Max, you haven't been to public school in quite some time, have you? It is public school that teaches the test.

Your correct I went to a private super prep school thru 9th grade then went to a HS that was really good,so good it was to be on 20/20 one year for the most crimes in a HS vs the highest GPA in a HS, they considered in a phenom. But compared to my private school HS was a complete joke. I didn't study and was already at a college level at that time. It was basically jumping hoops to complete and I left early and graduated early. I'm sure many here went the same route.

 

I don't know what you guys are so cynical about. You obviously have no clue what you're talking about, and you're demonizing a really good thing. Having experienced both home school and public school from a student's perspective, I can say that home schooling is best from an academic standpoint. The only place where it is lacking, is the social standpoint. I was socially inept by the time I got to school. I spent a whole year in silence, just learning to interact. It wasn't until I started smoking pot that I really was able to make friends easily. Home schoolers need to be proactive about getting their kids involved in activities with other kids so they don't turn out awkward or delinquent like me. Otherwise, great deal for everybody.

That means the world to me. I 'd much rather my kid (or myself for that matter) to be a worker than not be able to hold a natural conversation and maintain eye contact.

 

That means the world to me. I 'd much rather my kid (or myself for that matter) to be a worker than not be able to hold a natural conversation and maintain eye contact.

Yes it is very important. Thankfully I was thrust into the real world while I still had some pliability left in my personality. I think I turned out alright, but I have met some other home schooled people who are outright weird. I also cross paths with several people every day who are equally strange, who attended public school since kindergarten.

 

That means the world to me. I 'd much rather my kid (or myself for that matter) to be a worker than not be able to hold a natural conversation and maintain eye contact.

I've also seen the catholic school girl routine play out on home schooled kids. Their so sheltered then go off to college and are prepared for the temptations of modern day life. So they pretty much tail spin out of control. Its not a big group but I've seen it more then once where a home schooler cracked in the real world because of temptations.

 

Yes, over-reacting is another problem. It's similar to how some teenagers spend all their first salary money within 7 days, since they never learned how to build their own budget.

 

I've also seen the catholic school girl routine play out on home schooled kids. Their so sheltered then go off to college and are prepared for the temptations of modern day life. So they pretty much tail spin out of control. Its not a big group but I've seen it more then once where a home schooler cracked in the real world because of temptations.

That's basically what I did. It is temporary. I stayed stoned and in trouble from mid-9th grade until post-graduation. Barely graduated, with a ~70 average in most classes. I kept being a degenerate for a few months after I graduated. I was working as a furniture mover busting my ass in the Texas summer and burning through my pay faster than I could make it. It only took a few months before I realized that I was going to be a mover for the rest of my life and how bad that would suck. So I quit smoking for a few weeks and then went to see the recruiter.

Point is, parenting is the key. You instill values in a kid, when they're a kid, and those values stick. That kid might leave the path for a little while, but they remember where the path is, and how to get back to it. The kid won't admit it, but during the time they're off the path, they miss it.

On the other hand, if you don't instill those values; If you take your hands off the wheel and trust that the public school system and the TV will raise your kids, they can and do turn into permanent degenerates, with no hope of recovery. They were never shown the path, don't know where it is, don't care.

 

I've seen it both ways. A catholic family with strict father. Every child hated him. They left as soon as the law would allow and made their way into the world. All six still alive and 5 of them successful.

Then the family with a policy of no interference. Let the TV raise the kids. Let the children decide who they will be. The first child has HIV and 2 types of hepatitis from drugs and prostitution. She is in jail right now and only the police know how many times she has been arrested. The second child is dead. The third is a white collar prostitute. Much more careful about diseases.

I wish I could describe a family that worked between these two extremes. Take these 2 observations and make what you will of them.

 

In my school, they had different levels of instruction for different levels of learners. Those with high academic achievement were put into accelerated classes and those without were directed towards more vocational instruction. I was a little of both, because electronics was taught as a vocational class, like shop. The students in accelerated classes had no trouble in college. Most are very successful.

I took a 10 years detour as a US soldier, then finished college at age 32. I was the old man in the program

 

In my school, they had different levels of instruction for different levels of learners. Those with high academic achievement were put into accelerated classes and those without were directed towards more vocational instruction. I was a little of both, because electronics was taught as a vocational class, like shop. The students in accelerated classes had no trouble in college. Most are very successful.

Your high school was like mine. People tended to be in the academic area or the vocational area with some in each dabbling in the other. There were also many that just wanted the minimum number of the easiest classes with a D being their ticket out But on both sides of the house the programs were very strong. They had eight AP courses in both science and humanities or you could come out as a certified welder, auto mechanic, beautician, cabinet maker, auto body tech, electronics tech, and many others. They had a restaurant run by the students and people were routinely hired straight into management programs for major chains or started careers as chefs.

