In response to some of the debate we’ve been having about his new book, Robert Kunzman has written to us with some concerns about some of the the stats and studies that have been thrown around. He maintains a site which summarizes his conclusions from studying the data: Three Key Points about Homeschooling.
In brief:
1. We don’t have any comprehensive data about U.S. homeschoolers nationally: total number of homeschoolers, learning outcomes, or anything else.
Since many home-schoolers are opposed to any government oversight, they refuse to participate in surveys. For example, a 2003 survey by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) had a 58% refusal rate.
2. Claims that the “average homeschooler” outperforms public and private school students are simply not justified.
This is a neutral statement: due to the above problem of a lack of data, we simply do not know how homeschoolers perform in comparison to public schoolers. While there are several studies that frequently get touted, they all suffer from methodological problems.
3. There is no such thing as a “typical homeschooler.”
One thing we can say, simply from observation, is that there is great diversity within the movement. As previously mentioned, there are a wide variety of reasons to home-school, and just as many different ways to go about it.
As I mentioned in a previous post, this dearth of reliable data is one of the reasons why books like Kunzman’s Write These Laws on Your Children are so valuable. While they may be anecdotal, they are all we currently have.
For more information, see Kunzman’s main site, Homeschooling Research & Scholarship, which includes a bibliography of sources relating to homeschooling.
My wife homeschools our daughter currently and the results are a mixed bag. She somehow began interfacing with all of these homeschooling families who almost exclusively are young earth fundamentalists when she was a full time stay at home mother. What I found odd was that most of them were in areas with decent schools and had been swayed largely by the kind of mythology of “public schools are rotting our children” prevalent in conservative circles. They object to sex education, multicultural history, science (not just evolution), and god being removed from schools. You should get a curriculum catalog from these places, every subject taught from a “christian perspective”, even chinese history.
My wife would cringe every time I was around them. Not because I would be an ass, but because I might challenge their beliefs in some way. I have fossils on my wall (I’m a geologist) and she wouldn’t tell them how old they were when they ask. I did finally snap to some degree when one the men in this group kept talking to me and going on and on about subjects taught from a “christian perspective” and I finally asked him if he’d ever considered teaching from a fact-based or reality based perspective. Of course, facts have a liberal and anti-christian bias (his words).
The kids in these groups varied just like any groups of kids. The difference is they weren’t really encouraged to think. Everything from grammar to history literally used bible verses and christian imagery in lessons. Brainwashing.
Of course I’ve met a few “un-schoolers” who are essentially hippies (for lack of a better term). They just let their kid learn about whatever they fancy with no formal plan. These are also the people who are into herbal remedies, anti-vaccine, etc.
That’s not to say all of them are crazies. I have a friend who is a college professor who does it because he and his wife just thought they could do a better job, but they are the minority.
I think the perception about home-schoolers doing better comes form two things:
1) Most are well-behaved
2) Notice in the national spelling bee every year there seems to be a home-schooled kid that wins.
“Facts have a liberal and anti-christian bias”
I love that statement
http://www.sonlight.com/
A curriculum company FYI
“Discover how God miraculously preserved a small group of men, women, and children (who brought freedom, justice and the gospel to the “New World”) from fierce Indian attacks, starvation, and disease.”
“Discover the fascinating and largely untold story of the first “missionaries” to East Asia whose impact may have even reached Japan by the mid-700s.”
“Expose the first president who approved unconstitutional conduct to achieve a goal that he believed was best for the country.
Sorrow as they discover how presidents and politicians have chipped away at the Constitution for over 100 years.
Understand (contrary to journalists and politicians) that the United States of America is not a democracy.
Discover how historical events of the past 200 years have altered America’s understanding of the Constitution.
Learn how socialism quietly entered and quickly entrenched itself into our American system.
Uncover a simple plan to restore constitutional government.
And much more…”
Just a sampling
I’ve only known one person that’s had any homeschooling, and he said he used those two years to practice the guitar.
I would totally be trying to brainwash my kids with homeschooling, too, though. I’d force genetics down their throats and continually mock botany, I’d completely disregard history and geology, spend hours on algebra and ignore geometry…
Anyway, I’m all for extremely religious people teaching their children at home. For one, keeps ‘em the hell away from normal children. Secondly, that’s less competition for me in the workforce.
” Secondly, that’s less competition for me in the workforce.”
Ooooo. BRGulker’s gonna get you for saying that.
Neil, that’s too beautiful for words, thankyou!
I think Colbert said something like that too.
On the subject of liberal bias in the media, he said “is it our fault that reality has a liberal bias?”
Here it is: http://bit.ly/4FtI90
Such an awesome speech. Colbert has brass balls for that.
I’m assuming whoever booked him for that was either a disgruntled administration employee or doesn’t understand sarcasm/satire.
Atheist, secularly homeschooled, reporting in. My sister and I learned about evolution very early on, specifically so that we would be able to see through the fundamentalist lies of other homeschoolers.
I homeschool because I live in Floriduh. I do it for educational reasons and we have nothing to do with the flakes. I could tell you stories that would make your hair curl (boy who was still nursing from his momma at age 12) but these people aren’t flakes because they homeschool. They were always flakes.
I knew many home-schoolers in H.S. back when I lived in Wisconsin. Their mothers were all homeschooling moms together, a big support group, I guess. All the kids started in public school in 9th grade to … acclimate, if you will.
Anyway, I dated one of them and you wouldn’t believe the simple stuff she didn’t know. I’d always think she was joking when she had trouble with menus at restaurants, or with reading assignments in English. Or calculating a 10% tip (it was a few years ago) was like pulling teeth. It was sad.
You could always tell which kids mom was good at math, or english, or grammar; and which weren’t. One of her friends was really quiet, but she was amazingly quick. My little gem… she was one of the unlucky ones who turned out to be … really nice, with… a great personality.
Luckily, some Lutheran kid snatched her up and boinked her before we got to that stage. They’re married now. And frankly, I’m glad it wasn’t me.
My son and daughter, now both grown and on their own, were homeschooled for a year in their early elementary years. My wife got a non x-tian curriculum from a source now long forgotten. We had access to outstanding public schools, but just weren’t really happy with some of what was going on, with one child’s school in particular. When one was offered the opportunity to be home schooled, the other wanted it as well. Long story longer, they both thrived, went on outstanding fieldtrips weekly, and now are amazing, well adjusted grown-ups. They did fine when back in the public schools, both ended up being accepted to magnet high schools, and one graduated magna cum laude & phi beta kappa. Not young earth xtians, not crunchy hippies, just people who were lucky enough to be able to do it.
There is no such thing as a “typical homeschooler.”
Funny, I thought they all ended up working at McDonald’s.
