, wherein the science minister was trying to relate how another allotrope of carbon had just been discovered, where one of the lords of the chamber asked the obvious question, “but, my Lords, what does it do?”.
Of course, at the time, there was no answer…
It doesn’t do anything. That’s the beauty of it.
Yes, but if you created a tiny molecular soccer player, it could kick it around!!!
I’d also like to address the idea that a parent is incapable of teaching their own child. This argument is really a contradiction of itself. Some insinuate that only a public school or certified teacher is capable of teaching properly. If a parent has graduated from a public school, like I have, then why would that parent not be able to teach what they were taught so well? I received a diploma, so I must have learned the information taught me. Then I would be perfectly capable of teaching it to someone else. If, however, I’m not educated well enough to teach the information to another, then the public school has failed to perform its task and thus is not a viable option for teaching children.
That’s a good argument. I’m stealing it.
That’s a terrible argument. As a certified teacher (and a special education teacher) tell me what you’d do to accommodate a child with ADD? What are the best practices to teach math versus reading?
Don’t know? Well, I guess you not an educator.
This is why teachers get paid such crappy money. Everyone thinks they can do it. I guess we teachers only need a high school diploma to teach… and yet, we’re required a college education and certification. Why is that?
I mean, seriously. Just because you’ve had dental work doesn’t make you a frakking dentist. Just because you’ve done you taxes doesn’t make you an accountant.
LRA,
Look, you’ve made your point. Homeschooling can be done badly, and it can hurt children. No one disagrees about that. And you do great work in your career; my sister-in-law is also a certified teacher for special needs children. I applaud you for that.
But you are refusing to listen to all the personal testimonials from atheists and Christians alike that directly contradict your claim — that people who aren’t certified teachers aren’t qualified to teach their own children. You are also completely ignoring what has been said about state laws that regulate homeschooling — in my state, our work had to be reviewed monthly by a certified teacher, and we had to have interviews with that same certified teacher (every quarter, iirc).
Had any of me or my siblings had ADHD, my parents would have sought additional professional help. Arguing from the exception to prove the rule ain’t gonna cut it, LRA.
As I see your argument, it basically boils down to you wanting to take the rights of parents away from them because they don’t live up to your personal standard of what qualifies one to teach. In our country, parents are given the legal right to take responsibility for their children’s education; I, for one, am thankful for that right, because my parents did a far better job than any of the schools in our district could have done. Had I been in public school and taught by certified teachers, there’s a good chance I would have been much worse off — because our school district was hemorrhaging money, losing teachers, classroom sizes ballooning, etc., etc.
I’m incredibly grateful that you aren’t writing our country’s laws about education with respect to homeschooling; if you were, I may never have gone to college — the only reason I could afford it was because I had a huge academic scholarship based on my grades and ACT performance. Both of those would have suffered mightily had I been in public school all my life (in my district).
Homeschooling should absolutely be regulated to ensure that children arne’t put at a disadvantage, but the right that parents have — even parents without teaching degrees/certificates — to take responsibility for their children’s education should absolutely not be taken away from them.
I mean, seriously. Just because you’ve had dental work doesn’t make you a frakking dentist. Just because you’ve done you taxes doesn’t make you an accountant.
At the dentist, you’re not taught dentistry; you have your teeth cleaned. In school, you don’t get math/science/literature performed on you; you learn those skills for yourself (or at least that’s the idea, right?). And again, we’re back to the point of homeschool regulations — my mother had to demonstrate that we were in fact learning, which we were, and she demonstrated it to the satisfaction of a certified teacher such as yourself. It’s not just stupid old mom and her kids at the kitchen as you’re making it out to be, or at least not in states that do a good job of regulating things.
I’m happy to hear it’s regulated. And my argument about best practice and learning differences is perfectly valid because that is the work I do. As I’ve said repeatedly (and Daniel pointed out below) there is a spectrum of abilities for kids. You are intelligent and did well in homeschool. I am intelligent and did well in public school. Great. I’ve already stated my reasons for objecting to unqualified parents teaching false stuff to their kids and there is no need to go over it again.
On the one hand, you’re acknowledging that people like my parents and JonJon’s parents did things well, and that’s great — right?
On the other hand, you’re arguing that parents who aren’t certified teachers shouldn’t be allowed to educate their children at home.
The problem is that those two things contradict themselves. My mom had a high school education, and nothing more. If your theory is correct — that ‘ignorant’ homeschooling parents produce ignorant kids — then why are there so many instances where that’s not the case (just in the comments here, no less!)?
