Homeschooling -- Recommended?

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

A homeschool co-op has the potential to become just an unregulated bureaucracy, with less accountability than today's public schools. Sort of like a neighborhood association.

On the contrary, because it's small and highly invested, it has the potential to be the most accountable. Strangers don't care nearly as much about each child as parents who know those children. Much less distant school officials and government bureaucrats.

This is simplistic. A situation in which one parent in every family has to forego a professional life (and the income it might bring) to coordinate and deliver education is incredibly wasteful of human resources. You might find homeschooling your own children to be personally fulfilling, but one person's individual notion of fulfillment is a bad yardstick for public policy decisions. In a democracy, it is everyone's job to worry about the issues that face society, at least as long as one wishes to belong to that society. "Government by the people" works only when people educate themselves on the issues and get involved.

Yes, it is. Simplicity works best. Contrast that with the way our burgeoning government works now. See a correlation?

And teaching children is a part of the human experience. What more important issue is there, really? Parents should not procreate if they will shirk this most important facet of raising human beings. If they do shirk, it falls to society to pick up the slack, yes, but that should be the exception, not the rule, as it currently is set up.

That is easy to say if one has adequate income. If not, it becomes a choice between paying rent, buying food, going to the doctor, or if you had your way, educating one's child.

It is not society's responsibility to support one's existence. There are other, creative ways to live within one's means.

Our educational system is already decentralized in that there is substantial local control of school districts. The problem is not that the federal or even state government is overcontrolling education and failing to respond to change. These problems exist on the local level. School districts are not responsive enough to parents, and have lost sight of their primary goal which is educating students and preparing them academically for adult life. Parents do not realize how much control and influence they have, much of which is already codified in public law. They too readily just do what they are told by teachers and administrators, whether it is beneficial for their child or not. What we need instead is for parents to bring the homeschool co-op mentality to the public school system, so they have the input and control, while getting the resources, consistency, efficiency, and accountability of the public but local system.

They still are not decentralized enough, however. Burned out teachers are not going to be very receptive to little Johnny's particular INTP-adhd personality as much as his mother/father/neighbor would be.

 

[Arthur Schopenhauer]

I was homeschooled. I would not recommend homeschooling unless the parent has an excellent understanding of the child's learning material, if the parent is not lazy with educating their child, if the parent prevents their child from being lazy and if the child is prevented from becoming socially inept.

My parent's chose the homeschooling route because it was the cheapest alternative...needless to say, adapting to society and catching up academically has been an issue for me.

Edit: I think that nurturing your child's academic interests is also very important. The material I used covered only the basic study groups such as math, literature, science, etc. and because of this I was never introduced to material such as programming or computers -- both of which are my current fields of study.

I had no idea what I wanted to do after high school.

 

[Coriolis]

On the contrary, because it's small and highly invested, it has the potential to be the most accountable. Strangers don't care nearly as much about each child as parents who know those children. Much less distant school officials and government bureaucrats.

This may be the theory of homeschool co-ops, but human nature tends to thwart that in practice. It becomes a small pond in which wanna-be big fishes can exercise authority. Yes, each family will put the needs of their own child(ren) first, perhaps as it should be, but the authority structure is inadequate to balance the sometimes competing needs and wishes in a fair way. The co-op will be run or organized not by those with the best skills or ability to do so, but with the most time on their hands (if you are lucky), or the biggest ego complex, or the greatest desire to be a busybody. I have seen this play out in a number of neighborhood associations, which work on the same principle. There is no requirement for transparency, and once contractual agreements are signed all round, there is very little legal recourse. Elected groups like school boards, by contrast, are bound by sunshine laws, recall provisions, and always by the next election. It is not perfect, but is better in practice.

And teaching children is a part of the human experience. What more important issue is there, really? Parents should not procreate if they will shirk this most important facet of raising human beings. If they do shirk, it falls to society to pick up the slack, yes, but that should be the exception, not the rule, as it currently is set up.

Feeding and clothing our familes is part of the human experience, too. Should all of us become farmers and tailors, then? We can abolish the Dept of Agriculture and the FDA. How about taking care of our kids when they are sick? We wouldn't be facing a doctor shortage now if more parents would stop outsourcing so much medical care. And the big one - protecting our families from outside dangers. Just think what a boon for decentralization it would be, not to mention a financial savings, to get rid of the Dept of Defense and rely on each family to defend its own home.