:)
Be quiet and make some more fries. People are waiting on their food.
Instead of picking on me, why don’t you read the above comments. I mean, one girl couldn’t even calculate a 10% tip! Based on that alone, I wonder if McDonald’s would even take her?
And I find this comment particularly disturbing:
“The kids in these groups varied just like any groups of kids. The difference is they weren’t really encouraged to think. Everything from grammar to history literally used bible verses and christian imagery in lessons. Brainwashing.”
They *weren’t really encouraged to think*! Jeez, and you wonder why I object to that.
:(
Fortunately for her, no one tips McDonald’s workers, so inability to calculate a tip would not be a barrier to employment.
Yes. True. I guess she’d never be a cashier there tho.
You haven’t worked at McD’s then.
The registers have buttons with little pictures of the items, and they tell you how to count out the change.
No math skills necessary.
I’m a public school kid who spent two years working McD’s in high school.
Wow. I had no idea. So I guess McD’s would take her then. One more homeschooler flippin’ burgers. LOL!!! :P
btw, it is not lost on me that McD’s is a fine place to work for teenagers. I worked at Subway for a summer when I was 16. I just think minimum wage work is not a decent option/anything to aspire to for adults who are trying to raise a family (yes, plenty of people do it, I realize) .
Subway has much better food.
LRA — it was just a joke!!! Hence the :)
I’m glad Ty picked up on the sarcasm, anyway.
Instead of picking on me, why don’t you read the above comments. I mean, one girl couldn’t even calculate a 10% tip! Based on that alone, I wonder if McDonald’s would even take her?
I did read them all, LRA. I chose not to comment because I didn’t want to inflame the conversation …
But somehow I doubt that homeschoolers have a monopoly on producing graduates with poor Math skills …
I’m a public schooler with poor math skills, and proud of it!!!
You and my wife both … don’t tell her I said that ;)
Let’s hope your wife doesn’t homeschool your kids in math then.
They *weren’t really encouraged to think*! Jeez, and you wonder why I object to that.
And around the mountain we go. I object to that, too! I support monitoring and regulating homeschooling! But I am opposed to making it illegal — which is what you continually advocate for (only licensed teachers should be allowed to homeschools is your mantra of choice).
Because clearly you think that uncertified, non-college educated parents are capable of teaching chemistry, or calculus, or even a good lesson on Shakespeare. K.
Also, I’m not for making it illegal. I never said that. I am for making it *more highly regulated* so that it at least has the same standards as public school. I want evidence that parents are actually capable of teaching their kids. Is that so wrong???
Because clearly you think that uncertified, non-college educated parents are capable of teaching chemistry, or calculus, or even a good lesson on Shakespeare. K
Prove that I’ve ever said anything that even remotely resembles that accusation. You won’t find anything of the sort.
What you will find is me saying exactly the opposite based on my own experience — by the time I reached high school, the subject matter reached a point of complexity that necessitated my enrollment at a public high school. You can’t do lab science at home, and I don’t dispute that point.
Also, I’m not for making it illegal. I never said that. I am for making it *more highly regulated* so that it at least has the same standards as public school.
Regulation happens via legislation. You advocate for regulation (and consequently legislation) that would allow only certified teachers to homeschool, thereby making it illegal for anyone other than a certified teacher to homeschool. Your objective isn’t to illegalize homeschooling, but that is the necessary outcome of your position.
“Your objective isn’t to illegalize homeschooling, but that is the necessary outcome of your position.”
No it’s not, if you’d cared to think about it which you obviously have not.
LRA has said repeatedly that in her opinion the only parents who should be legally allowed to teach their kids at home are parents who are also certified teachers.
That would make it illegal for anyone who’s not a certified teacher to teach at home — right?
If so, how am I mischaracterizing her, or how am I putting words in her mouth?
Your objective isn’t to illegalize homeschooling, but that is the necessary outcome of your position.”
Parents who are certifed teachers can homeschool … how is that making homeschooling illegal as you have cliamed?
I also think that only licensed people should drive. Ooooooh! I’m so big government!!
@LRA
You’re persecuting those that don’t know how to drive …
Jabster,
If you’re going to lash out at me, at least read what my comments say before doing so. From my comment above, copied and pasted:
thereby making it illegal for anyone other than a certified teacher to homeschool.
I never, ever said that LRA wants to make all homeschooling illegal. And I’m the one putting words in her mouth?
LRA:
I also think that only licensed people should drive. Ooooooh! I’m so big government!!
That’s an interesting analogy, given how involved parents are in educating their children how to drive — think learning permits. The kids take a few hours of classes, and then their parents teach them to drive for several months …
BR, you said:
“But I am opposed to making it illegal — which is what you continually advocate for”
I don’t advocate for that. I never have.
I was unclear in that particular statement. What I was getting at, but failed to do, was that the thing that you are advocating for (certification for homeschooling parents) would have the necessary consequence of making homeschooling illegal for anyone who isn’t a certified teacher.
You’re advocating for the former, not the latter, I realize that, but the latter is an inescapable outcome of the former.
“That’s an interesting analogy, given how involved parents are in educating their children how to drive — think learning permits. The kids take a few hours of classes, and then their parents teach them to drive for several months …”
That’s not how it works in my state. Kids take a state-approved driver’s education course that lasts about 6-8 weeks. Once that is completed, they take a test for a learner’s permit, which has restrictions on it that a regular license doesn’t have (like they can’t have other minors in the car with them when they are driving without adult supervision). Then, when they turn 18, they can take a test for a full license. Education is key in preventing underage car accidents/deaths, and that is why my state requires it.
That’s very similar to my state. Take a few weeks of classes, pass a test. Then spend about a year learning to drive with someone over 21 who’s had their license for at least 4 years (almost always the parent). It’s 16, not 18, though.
In my experience, I learned a heck of a lot more from my parents than I did the class … which was my point. My parents knew how to drive, and they were engaged as an educational asset in conjunction with state supervision — hopefully, the analogy is obvious.
That is the point. *Your parents know how to drive* *They are licensed* *They have proven to the state that they know how to drive*!!!!
Would it make any sense for an un-licensed parent to teach their kid how to drive?
No?
Then why does it make sense for an un-certified parent to teach their kid?
LOL!!! Check and mate.
Hardly checkmate.
In your view, what does your certification to teach actually certify you to do?
My specific certifications entitle me to teach students in the following areas:
Special education, grades 6-12
English, grades 6-12
Psychology, grades 6-12
Science comprehensive (physics, chemistry, and biolology, plus science based electives), grades 6-12
I get to teach kids because I have proven that I’m capable of it.
