Homeschooling | Forum

Eeehhhh....  I think homeschooling should be allowed, but discouraged. In terms of teaching  academic subjects, frankly your average parent just isn't going to be able to do as well as an actual, you know, teacher. The school system isn't perfect, but to think you can do a better job than a trained professional is kind of fallacious thinking. 

That being said, I do think it should still be allowed, within reason. I think that any parent wishing to homeschool their kids should be made to attend compulsory classes on the basics of educational theory and practice. In addition, homeschooling must always adhere to the core curriculum of the public schools, including requiring similar text books. 

I still think it's a bad idea though, because the miniature social jungle that is grade school is the best way for youngsters to practice their social skills. No amount of play dates or extracurricular activities can make up for the constant face to face interaction of real school. 

Quote from Khandnalie In terms of teaching academic subjects, frankly your average parent just isn't going to be able to do as well as an actual, you know, teacher.

I agree with you here. Teachers are specialized, each in his/her own academic field. An average parent lacks all the skills and necessary knowledge that school teachers have. This is why only the minority of parents teach their kids at home. I'm sure it requires a lot of skills, patience and commitment, and of course time. Take it into consideration though that parents who home-school their children cooperate at times, teaching each other's children. So then you don't have one parent teaching the child everything, but a group of parents taking turns to teach their children the subjects they know best.

Homeschooling might be an alternative to the public schools, especially that not all teachers are really dedicated to their work. However, it should be controlled somehow because it could be used by the religious fundamentalists to teach creationism, for example.

Quote from Khandnalie I still think it's a bad idea though, because the miniature social jungle that is grade school is the best way for youngsters to practice their social skills.

Sure, the school provides an opportunity for children to learn social skills and to learn how to cope with stress and interpersonal conflicts. On the other hand, a school is rather an artificial environment and quite an old-fashioned one. When compulsory education was introduced, its aim was to prepare youngsters to work in the factories. This was the beginning of the capitalist system and most people worked in factories, hence so rigid time schedule. The world has changed a lot since that time, the education system not so much.

My parents didn't believe in public education so all of my siblings and I were home schooled. This was during a time when only weirdos and religious nutters home schooled, before the internet and other resources made it "easy" or moderately understood. Once the state realized what my parents were doing we had to take proficiency exams every few years, but other than that and some nosy neighbors, we were pretty much left alone.

We didn't have typical days, and I didn't have a set "curriculum" until I hit my early teens. Essentially, I spent my childhood being a child, and I think that's the best way to go. If I wasn't outside getting into stuff or making things, I was at home or the library reading. I had writing assignments at times, but there were no deadlines and I could choose to write about anything that struck my fancy. I don't really remember learning mathematics but apparently I did well enough to pass the exams (though they were the only remedial classes I had to take at uni). Oi, and then there were the dance lessons, music lessons, gymnastics classes, art classes, language classes with bilingual home schooling families, and half a dozen other "social opportunities" my parents provided us.

Neither of my parents held advanced degrees at the time, yet we'd sit around the table at dinner and discuss Plato's theory of forms, May and anxiety, or Rousseau's social contract. The most valuable lesson they taught me was how to think--how to think critically, and question, and how to find answers--not what to think and which dates were important to memorize.

To be fair, I still suck at maths, and I couldn't explain more than a few basic principles of chemistry without sounding like a total moron. However, my interests simply weren't there, and my parents respected that and didn't push beyond what was required for proficiency exams (my little brother is the astrophysicist of the family anyway).

If I ever spawned, it's the only path I'd choose for my kids.

Quote from Sorrows

That being said, I do think it should still be allowed, within reason. I think that any parent wishing to homeschool their kids should be made to attend compulsory classes on the basics of educational theory and practice. In addition, homeschooling must always adhere to the core curriculum of the public schools, including requiring similar text books.

That is a reasonable requirement, without question.

Why is this a reasonable requirement--and without question, to boot?

Quote from AnnaCzereda Homeschooling might be an alternative to the public schools, especially that not all teachers are really dedicated to their work. However, it should be controlled somehow because it could be used by the religious fundamentalists to teach creationism, for example.

This happens anyway and has been for years. The few home schooling groups I went to as a kid were 80% some-flavor-of-fundamentalist-Christian, with some weirdos and Buddhists thrown in for flavor. Religious nutters are gonna religious nutter, whether or not home schooling is a factor.

Quote from AnnaCzereda Teachers are specialized, each in his/her own academic field. An average parent lacks all the skills and necessary knowledge that school teachers have.

This is pretty much a non point nowadays with the advances of the internet, the wealth of resources available to home schooling families, and online youtube classes (think Khan Academy). When I was younger people got around that issue by networking with other parents (as you've mentioned) or simply hiring tutors. My parents hired an undergrad at the local university to help my little brother when his studies got to that point and it was evident he needed assistance. A few hours a week and a kid got beer money, home cooked dinner, and even laundry washed. Win-win all around.

Point is... it's no excuse to set limitations on parents who want to home school, and it seems like that is what you are advocating.

I've dealt with broken, bloody, dying and dead children before, too. More than once or twice. I understand and share your sentiments about parents who, if we want to be totally honest with ourselves, don't even deserve to breathe. We can discuss this if you'd like, but it's kind of beside the current point I was poking at.

Quote from Sorrows however, stating that any and all parents should be allowed to teach their children at home without any oversight is a bit naive.