The logical outcome of your perspective is one in which every family is completely self-sufficient, providing for all of its own needs. If this is how you prefer to live, I am sure there are places where you can do so. For those of us willingly remaining members of a society, however, we acknowledge and expect greater interdependence than that. We get much better products as well as economies of scale by consolidating production and delivery. We can get further efficiency and greater fairness in distribution by consolidating payment, as with local emergency services.

It is not society's responsibility to support one's existence. There are other, creative ways to live within one's means.

It is society's responsibility to ensure that opportunities exist for those who put forth the effort to take advantage of them. You can't make the horse drink, but if there is no water, he has no choice.

They still are not decentralized enough, however. Burned out teachers are not going to be very receptive to little Johnny's particular INTP-adhd personality as much as his mother/father/neighbor would be.

The problem is not insufficient decentralization, it is insufficient parental involvement. A homeschool co-op, by virtue of its novelty, may help parents over this mental block, but there is nothing preventing them from asserting their very real authority now -- except their own reticence. And teachers would be less burned out if they were allowed to focus their energies on teaching. With smaller classes and teaching assistants, they will be able to address Johnny's ADHD in most cases.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

This may be the theory of homeschool co-ops, but human nature tends to thwart that in practice. It becomes a small pond in which wanna-be big fishes can exercise authority. Yes, each family will put the needs of their own child(ren) first, perhaps as it should be, but the authority structure is inadequate to balance the sometimes competing needs and wishes in a fair way. The co-op will be run or organized not by those with the best skills or ability to do so, but with the most time on their hands (if you are lucky), or the biggest ego complex, or the greatest desire to be a busybody. I have seen this play out in a number of neighborhood associations, which work on the same principle. There is no requirement for transparency, and once contractual agreements are signed all round, there is very little legal recourse. Elected groups like school boards, by contrast, are bound by sunshine laws, recall provisions, and always by the next election. It is not perfect, but is better in practice.

I haven't really seen that in practice though. Cooperatives are usually of agricultural origin, but they tend to be the most healthy (organic food coops, farmers market coops, etc.) and more receptive to the needs of the community. I think this is because they understand that there are things more important than the almighty dollar. There is no reason this wouldn't extend to educational coops, health coops, etc.

Feeding and clothing our familes is part of the human experience, too. Should all of us become farmers and tailors, then? We can abolish the Dept of Agriculture and the FDA. How about taking care of our kids when they are sick? We wouldn't be facing a doctor shortage now if more parents would stop outsourcing so much medical care. And the big one - protecting our families from outside dangers. Just think what a boon for decentralization it would be, not to mention a financial savings, to get rid of the Dept of Defense and rely on each family to defend its own home.

Sorry, but if we adopt a more decentralized, grassroots models for our needs (for education, food, health, and well-being) we wouldn't need the FDA and other government oversight operations. In fact, I can name several problems the FDA has directly caused me and people who are independently minded. One is making it a federal crime to sell raw milk to local, interested consumers. Another is all the herbal hubbub regarding supplementation. Another is making it virtually impossible to sell some homemade goods without expensive licensure, even when consumers are informed there is no licensure. The federal government takes away our choice, and tells us what we can consume and not consume. It is a direct violation of our liberty.

Families have been trained to rely (needlessly and, in many cases, tragically) on allopathic physician-based illness care, or costly, worthless 'preventive' care. It takes time to reeducate about how little one actually needs to see the doctor. It doesn't happen overnight. But the AMA lobby is HUGE, as you can imagine, so it won't be easy.

But, yes, people need to take more responsibility all around, not just regarding the educating of our children.

And I'm all for having a strong military to protect us.

The logical outcome of your perspective is one in which every family is completely self-sufficient, providing for all of its own needs.

No. My perspective means one is interdependent. But interdependent upon one's own little community. It actually allows for MORE interaction of individuals and families because a person and family will be more motivated to get involved if it directly affects/benefits them or their neighbor. That is just human nature.

I'm talking about reclaiming our society, but doing it by making small little pockets of networks within larger networks versus bulky governmental systems that are not sensitive to the needs of individuals and families.

It is society's responsibility to ensure that opportunities exist for those who put forth the effort to take advantage of them. You can't make the horse drink, but if there is no water, he has no choice.

Society is a representation of human endeavor on a small or large scale, depending. I believe society owes no one anything, but would be more caring and accommodating to those in need if each person felt more fulfilled and needed.

