What are your thoughts on homeschooling?

Fiddytree said:

I would generally agree, though I think the damage, or rather, the insult to injury, would be lessened if they actually made students read theoretical works instead of giving incredibly poor summation of it.

For all of the preening about it, has anyone been forced to actually read Dewey or Gardner?

The funny thing, though, is that our measurements for the impact of teacher preparation are less than stellar. We are still in a position of not really being able to point to whether either pedagogical instruction or core content areas actually has an impact on student outcomes.

Surely they (or either) can, but we can't quite prove it!

Sent from my LG-H910 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Advocating for taking a road that we cant prove will be good for us is a common problem in Western Culture today, but what is so much worse are claims that we KNOW! that what we are doing or calling for is the right thing to do because it has been proven when we dont know...often because we never bothered to go find out.... we lie our asses off. This happens constantly in America today. We also have developed a very nasty habit of choosing to do things that dont work very well but then being unable to figure out that they dont work very well(or maybe even worse we just dont give a ****), we so often dont make adjustments, which accounts for a huge share of the rot of America and Western Civilization as well.

Ya, I cant prove that a rich and deep understanding of the field will help be a better teacher to mostly entry level students, this is an intuitive belief of mine based off of my life as a student and as a teacher.

Your argument on the need to spend quality time with the source material is one that I have heard before, one that I groove with based upon all my days spent in the library of Michigan State reading back into the archives. I cant quite put my figure on the magic that happens, but it is similar to listening to great music when everyone else is found reading reviews of the music and biographies of the artist.

hanger4 said:

How do you define ignorant ??

Click to expand...

Not understanding the nature of reality.

Hawkeye10 said:

Not understanding the nature of reality.

Click to expand...

That's mighty subjective. How would one determine that.

I think that in general it's a bad idea. Parents are (generally) not qualified educators.

Hawkeye10 said:

Universities obsessing on education theories and methods instead of teaching future teachers (or in the cast of masters programs actual teachers) core competence in the fields that they are going to teach has of course been a disaster, one that almost no one will admitt to, and one that never gets fixed.

Click to expand...

Experience with kids is a huge thing when actually teaching. I worked at a summer camp for a few years. I've had kids who heard voices, kids who came from ghetto hell, bullies, bully victims, and all that stuff. The thing is...they are all kids and they think like kids. And some "teachers" don't understand that. They are rule followers(the teacher). No flexibility. Those tests and measures and theories only matter if they are practically applied. I think that hurts competence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Richard Loeb said:

What are your thoughts?

Click to expand...

If I were able to devote that much time to my child's education, I would rather be an adjunct to her public schooling. I don't see the point other than massaging the ego of a parent.

Richard Loeb said:

What are your thoughts?

Click to expand...

From watching the spelling bees etc. It seems the finalist are always the ones who were either home schooled or went to private schools. They always do better than those who attend public schools. But does that equate across the board or not? Home schoolers do better in college and as a percentage more of them graduate.

https://www.usnews.com/education/hi...12/06/01/home-schooled-teens-ripe-for-college

It does seem home schoolers receive a better education than those who go to public schools.

joG said:

If you send kids to good private schools it will do the kids more good; send them to the wrong inner city one and they wont. A friend founded a private school to save the kids from the public system in the city they were living. But even having been to the best schools of the land, parents can hardly handle the breadth of information the kids will need for university.

Click to expand...

The problem with good private schools is they're expensive. A $50K/year earnings does not allow for 3 kids to be enrolled in a $20K/year private school.

So the alternatives are home school or bad public school.

School vouchers are one obvious and simple to put in place answer. The only group that would suffer is bad public schools.

There is some merit to the argument that home schooled kids often emerge lacking social skills, and also the idea that many home schooled do so for religious reasons. But there is some merit to the claim that many public schooled emerge with few marketable skills and rather poor social skills.

jimbo said:

The problem with good private schools is they're expensive. A $50K/year earnings does not allow for 3 kids to be enrolled in a $20K/year private school.

So the alternatives are home school or bad public school.

School vouchers are one obvious and simple to put in place answer. The only group that would suffer is bad public schools.

There is some merit to the argument that home schooled kids often emerge lacking social skills, and also the idea that many home schooled do so for religious reasons. But there is some merit to the claim that many public schooled emerge with few marketable skills and rather poor social skills.

Click to expand...

