5 ms·

I don't think this is a problem with homeschooling as much as with a subset of homeschoolers - particularly religious fundamentalists and anarchist types. My w

I don't think this is a problem with homeschooling as much as with a subset of homeschoolers - particularly religious fundamentalists and anarchist types. My wife and I homeschool, but we have our kids pushing well beyond their grade level in every subject. She had a teaching license up until a couple of years ago (they do expire after a while) and taught for several years before we had kids. Then, once they arrived, she decided this was a natural fit. Meanwhile, they're also plugged in with a local co-op with more than thirty kids that they meet up with several times a week. Homeschooling can be used to keep kids out of the system and deny them a good education, but it can also be the platform for an elite education like no other. There's a reason the wealthiest families in American pay for private tutors and elite schools with tiny class sizes. Nothing beats one on one from a capable instructor. As my kids grow older, they'll get one-on-one training in the arts, foreign language, and various extra-curricular skills like swimming, dance, etc. from instructors that we hire to assist them. They'll walk away from this better equipped than any of their peers in traditional school. Honestly, if there is anything wrong with homeschooling itself, it's that it is only available to middle and upper class families.

rootusrootus 7y ago
> They'll walk away from this better equipped than any of their peers in traditional school. Except for those whose parents also hire expert tutors. It's not like kids going to traditional schools can't also get additional educational opportunities. When you consider how much homeschooling is by parents who are not themselves professional educators, I suspect a hybrid approach works better on average.
- camelNotation 7y ago
  Professional educators really only need the training and certification because they are dealing with students at scale. One on one teaching is not remotely the same as teaching in a classroom setting where you have to adapt to multiple learning styles and multiple achievement levels all while using standardized assessment techniques, detailed lesson planning, and classroom management skills. The vast majority of what composes an education degree is there because you are educating a large, diverse group. When it is just one teacher working one on one with a single student, a lot of that is irrelevant. The way you teach, the way you assess their progress, and the way you adapt to their needs is much more natural. And most of the principles that apply in both contexts can be learned on the fly. > It's not like kids going to traditional schools can't also get additional educational opportunities. This is true and it's a lot of why we homeschool. There are peers that are getting similarly elite educations and just doing it slightly different ways. If I had a billion dollars, I would be paying for an elite, personal tutor to educate my children. I wouldn't be sending them to a public school. Homeschooling allows my wife and I to provide something analogous to that elite structure for our children, even though they are firmly middle class.
  - notacoward 7y ago
    > Professional educators really only need the training and certification because they are dealing with students at scale. Untrue. Any teacher must be familiar with both the subject matter and basic pedagogy, regardless of whether they're teaching one student or many. Yes, there are additional skills necessary when teaching a larger class, but I think you drastically exaggerate how much of a teacher's job that is.
    - camelNotation 7y ago
      > Any teacher must be familiar with both the subject matter and basic pedagogy, regardless of whether they're teaching one student or many I think you are imagining a homeschool from the 1980s. My kids learn many aspects of the subject matter from sources like Khan Academy and Outschooling. The idea that the teacher needs to know the subject matter deeply in order to manage the child's education is obsolete.
      - notacoward 7y ago
        > Khan Academy and Outschooling If those allow you to outsource the entirety of your child's education, including personalization of the curriculum to individual needs, answering arbitrarily-deep questions about the subject matter, etc. then great, but I'm not sure I'd call that home schooling. That would be more like a (virtual) private school, with the same level of parental involvement. If you want to be more involved you need more training, simple as that, and the fact is that a lot of home-school parents don't even have an average education themselves. Also remember, you're not the sample. You claim to have some expertise in data science. What do the data suggest, for a typical home-schooler and not just for you or the non-random sample of others in your neighborhood.
        surge 7y ago
        https://www.dailyinfographic.com/homeschooling-by-the-numbers-infographic https://www.dailyinfographic.com/homeschooling-by-the-number...
notacoward 7y ago
> particularly religious fundamentalists and anarchist types. You mean the significant majority of home schoolers, driving most of the agenda e.g. around certification and curriculum standards? Public schools are meant to ensure that every child can get a minimal level of education. Obviously it's great when people can do better, whether it's through regular public schools, charter schools, private schools, or home schooling. The problem is that when you open it up to just anyone without any kind of certification, testing, or oversight, it results in a form of neglect. > it is only available to middle and upper class families Sadly, no. That might describe the home schoolers you see, but "home schooling" which involves little or no actual schooling is also a common option for the (especially rural) poor. Some of my own first and second cousins grew up that way, and basically never recovered.
- burfog 7y ago
  You don't have to be a religious fundamentalist of any type (Christian, Muslim, Jewish, etc.) to be deeply offended by the political indoctrination in the history and sex-ed classes. Atheists and agnostics are not of one mind on those subjects.
  - notacoward 7y ago
    I don't think that contradicts any of what I said. If people have a principled objection to public school, good for them. They should have the right to secure an equivalent education any other way they choose ... but it has to be equivalent. If not, too bad. Parents aren't allowed to feed their children sawdust instead of food, and they're not allowed to fill their their children's heads with religious/libertarian dogma instead of an actual education, for the same reason. Either would be a violation of the child's rights, and that's unacceptable in a civilized society.
    - jriot 7y ago
      Schools fill them with their own religious/political dogma. You just don't like it because it doesn't match your worldview.
inetknght 7y ago
You present one well-honored experience. I present a stark contrast to it. > My wife and I homeschool, but we have our kids pushing well beyond their grade level in every subject. My parents told themselves the same thing. I apparently had top percentile test scores in several early years, particularly in math. Despite that, my parents completely failed to provide an education after choosing to homeschool. > She had a teaching license up until a couple of years ago (they do expire after a while) and taught for several years before we had kids. Neat! Not that it really matters, but I am curious: what did she teach? > they're also plugged in with a local co-op with more than thirty kids that they meet up with several times a week. That's also something my parents told themselves and others. Despite that, it wasn't exactly an honest statement. We met with other church members about once every week for about a month. Then about once every quarter of a year for about a year. Then basically never, while my parents fell deep into paranoia. > it can also be the platform for an elite education like no other. Yes, it can. But my experience brings with me a very skeptical mind. > There's a reason the wealthiest families in American pay for private tutors and elite schools with tiny class sizes. Nothing beats one on one from a capable instructor. While you're right in that there's a reason for private tutors and elite schools, I think you're wrong about your conclusion for the wealthy. I think wealthy parents don't want their children to associate with poor people who can't afford to hire their own private lessons. I think that's also a despicably-elitist action. > They'll walk away from this better equipped than any of their peers in traditional school. It's almost as if you're parroting the same things my parents said. Indeed, I walked away better equipped for computers than pretty much anyone I know. But that's more of a byproduct of spending years in front of a computer than anything that my parents actively tried to teach. Where I gained knowledge about computers there's also loss of other opportunities and knowledge. > Honestly, if there is anything wrong with homeschooling itself, it's that it is only available to middle and upper class families. You are wrong. I consider myself middle class. Almost all of my family are somewhere between poor and destitute.
- 1123581321 7y ago
  Tying back to your earlier comment, it doesn’t sound like your parents would have fit well with your public school system or stayed involved.
- 7y ago