The problem is not insufficient decentralization, it is insufficient parental involvement. A homeschool co-op, by virtue of its novelty, may help parents over this mental block, but there is nothing preventing them from asserting their very real authority now -- except their own reticence. And teachers would be less burned out if they were allowed to focus their energies on teaching. With smaller classes and teaching assistants, they will be able to address Johnny's ADHD in most cases.

It's hard for people to get involved when they feel like it's difficult or unremoved; or it is so broken getting involved wouldn't make much difference.

People like to get on board with things that have potential and feel exciting. Build it and they will come and all that.

 

[Ivy]

Oh man, I have definitely seen the busybody effect on co-ops here. There has been MAJOR drama around here on account of our mfing FARMER'S MARKETS, of all things. It's just sad to see the granolas bicker. But these little insular communities tend to get incestuous and blow up over some tiny bone of contention, without any outside air.

 

[Coriolis]

I haven't really seen that in practice though. Cooperatives are usually of agricultural origin, but they tend to be the most healthy (organic food coops, farmers market coops, etc.) and more receptive to the needs of the community. I think this is because they understand that there are things more important than the almighty dollar. There is no reason this wouldn't extend to educational coops, health coops, etc.

See Ivy's response. I know it happens in homeowners associations.

Sorry, but if we adopt a more decentralized, grassroots models for our needs (for education, food, health, and well-being) we wouldn't need the FDA and other government oversight operations. In fact, I can name several problems the FDA has directly caused me and people who are independently minded. One is making it a federal crime to sell raw milk to local, interested consumers. Another is all the herbal hubbub regarding supplementation. Another is making it virtually impossible to sell some homemade goods without expensive licensure, even when consumers are informed there is no licensure. The federal government takes away our choice, and tells us what we can consume and not consume. It is a direct violation of our liberty.

We can balance that against all the people who are affected when contaminated meat and produce gets into the stores. If the entire food production system became more decentralized, that would limit the damage that could be done by a single supplier, but I'm still not sure customer response would be enough to rein in those who are being sloppy and cutting corners to the point of a health risk. How many people would have to get sick or die before the public would figure out they shouldn't buy [whatever] from the offending supplier? I don't know about you, but bake sales and farmers' markets abound in my area, and don't seem to be hampered by excess regulation. We even have a dairy that sells raw milk.

Families have been trained to rely (needlessly and, in many cases, tragically) on allopathic physician-based illness care, or costly, worthless 'preventive' care. It takes time to reeducate about how little one actually needs to see the doctor. It doesn't happen overnight. But the AMA lobby is HUGE, as you can imagine, so it won't be easy.

Much of the unnecessary care is driven by the overall litigiousness of our society, and not by medical necessity. Doctors themselves admit this, as their careers are at stake, along with patients' well-being. The only way to reform this is to make malpractice law more realistic.

But, yes, people need to take more responsibility all around, not just regarding the educating of our children.

And I'm all for having a strong military to protect us.

So, you agree with outsourcing certain functions, but not others. That is generally how these arguments fall out. [/QUOTE]

 

[Randomnity]

I think it can work in an absolutely ideal situation, with parents who have great teaching personalities, control over their kids, lots of spare time and money (stay at home mom + money for activities), a large social network with other homeschooling parents, the knowledge and resources to teach complicated subjects, planning classes so that kids can go to college later, and most importantly the motivation to actually follow-through with all those plans.

Most of the time some of these elements are missing, IME, and the kids I've known haven't really turned out well as a result. Unfortunately, the vast majority of homeschooling parents tend to think they meet those criteria regardless of whether they actually do.

I tend to think it's only a good idea if your kids have severe special needs that can't be addressed by your school system, or in cases of severe bullying where there are no alternative schools, or if your public school is really really awful or unsafe. But sure, it can work well in a ideal situation. Although I'm not sure how you'd do things like real science labs without equipment and chemicals that aren't available to the general public. I think in most cases you're better served by teaching them at home in addition to public school - home projects, field trips, museums etc don't require full time homeschooling at all.

[MENTION=4939]kyuuei[/MENTION] - If they think it's too difficult without even trying it, I'd be really hesitant to persuade them to do it. It usually is far more difficult than expected, if you want to do it right, and it is a tremendous amount of work and requires a stay-at-home-parent. You have to be really dedicated to the idea for it to work out well and it sounds like your sister isn't really.

edit: I was homeschooled for about 6 months, although I don't think it's that relevant since it was so short. Bad experience, but I'm drawing more on my experiences with people who were homeschooled for years/entire K-12.