That was 1983. Those programs were strongly tracked and you couldn't get into a course unless you had at least a B in whatever the prerequites were. Thus, the students in the final courses were all well prepared and at about the same level so that the teacher could move the class along at a reasonable pace.

Now fast forward to about 1993. I was a grad student teaching college classes and was contacted by my high school's district and invited to be on a panel aimed at putting together an engineering tract for the district. There were about a dozen folks, mostly from area engineering firms, and all of us were excited to help bring this about. I was, in particular, because I was just becoming aware of how poorly prepared so many high schoolers were for college level work.

We met weekly for two months and every plan we put together was shot down for largely specious reasons. We kept trying because we believed that such a program was valuable. Finally, the wrangler from the district said, "Look, here is how it is. There is no way that any program will be approved unless any student -- ANY student -- can participate in it and have an equal likelihood of success." We spent a couple weeks futilely seeking an approach that we believed had merit in preparing students for an engineering path that could also meet the requirement that even the bottom kid in the school had to have equal access to and likely success in that same program. But by the third week we had all resigned from the panel and nothing ever came of it.

Switching to home schooling -- I lived in Colorado Springs and worked heavily with a national youth organization and since the home school movement is strong in that area I had a significant fraction of the kids in my unit that were home schooled, usually between 1/3 and 1/2. Without exception, the home schooled kids were far better prepared academically and, in most cases, physically and socially, as well. In this organization there were, at the time, three "milestone" awards. The first of these is an award earned by a little less than 10% of the people that start the program, which is roughly comparable to the fraction of Boy Scouts that earn their Eagle Scout (depending on exactly how you do the counting you get numbers from 2% to 7%). One of our home schoolers earned that first milestone award the same month that he earned his Eagle Scout and stated that it was much more challenging to earn ours than the Eagle Scout. He went on to earn both of the other two milestone awards. The last one is awarded to about 1 person in 1000; most units go years (or decades) without anyone earning. Our unit of about 30 kids saw seven of them awarded in the space of about five years with all but one of them going to a home schooler. During roughly that same time frame we also had at least eight receive appointments to the Air Force Academy, with five of those, I believe, being home schooled. The Academy tracks the success of pretty much every category of cadet that they can think of and home schooled cadets have a significantly higher success rate at the Academy than almost any other group they track.

But consider the reality of home schooling. It is highly self-selective. Few parents, even those convinced of its merits, will attempt it because it is a daunting undertaking requiring a significant commitment of time and effort. So those that do choose to home school are, largely, the ones confident they are up to the challenge or at least willing to devote the time and effort necessary to make it work. Next, no matter how committed a public school (or even private school) teacher is to their students' success, it pales in comparison to the motivation and commitment that a parent generally has; at the end of the day, a teacher's students are someone else's children whereas, for the home schooler, this effort is being done for THEIR child. And that's before you take into account that the teacher has 20 to 30 students at a time and, at the middle and high school levels, has a total of perhaps 100 to 200 total students that take classes from them over the course of a year. On top of that, a given teacher interacts with a given student for one or at most a few classes out of a twelve year educational journey whereas a home schooling parent is intimately involved with their child's journey all the way, giving them a level of insight into where that child is and needs to go that most teachers would love to have but will never come close to.

Then consider that when a public (or private) school student goes home from school, they are out of school. Their other activities seldom have any meaningful connection to their school work and, when one does exist, it is likely accidental and either overlooked or not exploited well. But for the home schooled, every project around the house, every vacation, every trip to the supermarket, even most movies and television shows they watch provide opportunities for the parents to make those connections in ways both apparent and subtle. And that's not even mentioning all of the activites done specifically to reinforce their kids' learning.

Now, I mentioned that, in my experience, home schooled kids tend to be more physically fit and socially adjusted than the typical public school kid. Why? To understand this, the first thing you have to understand is that the notion of home schooling as being a kid sitting at the kitchen table doing homework with the mother, while doing the household chores, reads to them from time to time from a text book on a subject she's never taken, and of that child never interacting with other kids their own age on any regular basis, has never been a very accurate depiction of the typical home school environment and it most certainly is not the case today. Home schooling, like other things, evolves over time and strives to identify and correct its shortcomings. Two of these are the physical fitness and social interaction arenas.