Further, why not simply argue that homeschooling should be regulated — which seems to be a point of common ground among the various commenters here? Why jump to the extreme and argue that homeschooling should be done away with unless parents go become certified teachers?
I don’t know if your parents did well. They may have gotten lucky because you and JonJon are smart people. You may have done well wherever you were. However, I’m curious to know how your high-school only educated mom would have taught you the complexities of calculus? How about chemistry? How about Latin? French? Or did you largely teach yourself? What if you had had dyslexia? What would she have done then? Also, what did she teach you about biology? Geology? Paleontology? That Genesis is literal and the many fields that contradict it are false? Did she teach you that all of the founding fathers were Christians? Did she teach you false information?
The point is that I’m thinking about the larger picture here. As I see it, a regulated homeschool situation is a viable option, however, parents should also be tested in some way to demonstrate ability. It’s about standards, and I don’t think my standards are impossibly high, seeing as how regular teachers achieve those standards all the time.
Did she teach you false information?
I understand that you’re a teacher, so don’t take offense, but teachers generally (and some subjects are certainly worse about this than others) lie compulsively to their students, make lazy and unbelievably inaccurate generalizations, and distort to suit their opinions.
All the damn time.
I went to public school, one that was quite decent in many areas. I still had to unlearn or ignore pretty much every “factual” thing I was taught in high school to get anywhere at all in college.
There may be a little less room for this in the sciences than elsewhere, but generally speaking, teachers are not exactly pillars of veracity.
Well, that didn’t happen with my teachers. How does a French teacher or math teacher or science teacher teach false information when the facts are right there in black and white in the book? Perhaps English and history might be a little fuzzier, but still, the information is there. I don’t understand how that could have happened to you? What kinds of false info did they tell you?
History is by far the worst offender, and the textbooks actually do not reflect anything close to the consensus of the field, and lie by omission on some of the most significant events, even eliding them completely. Health classes are also serial violators, with bald factual lies about sex and intoxicants. Every physics and chemistry teacher that teaches using the Rutherford model ought to be slapped silly; it is a real disservice to students that ever want to learn more about the respective subjects.
I don’t understand how that could have happened to you?
Happen to me? It happens to pretty much everyone. Every person who thinks of an atom as a mini-solar system or thinks that World War I was a popular war is a victim and in all likelihood would never know it. The insidious thing is that teachers are set up (sociologically speaking) as fonts of knowledge, and so for the most part a student would not even think to question or think critically about what is being taught. When in many cases your first exposure to a concept is what you learn in class, would it occur to most people to question it?
Yes, but notice that health classes (sex ed in general) and history classes are continually attacked by fundies, as are biology classes. Do you keep up with what is going on in the Texas school board? This is one of the reasons I am so vocal about the integrity of information being passed down to kids. I don’t approve of neo-theocrats getting their paws on hard won knowledge so that they can distort it. That is why I don’t approve of neo-theocrats homeschooling their kids.
The sorts of distortions and lies I’m talking about are not generally the sort that are religiously motivated.
A lot of education is based on the lie-to-children model, so there’s that.
Then too, textbooks are frequently written by cut-n-paste from previous textbooks. Stephen J. Gould look at how science textbooks still sometimes use the analogy that eohippus was the size of a fox terrier – a breed of dog that is now extremely rare and most kids will never have seen.
Unfortunately, it looks to me like the services used by home-schoolers still make use of the standard textbooks – or something based on a standard textbook with an overlay of conservative Christianity. So if something is going to be done about the problem, it’s not going to come from that quater just yet.
btw. your personal testimonial is evidence from ancedote. How bout this evidence:
The acceptance rate at Harvard is 9.3%. They only take 2-3 homeschoolers a year… well below the acceptance rate.
I don’t want to continue this argument, but as a person who had taught literally hundreds of kids, I am concerned about the teaching of the population, not a few individuals.
btw. your personal testimonial is evidence from ancedote
So is yours, LRA. So is JonJon’s. So is the evidence offered by the homeschooling parents on this forum. And?
The acceptance rate at Harvard is 9.3%. They only take 2-3 homeschoolers a year… well below the acceptance rate.
So Harvard is biased against homeschoolers. Your point is …. ?
Is Harvard the only place to get a good education in this country? Is Harvard the standard by which we should hold every university in the entire country? Is Harvard the only place a homeschooler can learn the skills needed to be competitive in the job market?
I honestly have no idea what you think that ‘evidence’ proves.
My point is that if homeschooling is so superior, then why does the premiere college in the US have such low rates of acceptance for it? Yes, I suppose that kids can go to a state school (I did) and that is no problem, but I’d like to see more studies about how homeschooled kids actually do overall (I’ve looked these up before and there wasn’t much).
