Public school education vs. homeschool education

[ebenz47037]

Good Public School Education Vs. Bad Homeschool Education




What is the difference between the two? A few years ago, if you had asked me, I would have always gone on the side of a good public school education over a bad homeschool education. That was before I observed by watching my daughter's neighborhood and church friends who attend public schools. After watching them (some of whom go to the highest rated schools in my state), I'm beginning to think that there is no longer such a thing as a good public school education.

Let's look at what happens when someone gets a bad homeschool education. What do they get from their education? What do they learn? Well, they might get what could be considered a lopsided education or a biased education. Yes. That's possible. I don't see a problem with that though because they get a biased education in public school. They may pick up bad study habits. They may be allowed to focus on one or two subjects to specialize in, instead of learning every subject that is taught in public schools now.

Yes. There are a few things that could be considered bad if a child gets a bad homeschool education. Do those few things mean that we should require all children to go to public schools? Well, maybe we should look at what our children learn in public schools before we decide something so drastic. These are things that happen in a "good" public school.

Our kids learn that it's okay for them to have sex outside of marriage. In fact, they are given free birth control because kids "are going to have sex no matter what anyone says or does." Our daughters are told that if they get pregnant, they don't have to tell us and that they can just get an abortion. Our kids are taught that homosexuality is normal and that they don't have to just accept that they like someone of the opposite gender; they can be homosexual or bi-sexual. It's no one's business but their own. Our kids are taught that if they want something they should demand it "now". And, heaven forbid, anything bad happen to them. It's "not their fault." They learn that no one should have any authority over their lives except for them, even though their parents are legally and financially responsible for any damages that they may cause. Since the "No Child Left Behind Act" came into being, it's more like No Child Gets Ahead. Instead of seperating our children into groups that learn similarly, they seperate them into similarly aged groups of twenty or more children. If any of the children are intelligent, they are made to slow down so that those who may be slower can catch up. In fact, anymore, the children who are in the middle range between slow and gifted children are made to slow down for the slower children. More than one teacher has told me that they're not supposed to let anyone go ahead because the slower children get jealous. What's this? Isn't school supposed to prepare our children for real life?

Let's look at a question that many people are afraid to ask. Who taught the children before public schools came into being? What happened to those children? Let's name off some of those children:

• Leonardo Da Vinci
  Claude Monet
  Irving Berlin
  Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
  Douglass MacArthur
  George Patton
  Alexander Graham Bell
  The Wright Brothers
  Abraham Lincoln
  Theodore Roosevelt
  Dwight L. Moody
  John Wesley
  Albert Einstein
  Booker T. Washington
  Winston Churchill
  Patrick Henry
  C.S. Lewis
  Mark Twain

There are many more. It looks like a public school education does not make or break the man. Take a long, honest look at the two options, side-by-side. Make an honest evaluation. Then, decide for your own children which is the best option. I know that not every parent can teach their children. But, there are people, much like myself, who thinks that homeschooling is so valuable that they're willing to step up and help those parents out by teaching those children alongside their own. There are people who will help a financially struggling single mom by renting her a room or two and then homeschooling her children alongside their own. We've been throwing more and more money at the public school system year after year after year. It's not helping any. If anything, it's making the problems worse. I think it's about time we put this one out of it's misery.




E. L. Benz
4/24/07

 

[Vaquero45]

No doubt there are some homeschooling horror stories available, but I'm with you. I don't believe in good government schools either. We sent our older daughter to a Christian school for 4 years, and now we homeschool both of them. Even the difference between Christian schools and homeschooling is notable, although I'd take a good Christian school over a government school 100 times over.

 

[PKevman]

Good Public School Education Vs. Bad Homeschool Education




What is the difference between the two? A few years ago, if you had asked me, I would have always gone on the side of a good public school education over a bad homeschool education. That was before I observed by watching my daughter's neighborhood and church friends who attend public schools. After watching them (some of whom go to the highest rated schools in my state), I'm beginning to think that there is no longer such a thing as a good public school education.

Let's look at what happens when someone gets a bad homeschool education. What do they get from their education? What do they learn? Well, they might get what could be considered a lopsided education or a biased education. Yes. That's possible. I don't see a problem with that though because they get a biased education in public school. They may pick up bad study habits. They may be allowed to focus on one or two subjects to specialize in, instead of learning every subject that is taught in public schools now.

Yes. There are a few things that could be considered bad if a child gets a bad homeschool education. Do those few things mean that we should require all children to go to public schools? Well, maybe we should look at what our children learn in public schools before we decide something so drastic. These are things that happen in a "good" public school.