[emphasis added by bubba]

let's continue with your example
you tell us that the family will have to pay $60000 annually to give their children a good private school education
what causes you to believe that the government funded voucher will fully cover the entire tuition of a good private school

and if it does not provide enough to fund the full tuition, then that voucher only serves to deplete the funding of the public school system to subsidize the tuition of affluent kids attending the expensive private schools

justabubba said:

[emphasis added by bubba]

let's continue with your example
you tell us that the family will have to pay $60000 annually to give their children a good private school education
what causes you to believe that the government funded voucher will fully cover the entire tuition of a good private school

and if it does not provide enough to fund the full tuition, then that voucher only serves to deplete the funding of the public school system to subsidize the tuition of affluent kids attending the expensive private schools

Click to expand...

Good private schools need not cost $20,000. Volume and getting rid of a monopoly generally brings cost down and/or quality up. If, for example, the voucher stays similar to the current cost of educating a child, currently in most areas slightly over $11,000, the market will adjust. Since public schools are already getting that $11,000, the only other competitive component would be quality.

If private sector can do it better, I see no reason for public schools to exist. If public schools end up being the best, then the public system will prevail.

jimbo said:

Good private schools need not cost $20,000. Volume and getting rid of a monopoly generally brings cost down and/or quality up. If, for example, the voucher stays similar to the current cost of educating a child, currently in most areas slightly over $11,000, the market will adjust. Since public schools are already getting that $11,000, the only other competitive component would be quality.

If private sector can do it better, I see no reason for public schools to exist. If public schools end up being the best, then the public system will prevail.

Click to expand...

let's use your $11K figure as the amount required to teach a child in public school each year
i would have no objection to allowing the public school student to receive an $11K voucher to be used at any of the public schools in the public school system in which (s)he resides
that way, no funding is withdrawn from the public school system, but the parents/students get to vote with their feet, which schools are best performing
to do so would tear down the barriers that prevent poor students from attending schools in affluent communities where the attendance lines are artificially drawn to segregate the poor students from the affluent ones

justabubba said:

let's use your $11K figure as the amount required to teach a child in public school each year
i would have no objection to allowing the public school student to receive an $11K voucher to be used at any of the public schools in the public school system in which (s)he resides
that way, no funding is withdrawn from the public school system, but the parents/students get to vote with their feet, which schools are best performing
to do so would tear down the barriers that prevent poor students from attending schools in affluent communities where the attendance lines are artificially drawn to segregate the poor students from the affluent ones

Click to expand...

Why, if the public system is not doing its job, would you want to limit redistribution of the money only to the failing system?

I could care less whether funding is drawn from the public school system or not. The purpose of the education system is to educate, not perpetuate the system

Public schools could avoid loss of revenue by getting better. If they don't, then private schools will prevail.

jimbo said:

Why, if the public system is not doing its job, would you want to limit redistribution of the money only to the failing system?

I could care less whether funding is drawn from the public school system or not. The purpose of the education system is to educate, not perpetuate the system

Public schools could avoid loss of revenue by getting better. If they don't, then private schools will prevail.

Click to expand...

Check the private schools DeVos has backed in her home state. They aren't any better, but it DOES manage to divert public money into private companies. Private sector isn't always better. For example, private prisons are horrible on every level, but it's a big, profitable business.

jimbo said:

Why, if the public system is not doing its job, would you want to limit redistribution of the money only to the failing system?

I could care less whether funding is drawn from the public school system or not. The purpose of the education system is to educate, not perpetuate the system

Public schools could avoid loss of revenue by getting better. If they don't, then private schools will prevail.

Click to expand...

it would introduce competition within the public school system. thought that was something you were seeking to use to elevate the quality of education. or is it that you just want to hollow out the public school financing by offering vouchers to privatize the ed system

justabubba said:

it would introduce competition within the public school system. thought that was something you were seeking to use to elevate the quality of education. or is it that you just want to hollow out the public school financing by offering vouchers to privatize the ed system

Click to expand...

No, I advocate competition. Transferring public monies from one public school does not promote competition. More likely it would encourage more mediocrity.

As I stated, I could care less about funding for public education. I'm an advocate for improving the quality of education for the students.

Your scenario is similar in concept to only allowing GM to produce cars since they produce several models.

Chevrolet's are cars are improved not because of Buick, but rather because of Ford, Rolls, and Maserati. Left to GM only Chevrolet and Buick would be clones. In reality they often are. So people buy Fords instead.