My point is that if homeschooling is so superior, then why does the premiere college in the US have such low rates of acceptance for it?
Whoa, whoa, whoa. I’ve never, ever argued that homeschooling is superior — all I’ve ever said is that homeschooling was far better for me than any of the alternatives would have been.
I don’t know of any studeis; I asked someone in the previous thread, but I think that question was interpreted as a rhetorical jab rather than an honest question. I don’t how much research has been done on homeschooling; I’d love to see any if it happens.
But again, anecdotally, educational institutions tend to be skeptical of homeschooled students. When I enrolled in public school in the 10th grade, I was placed into, for lack of a better term, the underachiever classes. My teachers were all made aware of who I was and how I had been taught up to that point — so they were literally keeping an extra eye on me.
I flourished, and by 2nd semester, I was in honors courses.
Obviously, that’s anecdotal — but I suspect that something analogous is happening in institutions of higher education, and I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to think that that’s a fairly safe assumption.
As an academically “gifted” homeschooled student who applied to Harvard and got a lovely form letter instead of an admissions notification, let me tell you my theory (all anecdotal of course).
I didn’t have a hell of a lot of extra-curricular activities on my resume. I really think that hurt my chances, although I was a National Merit scholar with half decent reference letters and pretty fair set of admissions essays. I also had a HS diploma from my nearby community college, and almost two years of coursework there (and in fact I had an associates degree when I graduated). No sports (not athletic) no debate, no deans list, etc. Also, it doesn’t help that I’m a white, Christian, middle class, suburban male.
(Also, lets not kid around, about 27,000 of the best students in the country applied the year I did, and they admit somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,000-1,200 students. I might be bright, but I’m not that bright…)
Yes, Harvard is the premiere institution in the country, with bundles of prestige, but it didn’t get that way by gambling with its admissions process. Less ‘well-established’ schools, especially those who aim at climbing the ranks of nationally recognized colleges, are much more inclined to admit homeschoolers.
Does a parent need to get a psychology degree to give advice to their children now? Or a nursing degree to clean their wounds & give health advice?
We’re all pretty well educated here, and most of us are highly educated in areas where we don’t have degrees. For instance, I’m an expert in designing and programming websites and am very well paid to do so. People often come to me for advice, and I’ve taught many people how to better their skills. I will also teach my children how to do this.
But I don’t have a degree in graphic design or computer science or programming. Does that somehow disqualify me? My employers and clients haven’t thought so.
Honestly, if I decided to homeschool my kids, they’d get a hell of a lot better education than I got in my private/public education, which was horrible. I didn’t even know how to write a real essay until college!
Daniel, if you child had serious emotional problems, then I would expect you to put them in counseling and not do it yourself. If your child had a serious wound, you’d need a health professional to take care of that. Do you really think that most teaching is so easy that just anyone can do it? Sure, teaching naturally gifted, intellectually curious kids is a bit easier, but what about kids with learning differences or kids who come from parents that think that “book learnin’” is for losers?
I agree that kids with special problems need special help (and/or parents who are willing to learn how to help).
And how about the children of homeschooling neo-theocrats that want to create a sub-population of counter-culture kids that reject science whole-sale and weasel their way into politics in an attempt to deny us our Constitutional rights? What about those kids?
What about them? They have existed and will continue to exist, homeschooling or not.
And I will continue to fight them. Case in point: Cynthia Dunbar
http://blogs.chron.com/texaspolitics/archives/2008/12/state_education.html
And you should. I think the point is you’re focusing in on the wrong aspect of their identity. The problematic part is that they’re anti-science and trying to erode Chruch-State separation, not that they happen to have been home-schooled.
I disagree. Because the kids are homeschooled, they don’t get exposed to the better arguments for science and social studies that are currently held in the field. They are effectively sequestered by over controlling parents. I see that as a problem, especially when they grow up to become people who want to interfere in the passing on of good knowledge that occurs in mainstream culture. Now, if they just went off and did their own thing (like the Amish), I’d have nothing to say about it. However, I am still left with the concern that these kids may not be receiving a decent education in some cases, and if that happens in significant numbers, it is not good for society as a whole.
LRA, in the USA, children are born as children of their parents — not as children of the state. Parents have both the right and the responsibility to ensure that those children are educated.
The state offers public education, and the state requires that people who teach other peoples’ children must meet certain professional and educational requirements. Like markbey noted, I have a deep respect and appreciation for those who do that.