rootusrootus 7y ago

> They'll walk away from this better equipped than any of their peers in traditional school. Except for those whose parents also hire expert tutors. It's not like kids going to traditional schools can't also get additional educational opportunities. When you consider how much homeschooling is by parents who are not themselves professional educators, I suspect a hybrid approach works better on average.

camelNotation 7y ago
Professional educators really only need the training and certification because they are dealing with students at scale. One on one teaching is not remotely the same as teaching in a classroom setting where you have to adapt to multiple learning styles and multiple achievement levels all while using standardized assessment techniques, detailed lesson planning, and classroom management skills. The vast majority of what composes an education degree is there because you are educating a large, diverse group. When it is just one teacher working one on one with a single student, a lot of that is irrelevant. The way you teach, the way you assess their progress, and the way you adapt to their needs is much more natural. And most of the principles that apply in both contexts can be learned on the fly. > It's not like kids going to traditional schools can't also get additional educational opportunities. This is true and it's a lot of why we homeschool. There are peers that are getting similarly elite educations and just doing it slightly different ways. If I had a billion dollars, I would be paying for an elite, personal tutor to educate my children. I wouldn't be sending them to a public school. Homeschooling allows my wife and I to provide something analogous to that elite structure for our children, even though they are firmly middle class.
- notacoward 7y ago
  > Professional educators really only need the training and certification because they are dealing with students at scale. Untrue. Any teacher must be familiar with both the subject matter and basic pedagogy, regardless of whether they're teaching one student or many. Yes, there are additional skills necessary when teaching a larger class, but I think you drastically exaggerate how much of a teacher's job that is.
  - camelNotation 7y ago
    > Any teacher must be familiar with both the subject matter and basic pedagogy, regardless of whether they're teaching one student or many I think you are imagining a homeschool from the 1980s. My kids learn many aspects of the subject matter from sources like Khan Academy and Outschooling. The idea that the teacher needs to know the subject matter deeply in order to manage the child's education is obsolete.
    - notacoward 7y ago
      > Khan Academy and Outschooling If those allow you to outsource the entirety of your child's education, including personalization of the curriculum to individual needs, answering arbitrarily-deep questions about the subject matter, etc. then great, but I'm not sure I'd call that home schooling. That would be more like a (virtual) private school, with the same level of parental involvement. If you want to be more involved you need more training, simple as that, and the fact is that a lot of home-school parents don't even have an average education themselves. Also remember, you're not the sample. You claim to have some expertise in data science. What do the data suggest, for a typical home-schooler and not just for you or the non-random sample of others in your neighborhood.
      - surge 7y ago
        https://www.dailyinfographic.com/homeschooling-by-the-numbers-infographic https://www.dailyinfographic.com/homeschooling-by-the-number...

