Jump to content

What's with the ads?


Photo

How American Homeschoolers Measure Up


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

What's with the ads?

#1 mofbethany

mofbethany

    Hive Mind Level 3 Worker: Honeymaking Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 05:16 PM

Saw this today and wanted to share:

 

http://www.topmaster...m/homeschooled/

 

(Not sure how to get the graphic in the post :confused1: )


  • Mommy22alyns and Queen Goddess of the Deep like this

#2 sagira

sagira

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5263 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:19 PM

I like it! A friend of mine shared this on Facebook, thanks for sharing here :)

#3 Dramorellis

Dramorellis

    Hive Mind Larvae

  • Members
  • 34 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 10:01 AM

Very interesting!



#4 strange_girl

strange_girl

    Hive Mind Level 4 Worker: Builder Bee

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 294 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 12:43 PM

If their data is accurate, then I think that says a lot for homeschooling. As a second generation homeschooler, I do agree with the questions asked of homeschooled kids. I do feel that I received a superior education at home and I don't feel that it limited my career or higher education choices.

OTOH, my 6 year old thinks I'm already limiting her educational choices too much :D
  • mofbethany likes this

#5 Jean in Newcastle

Jean in Newcastle

    Beekeeping Professor

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38682 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 02:07 PM

You know what I would like to see?  A study that measures American homeschoolers against students in other countries.  


  • kwg, idnib, Teneo and 7 others like this

#6 SparklyUnicorn

SparklyUnicorn

    Radioactive

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 47936 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 03:27 PM

I just wonder how they compile this information when there are so many states where people don't even have to report. 

 

 


  • Mandy in TN, PollyOR, duckens and 1 other like this

#7 mofbethany

mofbethany

    Hive Mind Level 3 Worker: Honeymaking Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 07:52 PM

I just wonder how they compile this information when there are so many states where people don't even have to report. 

 

Probably the same way they compile any similar statistic- by studying a set of homeschoolers who do report.



#8 SparklyUnicorn

SparklyUnicorn

    Radioactive

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 47936 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 08:07 PM

Well if you look at their citation list it mostly refers to the HSLDA's study.  IMO there are all sorts of things wrong with that study.

 

Not that I don't want to believe homeschooling is awesome.  

 

 


  • Penelope, Crimson Wife, NittanyJen and 3 others like this

#9 duckens

duckens

    Hive Mind Royal Larvae

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1170 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 08:13 PM

 

I just wonder how they compile this information when there are so many states where people don't even have to report. 

 

Probably the same way they compile any similar statistic- by studying a set of homeschoolers who do report.

 

I don't want to be negative.  Just a critical thinker.

 

In our state, we do have to report: by test OR portfolio OR visiting teacher.

 

If my child goes to public school, they are automatically tested with the ITBS at 3rd grade.  This is whether she is a good tester or not.

 

If my child homeschools, and she is a good tester, we would of course take the ITBS. 

 

If she is not a good tester, there would be temptation to choose to do portfolio or visiting teacher...and artificially drive up the ITBS scores because my poor tester's score would not be included.

 

(FTR, we are going to test either way.  I want to know how dd6 compares to others on grade level).

 

It is flattering to think of homeschoolers as a group doing so well, but we need to be critical thinkers and ask questions like this.  Sorry to rain on your parade.


  • Dana, HoppyTheToad and zoo_keeper like this

#10 mofbethany

mofbethany

    Hive Mind Level 3 Worker: Honeymaking Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 08:14 PM

Could very well be, I know nothing about the HSLDA study. I was just making the point that these statistics are compiled just like any other statistic- they never account for everyone. But do they seem that off? From personal experience? I wouldn't say so, but I'm not around tons of other homeschoolers.



#11 mofbethany

mofbethany

    Hive Mind Level 3 Worker: Honeymaking Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 08:16 PM

I don't want to be negative.  Just a critical thinker.

 

In our state, we do have to report: by test OR portfolio OR visiting teacher.

 

If my child goes to public school, they are automatically tested with the ITBS at 3rd grade.  This is whether she is a good tester or not.

 

If my child homeschools, and she is a good tester, we would of course take the ITBS. 

 

If she is not a good tester, there would be temptation to choose to do portfolio or visiting teacher...and artificially drive up the ITBS scores because my poor tester's score would not be included.