But children are not born as children of the state! The state’s control is and should be limited! Parents are not required to get college degrees to teach their own kids — because those children are their responsibility, not the state’s.
Whether intentionally or not, you want to strip parents of that right — that is the foundation of your argument. By arguing that parents who don’t have a college degree in education and a certificate in teaching aren’t qualified, de facto, you’re simultaneously arguing that parents’ rights should be taken away.
You don’t see any problem with that?
If children are only children of parents and not society at large, then why do we have child abuse laws in place? By your argument, a parent has the right to beat the crap outta his/her kid if he/she so chooses. I disagree with that because I see the child as a citizen of a larger culture and I want what’s best for that child. In my opinion, not being properly educated is not what is best for the child, so why would I want to protect a parent’s right to do that?
By your argument, a parent has the right to beat the crap outta his/her kid if he/she so choose
Give me a break. That’s not what I said at all. I said that parents have the right and responsibility to ensure that their kids receive a quality education, and I also said that I support regulation (and obviously the enforcement of those regulations) of homeschooling!
How in the world can you get from that to saying that I think child abuse should be permitted by the state?!?!?!
In my opinion, not being properly educated is not what is best for the child, so why would I want to protect a parent’s right to do that?
Of course being educated is what’s best for the child!! I agree completely!
Where we disagree is about what standards must be met by the parents in order to give a quality education. I think a mother with a high school education who follows state regulations (consulting with a certified teacher, e.g.) is sufficient — because I’ve seen it work over and over again. I also realize that parents can exploit the system — and that’s not good.
But at the same time, I also know that public schools are just as capable of letting students down as parents are. So what do we do about that? If we ought to end homeschooling if parents can’t deliver quality education — what should we do about the public schools?
You specifically said, “But children are not born as children of the state! The state’s control is and should be limited!” I provided a counter-example to that. The state’s control is there for a reason (and I wont go further into this because I suspect you are conservative and I tend to be a little left leaning).
Now what to do about public schools? Why not have bigger budgets for them so that they can do what they are meant to do? Why not pay teachers the white collar salary we deserve so that teacher turn-over drops dramatically. That would help, for starters.
I wrote a longer reply here, but thought better of it. It was all sorts of rambling.
I’ll sum up with a question:
Who decides what constitutes ‘properly educated,’ and who decides what is ‘best’ for a child?
Only a Sith deals in absolutes!!! (Is this statement an absolute? Let’s have a parsing throwdown! :)
But seriously, when someone argues that children are children of their parents and not the state, there ought to be an understanding that the person is talking about the rights normally afforded to parents by the norms of the society. Beating the tar out of a kid is not part of the normalized parent-child relationship anymore, and so violence against children is a state affair.
Generally, we are establishing priorities of authority, not ownership.
I could write a long and drawn out answer, but instead, I’m gonna recommend this:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/education-philosophy/
Which one of us is the history of educational philosophy directed at?
You JonJon, since you were asking about who decides what. :)
You specifically said, “But children are not born as children of the state! The state’s control is and should be limited!” I provided a counter-example to that.
No, you said that my logic leads to permitting child abuse. You offered a straw man that was also a non-sequitur that was also tangentially related to the topic at hand.
Parents have the legal right (and moral responsibility, I think) to take responsibility for the education of their children; you want to remove that right and place it (almost) completely on the state — only state-certified teachers are allowed to teach kids has been your only argument while pointing to extremists along the way.
Look, one of the primary functions of gov’t is to protect its citizens from maltreatment by other citizens — right? If a child is being abused, for example, the gov’t would be well within its bounds to intervene. I don’t disagree with you on that point in the slightest.
One of the responsibilities of being a parent is instilling a sense of morality, right? With children, that includes discipline. So one could say that parents have the responsibility to instill some sense of morality and of being a good citizen, and they have the right to use appropriate forms of discipline to do so. But even so, that does not justify child abuse! There are other forms of discipline that don’t harm the child and work more effectively than spanking, for example, so even that argument wouldn’t lead to permitting child abuse.
Analagously, parents have the responsibility to ensure that their children are educated, and the right to choose what they think is best. Again, I have no idea how this can be equated with permitting child abuse — especially when I support state regulation of homeschooling to ensure quality!
Here’s where I see the crux of our disagreement. Parents currently have the choice among 3 options: 1) Public school 2) Private school and 3) Homeschooling. You want to roll all of that into option one, thus removing the parents right to choose what they think is best for their kids. I don’t object to your personal opinion that educators should themselves be educated; I object to it when you try to make that personal opinion into a law that would strip parents of their rights.
