Parents Fight Governments to Homeschool

[Tony]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,87121,00.html


LOS ANGELES — More parents are choosing the home over the classroom when it comes to educating their children.

But some say governments aren't making it easy to make sure kids get the proper education in the comfort of their living room.

In the last 20 years, the number of American children being educated at home has gone from around 25,000 to 1.3 million -- 2 percent of the nation's student population.

The National Home Education Research Institute (search) says the number of students being homeschooled is growing at a rate of 7 percent to 15 percent a year. During the 1999-2000 school year, there were 1.3 million to 1.7 million children being taught at home in grades K-12.

Parents choose to homeschool for a variety of reasons, including religious choice, safety for their children, lack of confidence in public schools and simply wanting to have greater control over their kids' education.

California mom Loren Mavromati, who teaches her kids at home, is unhappy with the state of public education these days. She chose to homeschool and said the state doesn't make it easy.



The government is going over the line. Where's the aclu to defend the civil rights of these parents?

[Whoracle]

I don't want to sound too nazi here or anything, but I really think parents should meet some sort of intelligence requirement before being allowed to homeschool their children. Now I know it's not the case all of the time, but all the kids I ever met that were home schooled had "crazy" fundamental religious parents who think evolution is a tool of the devil. Now I just know someone is going to respong saying "all of them are not like that!" I know this, I even said this.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Whoracle
Now I know it's not the case all of the time, but all the kids I ever met that were home schooled had "crazy" fundamental religious parents who think evolution is a tool of the devil. Now I just know someone is going to respong saying "all of them are not like that!" I know this, I even said this.


That doesn’t matter, what should matter is if the kids get a good education and how well they succeed in college..... Now that I think about it, that shouldn’t really matter either, as long as the kids aren't being tortured, raped, or forced into slavery, it is none of the government's business.

[SRW]

From the same art.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

But homeschoolers say the issue is actually about money -- every home-schooled child means fewer dollars in the public school budget, since the money follows the child.

"It's still money being taken away from the classroom," Terry Pesta, of the San Diego Education Association, told thesandiegochannel.com. "When supplies are bought in a classroom, it's not necessarily that just one student is using the supplies. A group of students, sometimes 30 or more, share in the supplies."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's all about the money, the ACLU would jump in if these parents were denied the ability to make a choice, but don't expect anyone in government to make freedom of choice easy.

[Tony]

Originally posted by SRW
From the same art.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

But homeschoolers say the issue is actually about money -- every home-schooled child means fewer dollars in the public school budget, since the money follows the child.

"It's still money being taken away from the classroom," Terry Pesta, of the San Diego Education Association, told thesandiegochannel.com. "When supplies are bought in a classroom, it's not necessarily that just one student is using the supplies. A group of students, sometimes 30 or more, share in the supplies."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's all about the money, the ACLU would jump in if these parents were denied the ability to make a choice, but don't expect anyone in government to make freedom of choice easy.


When I was in high school, I was having a conversation with a teacher about why kids were disciplined for skipping school. She went on to tell me basically what this article reinforces, that the school gets more money for having more students. I thought it was ********, and it is defiantly a case of a government institution over stepping its bounds. My hatred for public school stems from my experiences attending them, and I went to good, well-funded schools.

The public school system is in need of serious reform.

[Roadtoad]

I think, Tony, you missed this one:

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=17898&highlight=Home+Schooling

Personally, if I had to do it over again, I think we would have chosen to work a little more closely with our public school, or chosen a private school. I agree, we're getting less and less for our education dollar in California, (we're 49th in the nation, now), but maybe there were alternatives available.

It took us a long time to find a home schooling program that actually worked for us. This one has a teacher that comes to our home, and works with our sons. However, that's a major difference from having a teacher with whom they interact on a daily basis.

Further, without classmates, they aren't learning other lessons which are equally valuable, such as how to interact with their peers. That's a major one, and my fear is that our sons have been hurt for the lack of it.