Consider the physical fitness arena and the situation for most public school kids. They are required to take gym where they are expected to participate at least minimally in whatever activity is being done. If you show up every day for class, you are gong to pass no matter how little effort you put forth, how physically unfit you are, or how little progress you have made. Seriously, how many people ever fail gym class? But now consider the home schooler in which the same parents that have accepted the mantle for their child's academic education now realize that they are also responsible for their child's physical education. As with academics, they are highly motivated (remember, it's THEIR child) and in a position to monitor, encourage, and measure their child's progress and also to guide their child's physical activity and nutrition all day every day and not just when they are "in school". They can also match the physical activity to their child's interests and shift it as the interests shift. The result is much more enjoyable and intense "P.E." and the development of life-long habits. In my unit I've had home schoolers that competed at State in cross country or were competitive tae kwon do black belts, gymnasts, bicycle riders, volleyball players and other high-end athletic achievers. For the public schooled kids, there were a number that "played" sports of one kind or another but few were athletic achievers. This is not surprising because to achieve in athletics you have to commit enough time that it selcom leaves time for academics, let along organizations like ours. But, having said that, consider that so many home schoolers DID have both the time to commit to their athletic endeavors AND excel academically AND particpate (and excell) in our organization.

What about that social component? Again, the home schooling community recognized this issue some time ago and have aggressively tried to mitigate it. Many more resources are available to parents, ranging from just bringing the matter to their attention, underscoring the importance of social developemt, and offering alternatives on how to foster it. Home schoolers often collaboratie to come together regularly (usually a couple times a week) for things designed both for social development and academic/athletic development as well. You also tend to see more home schoolers doing volunteer work and/or participating in organizations like ours because they are good avenues to promote social development.

As for home schoolers taking resources from otherl kids, that's just silly. The parents pay the same taxes toward public education as any other parent and the school district receives the same amount of money (since home schooled kids generally count toward the district census). Hence the district has fewer kids which translates into smaller classes with more money per pupil.

 

Thanks, WBahn, for this extended exposition.

However, what you describe is simply out of my reality and boundaries of imagination. I can't see it happening around me, but that's just because I am a total stranger to it.

In Greece, I have never heard of any child being home schooled, ever. The only cases I know are about mentally deficient children.

The only flaw I see in that system is that a parent must do the work of the teacher. How can a person take up such a task for a good 6 years (does highschool count too?) without extended prior education and training? I consider teaching one of the hardest things to do, and an elementary school teacher is anything but an unskilled job (or at least it shouldn't be).

 

The same school I described earlier was featured in a national news story a couple years ago. The school has an aggressive physical fitness program aimed at reducing child obesity. Traditionally, school PE programs focused on the jocks and pretty much ignored the needs of the less athletic students. In this program, all students are being given a more focused physical fitness program regardless of their athletic ability. Maybe this school is a special case. I've been told more than once that I had an exceptional education. Odd because I grew up in a typical working class neighborhood in Texas.

Although my old school had a college preparation tract, we were always encouraged to participate in a other activities which in my opinion were helpful for creating a well rounded educational experience. I took advantage of many of these programs and was well glad of it. Twenty years later when my kids were in school, I found that little had changed. The academics standards were still pretty high and the activities were still available, which the kiddos took advantage of, just like their old man. They all graduated college and are living happy, productive lives Maybe I got lucky twice. Or maybe the schools aren't as bad as the hype would suggest. I always believed that people blame schools for their kid's poor performance, whereas they might assume a little more responsibility. Case in point; when I moved to Tucson, my landlord, who's kid was struggling through life, would rant about how poor the school is, and how it ruined his child's life by not providing a proper education. Now, this is the same school my kids attended, but with a very different result. I would take criticism of education with a grain of salt now, as my experiences have been very different from what I hear.

Where I live in Alabama, there are good schools and bad schools. Most of my friends send their children to a nationally recognized academic school in an affluent neighborhood, and the children excel in just about every way imaginable, academics, sports, arts, etc. On the other side of town a lot of 'latch key' kids attend lessor schools and don't get the same results ( although one of these schools has won the state basketball title several times in my time there ) So, there is much more to the story besides the choice to home school the children.

 

The only flaw I see in that system is that a parent must do the work of the teacher. How can a person take up such a task for a good 6 years (does highschool count too?) without extended prior education and training? I consider teaching one of the hardest things to do, and an elementary school teacher is anything but an unskilled job (or at least it shouldn't be).

But you need to keep several things in mind.

Teachers are educated and trained in order to deal with other people's kids. But much (not all) of what they are doing are things that all parents, some better than others, are expected to do with their own kids right out of the box (or, more accurately, learn via OJT). Teachers are limited in the amount of control and influence they can exert over a child, legally, morally, and practically, in ways that parents are not.