(and I wont go further into this because I suspect you are conservative and I tend to be a little left leaning).
Why would you suspect me of being “conservative”? I’m a lot of things, but conservative probably isn’t one of them.
“That’s a terrible argument. As a certified teacher (and a special education teacher) tell me what you’d do to accommodate a child with ADD??
To ask such a question is to insinuate there is a blanket answer. Such as, you do X for ADD children to best accommodate them, which is a poor teaching approach at best and can be detrimental. Each child has their own learning style, whether they’re challenged, average or gifted students. You want to know how to best accommodate that ADD child? Give him/her to me for a month and then I’ll tell you how. I won’t be considering any cookie-cutter teaching approach; I’ll be considering the individual child’s needs.
“What are the best practices to teach math versus reading?”
Again, the cookie-cutter approach is your “best practices”, but in the end, the ones who do not respond well to those “best practices” are left in a learning void. You use your cookie-cutters, I prefer to individually mold clay.
“Don’t know? Well, I guess you not an educator.”
This attitude is nothing but blatant arrogance. Because some have a college degree and/or certification, they think they are privy to special arcane knowledge we little people could never understand. You’ll have to forgive me if I forget to grovel.
“This is why teachers get paid such crappy money.”
I agree, teachers are not given the support and encouragement they deserve, whether they teach in public/private schools, tutoring roles or at home. It’s a thankless job for the most part, but some of us don’t grow bitter because of it. Most of us look kindly on anyone who will spend five minutes with a child in an effort to enrich their lives. The joy of a teaching moment has no comparison.
“I guess we teachers only need a high school diploma to teach… and yet, we’re required a college education and certification. Why is that?”
My sister has never attended a day of college, but after taking a test received a teaching certificate and teaches part-time at their local public school. My brother-in-law went to college and has a degree in Construction Management. Due to the economy he has been out of work for six months now. He took the certification test and is teaching full time at a public school. Apparently, college teaching courses are not required to be a teacher. (At least not in this state)
“I mean, seriously. Just because you’ve had dental work doesn’t make you a frakking dentist. Just because you’ve done you taxes doesn’t make you an accountant.”
This is a poor counter-argument. The dentist doesn’t show you how he does it, he just does the job for you. Are you insinuating that is what public school teachers do?
(P.S. I went to college for accounting and could have learned the entire degree by reading the books at home and taking the test, which is exactly what some people do now, via online courses.)
“To ask such a question is to insinuate there is a blanket answer.”
No, that is your assumption. Of course I teach individually based on varying learning modalities. That being said, there are commonalities between students with ADD, or dyslexia, or dysgraphia, etc. So, of course, I have a “bag of tricks” to try as I adjust my teaching practices to their learning environment. Nothing cookie cutter about it.
“This attitude is nothing but blatant arrogance”
How is it arrogance to defend my job against claims that just anybody can do it? Would it be arrogance for a chef to say such a thing? Or a surgeon? You imply that I have no special skills and it is insulting. Especially with your anecdotes about your family members who went into teaching with no training. Do you think it might just be because school districts are desperate for any warm body do to teaching, seeing as how teaching has one of the highest turnover rates out there? In addition, I doubt seriously that your family members are just teaching away with not training, they are probably in an alternative certification program in which they get training on the job. C’mon!
(should have said *some* school districts. Other school districts have excellent teachers and some even require that teachers have master’s degrees)
LRA I thank you for your service as a teacher. I think teaching is the noblest profession ever. Incidentally the teacher I hated the most (well not the most but she did annoy me) I now believe was the best teacher I ever had in my life.
Thanks!!! :)
As I private music teacher I teach students from both public and home schools. From more than 30 years experience, I have learned the following:
Homeschooling parents fall into one or more of the following categories.
1 – Parents who want control over every aspect of their child’s life – (fundamentalists)
2 – Parents who were traumatized in their own school years or whose children suffered a traumatic experience – (spending junior high hiding in the bathroom or a child who went to school too close to the Oklahoma bombing)
3 – Parents who seriously believe that no one else is smart enough to teach their 5 year old.
4 – Parents who cannot tolerate the narcissistic wound of having their child come in second to someone else’s child – (Instead of signing up for the AP classes at high school where the child would have to compete with other smart kids in town, they enroll at a fourth-rate college and take freshman classes as a 16 year-old so they can feel “super smart.”)
Homeschooled children have more free time to practice their music but the advantages end there.