Right, you are certified to teach at a public institution, which makes you directly responsible for the education of someone else’s child. As a public educator — that is, as someone who is responsible for the child of another — you are required to meet and demonstrate that you do in fact meet those standards. That’s a very good thing.Becoming a certified teacher does not certify you to tell me how and how not to educate my child; it simply certifies you to teach my children should I entrust their education to the state.
Right now, parents are not required by law to attain that level of certification. I will only speak for my state, because I understand its legislation fairly well. In my state, parents aren’t required to do all of what you just did; instead, they are required to consult with someone who has (on a monthly basis, iirc). By law, homeschooling parents must produce curriculum, homework assignments, tests, projects, etc. for review by a certified public educator, who reviews them and either approves or denies what’s happening.
The assumption behind the legislation is that parents — not the state — bear ultimate responsibility for their children’s education. Not exclusive responsibility, but final and ultimate responsibility. The state’s responsibility is to protect its citizens, which takes the concrete form of regulating homeschooling to ensure its quality. Further, parents have the right to pursue options other than the public option for education for an abundance of different reasons.
Whether or not you intend to, you are arguing to remove that right and take away their options. And frankly, I oppose that position so strongly because I want the option to take responsibility for my children’s education when the times comes, and if you have your way, I won’t.
So, if that is the case (that a certified teacher must approve lesson plans, etc), then please explain to me how fundies are allowed to use books like “Of people and pandas” which expressly teaches creationism??? Would a public school science teacher approve of that? Certainly not. So explain to me how it is, in fact, being used?
I have no idea, LRA. Legislation varies from state to state, and as I’ve said from the get-go, I’m not opposed to regulation in general — I’m opposed to the specific form of regulation that you oppose.
I know three things:
1) Homeschooling worked for me and my siblings. We are leaps and bounds ahead of where we would have been without it.
2) Homeschooling worked for us because my parents did it right — they collaborated with professional educators, ensured we had social interaction, etc., etc.
3) I oppose your point of view because I want the right to take responsibility for my own children’s education — and if homeschooling them (for a time) is the best of all the options, I want to have the right to make that choice. Not you. Not the government. Me, as the parent — that’s my right, and my responsibility.
Here is my response to your points:
(1) I went to public school and it worked for me. It worked so well that I completed my master’s degree at Columbia after attending Texas A&M on a full scholarship.
(2) It’s great that your parents did it right. I applaud that. I applaud any parent that homeschools kids the right way. I care about the education of the child, bottom line.
(3) I oppose your point of view because you seem to think that homeschooling parents can be trusted based on their good intentions. Well, that is just plain bad for society. When neo-theocrat indoctrinated kids grow up, they vote for neo-theocrat politicians who screw with public education. I know because that is *exactly* what is happening in my state and I find it abhorrent and in violation of the separation of church and state. I find it so threatening that I get angry about it and end up arguing with people like you about it, writing my representatives on a regular basis, and talking at my university about it.
1) Obviously, there’s more than one way to skin a cat. I received a great education via homeschooling (and three years of public education, which was indispensable). You received a great education via public schools.
I want to keep the options; for all intents and purposes, you want to roll them all up into the latter.
2) If your priority is as you say it is — which I don’t doubt — then why are we even having this conversation? If parents can educate their children at home better than the public schools can do, then shouldn’t you be pro-homeschooling, not anti-homeschooling?
3) I have no idea how you could reduce my position to what you just articulated. It’s baffling to me. Honestly. I’ve never said anything that even resembles that, LRA. Your closing comments might lend some insight, though:
When neo-theocrat indoctrinated kids grow up, they vote for neo-theocrat politicians who screw with public education. … I find it so threatening that I get angry about it and end up arguing with people like you about it, writing my representatives on a regular basis, and talking at my university about it.
As I’ve said before, I think you are either unwilling or unable to consider the possibility that there are homeschoolers out there who don’t fit that mold. In other words, you’re letting your personal experience with one particular subset of homeschoolers (who are probably the majority, but still) blind you almost completely.
Further — can we please separate these two issues:
1) People who want to homeschool their kids (religious or otherwise).
2) People who want to “screw with public education.”
I have no disagreement with you with respect to issue 2. I’m not pro-creationists in the classroom or pro-Id in the classroom; you keep returning to this in our conversations, and it’s just muddying the waters.
Finally, I really would like to hear a substantive repsonse to this point that I keep making (and you seem to be ignoring completely):
I want the right to take responsibility for my own children’s education — and if homeschooling them (for a time) is the best of all the options, I want to have the right to make that choice. Not you. Not the government. Me, as the parent — that’s my right, and my responsibility.
You are arguing a position that will take my rights as a parent away. Your response is ….. ?
“If parents can educate their children at home better than the public schools can”
Can they? What evidence do we have for that? I propose a model in which the evidence is based on the testing of the parent first before the parent teaches the kid. That way, we as a society are assured that the parent is at least familiar with the subject material before imparting it upon their child. If a parent wants to teach their kids that all the founding fathers were all Christians and that the US is a Christian nation built upon Christian principles (rather than enlightenment principles), then they’d fail the test and be unable to do so. In other words, we would limit parents from misinforming their kids, which can *only* be a good thing.
If you don’t require parents to certify/be highly regulated then, as I said, homeschooling parents have to be trusted based on their “good” intentions because what proof do we have otherwise? What proof do I have that your parents were capable of “doing it right” except in hindsight. What if they had screwed it up? What if y’all lived in a state without the regulations you described? Where would you be then?
You said, ” I think you are either unwilling or unable to consider the possibility that there are homeschoolers out there who don’t fit that mold”
I am willing to accept that, as I have said repeatedly. But I want evidence beforehand before I trust some parent to do my job for me. And yes, it is MY job to educate our society’s kids. We live in a society that depends on division of labor to get things done. My job is “educator”. My brother’s job is “accountant”. If my brother wants to educate his kids, then he needs to prove that he’s up to the job.
You said, “I want the right to take responsibility for my own children’s education”. Well, my response is this: fine. Just fine. Prove it. Certify. Show me you’re up to the job. If you fail, then tough titty. Your kids don’t belong to you, they belong to our entire society.
That way, we as a society are assured that the parent is at least familiar with the subject material before imparting it upon their child
If someone graduates from a public high school, shouldn’t they be familiar with the subject matter? I mean, if you’re doing your job, shouldn’t they have at least a basic knowledge of all those subjects?
Do you understand the near impossibility of your proposal? Parents don’t have time to go through the process you’re demanding. Plain and simple. But they do have time to consult with professionals and submit to review and regulations. That review process, the kind that works so well in my state, is more than good enough for me.
What proof do I have that your parents were capable of “doing it right” except in hindsight. What if they had screwed it up?
