>This is more-or-less exactly what I would expect: the younger you are, the more in-person learning matters. Yes, but I think there's something else more subtl

>This is more-or-less exactly what I would expect: the younger you are, the more in-person learning matters. Yes, but I think there's something else more subtle happening - younger kids have a lot less to do. I originally wrote a long diatribe with lots of facts, but it comes down to this: programs like No Child Left Behind et al. have actually lowered standards, especially by decreasing the subjects encountered at younger ages. Things that might have been taught at that age in the past have been pushed up or out. On the other hand, re: in-person learning... watching my ten year old lap her class because she's on Khan Academy told me what I had long suspected: All of the academic things we are teaching at the early grades can be automated away. In fact, I'm fairly convinced she picked up the material better that way than the classroom approach because she had fewer distractions. So, yes - my high schooler is even more nominally self-sufficient than my younger kids, but I think it has more to do with the amount of material she has to cover rather than age or aptitude related.