Our kids learn that it's okay for them to have sex outside of marriage. In fact, they are given free birth control because kids "are going to have sex no matter what anyone says or does." Our daughters are told that if they get pregnant, they don't have to tell us and that they can just get an abortion. Our kids are taught that homosexuality is normal and that they don't have to just accept that they like someone of the opposite gender; they can be homosexual or bi-sexual. It's no one's business but their own. Our kids are taught that if they want something they should demand it "now". And, heaven forbid, anything bad happen to them. It's "not their fault." They learn that no one should have any authority over their lives except for them, even though their parents are legally and financially responsible for any damages that they may cause. Since the "No Child Left Behind Act" came into being, it's more like No Child Gets Ahead. Instead of seperating our children into groups that learn similarly, they seperate them into similarly aged groups of twenty or more children. If any of the children are intelligent, they are made to slow down so that those who may be slower can catch up. In fact, anymore, the children who are in the middle range between slow and gifted children are made to slow down for the slower children. More than one teacher has told me that they're not supposed to let anyone go ahead because the slower children get jealous. What's this? Isn't school supposed to prepare our children for real life?

Let's look at a question that many people are afraid to ask. Who taught the children before public schools came into being? What happened to those children? Let's name off some of those children:

• Leonardo Da Vinci
  Claude Monet
  Irving Berlin
  Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
  Douglass MacArthur
  George Patton
  Alexander Graham Bell
  The Wright Brothers
  Abraham Lincoln
  Theodore Roosevelt
  Dwight L. Moody
  John Wesley
  Albert Einstein
  Booker T. Washington
  Winston Churchill
  Patrick Henry
  C.S. Lewis
  Mark Twain

There are many more. It looks like a public school education does not make or break the man. Take a long, honest look at the two options, side-by-side. Make an honest evaluation. Then, decide for your own children which is the best option. I know that not every parent can teach their children. But, there are people, much like myself, who thinks that homeschooling is so valuable that they're willing to step up and help those parents out by teaching those children alongside their own. There are people who will help a financially struggling single mom by renting her a room or two and then homeschooling her children alongside their own. We've been throwing more and more money at the public school system year after year after year. It's not helping any. If anything, it's making the problems worse. I think it's about time we put this one out of it's misery.




E. L. Benz
4/24/07

PK POTD! :first:

 

[PKevman]

Oops I'm not a subscriber right now. But it is still my POTD! :up:

 

[PKevman]

In fact I think this might be the best post that I have read all year!

 

[Granite]

I'd say some parents are cut out to home school and others are not. I just happened to get lucky.

 

[One Eyed Jack]

I wish my parents would have homeschooled me. They never even told me that was an option. Probably because if I'd have known, I would have insisted -- they knew how much I hated school.

 

[Layla]

I think different options work for different parents and kids. If you're generally opposed to the politics and social theory (what else can I call it? Hrm) taught in public school, I see no reason why you shouldn't homeschool your kids. It'sa tough one for me, really, because I don't think kids should be indoctrinated either way -- I don't think parents' beliefs and values should be forced on/instilled in a child, but I don't think the current political, religious, and social values of the state should be, either. I think kids should simply be presented with all the information they need to make their own minds up about what they believe, without being swayed one way or another by their teachers (be it government or parents). I think that's a fairly unattainable goal, though.

 

[Supremum]

I think you mean "Civics?" It isn't taught any longer. It used to be, and I think it consisted mostly of learning Aristolelian ethics. I have to agree that this whole no child left behind thing is a load of crap, but I still believe that public schooling is necessary. We shouldn't be afraid to separate children according to their "school age." The whole push towards not doing so seems to be based on the baby-boomerish "all kids are special and can be president" philosophy. I'm in favor of something more similar to the German or Finnish model, where students are broken up into different schools according to skill starting at 13. Before this age it doesn't really make much of a difference, except in a few cases.
As for your list: You have to keep in mind that most of these men were from money, and so had very good tutors from an early age, or attended good private schools.

 

[ebenz47037]

I think you mean "Civics?" It isn't taught any longer. It used to be, and I think it consisted mostly of learning Aristolelian ethics. I have to agree that this whole no child left behind thing is a load of crap, but I still believe that public schooling is necessary. We shouldn't be afraid to separate children according to their "school age." The whole push towards not doing so seems to be based on the baby-boomerish "all kids are special and can be president" philosophy. I'm in favor of something more similar to the German or Finnish model, where students are broken up into different schools according to skill starting at 13. Before this age it doesn't really make much of a difference, except in a few cases.
As for your list: You have to keep in mind that most of these men were from money, and so had very good tutors from an early age, or attended good private schools.