So you are arguing from a stance of "protect the children from abusive/neglectful fucks," or from the idea that parents without specialized training lack the ability to teach their children as well as a certified teacher in a public classroom? This is what you agreed with without question: I think that any parent wishing to homeschool their kids should be made to attend compulsory classes on the basics of educational theory and practice. In addition, homeschooling must always adhere to the core curriculum of the public schools, including requiring similar text books. - Khandiwhatever

So, again, I ask why. Which educational theories are we talking about? The biggies, the oldies, the up-and-comers? Which theorists? Erikson, Piaget, Vygotsky? Ivan Illich? :)

Convince me that whichever social science or English book the local public school uses is better than something I could find in the library. Make a reasonable argument as to why 14-year-old largely autonomous me should read some new YA book I've no interest in for class rather than The Stand (because that booked rocked so hard I read it twice during the summer '97).

Quote from Sorrows Are you certain that you wish to be a champion for all people to be able to educate their child(ren) without any oversight?

That depends on whether or not I get a nifty shiny badge to show for my trouble. Ooh, or maybe a sword. Can I have a sword?

Who said anything about not having oversight?

Bottom line: you and Khandiwhatever decided putting certain limitations and educational prerequisites on parents who want to home school is a good idea. You thought it was such reasonable requirement, you even said as much with no questions asked! I've learned from the past that Khandiwhatever is, well, not quite the sharpest crayon in the box, so I'm asking you to elaborate.

Edit: when you edit out large chunks of your text, it makes me look like I'm pulling crap outta my bum. Just sayin'.

Quote from Sorrows It is more than reasonable to establish some minimums for those who wish to home school their families.

Actually, in my country all parents who wish to educate their children have to follow the core curriculum which is obligatory for both public and private schools. It's supervised by the state education authorities. The children's progress is verified by the regular tests which they have to take at their local schools. The choice of the handbooks belongs to the parents, but again these have to be authorized by the Ministry of Education.

So it's not like the parents can teach the children whatever the hell they wish. Education is controlled by the state so if someone starts teaching creationism instead of evolution theory, they will have troubles. Anyway, most Poles don't even know what creationism is.

Funny Fnord should say about the students being taught enough just to be employees. John Rockefeller once gave a speech on standards of schools and what each type of school was to aim for. The founding of the American Education Board with Rockefeller and Gates started in 1902 and in the next couple of decades showed state schools educated enough for basic jobs and anything more than that would cost.

As Rockefeller said in his speech on educating people for their class structure,, “There are enough lawyers, doctors and so on being taught in private school. So state schools aim is to educate just enough to function in a basic labouring job”. This is why creativity is not a major aim in schools.

Side note; The Rockefeller family invested more money into education in the founding decades of the GEB than the government.

So,,, creativity is not going to be a major focus for many teachers. If a person feels they need to add creativity to a child's education, then I have a couple of questions.

What stage should the extra teaching start?

Would they actually be interested in it?

I don't know about other countries or states, but public education here is shit. It's mostly just busywork and excessively explained concepts meant to fill class time that could be spent moving on to something else. There is little diversity in teaching style, which means if your preferred way of learning or pace isn't standard, you'll have to deal with it. I find one of the biggest problems with most classes is that the teachers regard the class as a collective group that learns the same way rather than a bunch of individuals sitting in a room together.

...Not to mention that the faculty is allowed too much power over the students, and act as though they are a parent rather than a public education worker.

Homeschooling is better, depending on the parent. I think issuing tests/quizzes and letting people learn the necessary information on their own is an ideal way of learning and assessment.

Homeschooling induced social isolation is worth it. There are many other ways to meet people (especially because of the internet) anyway.

Quote from Sorrows Anywho, that's what I've really been thinking. Should've started off by saying that.

I agree. Revealing yourself as a zealot rather than someone who might be interested in a discussion would have saved me a few minutes.

I lean on the side of either public schooling, over homeschooling. 

Let's admit one very basic fact of life: It's not the grades you make, but the hands you shake. This makes public schooling infinitely more valuable than homeschooling, simply because you are exposed to more people.

What is taught at school, be it indoctrination or arbitrary bullshit by teachers, can be fixed at home. If you have the time to homeschool your child, you have the time to fix any problems that may arise.

So yeah, when people say homeschooling is lacking in the social aspect, it's not just about friends. It's about your child's future network of contacts. His future power over others. Isolation gives one no power.

My daughter is going to go to public school. If I can afford it, an elite private school. Because it's all about the other people in that school, not necessarily what is being taught.

I used to be a governess which involves home-schooling other people's kids. A lot of cattle properties in Australia are very remote and the children of property owners  don't have access to regular schools. Often the kids will home-school until high-school and then they stay in at a boarding school. It was fun and I loved the flexibility - being able to spend extra time on things they struggled with and race through stuff that came easily. As well as me working through the correspondence lessons the kids also got a two-way radio lesson with their class and teacher each day. Of course, that was over 20yrs ago - I'm sure they have internet classrooms now. 

I actually am doing my Diploma of Graphic design through an online  college now.

I also taught my son pre-school via correspondence because I was a cook on a cattle property at the time. I opted not to continue his schooling in this manner simply because I don't believe he was suited to it at an individual, so I moved and settled elsewhere before he started primary school. My point being, I definitely think some kids are more suited to home-schooling than others.