Topic : 11/24 Great School Debate

I "Graduated" via GED age 15 because I was BORED. Aced the ACT and was accepted into every college I applied to at age 16. Before I quit school to actually learn something, I had been public schooled, parochially schooled; prep schooled (full academic scholarship) and homeschooled. Despite having natural aptitude and high scores, by the time we tried homeschooling, I'd already grown to despise everything to do with learning. When I passed the SAT prep test, I decided I wanted to be done with high school and move on. I’ve never regretted not going to prom…. :D It’s just not that big a deal when you are in college LOL! I have homeschooled my children for four years, although I do not have an educational degree, or any specific teacher’s training. (I used to think I’d go back to school for some teacher’s training, now I realize it wouldn’t be applicable, tutoring isn’t the same as teaching a crowd of 30). I feel somewhat qualified to comment on schooling methods, and homeschooling in particular. My husband and I (he's an engineer) are not extremely energetic or compulsively organized types. We aren't the kind of homeschoolers whose children are in 15 different activities and groups, whose school days each cover eight subjects, and whose days are filled with sculpture medium and advanced manipulatives. I tend to direct projects and "school" from my chair while snuggling a baby, or while fixing lunch. We tend to spend less than four hours a day on official "school" subjects (although we learn constantly), my average cost per student (including lessons) is less than $500.00 a year for all materials, outings, etc. After teaching them to read, I expect them to take responsibility for their work, and use questions and conversation (not testing) to ensure their understanding. Oddly, they are more motivated than I am in ensuring subject mastery, because if they don't understand something, they (my 8yoDD and 6yoDS) will voluntarily work until they obtain mastery rather than do something poorly. Despite our laidback parental and schooling approach, both my daughter and my son (and my 4yo for that matter) are more than a year ahead of their PS counterparts. I judge that from the Scope and Sequence on our state's educational website (BTW, none of the PS in our state meet their "high standard" requirements, so we are probably even further ahead by real ability comparisons). Learning is fun for children who aren't bored, bullied or stressed by institutionalized schooling. Just one example, less than a year after learning to read, my DD read through the ENTIRE Childcraft Encyclopedia set over summer break. More recently, she has read through one volume of the Children's Britannica every day for the past month (skipping a few busy outing days). She not only read them, but she understands nearly everything she reads and has excellent retention. This was not "school" work; this was her "fun" reading. She’s hoping for books for Christmas, especially nonfiction books. The children LOVE to learn, something I never understood until becoming a homeschooling parent. For all my academic gifts, I never enjoyed learning myself until I became a homeschooling parent. I'm often told how well behaved, sweet, thoughtful, fun and "smart" my children appear to others... and they've never set foot inside an institutionalized school (Several of their "fans" have been public school teachers.... : D ). Although we aren't "unschoolers" per se... (I'd describe our style as eclectic leaning towards Charlotte Mason method), we "school" wherever we are. Learning is something that happens constantly. Their coaches, music teachers, choir director and activities directors all have excellent reports, and they tend to be leaders and positive role models for the other kids. Unlike most of my children's PS'ed friends, my children actually are well socialized. They enjoy companionship and conversation with their peers (they are very self confident) and all other ages too. They already seem impervious to bullying and peer pressure to do stupid things, dealing maturely and intelligently with both situations, invariably tending towards leadership when with age peers. My theory is that they have grown so confident and secure because they aren’t continually battling with peer stress and the insecurity of “going it alone” every day at school. Not exactly what the “kids need tough school socialization to be strong and socially relevant” crowd imagines, but who cares. I think every parent should consider homeschooling FIRST and any other schooling second. One on one tutoring works every time it’s tried. Failing parents can improve through homeschooling, lots of failing students already have.

I am disappointed in Dr. Phil, and in many of the hundreds of posts written regarding homeschooling this past week.  Fortunately, the LAW allows me to educate my children at home so I don't have to explain or justify my methods or reasons to anyone. HAH!

 

However, I will leave you with this.  We just returned home from Orlando Florida where my child competed in a national pageant.  (i.e. socialization)  Upon discovering that my daughter is homeschooled, children proceeded to grill her with their best spelling and math questions.  She answered them all with ease.  In addition, she read at a higher level than girls several years older than her.

 

So like it or not, I am successfully homeschooling my kids, using my knowledge, and my money (for tutors) when needed. 

 

I think Dr. Phil and alot of other commenter's need to get better educated on homeschooling before making blanket statements.