As to public education being necessary, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

If I have the time period correct, I fall just outside of the baby boomer era. I was born in 1968. And, I don't believe that line about all kids can be president. But, I do believe that all kids should be offered the chance to do his or her best in school. That's not happening in public schools today (at least, not the ones I've dealt with).

I can understand separating age groups a little (5 to 7, 8 to 10, 11 to 13, and 14 to 18). But, I think the way we do it now is unrealistic. There is nowhere in the real world where we are with 30 people the same age as we are for eight hours a day, five days a week.

My point with the list is that public schools are not necessary for someone to do well in life.

 

[ebenz47037]

I think different options work for different parents and kids. If you're generally opposed to the politics and social theory (what else can I call it? Hrm) taught in public school, I see no reason why you shouldn't homeschool your kids. It'sa tough one for me, really, because I don't think kids should be indoctrinated either way -- I don't think parents' beliefs and values should be forced on/instilled in a child, but I don't think the current political, religious, and social values of the state should be, either. I think kids should simply be presented with all the information they need to make their own minds up about what they believe, without being swayed one way or another by their teachers (be it government or parents). I think that's a fairly unattainable goal, though.

But, either way, kids are going to be "indoctrinated." I'd much rather it be the parents doing the indoctrination than the schools.

 

[ebenz47037]

I wish my parents would have homeschooled me. They never even told me that was an option. Probably because if I'd have known, I would have insisted -- they knew how much I hated school.

I hated school too. But, I don't think my mom had ever heard of homeschooling in the 70s and 80s. :chuckle:

 

[Layla]

But, either way, kids are going to be "indoctrinated." I'd much rather it be the parents doing the indoctrination than the schools.

I think it depends on your views and the views of your local schools, what you'll prefer. I'd tend towards preferring schools, I think, as the population as a whole has more say/input with them than with homeschool/parents, as well as the fact that in public school children are likely to be exposed to many different views, other children, etc, etc.

 

[Supremum]

As to public education being necessary, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

If I have the time period correct, I fall just outside of the baby boomer era. I was born in 1968. And, I don't believe that line about all kids can be president. But, I do believe that all kids should be offered the chance to do his or her best in school. That's not happening in public schools today (at least, not the ones I've dealt with).

I can understand separating age groups a little (5 to 7, 8 to 10, 11 to 13, and 14 to 18). But, I think the way we do it now is unrealistic. There is nowhere in the real world where we are with 30 people the same age as we are for eight hours a day, five days a week.

My point with the list is that public schools are not necessary for someone to do well in life.

I was exhausted when I wrote that, heh. Let me be more clear.

Public school is little more than a free day-care with lessons at an early age. It is true that most of the lessons taught can be taught at home just as well if not better, but this would require that at least one parent be available. I don't need to tell you that this is rarely the case nowadays. High school is another matter altogether. Some of the lessons taught cannot be taught by most parents, especially if they're at home. What I mean to say is that most people who know say, Newtonian mechanics, have jobs. The controlled atmosphere is also good for learning politics(interpersonal that is.) And so is a good prep for college, or experience for the "real world." You got me on middle school; kids are so awkward around this age it might just be better to keep them at home instead of subjecting them to each other.
The "baby-boomer" jab was directed at Dr. Spock, really. You were correct that some schools are more interested in the kids' self-esteem that what they actually learn, and that this hurts the better students. When I suggested separating students into different schools, I was actually referring to this. At around the age of 13, it is generally possible to tell which students are going to work at McDonalds from the next John Nash. Separating these students simply makes sense; most districts do have magnet schools, but these generally take a very small sample of students. Places like Germany and Finland go even further in that they graduate laborers from "labor" high schools around 17, and keep "future professionals(doctors, lawyers, scientists") for a couple more years. The students in the middle of the road have a curriculum almost identical to ours.
As for the year-to-year thing, I agree, but I do remember a 12 year old girl in my high school CalI class. She could do the math, but simply had no social basis for interaction(the has made her pretty awkward now.) In any case, I'm not argueing that public school is necessary for success, in fact I'm pretty sure the data says private schools are better, but that it is a necessary component of government's function. I think this is the longest post I've ever written.

 

[The Barbarian]

If you do a good job of homeschooling it should be easy to outdo public schools. But you best be good at it. There's an art to teaching, and a science to it as well.