They had to demonstrate what they were doing every step of the way to a certified professional. We had monthly meetings with certified teachers, that is, we children without our parents, to demonstrate our progress. Those regulations minimized the risk to the point of near impossibility that our parents would “screw it up.”
What if y’all lived in a state without the regulations you described? Where would you be then?
For the last time: I’m not opposed to regulating homeschooling. I don’t know what it’s like in Texas, but I can say confidently that the position you’re proposing isn’t a solution. Obviously, I really like the way my state does it, and it seems like a model that could be replicated fairly easily.
But I want evidence beforehand before I trust some parent to do my job for me. And yes, it is MY job to educate our society’s kids.
You and I will never agree about this. In fact, hearing you say that angers me. You used the word “threaten” earlier. That’s a good choice of words for me at the moment. In my view, this type of thinking is an enormous threat. Your job is to educate the children whose parents have entrusted their education to the state. You have it ass backwards, LRA. Plain and simple. But I’m glad to finally hear you say it this clearly. Honestly, your point of view scares me, and I’m incredibly grateful I never had a teacher who thinks that like, and I’m even more grateful that you live in Texas and not my state.
I’m sure you’re a great young woman with a good heart, but I completely reject the notion that you should have any influence on my children, let alone the idea that I must be compelled to let you and people like you educate them. I will oppose that position with everything in me, because when I do have children, I want to pursue what’s best for them; IMO, I will be a hell of a lot more qualified to know what that is better than you will, regardless of who’s certified and who’s not.
Your kids don’t belong to you, they belong to our entire society.
I can hardly believe what I’m reading. My children don’t belong me, yes. But they sure as hell don’t belong to society. They are a part of society, and they help to constitute and shape that society; they are not possessed by it.
You’re right. We’re not going to agree. Plain and simple. I take the position I do because not all parents are great parents. Some parents really suck at parenting. A parent who improperly educates their child sucks at parenting. A parent who abuses their child sucks at parenting. Either way, you get a damaged adult– one improperly educated with misinformation and one that is emotionally damaged (assuming said person doesn’t get counseling to work through it). Both are bad for society. I’m sorry it makes you mad, but the fact is that MY job is to educate our society’s kids. Period. I’ve done the work to prove it, and I would like homeschooling parents to be held to the same standard. Period.
Also you are right to point out that kids grow up to shape society. That’s why I don’t want badly shaped kids in our Constitutionally defined society. One way to prevent this may be with the regulations you propose. IMO, a better way is to require stringent standards on parents who want to teach their kids. And hey, as you say, if they learned the material well enough from public school, then they shouldn’t have a problem being tested to certify.
LRA, I’m sure you are good at your job, and you seem like a very intelligent and generally very nice young woman. But if your claim that you I must send my children to be taught by people such as yourself — who think that you’re entitled to teach my children because they “belong” to the society — only reinforced my belief that I should have options. I would never, ever want someone teaching my kids that nonsense. Fortunately, we have legislation that protects my right to do just that.
All best to you, LRA, and I sincerely with you the best in your efforts working with special education children. I tutored a young man with Down’s Syndrome 8 hours a week for two academic years; I have a special place in my heart for children with those types of challenges and appreciate people who dedicate their careers to helping them.
It’s not nonsense. We live in a representative democracy which relies on people being properly educated in order for them to effectively participate in the system. For you to suggest otherwise is the real nonsense. And it isn’t my claim, it’s the government’s claim. The education of children is so important that we have an entire department of education to oversee this necessary endeavor. If you can prove that you’re as capable as me at teaching, then I have no problem with you teaching your own kids. If you can’t then I do. What is non-sensical about that? Nothing.
LRA, how long does it take to get a teacher’s certification?
In my state it involves taking a test and either (1) having education as a minor at university or (2) taking education classes your first year as a teacher. I’d settle for parents just sitting for the test and nothing more. The tests aren’t that difficult if you know the subject matter and you are certified with a 70% or better.
“Your objective isn’t to illegalize homeschooling, but that is the necessary outcome of your position.”
“I never, ever said that LRA wants to make all homeschooling illegal. And I’m the one putting words in her mouth?”
“But I am opposed to making it illegal — which is what you continually advocate for (only licensed teachers should be allowed to homeschools is your mantra of choice).”
“If you’re going to lash out at me, at least read what my comments say before doing so.”
I have read your comments and it is quite clear what you have said …
You are quite dense, Jabster. Goodbye.
“I never, ever said that LRA wants to make all homeschooling illegal. And I’m the one putting words in her mouth?”
“But I am opposed to making it illegal — which is what you continually advocate for (only licensed teachers should be allowed to homeschools is your mantra of choice)”
… and I’m the one who is dense?
I don’t understand how my point is unclear. LRA seems to understand it just fine. You’re isolating a statement from its context and twisting it to say something I never intended to say.
LRA wants to restrict homeschooling to those parents who are or who are willing to become certified teachers thereby making homeschooling illegal for any parent who is not.
I am opposed to that illegalization.
There is no way for me to make my point more clearly, but I have no doubt that you’ll continue twisting my words and isolating from the larger conversation in order to demonize me. Prove me right, please.
““But I am opposed to making it illegal — which is what you continually advocate for (only licensed teachers should be allowed to homeschools is your mantra of choice)”
This is not twisting your words … this is what you said and then you denied that you had said anything of the sort. Of course you also claimed I was dense before you came up with you latest reason why you’re not wrong really and changed the subject.
Here’s a good bit of advice, we are all wrong sometimes and admiting it is the right thing to do. Calling someone a dick or dense is not. Just think of it like this, what would Jesus do? ;-)
Jabster, you’re isolating one statement I made from its entire context — the context of which is several pages on the blog and at lest one conversation in the forum. The statement you’re isolating isn’t clear, which I’ve already admitted. It conveys something I do not intend to convey, which is obvious, I think, if you were to read the entire conversation (i.e., that statement’s context) between LRA and myself.
And frankly, the statement itself is a bit self-correcting: (only licensed teachers should be allowed to homeschools is your mantra of choice)” I think it’s pretty clear that this phrase is where the beef between LRA and I actually lies … and that illumines the first part of the statement in its context.
“I think it’s pretty clear that this phrase is where the beef between LRA and I actually lies … and that illumines the first part of the statement in its context.”
Well that’s obviously your opinion. My opinion is that you don’t wish to admit that the post you made is wrong so you restored to calling me dense (well I suppose it makes a change from dick) and now you’ve realised you were wrong you’re trying to change the focus of the post. I’ll tell you what, say sorry for calling me dense and I’ll say sorry for calling you a thick home schooler ;-)
My opinion is that you don’t wish to admit that the post you made is wrong so you restored to calling me dense
I’ve said 2-3 times that my post was unclear … that it did not communicate what I intended to communicate. I’ve admitted my folly.