And never forget the level of self-selection that is going on. The very fact that a parent sets off on the home schooling path makes them a very non-representative parent. Plus, if someone decides to home school and after a few months it just isn't working as well as public school, guess what? They stop home schooling! There are very, very few parents that are so dogmatic that they are going to keep doing something for a decade or so and watch their child get further and further behind. So the one's the keep home schooling are the ones that are doing it well.

I think some teachers feel threatened, unnecessarily IMHO, by the notion that successful home schooled kids somehow indicate that perhaps teaching isn't a very skilled profession. But anyone that makes that claim is making the classic fallacy of taking what happens in very special and unusual circumstances and applying it to the general case. Most parents would not do all that well in a traditional classroom. I will even say that most successful home school parents would not do all that well in a traditional classroom. Furthermore, for reasons both similar and different, most parents would probably not do too well as home schoolers, either. But the home school environment is so heavily biased in favor of success because of so many factors that not even most private schools, let along public schools, can match that dedicated and motivated parents willing to put in the effort have a good chance of achieving superior results.

 

I will have to disagree with several of the statements above. I have known several parents that are not qualified teachers homeschooling, but in their stubborness to not admit they are wrong continue down the same path anyhow. I have also know people who were better indeed, but the damage done to the former is basically irreversible. In one of these cases the state (not Texas) intervened and forced the kids into public schools, where they had to receive remedial education.

Do not forget there have been a case in the news lately were a 10 year old boy was allowed to starve to death. Abuse can take many forms, with out any followup abuse can proceed without interference.

 

Your argument is along the lines of disagreeing with someone saying, "Most minor cuts do not become infected and therefore do not need medical attention," by citing some case in which a minor cut became infected and the person had to have the limb amputated. That's not a counhter at all because the original claim was not that ALL minor cuts do not become infected. The claim is completley consistent with the counter example.

The same here. I never stated that NO home school parent would ever keep home schooling when it wasn't working, merely that they are few. Thus, citing one case where intervention was required or saying that you've known several that weren't qualified is not inconsistent with what I said. You need to show evidence that the fraction is high enough to render the claim false.

Considering that there are somewhere in the neighborhood of two million kids being home schooled in the U.S., it will take a lot of individual cases where it is not working well to rise to the level of being a counter to the claim that it is, especially in light of the demonstrated results that on measures such as the ITBS and TAP test batteries home school students do considerably better than private school students, which do considerably better than public school students. This is particularly telling when you consider that it is comparing students based on enrolled grade and not age and about a quarter of home schooled students are enrolled one or more grades ahead of their age. When the data is compared by age, the median home school kid is performing 1 to 2 grade levels above the national average and by eighth grade the median home school kid is 4 to 5 grade levels above the national average.

Furthermore, despite always hearing about how girls underperform relative to boys in school and the need to address it, there is virtually no difference in performance based on gender for home schoolers. There is also no difference in performance based on whether at least one of the parents is a certified teacher, underscoring the claim that teacher certification does not appear to be a significant factor in home schooling, but also needing to emphasize that this bears no relevance to whether teacher certification is valuable in the public classroom -- different question entirely.

There were differences noted in the performance among home schoolers when looked at in terms of parent educational level, median income, amount of time spent watching television, and so forth, but in all cases the median home school performs was well above the national average.

 

[...]Furthermore, despite always hearing about how girls underperform relative to boys in school and the need to address it[...]

I 'd like to point out the very local nature of the discussion by state that in general the opposite is happening here in Greece.

 

I 'd like to point out the very local nature of the discussion by state that in general the opposite is happening here in Greece.

I was definitely only referring to the situation in the U.S., and probably should have made that clear.

When you say that the situation is the opposite in Greece, I assume you mean that girls are outperforming boys in public education? I'm figuring that you are not saying that the performance is about the same in public school but that there is a big disparity in home schooled kids because I believe you said that home schooling in Greece is essentially nonexistent.

 

I 'd like to point out the very local nature of the discussion by state that in general the opposite is happening here in Greece.

Same here, Women out preform men in every test. Once you go into the working world it changes a bit though.

 

I was definitely only referring to the situation in the U.S., and probably should have made that clear.

When you say that the situation is the opposite in Greece, I assume you mean that girls are outperforming boys in public education? I'm figuring that you are not saying that the performance is about the same in public school but that there is a big disparity in home schooled kids because I believe you said that home schooling in Greece is essentially nonexistent.

Exactly: Home-schooling is non existent and girls do get a better grade total than boys in high school.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/homeschooling-most-harmful-myth-debunked-000010813.html
Good Article on the Myths of Home Schooling.