I agree, the State has little grounds to block a parent's choice, but when you consider what they're being offered as a choice, I'm more inclined to go with some stronger state controls over those choices.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Roadtoad

Further, without classmates, they aren't learning other lessons which are equally valuable, such as how to interact with their peers. That's a major one, and my fear is that our sons have been hurt for the lack of it.



Is that a learned skill or something that comes natural? A lot of kids go through public school their whole lives and still lack social skills. I would be willing to bet your kids will be better off, more mature and more independent WITHOUT being exposed to the idiocy at public school. They will be more focused on their studies and less distracted by the gossip mongering and conformity that goes on at schools. Would you be rather have your kids learning philosophy (a subject foreign in public schools) in Jr. High or have them discussing who slept with who at the party last weekend?

[Roadtoad]

Originally posted by Tony


Is that a learned skill or something that comes natural? A lot of kids go through public school their whole lives and still lack social skills. I would be willing to bet your kids will be better off, more mature and more independent WITHOUT being exposed to the idiocy at public school. They will be more focused on their studies and less distracted by the gossip mongering and conformity that goes on at schools. Would you be rather have your kids learning philosophy (a subject foreign in public schools) in Jr. High or have them discussing who slept with who at the party last weekend?

That was one of our concerns at first. It's also to be noted that they still talk about that sort of thing AFTER school with their friends. (We manage to close off a lot of such discussion and change matters by inviting our sons' friends over here. You'd be surprised what you can accomplish by opening your home.) If you'll read the thread I linked to, you will also understand the other reasons we pulled our sons out of public school.

If I had managed to find a way to become more active in our sons' educations, I think I could have accomplished far more with them in public or private school than I would have by home schooling them.

Why do you put your kids in school? Some parents do it because it's the law, others do it because it's cheaper than a babysitter. I wanted my kids to LEARN! Yes, we've gained by doing this, but we've lost something in the trade-off. And I'm not sure that we're better off in the bargain.

If that's the case, then what was the point in making the change in the first place?

[Tony]

Originally posted by Roadtoad


That was one of our concerns at first. It's also to be noted that they still talk about that sort of thing AFTER school with their friends. (We manage to close off a lot of such discussion and change matters by inviting our sons' friends over here. You'd be surprised what you can accomplish by opening your home.) If you'll read the thread I linked to, you will also understand the other reasons we pulled our sons out of public school.

If I had managed to find a way to become more active in our sons' educations, I think I could have accomplished far more with them in public or private school than I would have by home schooling them.

Why do you put your kids in school? Some parents do it because it's the law, others do it because it's cheaper than a babysitter. I wanted my kids to LEARN! Yes, we've gained by doing this, but we've lost something in the trade-off. And I'm not sure that we're better off in the bargain.

If that's the case, then what was the point in making the change in the first place?

If you feel that you lost something by home schooling your kids, why don’t you put them back in public school?

I don’t have kids (yet), but when (and if) I do, I am not planning on putting them in public school (actually I want to wait until I am financially secure before I have kids, so I can afford private school). Either a private catholic school or some kind of home school program.

edit to add: The merits of homeschool are somewhat irrelevant as it relates to government regulation. The state has absolutly no authority to tell anyone how to raise their kids (aside from physical, sexual or emotional abuse.)

[Roadtoad]

Originally posted by Tony
I don’t have kids (yet), but when (and if) I do, I am not planning on putting them in public school (actually I want to wait until I am financially secure before I have kids, so I can afford private school). Either a private catholic school or some kind of home school program.

Significant numbers of your arguments have now been invalidated.

Let me know when you have kids of your own. In my case, I have four.

And as to being financially secure enough to have them: Thank you from removing yourself from the breeding population.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Roadtoad


Significant numbers of your arguments have now been invalidated.



Why? and Which ones?


And as to being financially secure enough to have them: Thank you from removing yourself from the breeding population.

Ok, where did that come from? There is no reason to be a dick.