You seem to be a smart guy, and for whatever reason, you’re following this conversation (not just this post, but the entire thing). Since you’ve read so much of it, you realize what my concern with LRA’s position is — I know she doesn’t want to make all homeschooling illegal, and I think you know that I know that. In my haste, I posted a comment that didn’t communicate my position clearly, and from my perspective, it looks like you pounced on that so you could take a jab at me.
Another possibility is that you are in fact dense , and you’re simply not getting what I’m attempting to communicate.
Another possibility is that I’m being completely unclear and contradictory — something I’ve attempted to remedy in the last couple posts to you.
Of course another possibility is that when you call someone dense (or a dick) they may take offence if you don’t apologise and admit you where wrong. So a simple question do you apologise or not?
If you are intentionally trolling me, then you are being a dick (option 1 above). If you’re just dense, then I’m simply observing a fact (option 2). If option 3 is the case, and the fault is on me, then I would be in the wrong and should apologize.
I’m being perfectly honest here: I don’t know which of those is the case. If it’s the final of the three, then of course, I apologize.
I’ve already admitted that I wasn’t clear in my communication, multiple times now, though. Kind of a dead horse at this point.
“You are quite dense, Jabster. Goodbye.”
“I’m being perfectly honest here: I don’t know which of those is the case. If it’s the final of the three, then of course, I apologize.”
So I’ll take that as — well I not going to come out and apologise but I’ll sort of pretend I would even though I don’t mean.
So over to you; do you wish to apologies or just carry on being a bit of a dick (your terminology not mine)?
When I typed, “You are quite dense,” I meant it. I thought you were simply having a difficult time understand my comments.
If I’m in the wrong, I’ll apologize. In this thread, were you intentionally taking my words out of their context in order to troll me and make me look bad?
If not, then I apologize. If so, I don’t see anything wrong with calling a spade a spade. Make sense?
“If I’m in the wrong, I’ll apologize. In this thread, were you intentionally taking my words out of their context in order to troll me and make me look bad?”
There is no context to take … you claimed that you hadn’t stated something and when it was pointed out to you that you had indeed stated something you called me dense.
“If I’m in the wrong, I’ll apologize.”
Stop doing the I’ll make at least a half arsed attempt to look nice when you have no intention of apologising.
Jabster, are you going to apologize or not?
In other words, if you really are being a troll, and I call you a troll, what need is there to apologize?
I don’t know if you are or not. We’ve not had much interaction at all, and what we have had isn’t possible. I seem to recall a UF Forum post in which you called me tedious, and the thread was not about me, nor had I commented in it up to that point.
I’m not going to feign an apology for the sake of being PC. If you really are a dick, and I call you a dick, I’m not sorry. OTOH, if you’re not really a dick, and I’ve overreacted emotively, I’ll apologize. I honestly don’t know which is which.
*possible = positive
Weeeeee, Mud!
@brgulker
So I take that as no then … you act like a twat, and a rather tedious one, and when it’s pointed out to you that yes you did say what you claimed that you didn’t say you go on to claim that I’m dense and try and change the subject. When it’s pointed out to you yet again, you claim that it was taken out of context. Rather strange don’t you think? It seems to me that your marvellous home-schooling didn’t teach you some valuable lessons.
p.s. If you can pick up your toys and put them back in your pram that would be most appreciated.
So I take that as no then … you act like a twat, and a rather tedious one,
So are you going to apologize or what?
it’s pointed out to you that yes you did say what you claimed that you didn’t say you go on to claim that I’m dense and try and change the subjec
How many times in this one thread have I admitted that I made a mistake. In my haste, I typed something that didn’t say what I intended to say. You’re right! I made a mistake! Can’t you let it go?
p.s. If you can pick up your toys and put them back in your pram that would be most appreciated.
Now, if that’s not acting like a dick, I don’t know what is. This is exactly why I didn’t apologize — because you do harbor malice toward me and act like a dick toward me. I’m not going to apologize to you for calling your actions what they are.
Goodbye, Jabster.
“How many times in this one thread have I admitted that I made a mistake. In my haste, I typed something that didn’t say what I intended to say. You’re right! I made a mistake! Can’t you let it go?”
It’s really simple, although you’ve admitted you made a mistake (although it was similar to getting blood out of a stone) you have yet to apologise when you called me “dense” when this mistake was pointed out to you. You tried to change the subject and made apologies that a politician would be proud of, but let’s face it your personality is such that admitting that you are wrong is difficult to do.
“But I am opposed to making it illegal — which is what you continually advocate for (only licensed teachers should be allowed to homeschools is your mantra of choice).”
As LRA said … stop putting words into people’s mouths.
but let’s face it your personality is such that admitting that you are wrong is difficult to do.
Yes, that is something I have a very hard time with.
There’s plenty to dislike about our public education system (distorted view of history written by imperialists, drill and kill long division and such, etc.). But could someone please provide a list of things being taught in traditional public schools with which Christian fundamentalists take issue? Is it just evolution or are there other topics that get them riled up?
As far as I can tell, our public education system isn’t doing much in the way of promoting critical thinking or other “dangers.” You have to go to Democratic Education schools for that sort of thing.
It’s not “just evolution.”
Evolution isn’t viewed by these folks as simply another part of science; it’s viewed as a part of a much bigger secular/humanist/godless agenda. Kind of an “axis of evil” that parents want to protect their kids from.
While I’m not going to step into your argument with LRA and others, I will say that allowing those parents to pull their kids out of school and isolate them for indoctrination is doing those children and the world at large a great disservice.
One might say that it is not the primary purpose of children to do the world a service. :)
No, but that’s at least one of the goals of educating them.
Ty, I hope I haven’t communicated that I would be supportive of that.
I wasn’t accusing you of holding that view.
Requiring teacher certification to homeschool isn’t the same thing as illegal. My super-Christian sister-in-law has a teacher’s certificate and homedoctrinates her four boys.
*making it illegal
It is a fairly onerous restriction for the activity, such that it would have the practical effect in most cases of making it illegal.
It should be onerous. We’re talking about a child’s formal education, a very serious matter.
Yeah, so let’s leave it in the competent hands of the state. I’m sorry if that doesn’t leave me with a confident feeling.
Are you calling me incompetent?
Are you the state? :-)
What I am calling incompetent is whatever authority is set up in order to establish curricula, certify teachers, and test students. Most teachers I know do the same: bemoan efforts like NCLB (as I believe Garrett does below), think that the curricula are generally flawed, and that standards for teaching are lackluster.