 

(FTR, we are going to test either way.  I want to know how dd6 compares to others on grade level).

 

It is flattering to think of homeschoolers as a group doing so well, but we need to be critical thinkers and ask questions like this.  Sorry to rain on your parade.

 

Good point. However, there are also states where all homeschoolers have to test.



#12 SparklyUnicorn

SparklyUnicorn

    Radioactive

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 47936 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 08:19 PM

I don't want to be negative.  Just a critical thinker.

 

In our state, we do have to report: by test OR portfolio OR visiting teacher.

 

If my child goes to public school, they are automatically tested with the ITBS at 3rd grade.  This is whether she is a good tester or not.

 

If my child homeschools, and she is a good tester, we would of course take the ITBS. 

 

If she is not a good tester, there would be temptation to choose to do portfolio or visiting teacher...and artificially drive up the ITBS scores because my poor tester's score would not be included.

 

(FTR, we are going to test either way.  I want to know how dd6 compares to others on grade level).

 

It is flattering to think of homeschoolers as a group doing so well, but we need to be critical thinkers and ask questions like this.  Sorry to rain on your parade.

 

And then there are people like me who are against all of the standardized tests and do as few as allowed by regulation.  If we lived in my previous state where no testing is required, I'd not test him at all with those tests.  I don't believe in them.  It has nothing to do with thinking he wouldn't do well.

 

The study was conducted by an organization who had an interest in the study turning out well.  It was funded by an organization who had an interest in the study turning out well.  Those two factors right there make me unsure.


  • zoo_keeper, hjffkj and Stars like this

#13 duckens

duckens

    Hive Mind Royal Larvae

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1170 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 08:24 PM

 

 But do they seem that off? From personal experience?

 

The numbers may be right on the money, but bad science is bad science.  Coming up with the right answer with a poor method is not something we want to take seriously.

 

I could look at the innards of the dead bunny up the street to predict tomorrow's weather  That doesn't mean that rabbit entrails is a good method for determining the weather temp.  The SYSTEM is flawed.

 

I also want to be clear that I have not read the "methods" part of the study.  It is quite possible that professional (and non-homeschooling so they don't have an ethical-conflict-of-interest) statisticians compiled the research and numbers in a manner that accounted for those who were not tested.


  • Spy Car, Dana, Luckymama and 2 others like this

#14 duckens

duckens

    Hive Mind Royal Larvae

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1170 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 08:25 PM

 

The study was conducted by an organization who had an interest in the study turning out well.  It was funded by an organization who had an interest in the study turning out well.  Those two factors right there make me unsure.

 

Bravo! 

 

ETA: This is turning into a critical thinking workshop.



#15 SparklyUnicorn

SparklyUnicorn

    Radioactive

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 47936 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 08:32 PM


 

I also want to be clear that I have not read the "methods" part of the study.  It is quite possible that professional (and non-homeschooling so they don't have an ethical-conflict-of-interest) statisticians compiled the research and numbers in a manner that accounted for those who were not tested.

 

I read some of it.  I was not impressed.   Plus I'm assuming most who participated where members of HSLDA.   Which I get.  It was a convenient way to find homeschoolers irregardless of whether or not they have to report.  But right there you are dealing with bias and a very specific group of people.  I won't join HSLDA because I don't agree with most of their political views and I'm an atheist.  So, again, some people like me wouldn't have even been asked these questions.

 

There was criticism regarding the test score results (claims).  The answer from the group who conducted the study was that a large percentage of participants said they didn't know what their children's scores would be.  Um...one would hope.  But I can't imagine a ton of parents agreeing to have their child tested if they thought they wouldn't positively represent the study.


  • duckens, Luckymama and Dialectica like this

#16 mofbethany

mofbethany

    Hive Mind Level 3 Worker: Honeymaking Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 08:34 PM

The numbers may be right on the money, but bad science is bad science.  Coming up with the right answer with a poor method is not something we want to take seriously.

 

I could look at the innards of the dead bunny up the street to predict tomorrow's weather  That doesn't mean that rabbit entrails is a good method for determining the weather temp.  The SYSTEM is flawed.