[SRW]

Originally posted by Tony



When I was in high school, I was having a conversation with a teacher about why kids were disciplined for skipping school. She went on to tell me basically what this article reinforces, that the school gets more money for having more students. I thought it was ********, and it is defiantly a case of a government institution over stepping its bounds. My hatred for public school stems from my experiences attending them, and I went to good, well-funded schools.

The public school system is in need of serious reform.

You think it's bad being a student, I was a Sub teacher for about six months (California Schools) and the single most important part of school to the administration was roll call. As long as the kids were counted the admin was happy.

I was a great teacher because I turned in my roll sheets on time,
was on a review I received.

:rolleyes:

[Roadtoad]

Okay, let's start with this one...

Originally posted by Tony
That doesn’t matter, what should matter is if the kids get a good education and how well they succeed in college..... Now that I think about it, that shouldn’t really matter either, as long as the kids aren't being tortured, raped, or forced into slavery, it is none of the government's business.

Sorry, but first of all, who's defining what makes an education "good?" And why such a low threshhold, such as making sure the kids aren't being tortured, raped, or forced into slavery? Sorry, Amigo. I have higher expectations for my kids' schools. Not only do I expect them to provide a good education, (in other words, the kids who graduate can read, write, and do higher math, and have developed critical thinking skills), but I expect them to to model for my kids higher ethical and moral standards. I want school administrators to prevent bullies from making my kids lives hell, and I want them to demonstrate ethical behavior themselves, (in other words, simply counting the kids does not qualify as good pedagogical skills). Maybe it's just me, but I expect better.

As to your other remark:

Ok, where did that come from? There is no reason to be a dick.

I'm not being a dick, I'm being realistic. NO ONE is ever prepared sufficiently in ANY area to become a parent. You can be BETTER prepared, but I hate to tell you this, you'll rapidly find out the cost of raising a child can easily outstrip your earning power. All I can say is Thank God for Visa!:D

[Tony]

Originally posted by Roadtoad
Okay, let's start with this one...



Sorry, but first of all, who's defining what makes an education "good?" And why such a low threshhold, such as making sure the kids aren't being tortured, raped, or forced into slavery?


I think you are misunderstanding me. The government's authority to tell us how to raise our kids only extends to the protection of the child's well-being. My point is that the government has no place forcing us to use the public school system. If a parent CHOOSES to utilize homeschool, they should have that freedom.


Sorry, Amigo. I have higher expectations for my kids' schools. Not only do I expect them to provide a good education, (in other words, the kids who graduate can read, write, and do higher math, and have developed critical thinking skills), but I expect them to to model for my kids higher ethical and moral standards. I want school administrators to prevent bullies from making my kids lives hell, and I want them to demonstrate ethical behavior themselves, (in other words, simply counting the kids does not qualify as good pedagogical skills). Maybe it's just me, but I expect better.

I agree with everything you said here. My original point was that the government has no place forcing our kids to attend a failing public school.


As to your other remark:

Ok, where did that come from? There is no reason to be a dick.

I'm not being a dick, I'm being realistic. NO ONE is ever prepared sufficiently in ANY area to become a parent. You can be BETTER prepared, but I hate to tell you this, you'll rapidly find out the cost of raising a child can easily outstrip your earning power. All I can say is Thank God for Visa!:D

Perhaps I should have worded my statement differently, I want to be as prepared as possible so I can provide my kids with a happy childhood, parental support and the best education possible. Is that better? :)

[Roadtoad]

Originally posted by Tony
Perhaps I should have worded my statement differently, I want to be as prepared as possible so I can provide my kids with a happy childhood, parental support and the best education possible. Is that better? :)

Much better. Thank you.

[Clancie]

I guess my experience with home schooling (as the would-be teacher) is a little different than what other's have said so far.

My son is very bright, but totally uninterested in learning, in or out of school. He managed to do well in school when demands weren't too great, but then fell apart when he entered middle school.