 

[Qlip]

kyuue - If they think it's too difficult without even trying it, I'd be really hesitant to persuade them to do it. It usually is far more difficult than expected, if you want to do it right, and it is a tremendous amount of work and requires a stay-at-home-parent. You have to be really dedicated to the idea for it to work out well and it sounds like your sister isn't really.

Seconded. It really is a big undertaking that I don't think would succeed if the person needs to be persuaded and encouraged to do it.

 

[Coriolis]

I tend to think it's only a good idea if your kids have severe special needs that can't be addressed by your school system, or in cases of severe bullying where there are no alternative schools, or if your public school is really really awful or unsafe. But sure, it can work well in a ideal situation. Although I'm not sure how you'd do things like real science labs without equipment and chemicals that aren't available to the general public. I think in most cases you're better served by teaching them at home in addition to public school - home projects, field trips, museums etc don't require full time homeschooling at all.

This sums it up well. Homeschooling is a good solution in some individual cases, but is bad general policy. Like abortion, it should be allowed, available, and effective, but rare.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

See Ivy's response. I know it happens in homeowners associations.


We can balance that against all the people who are affected when contaminated meat and produce gets into the stores. If the entire food production system became more decentralized, that would limit the damage that could be done by a single supplier, but I'm still not sure customer response would be enough to rein in those who are being sloppy and cutting corners to the point of a health risk. How many people would have to get sick or die before the public would figure out they shouldn't buy [whatever] from the offending supplier? I don't know about you, but bake sales and farmers' markets abound in my area, and don't seem to be hampered by excess regulation. We even have a dairy that sells raw milk.


Much of the unnecessary care is driven by the overall litigiousness of our society, and not by medical necessity. Doctors themselves admit this, as their careers are at stake, along with patients' well-being. The only way to reform this is to make malpractice law more realistic.


So, you agree with outsourcing certain functions, but not others. That is generally how these arguments fall out.

[/QUOTE]

I don't really have anything to respond with. You make some good points.

If you homeschooled (as I have always done), you might see more benefit than risk/liability in it.

I know it is superior to our educational system, at least for grade school. We seem to do a better job with high school, but it depends on the school systerm.

 

[Coriolis]

I don't really have anything to respond with. You make some good points.

If you homeschooled (as I have always done), you might see more benefit than risk/liability in it.

I know it is superior to our educational system, at least for grade school. We seem to do a better job with high school, but it depends on the school systerm.

Thanks for the interesting discussion, and for sharing your perspective. There are probably regional trends or tendencies in homeschooling, so I am seeing mostly the flavor in my locale.

 

[Werewolfen]

My second cousin who is 20 yrs older than me fathered another kid in 1995 by his really young second wife. All of his 3 kids before that kid were born in 1975, 77, 79 and all of them went to public school. His last kid is now 17 and was "supposed" to be home-schooled but they didn't do much of anything to teach him. The last time I saw him he was 13 and I doubt he could even read on a 1st grade level.

I'm not against home-schooling , I think it has more to do with how serious the parents are about teaching. The only thing they were concerned about was keeping him out of public school because the area they lived in had developed some extremely bad gang problems in school that had shootings a lot and they wanted to protect their son. I never got to know my 2nd cousin's very last kid who was home-schooled , but the one who was born in 1979 dropped out in the 7th grade and is doing really good now, I think mostly because he's ESTP and very extroverted, he was my favorite cousin.

I remember my ESTP cousin who dropped out in the 7th grade knew a girl his age that was home-schooled up until the time she was 14 and wanted to go to high school and got straight A's and even graduated a year early. It all depends on the parents is how I see it.

 

[Ricin]

no nonoonononononononononono
NO!!!!
Homeschooling is horrible. I hate it.
Public schooling teaches important things about life home school wont. Like how to interact with other people in this world. Basic conversation skills. How to make friends. Etc..

I've been home schooled since I was born till 9th grade.
High school was very awkward being the only 9th grader who didn't know what a blow job was and wasn't interested in dating at all. Most conversations I had ended with really weird looks. I didn't catch up socially at all. I still have trouble in social matters.

My siblings went to public schools and they do just fine with people.

Seriously. I don't suggest home school to anyone.