 

I also want to be clear that I have not read the "methods" part of the study.  It is quite possible that professional (and non-homeschooling so they don't have an ethical-conflict-of-interest) statisticians compiled the research and numbers in a manner that accounted for those who were not tested.

 

 

Check the sources and the method, then, before you label something "bad science." And I shall do the same before I label something "good science," which I haven't done.

 

Some of the numbers came from http://nces.ed.gov/



#17 albeto.

albeto.

    Just Visiting

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1685 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 09:18 PM

Saw this today and wanted to share:

 

http://www.topmaster...m/homeschooled/

 

(Not sure how to get the graphic in the post :confused1: )

 

 

You might balance this out with the other half of the story. You can find a quick review here.

 

 

Some excerpts:

 

Although, child labor was not new to the world, it is believed that during 1780 and 1840, there was a massive increase in child exploitation. During the Industrial revolution, it was very common to find children working in factories. In 1788, more than 60% of workers in textile mills of England and Scotland were children. Many laws were passed to eradicate child labor, but hardly succeeded.

 

1836

The National Trades' Union Convention made the first ever proposal to the government, stating that a minimum age for work be established for children to work in factories and other jobs. In the same year, Massachusetts introduced the first ever State law, which required children below 15 years, who were working in factories, to undergo compulsory 3 months of schooling each year.

 

1842

Massachusetts reduces the working hours for children to 10 hours a day. This law is emulated and passed by other states in United States.

 

1876

The Working Men's Party (WMP) proposed that children below the age of 14 be disallowed and banned from working in factories.

 

Let that sink in for a moment. When the commonwealth of Massachusetts passed its compulsory education law (education at the state's expense meant every child could access some education - three months out of every year - not just those families who could afford it), children were working in excess of 10 hours per day. Children as young as four years old put in twelve hour days. Considering this law was in some measure in response to the dangerous working conditions for children, it's less likely the law was created to control the masses, and more plausible to interpret it as applying a viable, organized system of education on a large scale, to benefit the whole of society. The image of the modern homeschooling family, sitting around while mother reads an enjoyable, classic novel, was not the reality of most children in the 19th century. Families who could not afford a private education brought their children to work with them, all day, every day. 

 

1936

The first ever boycott was initiated by Walsh Haley Act, as per which the United States government refused to purchase goods, which were manufactured through child labor. The act reduced the working hours for children above 14, to 8 hours daily, and 40 hours a week. Health and safety measures were reinforced.

 

1938

After many attempts, many states passed stringent laws, and banned child labor. Congress passed the Fair Labor Standards Act, also known as Federal Wage and Hour Law. This became constitutional in 1941 after a declaration by the US Supreme Court. According to this act, no child would work more than 40 hours a week, the minimum wage would be 40 cents per hour. Minors below 16 are not to work in those industries which are classified to be hazardous. There were no age restrictions for children to work in non-hazardous environment. Children were to work only outside their school hours and during vacations, but only for limited hours.

 

So until 1938 (my father was 2 years old), children's labor laws were largely ignored. Children were rushed out of sight when inspectors came. Children worked in dangerous conditions with no minimum wage pay. Educational laws came in conjunction with child labor laws. To assume the educational laws were haphazardly invented and forced on an otherwise happy society is to be ignorant of the rest of the story, and that makes one easy prey for conspiracists with a shiny, new snake oil for sale.

 

 

This is, in part, what education laws addressed:

 

childlabor.jpg

 

 

 

child-labor_7866.jpg

 

 

More photos here.


  • Penelope, Tress, Spy Car and 7 others like this

#18 GGardner

GGardner

    Hive Mind Level 5 Worker: Forager Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 933 posts

Posted 28 September 2013 - 09:25 AM

Check the sources and the method, then, before you label something "bad science." And I shall do the same before I label something "good science," which I haven't done.

 

Some of the numbers came from http://nces.ed.gov/

 

I think there's a deeper question of whether educational outcomes are amenable to science, or at least to the kind of science of analysis of standardized test scores we see all the time.  There's a huge "searching for your keys under the streetlight effect going on here", because standardized tests are so easy to administer and grade, but they can't measure the truly important things our students need to learn.  And, of course, the tests can be gamed, and lead to the rise of "teaching to the test", and teaching techniques that are only useful in this artificial scenario (learn how to fill in a bubble completely and quickly; if given a math question with four answers, see if you can throw away one or two quickly).  My favorite example is the vocabulary section on college entrance tests.  Having a large vocabulary was thought to be a proxy for being well-read, or perhaps intelligence in general.  However, now that it is tested, we forget that it is a proxy for something else, and just teach vocab directly. 