I think calling this "Socialist" is a pretty big stretch.  They're just kids. 

In addition to what "txmary" said, this isn't a dynamic between children. This is the public school system forcing parents to provide extra resources for children who have parents who can't provide for those children properly. It has very little to do with in-school dynamics between children and is little more than removing a problem from the school at the expense of parents who do provide for their children. Redistribution isn't sharing, it is another way that they remove a child's individuality in an effort to equalize. We sit in the store for hours picking out supplies that reflect the personalities of the children only to have our kids come home from school with dollar store crap while some little snot is running around with my child's high quality materials. The sad thing is that children, who do come from families that for whatever reason are not providing for their children, learn that it is ok to not have what you need because someone will eventually come along and provide it for you.

After taking care of my own children, if I have the financial resources to share, I will be more than glad to contribute. I don't mind contributing to the "charity" pile if need be. When I buy supplies for my children they should use their own supplies however and I should not automatically be expected to want to take care of other people's children or be required to.  Calling this concept Socialism isn't a stretch, it is giving it way more credit than it deserves. It feels a little more Communistic to me.

We tend to think because a child would rather watch TV than do something educational in their spare time that this is all they would be driven to do if they had all day long to do it. When I first brought my children home to school them this is in fact what they did for the first two months. They watched TV, played video games, played outside, and did other things they enjoyed that they normally had a very limited time to do. Giving them this freedom allowed them to get it out of their system and while they still enjoy TV and video games, they can't do these things all day long without eventually getting bored.

My husband was also against homeschooling at one time. Now, we both regret the decision to send our oldest two children to public school early on. Our youngest will not go to school until much later - if at all. I made the good old list of pros and cons - homeschooling won hands down.  It certainly won't hurt to try it - I hope you do and I hope your husband supports you.

Good luck!

The most important factor in whether a child receives a good education is parental involvement, regardless of the path. :)

 

 

I agree! And when a schools idea of parental involvement is just helping with homework there is a problem - an alternative should be considered.

One of my children is special needs (she attended school before).  Her needs are mild by comparison, but if not met, could make it "worse".

I'm lucky in that my husband and I support each other, and when I need down time, he shoos me out of the house and I get it.  We have 4 children, and it's a juggling act sometimes.

For me, I also redefine a "break".  Going out with the entire family is a break.  When they go to bed is a "break". etc etc...

For my special-needs child, I discovered that her greatest special need is one which basically should be (and often is) granted to typical children, and that is  - the freedom to be entirely herself, on her terms.  That, more than anything I have done, anything I may brag about having taught her, anything other people may have done (while it is also valid, of course!) is the largest contribution to how well she's fared in the last 4 years.

  As far as your statement about "one for all and all for one" having nothing to do with anything.  Tell that to the soldiers fighting for YOU and your family right now!!!!!

I see the point here, and it's a valid concern.  However, the issue is very very blurred and fuzzy.  For parents of people in public school, nobody says, "What are these parents doing with their children after school and in the summer holidays?"

I don't know any parent who, IF they didn't care about their child and wanted them out of their hair, wouldn't rather have the school as a "babysitter" than the television.  Parents rob themselves of a life if they just let their children sit around all day watching television.  I would have to have no life if that was all I did with my children. (please, this is not at ALL to say that parents who send their kids to school just want them out of their hair, but if they did, that's an easy way to do it, NOT keep them home where they still have to care for them)

At our home we have very little tv access.  We don't have cable, and we don't even technically have a "tv set".  We have a video card on our computer which allows access to some stations.  Since the family's computer is more often than not, used as a computer, that naturally leaves us oblivious to "what is on".  We often select programs to record, and then wind up deleting half of them because our disk space is getting full and we haven't had time to watch them.

I often see children who come home from school and watch a good 5-6 hours of tv, from the time they get home until bed time, and throughout the summer they watch a whole lot of tv.  Nobody regulates these parents during the summer time, either. 

The thing is, children are not in school year round.  Activities off-school hours are trusted to parents and families to maintain.  How do we know that a parent, for instance, has involved themselves with their child's homework, and the child was not just left to google lame answers and copy essays of the net?

The thing is, there will be people who abuse the system.  That would not be terribly surprising.  I see the public school system abused all the time, so why should the idea that the freedom to homeschool or the freedom to have your kids at summertime be abused be a shocking idea?

However, nobody monitored the "fringe unschooling hippies" of the 60s and 70s and many of those people are now successful (financially and otherwise) and are also unschooling their own children.