One day he was home with cold. I knew the school didn't want him in class sniffling and coughing, but, on the other hand, he really wasn't all that sick. So on a whim I said, "You know, you want me to homeschool you. You're home and you should be in school. Let's try it today." He was all for it.

I felt pretty confident in doing this because I'm a credentialed teacher and was very familiar with his curriculum. We started out gamely enough: English, Social Studies, Math.... He was also taking band, but even that wasn't a problem, since we play the same instrument. (If it became permanent, I figured private lessons would be sufficient, though not nearly as much fun as playing in the school band was). We did Science, including an experiment related to the unit in his book.

When we sat down to lunch, I realized three things. First, I was exhausted. Secondly, trained teacher or not, it was extremely clear to me that there was no way that one (relatively) good teacher covering all subjects was going to be able to offer him as good an education as six good teachers, each specializing, would.

As for the advantages of "one-to-one" learning....For kids who are great, enthusiastic learners, highly motivated and able to work independently, home schooling might work well (especially with the right guidance/participation from a knowledgable adult). But for a child like my son, the peer group provides an energy and dynamic to learning that is, in itself, motivational--and probably, for that reason, essential.

As a teacher, you try to create that kind of energy in a classroom but it is greatly helped by the peer group sharing an enthusiasm for what is being learned. But without that group energy/synergy, just one-to-one....I could see burnout fast approaching for me. If a student lacks curiosity and a thirst for learning, home teaching must be a very tough gig indeed, much much more difficult than reaching the same student in a classroom setting would be.

On the other hand, I was also surprised to find out how lax the standards for homeschooling are. I don't understand where the article quoted above is coming from, exactly, because to me it seems that public schools keep piling on more and more tests and paperwork and so-called "accountability", but students can graduate from schooling at home with virtually no uniform educational standards to meet at all.

And I can't see how many parents would be qualified to instruct their children in all subjects through high school--or who would know if they weren't doing a good job. I don't know if government intervention is the answer, but it does seem that homeschooled children should be guaranteed a certain uniform content to their education.

[Clancie]

Oh, and Tony, I don't know if you live in the U.S., but here private schools vary greatly in quality. Even very expensive ones may have classes just as large as public schools.

And, unlike public schools, most private schools don't require their teachers to have teaching credentials. (Not that that's the end all and be all, but it does show a year-long commitment to professional training before starting to teach--and also that certain standards and expectations as a new teacher have been met).

Also, since salaries and benefits at private schools are often not competitive with public schools, they may not get the best applicants (of course, some prefer low salaried private schools to schools with less cooperative students and parents. A trade off, I guess).

[Tony]

Originally posted by Clancy
Oh, and Tony, I don't know if you live in the U.S., but here private schools vary greatly in quality. Even very expensive ones may have classes just as large as public schools.

And, unlike public schools, most private schools don't require their teachers to have teaching credentials. (Not that that's the end all and be all, but it does show a year-long commitment to professional training before starting to teach--and also that certain standards and expectations as a new teacher have been met).

Also, since salaries and benefits at private schools are often not competitive with public schools, they may not get the best applicants (of course, some prefer low salaried private schools to schools with less cooperative students and parents. A trade off, I guess).

Yes I live in the US, where do you live?

[Clancie]

Yes, U.S., too. "Here", for me, is California. (For some reason I thought you lived in the U.K....)

[Tony]

Originally posted by Clancy
Oh, and Tony, I don't know if you live in the U.S., but here private schools vary greatly in quality. Even very expensive ones may have classes just as large as public schools.

And, unlike public schools, most private schools don't require their teachers to have teaching credentials. (Not that that's the end all and be all, but it does show a year-long commitment to professional training before starting to teach--and also that certain standards and expectations as a new teacher have been met).

Also, since salaries and benefits at private schools are often not competitive with public schools, they may not get the best applicants (of course, some prefer low salaried private schools to schools with less cooperative students and parents. A trade off, I guess).

From your description, one would get the idea that you are saying public schools are better than private schools. (if im wrong, let me know) If this is indeed the case, how do explain the fact that students in private schools consistently score better on standardized tests and take more advanced classes?