They have more difficulty with verbal questions and verbal directions. In a small group they are not tuned in to hear directions from a teacher’s voice. They know less about other peoples, cultures, and history – esp. American history. They learn many of their subjects by reading and then doing “study packets.” This gives them practice in only one method of learning which may work better for some than others but doesn’t give them the flexibility to learn out in the world. They have a very inflated sense of their abilities and their place in the world compared to my public schooled students. I am most concerned that they do not see others as equals or understand the principles of a democracy.
This is only my experience from the part of the country I have taught in. I don’t claim to have seen everything or every situation. I do, however, let parents have a piece of my mind when the child is missing chunk of culture – like the 7th grader who had never heard of Chanukah.
Have you ever encountered parents who would fit into the following category?
5 — Parents who live in bad school districts and want to take responsibility for their children’s education so they are not put at a competitive disadvantage?
I’m just curious, because you seem to have quite a bit of experience.
Have you ever encountered parents who would fit into the following category?
My folks, though I didn’t find this out until just recently. We didn’t home-school, though, because we couldn’t afford to give up my mother’s income.
I think that’s a problem for a lot of the parents in bad school districts. If they can’t afford to move out of the district, they probably can’t afford to give up the mother’s income (and it’s always the mother, isn’t it? Are there any home-schooling fathers out there?) Some of the different curriculum can get expensive as well, plus membership in various support and advocacy groups.
There are homeschooling fathers. According to wikipedia, (so trust that as far as you like) in the US 77% of mothers who homeschool are not employed at the same time, and 98% of fathers who homeschool are not employed at the same time. There are more men than women in the workforce, so the disparity is more obvious, especially because in two-parent, one job households, the male is a good bit more likely to work.
Have you ever encountered parents who would fit into the following category?
6 – ones who can feed my persecution complex?
I’m just curious, because I seem to have quite a bit of experience.
It was an honest question. No need to be a dick.
Justing giving you another chance to play the you’re persecuting me card … you seem to rather enjoy it do you not?
“They have a very inflated sense of their abilities and their place in the world compared …”
*coughs*
LOL!
I have a son who is a junior in public school and was homeschooled up until 4 weeks ago. He has a 99% avg so far in all classes–I obviously did something wrong during 10 years of homeschooling. Plus, after one week of practice with the football team, he was moved to varsity and put in on the starting line up. Again, I failed as a homeschooled parent. *snicker*
I also have a third grader who is homeschooled.
There is no comparison in the level of education they are receiving. My hs’er takes 4 classes, one of which is PE-it’s pathetic. My third grader’s course of study is more varied and much. more challenging.
I am far from evangelical christian.
When my son comes home to tell me about the stretch marks he sees on some girls boobs…wow, yeah, what an education. He can see that watching Porkys – which he’s seen 3 times…you know, because he was homeschooled and sheltered for 10 years.
I’m sorry, this original post is a boring, old, and tired argument made by someone who has no experience homeschooling or comparing hs to ps with their own children.
Signed,
The voice of experience
What original post and argument are you referring to? I think homeschooling can be great for lots of people, though it’s certainly not for everyone. I know smart, well-adjusted homeschooled kids, and I know stupid, annoying ones. The same spectrum exists in public & private schools.
Quit with the persecution complex Daniel! She’s obviously not referring to you!
*wink*
The “Voice of Experience” apparently lacks the experience to let us know which argument and original post they were talking about.
I have to jump in here. I am an independent science educator and video producer. For the past 24 years, I have presented live science programs at schools, museums, and universities across the US. I always look forward to homeschool audiences, as they always have the most thought provoking questions. I can usually pick out the homeschooled kids from a museum audience by their questions and responses.
I admit that I may be getting a polarized view of homeschooling, as anti-science parents would not bring their children to a presentation on electricity or energy, but from my observations, there are thousands of homeschool families out there that are doing a good job in educating their children.
I’ve been following this ongoing debate – it’s interesting. My four kids all go to public school. My wife and I never even considered homeschooling, and I imagine it would take some pretty extreme circumstances for us to consider it a viable option.
I went to public school myself, and truthfully got a pretty poor academic education there. (At least in part because I didn’t take it seriously, but also because the quality of education was poor.) I spent a good amount of time in college catching up on things I should have learned but didn’t. That being said I did well at a state college, and went on to do very well and get a law degree from a respected private university. I now have the kind of job many lawyers aspire to.
My point is, poorly homeschooled students probably don’t suffer much of a disadvantage compared many public school kids, who are probably getting a crappy education anyway. Assuming they apply themselves in higher eductaion it’s probably a case of no harm no foul. Am I wrong?