notacoward 7y ago

> particularly religious fundamentalists and anarchist types. You mean the significant majority of home schoolers, driving most of the agenda e.g. around certification and curriculum standards? Public schools are meant to ensure that every child can get a minimal level of education. Obviously it's great when people can do better, whether it's through regular public schools, charter schools, private schools, or home schooling. The problem is that when you open it up to just anyone without any kind of certification, testing, or oversight, it results in a form of neglect. > it is only available to middle and upper class families Sadly, no. That might describe the home schoolers you see, but "home schooling" which involves little or no actual schooling is also a common option for the (especially rural) poor. Some of my own first and second cousins grew up that way, and basically never recovered.

burfog 7y ago
You don't have to be a religious fundamentalist of any type (Christian, Muslim, Jewish, etc.) to be deeply offended by the political indoctrination in the history and sex-ed classes. Atheists and agnostics are not of one mind on those subjects.
- notacoward 7y ago
  I don't think that contradicts any of what I said. If people have a principled objection to public school, good for them. They should have the right to secure an equivalent education any other way they choose ... but it has to be equivalent. If not, too bad. Parents aren't allowed to feed their children sawdust instead of food, and they're not allowed to fill their their children's heads with religious/libertarian dogma instead of an actual education, for the same reason. Either would be a violation of the child's rights, and that's unacceptable in a civilized society.
  - jriot 7y ago
    Schools fill them with their own religious/political dogma. You just don't like it because it doesn't match your worldview.

inetknght 7y ago

You present one well-honored experience. I present a stark contrast to it. > My wife and I homeschool, but we have our kids pushing well beyond their grade level in every subject. My parents told themselves the same thing. I apparently had top percentile test scores in several early years, particularly in math. Despite that, my parents completely failed to provide an education after choosing to homeschool. > She had a teaching license up until a couple of years ago (they do expire after a while) and taught for several years before we had kids. Neat! Not that it really matters, but I am curious: what did she teach? > they're also plugged in with a local co-op with more than thirty kids that they meet up with several times a week. That's also something my parents told themselves and others. Despite that, it wasn't exactly an honest statement. We met with other church members about once every week for about a month. Then about once every quarter of a year for about a year. Then basically never, while my parents fell deep into paranoia. > it can also be the platform for an elite education like no other. Yes, it can. But my experience brings with me a very skeptical mind. > There's a reason the wealthiest families in American pay for private tutors and elite schools with tiny class sizes. Nothing beats one on one from a capable instructor. While you're right in that there's a reason for private tutors and elite schools, I think you're wrong about your conclusion for the wealthy. I think wealthy parents don't want their children to associate with poor people who can't afford to hire their own private lessons. I think that's also a despicably-elitist action. > They'll walk away from this better equipped than any of their peers in traditional school. It's almost as if you're parroting the same things my parents said. Indeed, I walked away better equipped for computers than pretty much anyone I know. But that's more of a byproduct of spending years in front of a computer than anything that my parents actively tried to teach. Where I gained knowledge about computers there's also loss of other opportunities and knowledge. > Honestly, if there is anything wrong with homeschooling itself, it's that it is only available to middle and upper class families. You are wrong. I consider myself middle class. Almost all of my family are somewhere between poor and destitute.

1123581321 7y ago
Tying back to your earlier comment, it doesn’t sound like your parents would have fit well with your public school system or stayed involved.
7y ago