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2002/analyses/private/sa03.asp

http://www.cato.org/current/school-choice/pubs/gryphon-020530.html

http://www.capenet.org/teach.html

[Clancie]

Yes, Tony, I do think many public schools are better than many private ones. I also think the diversity often offered by public school (economic, religious and ethnic diversity) can be very beneficial for young people.

Of course, there are many people who feel that a local private school offers their child a better education--better curricula, perhaps, possibly smaller classes, a more motivated peer group and parents, a safer learning environment with higher standards of conduct than their public school.

My point really is just that people need to look at the specifics of the public and private schools their children could go to before automatically assuming private schools are always better. In my experience, they are often not....

Oh, and as for your question about children scoring higher....hmmm....well, in some ways it's hard to compare (for example, private schools don't have to give the national standardized tests that public schools do, so they can't be compared that way). For college admissions, etc. I would think one explanation might be that you're selecting "out" a more educated/more affluent/more involved group of parents/children for the private schools to begin with, so they should be more successful, with those advantages. Private schools don't take children with learning disabilities, second language issues, discipline problems, parents who don't care about their child's education, etc......

Public schools take (and test) everyone.

[DavidJames]

Clancy - very good responses. At this point, private schools get to "cherry pick" from the general population of students. I've always felt that two of the biggest success factors in how well a student is educated are the motivation of the student and parent and the demographics of the family, i.e. education, income level of parents.

I don't believe if you canvass the private schools today you will find many kids who don't want to learn and parents who don't care. Visit some public schools and you will find a different story. Simply comparing scores of public and private schools (if you can find comparative scores) will be comparing apples and oranges. Compare schools with similar student demographics and then tell me what you find. Look at the income levels, look at parent involvement, look at the education levels of the parents, look at other cultural factors. Now compare apples to apples.

Finally look at the agenda of those critical of public schools. Are they motivated by the desire for better education for the children or are they simply against government involvement. Are they backed by religious lobbies? Are they trying to reduce the influence of the teachers union? Regardless of the legitimacy of those causes, make sure you view the information they provide in context.

My kids are now finishing 9th and 11th grade. While it's only my personal experience, I've found that the main barrier to kids getting a solid education at the schools my kids have attended are the kids and their parents. If the kids want to learn and the parents support them, viola. It happens. By the way, the school my kids have attended have been overwhelmingly been based in middle/upper class neighborhoods with above average incomes. These schools, in PA, CA and now CO, have been consistently among the highest performing in their respective states. Are the teachers in those schools better? Not according to those parents I've talked to from other local schools who don't score as well. The main difference is the makeup of the student population. Many of the kids come from families that don't have the educational background, their home life is not conducive to studying. Those kids end up being distraction to those that do care not to mention bringing the schools scores down.

I'm not suggesting I've just defined the criteria for success of the entire public school system. It's a set of very complicated issues and it drives me nuts when I hear people provide very simplistic solutions.

Sorry for the rambling, but I feel better now :)

[Lazarus]

Is this article supposed to be an indictment of state gov'ts inability to recognize or to regulate homeschooling?

After reading the article, I find no specific allegations of state or local gov'ts putting undue pressure on parents that choose homeschooling. We are given one testemonial asserting that it is difficult and may be against the law from something read at a web site. Later, we are told that some parents are upset about the level of funding for homeschooling in California.

Then we are told of the state's interest in being assured that all children receive an adequate education. Could this parental over sight by gov't be the real source of the problem?

The story does little to live up to it's billing of "Parents Fight Governments to Homeschool." The whole issue could be nothing more than one of red tape, and this story seems nothing more than sensationalism.

[Tony]

Originally posted by DavidJames
I've always felt that two of the biggest success factors in how well a student is educated are the motivation of the student and parent and the demographics of the family, i.e. education, income level of parents.




I think you're right.

[corplinx]

What kind of country have we become where education is no longer a privelege but a mandate.