 

[Ricin]

My sisters and I have been brainstorming ideas for their children's education.. I suggested homeschooling as there are some great programs out there and public education is such a mess now-a-days. I feel strongly on education.. But they think homeschooling is too difficult and they won't be able to properly teach their kids. They are also worried about the lack of social interaction.. Which I think could be fixed by enrolling them into sports, independent art schools, etc.

If you homeschooled, did you find it intimidating? Did you warm up to it quickly? And most of all, would you recommend it?

If you were homeschooled, can you detail if you liked it or not? Did it benefit your education overall? If you went to college, did it help or hinder you getting in? Did you feel you were educated just as well as your peers?

I was called the smart weird kid when I got to high school. My home school education was apparently better than the public education. I was still very socially awkward and still have issues with socializing to this day. People say things to me about social situations that seem rather basic that I just don't fucking get a lot of times.

I wasn't interested in relationships for a while, and by the time I was I was far behind the curve. Even now I'm not really aware if I'm flirting or if people are flirting with me. So I just forget about it and find other things to do... Relationships [romantic and friendly] are something I have little to no control over. Which made me very depressed in college.

I was enrolled in sports while in home school. I only saw those kids at practice.

Initially I suggested not to do it. But really you just need to find some social group for the kids to be part of. Make sure they're in a nice neighborhood where they can meet other kids. And don't fucking move!!! Especially not frequently. That shit sucks. They'll lose all their friends and have to make new ones again. A lot of people I know seem to be very happy with their long term childhood friend they've known since they were 4.

Really you just gotta make sure there's some people they can play with and hang out with. Get crushes on whomever, learn how to interact and what's okay, not cool, and just plain weird.

 

[kyuuei]

[MENTION=16509]Ricin[/MENTION]

They're good points.. I've been contemplating a lot of the responses I've gotten here. I think a hybrid is probably the best option.. Especially with early education, having their days at school supplemented with home-school hours would be good.. when they're older, a saturday or sunday out of the week and an hour of concentrated effort into a curriculum could put some pressure on the kid, but they'd get the social life and break from the house of public school while still having some control over their education. Maybe in high school start to get some professional help via tutoring sessions to challenge the children instead of leaving it up to me since education will probably change drastically by then.

 

[WoodsWoman]

I haven't read this whole thread, so this may have been touched on already, anyhow... ANY schooling, public, Montessori, or otherwise, can be beneficial if the parents are involved. Homeschooling can be great, but should not be used as a cop-out by parents.

Also the personality of the youngster is good to take into account as some need more socialization than others. This need CAN be met though homeschooling, but needs to be paid attention to. I believe I would have benefited from homeschooling during a certain period due to extreme peer issues. (I survived without it though.)

 

[Ivy]

Kyuuei, I'm super excited about this website right now:

http://www.khanacademy.org/

I saw the founder on a TED talk ("I was watching TED talks before they were cool," lol) and I plan to use them with my kids. Their school is excellent but sometimes I wonder how far they could go if they were truly self-paced.

 

[kyuuei]

Thank you for the recommendation I'll check into it for sure.

 

[Coriolis]

I was called the smart weird kid when I got to high school. My home school education was apparently better than the public education. I was still very socially awkward and still have issues with socializing to this day. People say things to me about social situations that seem rather basic that I just don't fucking get a lot of times.

If you have read the whole thread, you will know that I am no fan of homeschooling. Developing a "social deficit", however, is the least of one's worries. First, it is very easy to compensate for this through outside activities and even homeschool co-ops. Second, a huge amount of that social interaction is vastly overrated, and you are just as well without it. I attended typical public schools for K-12, and deliberately kept myself out of the social scene because it was superficial, petty, and a drain of the time and energy that I preferred to direct toward other pursuits. You don't have to have a homeschooling background to be considered the "smart, weird kid" in high school. With the benefit of many years of hindsight now, I am reassured that was the right approach.

 

[Fidelia]

I haven't read this whole thread, so this may have been touched on already, anyhow... ANY schooling, public, Montessori, or otherwise, can be beneficial if the parents are involved. Homeschooling can be great, but should not be used as a cop-out by parents.

Also the personality of the youngster is good to take into account as some need more socialization than others. This need CAN be met though homeschooling, but needs to be paid attention to. I believe I would have benefited from homeschooling during a certain period due to extreme peer issues. (I survived without it though.)

This.