But while we’re on the subject, while I do not doubt your intelligence and assume you are gifted teacher, can you say with a straight face that your co-workers are all competent? If a parent had a similar question, could you in good conscience tell them that they’d without a doubt be in better hands with the teachers than with every alternative?
You’re right. Some teachers are total crap. And I do think that alternatives are a good idea. I don’t have a problem with homeschooling. What I’m arguing about is the curriculum. Sure, curriculum in public schools could be improved. No question. But it is better than a politically/religiously motivated parent teaching misinformation to their kid.
“But while we’re on the subject, while I do not doubt your intelligence and assume you are gifted teacher, can you say with a straight face that your co-workers are all competent?”
Yep and not all doctors are competent but I’m not going to let my Uncle perform a heart transplant on me …
Education is not heart surgery. Not. Even. Close.
Jabster, this isn’t heart surgery. I wouldn’t claim I could teach my kids that, but I’m pretty sure I can teach them the stuff I learned in school and out of school. We’re talking about teaching kids how to add and multiply, how basic biology works, and how to diagram a sentence. Not heart surgery, which I have no idea how to do or how to teach.
@DF
So you’d be ok with non-certified teachers in state schools then?
Teaching children isn’t as simple as you all seem to be implying, and there’s certainly a lot more to it than subject knowledge.
Agreed, Garrett. I’ve argued that before. One of the things that irritates me about certain homeschoolers is their assumption that they can do what I do without any training. That is just flat out wrong. In this particular thread, I’ve chosen to focus on curriculum. One of my primary concerns is that certain groups of homeschoolers deliberately teach misinformation to their kids because they are really anti-intellectual religious nuts.
Teaching children isn’t as simple as you all seem to be implying, and there’s certainly a lot more to it than subject knowledge.
That’s certainly true, though I would readily deny that certified teachers are particularly better at the requisite skills than most anyone else. People are generally either good or poor at teaching, and the formal training thereto doesn’t make much of a dent in that. Practice helps, though, so formal teachers might have an edge there.
“I would readily deny that certified teachers are particularly better at the requisite skills than most anyone else. People are generally either good or poor at teaching, and the formal training thereto doesn’t make much of a dent in that.”
What??? No that is not true at all. A person in the general population hadn’t read the education literature on best practice and as such wouldn’t know what methodologies are more appropriate when facing certain challenges that inevitably arise when communicating information to a student.
In my last post, I shouldn’t have said “you all.” I’m really referring to Elemenope and Daniel.
Anyway, subject knowledge is important. But there’s a lot more to teaching. Differentiation of instruction, understanding how the brain develops, writing IEPs (individualized education plans), etc.
Let me put it a different way.
My parents were shockingly more effective teachers than my teachers at school right up to college. And I mean all of them. So either my education is the summation of a ridiculous statistical improbability (as I’ve had quite a few teachers, as has anyone who has gone to public school; at least *one* of them should be better if what you are claiming is true), or teachers are not as incredibly better at teaching than parents as you are claiming.
I’m certainly not the only one who has had that experience, and so while anecdote is not scientific evidence, it gives me personal cause to doubt your claim. Pedagogical methodology, with all its bells and whistles, pales in comparison to raw talent, because teaching is an art, not a science. Until it is a science, I doubt teachers by-and-large will be able to make sustainable claims about them being more efficacious at overcoming pedagogical hurdles than their didactic competitors.
My parents were shockingly less effective teachers than my teachers at school right up to college. And I mean all of them. So either my education is the summation of a ridiculous statistical improbability (as I’ve had quite a few teachers, as has anyone who has gone to public school; at least *one* of them should be worse if what you are claiming is true), or teachers are not as incredibly worse at teaching than parents as you are claiming.
Sorry Nope, but I have to disagree. You are very, very intelligent and teaching you would be easy. I’d like to see your parents teach any of the kids I have taught in public school (mainly special education kids and gang kids). Let’s see what their success rate would be then.
My parents were shockingly more effective teachers than my teachers at school right up to college.
Just to point out, it’s much, much easier to teach and discipline a single child in an informal setting than it is to teach and discipline a host of kids in a formal classroom.
One of the advantages of formal training is that it teaches you to handle a variety of different learning styles that are not your own. Odds are good that your own children will have similar learning styles to your own, and thus teaching them will be easier and more natural. This is one of the advantages to homeschooling: the “teacher” doesn’t have to be as good as a professional.
Of course, if the child does have a different learning style, then problems can develop. Without formal training, parents frequently don’t understand why the child isn’t picking up on things that should be simple. Problems ensue.
So either my education is the summation of a ridiculous statistical improbability (as I’ve had quite a few teachers, as has anyone who has gone to public school; at least *one* of them should be worse if what you are claiming is true), or teachers are not as incredibly worse at teaching than parents as you are claiming.
I didn’t claim they were generally worse, certainly not *incredibly worse*. I said they were *not better*. Very different claims.
In my one case, they were worse, which is enough evidence to justify me not believing the general presumption that they are better, seeing as how unusual it would be if teachers have a structural advantage as LRA is claiming, and yet still all fail to be better.
You are justified, if what you are saying is true, in sustaining the general presumption as far as your own personal beliefs about teachers and education.
———
Sorry Nope, but I have to disagree. You are very, very intelligent and teaching you would be easy.
If you’ve had any experience teaching intelligent people, you’d know that we are an epic pain-in-the-ass to teach. It is very difficult, albeit in different ways than teaching someone with a learning disability.
Just to point out, it’s much, much easier to teach and discipline a single child in an informal setting than it is to teach and discipline a host of kids in a formal classroom.
That makes a great deal of sense. And of course I would not expect a random parent to perform equally with a teacher in a classroom setting.
But of course the cases we are comparing are [single parent and their own children] vs. [teachers in a classroom], because practically speaking those are the two cases which present in our social context.
“If you’ve had any experience teaching intelligent people, you’d know that we are an epic pain-in-the-ass to teach”
LOL!!! That is true. I have taught very bright children and they were pains. However, they were still easy to teach because they understand and retain the information much much better. In fact, the pain in the ass part is that they generally want to dig deeper and know more. They aren’t satisfied with surface answers and won’t agree to something just because I say so. That can be a pain, but it is also a delight to see a kid really using her brain!
My well-regarded teacher education program didn’t involve courses on a specific subject such as math. You take exams to prove your subject knowledge. The first semester was devoted to things like child development theories, teaching strategies, classroom management and so on. The second semester was devoted to student teaching. An untrained person misses out on a lot.
Garrett,
It is so nice to have another teacher on here to defend our jobs! :) People seem to think that just anybody can do what we do. We sure don’t get the respect we deserve at times.
People seem to think that just anybody can do what we do. We sure don’t get the respect we deserve at times.