Public school gave me a great education in “life” though. I had to learn to coexist with people who weren’t like me, who disagreed with me, who didn’t like me etc… I had to figure out what I believed and defend it. I had to deal with random, inane rules often put in place by authority figures who cared little about the impact they had on me. Plus I had to do it all without mom and dad there.
In other words, it was excellent preparation for the real word. I don’t think I would have gotten that if I was homeschooled, and I frankly think it made up for the academic shortfalls in my education. Do those of you with homeschooling experience worry about this? Are these skills that can also be picked up later on in life?
I’m interested.
Public school gave me a great education in “life” though. I had to learn to coexist with people who weren’t like me, who disagreed with me, who didn’t like me etc… I had to figure out what I believed and defend it. I had to deal with random, inane rules often put in place by authority figures who cared little about the impact they had on me. Plus I had to do it all without mom and dad there.
In other words, it was excellent preparation for the real word. I don’t think I would have gotten that if I was homeschooled, and I frankly think it made up for the academic shortfalls in my education. Do those of you with homeschooling experience worry about this? Are these skills that can also be picked up later on in life?.
IMO, and based on my experience, your point about life/social skills is much more important than the other topics we’ve debated.
I think people who don’t have experience with homeschooling tend to think that kids who are homeschooled have no social contact outside of their homes and families, as if we were just shut up in our houses all the time. That certainly does happen — but what people aren’t aware of is that there are all sorts of opportunities for homeschooled kids to experience that type of socialization. For example, there is a national organization for Christian homeschoolers that hosts an annual conference, and that organization is split into regional chapters throughout the country. Those regions organize athletic leagues, social activities, and often partner with certified teachers (often from private Christian schools) to actually have weekly classes together — to ensure that their education is on track and to ensure social interaction.
I played organized sports with other homeschooled kids, and I had my church youth group, and we participated in a partnership with other homeschoolers and a certified teacher. Given, we were mostly like-minded kids, so there is a good amount of sheltering, I suppose, but there’s still social interaction — and it’s not as if kids in public schools don’t tend to gravitate to other like-minded kids either. Public school kids can be just as sheltered as homeschooled kids, at least that was my experience in both worlds.
Are these skills that can also be picked up later on in life?
I went to high school in 10th grade, and the first few months were a struggle. I went from my home (and a class of about 20) to a school of about 1,400 kids. Big adjustment. But I learned. I went to college with a few people who were homeschooled all their life, and you never would have guessed it; they were very socially adept.
I think kids who struggle with self-esteem and socilaizing are going to struggle and need assistance regardless of whether they’re homeschooled or in public school; that’s simply the reality of it, I think.
But again, that is just my experience.
Well, as a reasonably sheltered homeschooler, I’d suggest that most of the interpersonal interaction that you mention (learning to get along with people whose viewpoint are drastically different) can also be accomplished in college. Heck, I’m told that going to college is an adjustment for people who were in a public school if for no other reason than geography. When people from disparate regions of the country (and world) are thrown together in close quarters it is almost always a growing experience.
For me, college was certainly a large development in my interpersonal skills and ‘life’ training. I didn’t feel handicapped, or even overwhelmed, but it was certainly a big change. I wouldn’t say that’s unique to homeschoolers, though. If you could ‘catch up’ academically in college, I don’t see too much of a problem in ‘catching up’ in life skills like navigating bureaucracies and getting along with people.
Do you people honestly believe homeschooling parents keep their children in a closet?
From the way some people argue about socialization, you’d think my children would be drooling idiots who cower in a corner of the house when the doorbell rings fearing contact with any human not sharing DNA with them.
This past summer my son worked as a lifeguard. Adults at the pool regularly commented to me about how impressive a young man he was because my son actually spoke to (er, uh, socialized with) the adults. In fact, on numerous occasions I was told he was the only lifeguard out of 13 who would greet the adults and carry on conversations. (Hmmm, could it be because he is the only homeschooled one and spent the last 11 years NOT living in the “adults are our enemy” world of public school) Plus, he gets along with all of the member children at the pool. There are some really obnoxious public school children who come up to him and drive him crazy–several even tried picking a physical fight with him because he is 6’3″ and they know he has a black belt in karate and is a 3rd degree in Ju Jitsu. He somehow, being the unsocialized, inferior human that he is because his father and I have kept in locked in a closet, refrained from beating the crap out of them . . . oh, I guess he missed that “real world” lesson in public school–the one where you take someone in the bathroom and beat them to death…or maybe just beat them nearly to death on the bus—as happened in our school district last year. Yeah, he missed that example last year, maybe had he seen that real world example, he could have just beat the crap out of a couple of kids at the pool this summer.