The key is the smaller the class, the more attention you can pay to each student, and this is critical. So, homeschooling, given teachers of identical ability and resources, should be better.

As noted above, there aren't that many knowledgable people who don't hold jobs. If you know what you need to know, someone is probably paying you to work for them. And as far as buying some kind of programmed learning text, that will have you doing what the lowest level of public school teachers do. You'll become the "worksheet queen."

I've seen kids from homeschooling who were superb students. And I've seen kids so far back that they were out of the race at 13. If you do it, put everything into it, and do it well.

The rewards are great, but so are the hazards.

 

[Highline]

With the caveat that if everyone installed in their children values of religous intollerance we would struggle to have a society that functions (look at Iraq); I think people should do what is best for their kids and their family.

I know people who homeschool (one family hires a tutor- does that count?) not for religous reasons, but for the scheduling flexibility. My oldest loves kindergarten, but every year it is always worth reveiwing all our options.

I will, however take issue with the list in the original post. Many of the people on it, like Theodore Roosevelt, came from very wealthy families that had countless tutors and other resources. Also, I beleive, TR went to college as 16 year old- in effect college was a cross between a boarding high school and junior college that prepared rich kids for a less competitive world than we have today. No doubt, though, that TR would have been successful in any era.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Homeschooling Success Story

Homeschooling Success Story

Just thought I would share a success story of homeschooling with everyone.

When my family and I moved from Chicago to Phoenix, we enrolled our son in the local elementary school. It was not long before we were getting calls that he was being held after school for reasons like forgetting to bring pencils to school, or forgetting his class notebook. The little guy would meet us after detention teary eyed.

My wife and I were both university professors at the time, so we pulled my son out of public school and started teaching him at home when we were not working during the day. I left academia for a time to start my own company, where I put my son to work as a "gopher" doing odd jobs around the office. My son also traveled with me when I worked at client's sites, sometimes for several weeks. I also took my son to France while attending a conference.

Initially, it was tough separating Mom and Dad's roles when teaching our son. Sometimes we would become very frustrated with him. Losing our patience was a problem we finally overcame. We taught him three hours each day and he spent another two or three hours working on his own. We schooled our son from the 4th grade through the 12th grade.

For elementary school material we reviewed traditional school materials and selected what we thought were useful texts. It was an ad-hoc approach and we focused each day's instructions on a single subject. Being the very religious person in the family I spent time teaching my son some of the great messages and stories from the bible. I had him complete some biblical text studies and write papers on the materials.

For High School we used the materials and curriculum from The American School. We selected this school because of its reputation (used by State Dept. employees, movies stars, etc.), for the school's ability to generate official transcripts, graded tests, actual science labs, 100 year history, and its regional accreditation. Lastly, I walked my son through the Dictionary of Cultural Literacy.

In December last year he graduated from ASU with a degree in Computer Information Systems and a 3.2 GPA. He spent five months as an intern at Intel Corporation and is now looking for full time employment.

The upsides of home schooling were enormously beneficial. My son completed High School in two years and had no problems being accepted at ASU.

The negatives were mainly socially related. My son missed the social interaction, proms, and dating. We pushed him into some social activities like volunteering in some of the local schools' community outreach programs. Nevertheless, my son has been quite isolated throughout his education. ASU was an eye opener for him, he struggled to fit into a daily cadence of attending real classes with lots of other students. After his freshman year, he blossomed and came into his own. Mom and Dad still worry about this young man who graduated from college never having went on a date or even so much as held a girl's hand. Dad can only hope that he won't marry the first young lady that pays any sort of attention to him!

 

[Lighthouse]

As I've said before, dating is overrated, and prom doubly so.

 

[JoyfulRook]

As I've said before, dating is overrated, and prom doubly so.

I had fun at prom. Can't wait till next year.

 

[Servo]

The negatives were mainly socially related. My son missed the social interaction, proms, and dating. We pushed him into some social activities like volunteering in some of the local schools' community outreach programs. Nevertheless, my son has been quite isolated throughout his education. ASU was an eye opener for him, he struggled to fit into a daily cadence of attending real classes with lots of other students. After his freshman year, he blossomed and came into his own. Mom and Dad still worry about this young man who is about to graduate from college never having went on a date or even so much as held a girl's hand. Dad can only hope that he won't marry the first young lady that pays any sort of attention to him!

Dating is just divorce training, so I really wouldn't worry about that. It just hardens the heart.