I don’t want to give that impression, and vorjack’s clarification helped me put it into words. What a teacher in a classroom is doing is fundamentally different from what a homeschooling parent is doing, process-wise, even though they are both ostensibly “teaching”. The contexts are entirely different, and the demand is likewise very unequal.
Teachers, by-and-large, are not valued by our society the way they ought to be, either in compensation or social respect. As a social role (disregarding for a moment the hotly debated issue of effectiveness), it is essential for establishing and reinforcing the notion for kids that knowledge is a valuable and desirable thing.
No worries, Nope! :)
It is so nice to have another teacher on here to defend our jobs! :) People seem to think that just anybody can do what we do. We sure don’t get the respect we deserve at times
Teachers are underappreciated. My in-laws were both teachers (mother in law and step-father in law); no doubt about it. But I hope you’re not talking about the conversation we’ve been having. I’ve never said your job isn’t necessary, and I have expressed my gratitude for the work you do on multiple occasions. If I’ve communicated otherwise, that certainly wasn’t my intent. The work that you do with special needs children is especially valuable
Thank you BRG, I appreciate that.
No one is saying that everyone can teach a classroom of kids effectively. Hell, 3/4 of my certified public school teachers couldn’t teach a classroom of kids effectively. It’s a tough job and one that requires more than certification — it requires passion and love and dedication and skill.
No one is saying that teachers aren’t necessary. All I’m saying is that most parents have the ability to teach their kids basic education if they wanted to. Not all. But if someone had 6 hours to sit down with their kid everyday, I bet most of them could teach their kids most pre-high-school education. I know for a fact I could, and I know lots of other parents who have done so successfully.
I don’t think everyone should do it — in fact, I think public & private education is best in most circumstances (for the child & for the economy). But if someone wants to and has the time & ability, I say go for it. It can’t be any worse than my public education, which was absolutely atrocious.
Daniel I agree with you. I don’t really have a problem with parents teaching pre-high school stuff. It’s the high school level stuff that I expect tougher standards for. Note that when I mention specific classes, I always mention high school level ones.
Oh, well I wish I’d known that before now. My parents have given all their kids the straight up choice on whether they’d like to go to high school or continue homeschooling. When you get to high school, teaching does become harder, and unless the student is able to learn directly from the textbook (like I did in math up through pre-calc) or the parent is a naturally good teacher in the harder subjects, having clearly defined standards of knowledge is incredibly important.
LRA, if what you’re arguing is being argued only for high school (and beyond) then I have soooooooo much less disagreement than I would otherwise.
It is possible to homeschool through high school, but the number of people who can do it successfully is definitely smaller.
This is such a relief to me, LRA, you have no idea. I was beginning to fear that you were beyond realism on this issue. I absolutely beyond doubt *know* that teaching at a high school level requires a sizable allotment of guts, and a great deal of practice; not to mention a lot of knowledge about the subject being taught.
If you are legitimately saying that what you have said before is primarily applicable to high school, then I think I can bring myself to give you a hug.
*hug*
JonJon, it’s my fault for not being clearer. I am/was a high school teacher, so in my head (in my world, I guess) when I think about school, the main place I visualize in the high school level. Also, it is the high school level that really counts for going to college. Colleges don’t look at elementary or junior high grades, so I generally am not referring to that when I worry about homeschoolers going to good colleges. When I worry about parents being incapable, it is because I’m imagining a parent trying to teach chemistry or physics or calculus or French or British literature (especially Shakespeare) to their kid without demonstrating that they are capable as such.
*hugs back*
Yay!
(Don’t worry, I got into a great college.)
There are home schooling setups in which it is possible to homeschool through high school, but they are far less common; unless you are really excellent at self-schooling (like I am) or have naturally competent parent-teachers, keeping up with high school standards at home is considerably harder than at times before it.
Heck, I didn’t even home school all the way through high school (just the first two years), and by the end I kind of had to teach myself math out of the book.
I’m so glad you aren’t *actually* a crazy person like I thought you were!
:D
LOL! Well, I’m glad you don’t think I’m crazy….
Daniel I agree with you. I don’t really have a problem with parents teaching pre-high school stuff. It’s the high school level stuff that I expect tougher standards for. Note that when I mention specific classes, I always mention high school level ones.
*falls out of his chair*
This is such a relief to me, LRA, you have no idea. I was beginning to fear that you were beyond realism on this issue.
+1. It’s a relief for me, too.
No one is saying that teachers aren’t necessary. All I’m saying is that most parents have the ability to teach their kids basic education if they wanted to. Not all. But if someone had 6 hours to sit down with their kid everyday, I bet most of them could teach their kids most pre-high-school education. I know for a fact I could, and I know lots of other parents who have done so successfully.
Yes, exactly. I think that’s check and mate, as LRA put it earlier?
And as you said, hardly checkmate. I’m sticking to my guns on this one. I think parents should have a certification (or at least sit for the certification exam) to teach their kids (mostly, and especially at the high school level). And while were at it, why would you assume I was talking about pre-high school stuff, anyway? Isn’t high school *part* of the public school experience? Do you really think that parents are qualified to teach all the core subjects *plus* electives to their kids? I certainly don’t.
If supports legislation that requires parental certification in order to homeschool, it would be illegal for anyone to homeschool without that certification.
The obvious way is to do it by individual topic. If a father is a certified welder, he is clearly qualified to teach his kids to weld. Similarly for other topics. It is simply impossible to treat it as a monolithic process. If the child is expected to reach a given standard in any given topic then the teacher must be qualified in that topic in order to ensure it is actually taught.
I think you can see that expecting someone with no knowledge of welding to turn out a child who can weld effectively would be completely unrealistic and you would not hire that person for a job that involved welding. If the child is to be certified as having passed any given topic in education that naturally the teacher must be evaluated in some way, such as a certification process on a per topic basis.
I can’t help but wonder if most of the fundie homeschoolers have the first clue about what goes on in a traditional public school.
As a fundie homeschooler… yes.
Thanks though.
I can’t help but wonder if most of the fundie homeschoolers have the first clue about what goes on in a traditional public school.
Well, that statement is so broad that it’s hard to know exactly what you mean. On the one hand, I certainly did; I had friends who were part of my social network that attended public schools.
On the other hand, it’s something I never experienced myself until I went to public school, and obviously there are things you never know until you experience it yourself.
I was homeschooled by very conservative catholic parents. I had a creationist “science” book, history from a conservative religious (catholic favored) perspective, religion-based spelling book, religious reading material, the whole shebang. Now, most of the time I didn’t do the homework I was supposed to be doing, and since my parents would only check over it every couple of weeks, I guess the kid/young adult me thought the bi-weekly grounding was worth the free time during the week.