Ugh! Tired old boring argument about socialization . . .
What’s the next tired argument? My husband and I don’t have the educational requirements to teach our children, despite my Master’s Degree in education and his degree in physics?
It’s really pointless arguing homeschooling with public school indoctrinated minds. They can’t think outside the collective box. I see it everyday at my son’s school . . . drives him crazy, too . . .they are like little lab rats, all they see is the piece of cheese and one way to get to it.
As Mark Twain once wrote, “I never let school interfere with my education.”
Okay, after reading through a few of these comments, I got just a little irritated.
I’m homeschooled. I’m currently in 9th Grade. I went to a private school for a year or so until my mother began homeschooling me for a year due to moving and not having very much time to get me to school and back home. Then I went to public school for three years before going to private school again for another two years. When I started 7th Grade in private school, I just couldn’t take it anymore. All of 6th Grade, I was trying to find time for everything I’d wanted to do during the day and never got to because of homework. I got up at 7:00 am every morning to go to school, spend hours and hours doing school work, then come home, get a snack, do some homework, eat dinner, do more homework, and if I was lucky, find time to get into the shower before midnight. Over five hours of homework EVERY DAY is absolutely rediculous. So once I got into 7th Grade, I’d finally had enough and asked to be homeschooled. There was so many deaths in my family during that year, and it was all just so overwhelming.
Ever since starting homeschooling, I’ve been much more social, I’ve had a lot more time than I did when I was in private and public school, and I haven’t been as tired as I always was during school. I’m not a morning person; I’m more of a night owl. That kind of explains why I’m posting this at 3:00 am.
Now, I’m not going to start saying that homeschoolers are smarter than people who’ve gone to private or public school and I’m not going to start saying that people who go to private or public school are smarter than us homeschoolers. (I’m absolutely sick of hearing people indirectly insult homeschoolers. I’ve seen plenty of TV shows that have characters that mispronounce words, act very stupid, and/or are antisocial, and turns out, they’re homeschooled. I find that very insulting. Just because we’re homeschooled for whatever reason doesn’t mean we’re antisocial or stupid. So long as our parents teach us properly, we can be very, very smart and successful.) But I do know that with homeschooling, I’ve been able to understand a lot more things than I was able to in PS. Because, unlike in PS, my teacher can explain things to me when I actually need help. :) So I don’t think I’d be as smart (or happy, for that matter) if I was still going to PS.
I guess you could say I’m naturally gifted in art and music. Because of homeschool, I’ve had more time to actually take music lessons. And also, because of being homeschooled I’ve gotten to become a published illustrator. I don’t think that would’ve happened if I was public or private schooled. I now have time to draw more often and get better and better at it to get to where I am today. I also wouldn’t have met all the great, hilarious, amazing people I’m now very good friends with if I had stayed in public or private school. Do you know why?
Because they’re homeschooled. :) I am definitely more social now than I was while I was in PS, and that’s because I didn’t have any time for friends, family, or taking care of myself due to so much homework. Now that I don’t have homework and get all of my school work done in just a matter of three to four hours, I get to hang out with my friends a lot more often, meet new people, get jobs as a petsitter or a babysitter to earn money, and work toward my dream.
Oh! Before I finish off here, I want to add one thing. While I was reading the comments above, I found one that really made me angry. Someone said that parents shouldn’t be allowed to teach their kids because they’re not certified. Excuse my language, but… What the hell is wrong with you? I agree with what someone else said. That is like saying parents aren’t allowed to give their children advice because they’re not certified phsychiatrist, and they aren’t allowed to take care of their child when they’re injured because they’re not a certified nurse or doctor. To me, saying my mother isn’t qualified to teach me is just flat out retarded. My mother, in my eyes, is far more qualified to teach me than anyone else in the world. Do you know why? Because she knows me and what I can accomplish way more than any certified teacher out there. She knows what I can do and what I can’t and that’s why she makes sure I try my best. If there’s something she knows I can’t do, she’ll try to make sure I understand it and help me through it until I can do it on my own. I don’t know any certified teacher that would do that, except for one; my 6th Grade teacher. Actually, I highly doubt there are any out there that will, except for that one I’d mentioned.
I’m just sick and tired of people insulting us, our parents, and our knowledge. There are plenty of accomplished homeschooled people out there that are most definitely not stupid. Take Christopher Paolini, for example. He wrote the Eragon series, which is very popular. Now is he stupid? I don’t think so.
Anyway, I guess that’s all I wanted to say…
Wow… That rant was a lot longer than I had intended… o.x