Strangely enough, I had unfettered unsupervised internet access, and was taken to the library at least once a week to check out (also, strangely, unmonitored) reading material. So I put my free time to good use. I was given two sets of tools from which to form my education and personality, and thankfully chose the glorious world of wikipedia, google, PBS documentaries, and library non-fiction instead of religious brainwashing.
I guess the point is that I could have been really messed up, but I graduated as an atheist with a computer science degree at 19 instead. I wasn’t socialized well, but I’m no less awkward than my college and work buddies, who were public or catholic schooled.
“I wasn’t socialized well, but I’m no less awkward than my college and work buddies”
I was going to say something about computer geeks and socializing, but what the hell! Here it’s saturday morning and I’m posting comments in a blog.
The problem with homeschooling is that it depends on many factors and it has very few guarantees. It depends on the parents, if they were properly educated and are able to educate -not only in contents but also encouraging thinking- their own kids. Some parents will do a great work, others are going to fail.
And it also depends on the kids. Some of them will just do what their parents teach them. Others are going to look for their own ways. Some kids are brighter. You were lucky so…congrats!
You know, I had thought that this post would actually ease some of the tension – damn fool that I am.
Well I, for one, really appreciated it — especially the links to the research.
In college, I tried to write a research paper on this topic once, but I eventually had to give it up because of a lack of literature. Obviously, what we haven’t isn’t much, but it’s more than I was ever aware of before.
At least I know that my problem wasn’t that I couldn’t find the literature because I was a stupid homeschooler ;)
Nah! It seems that your problem was that an awful lot of homeschoolers think about their our government that they are “the enemy”.
But don’t worry about it…
there is some reliable data that shows that home schooled children do poorly when the go into a college setting. Christian students do even worse as they tend to not know what many colleges think are the basics. Home schooled are not use to the large number of other people as they are used to having all the attention, have poor study habits and interpersonal skills, and are generally not prepared for the reality of being with others. This is not universal, but does tend to hold true. Some universities are careful about admitting these children because they are not aware of what they are knowledgeable about, they do not have a curriculum available and no past testing data. If you do home school, get information of what the local district is teaching and try and include that. Christian no science, only bible, non-investigative home schooled do not tend to finish college, they just do not have the skills and knowledge.
Anne, I’m not going to let you slide on all this:
there is some reliable data…
Where? Not a rhetorical question. If it’s there, I would truly love to see it.
You just made some enormous claims, not just about homeschoolers but Christians generally.
Christian students do even worse as they tend to not know what many colleges think are the basics.
I call BS. That’s actually pretty offensive, if you take the time to think about it.
I could be mistaken but I think she meant “students who are homeschooled because of their Christianity” for “Christian students”.
Maybe, maybe not.
I agree with brgulker, pics or it didn’t happened
Well… education is sadly lacking all over the spectrum now. According to the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs, 75% of Oklahoma high school students can’t name the first president of the United States. (For those outside the US who don’t realize, this is HUGE. We’ve only got 200 years of history, and the beginning of it is most of what we learn. Plus, you know, he’s on the money, he’s got a state, and he’s got the US Capital named after him. I say this b/c a Canadian guy on another forum accused me of being an Oklahoma hater for mentioning any of this.)
Btw, “data” is a plural word. It should be “there are some reliable data.” /grammar nerd
The wonderful thing about grammar is because so many people say “is” with data, it will become correct. Before long people will be correcting people who use the outdated “are.”
I use “is” with data because I think it sounds better, grammar-by-the-book nerds be damned. ;)
VorJack, I appreciated the attempt to smooth feathers! There should be research done, but I don’t know who we’re going to get to finance it. I wonder if parties in the Department of Education are interested in looking at this at all.
So are homeschool curricula monitored at all? I mean, is anybody checking whether these kids are learning anything? The only person I know who homeschooled her kids is indeed a certified teacher. I really don’t know much of anything about it other than it’s popular with the whackjob godbots.
Also, I got bored before I finished reading the war, so I don’t know if this has been addressed. But here in Massachusetts there is a standardized test you have to pass in order to graduate high school. Is anybody giving this type of test to people who are homeschooling their kids? Or can any illiterate bum just say “hay i be gonna edumacate muh kidz at teh home here” and that is that? (That was in Pete the Puma’s voice in my head, btw…)
This is a helpful FAQ about the rules and regulations for homeschooling in Massachusetts. As to your specific question, no, homeschooled kids do not need to take the MCAS. However, the lesson plans for homeschoolers are required to be pre-approved by the superintendent’s office.
Wow, that’s… depressing.
In Washington State, homeschoolers must pass the high school exit exam, just like everyone else. Additionally, they are required to take standardized progress tests every year.
You are so right! I was homeschooled in high school, and I have found that I was at a disadvantage when I went to college because of my home education- unlike what homeschoolers claims.
I’ve written about my experiences at : Disadvantages of Homeschool
Elemenope wrote, “Yeah, so let’s leave it in the competent hands of the state. I’m sorry if that doesn’t leave me with a confident feeling.”
I’m a licensed teacher in the state of Oregon. I have a lot of problems with the way we’re educating our young public school students (NCLB has made things infinitely worse). We the people can use the legislative process to force change.
I’m not against homeschooling, per se, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to demand that homeschoolers meet certain requirements. What those requirements ought to be is open for discussion/debate.
I don’t think it is unreasonable either. I think getting a teaching certificate to teach your kid to read is silly, but if we wanted to increase standards for kids who don’t go to high school I think I might be open to that.
I’m not against homeschooling, per se, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to demand that homeschoolers meet certain requirements. What those requirements ought to be is open for discussion/debate.
Absolutely.
Some people are just afraid of the state.
Wow, I’m incredibly shocked by the ignorance and intolerance of the vast majority of comments on this posting. As if the public school system is not overflowing with illiterate and social misfits. Test scores continue to go down every year, no child left behind continues to destroy teachers ability to actually teach, violence, drugs and promiscuity are rampant. Is that what you’re comparing homeschooling to? Sure there’s some nut-jobs, but you’re gonna find that in every walk of life. The vast majority of homeschoolers are perfectly normal, highly educated individuals who take it upon themselves to educate their children.
Do you really think it’s the government’s job to educate? It wasn’t until the 1970′s that the Department of Education even came into existence. How have test scores done since then I wonder?
A study came out earlier this year on academic achievement between homeschoolers and public schoolers. You can read the results here.
If you want to see a good role model of homeschooling, look at Tim Tebow, the Heisman trophy winning quarterback for the University of Florida. He’s a great example of homeschooling in action.
How is someone who excels at athletics a good role model for the scholastic value of homeschooling?
I see your anecdotal evidence and raise you one anecdote!