  • duckens, mofbethany and Stars like this

#19 KarenNC

KarenNC

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4654 posts

Posted 28 September 2013 - 01:09 PM

They did make a mistake with NC---we are required to test yearly using a nationally normed standardized test, but we are *not* required to submit the scores nor are we required to have a professional evaluation.

 

I wish they had footnoted the specific statistics so that one could match the statistic to the source, rather than just giving the source.



#20 tabinfl

tabinfl

    Mind? What Mind?

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 391 posts

Posted 28 September 2013 - 01:47 PM

Well if you look at their citation list it mostly refers to the HSLDA's study.  IMO there are all sorts of things wrong with that study.
 
Not that I don't want to believe homeschooling is awesome.


I showed the HSLDA study (I think I'm thinking of the same one) to a friend of mine who reads (and writes) scientific papers for a living. He tore it apart. I don't know enough statistics to really understand al of what he was talking about, but he started with self-selected participants making it invalid right off the bat, to testing administered by parents in uncrontrolled conditions, and went from there. According to him, they didn't even use the correct analytical functions for the type of data they collected, and the numbers they claimed proved something didn't actually prove that thing at all.

Made me sad, but if it's not good science, it's not science. I'm now on a quest to learn enough statistics to not have to take anyong else's word for it.
  • Laura Corin, Dana, duckens and 4 others like this

#21 farrarwilliams

farrarwilliams

    Expert Cat Herder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10762 posts

Posted 28 September 2013 - 10:35 PM

Yeah, I've gotten to the point where I just completely dismiss "data" like this infographic because the methods through which they collect the information is so, so very flawed.  The truth is that we just don't know how homeschoolers stack up against public school kids.  There's just not enough real data to say.  I tend to think we're probably doing better than the average for public schools on most measures, especially by the end of elementary school or so (earlier I might guess we could be doing worse since so many homeschoolers tend to delay academics or not push some of the skills that are most heavily tested in the early grades), but that's just my hunch.  Again, we just don't know.


  • Dialectica and Stars like this

#22 farrarwilliams

farrarwilliams

    Expert Cat Herder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10762 posts

Posted 28 September 2013 - 10:41 PM

I think there's a deeper question of whether educational outcomes are amenable to science, or at least to the kind of science of analysis of standardized test scores we see all the time.  There's a huge "searching for your keys under the streetlight effect going on here", because standardized tests are so easy to administer and grade, but they can't measure the truly important things our students need to learn.  And, of course, the tests can be gamed, and lead to the rise of "teaching to the test", and teaching techniques that are only useful in this artificial scenario (learn how to fill in a bubble completely and quickly; if given a math question with four answers, see if you can throw away one or two quickly).  My favorite example is the vocabulary section on college entrance tests.  Having a large vocabulary was thought to be a proxy for being well-read, or perhaps intelligence in general.  However, now that it is tested, we forget that it is a proxy for something else, and just teach vocab directly. 

 

I agree with this in some ways.  Certainly, this is why we haven't bothered much with standardized testing to this point and why I sometimes choose the less tangible, quantifiable educational experiences (like playing in creeks) over the more tangible, quantifiable ones (like extra math drills).  However I've also grown weary of dismissing the numbers out of hand.  They do tell us something...  which is part of why it's so frustrating not to have any actual numbers to compare in this case.



#23 mofbethany

mofbethany

    Hive Mind Level 3 Worker: Honeymaking Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 607 posts

Posted 28 September 2013 - 10:42 PM

I showed the HSLDA study (I think I'm thinking of the same one) to a friend of mine who reads (and writes) scientific papers for a living. He tore it apart. I don't know enough statistics to really understand al of what he was talking about, but he started with self-selected participants making it invalid right off the bat, to testing administered by parents in uncrontrolled conditions, and went from there. According to him, they didn't even use the correct analytical functions for the type of data they collected, and the numbers they claimed proved something didn't actually prove that thing at all.

Made me sad, but if it's not good science, it's not science. I'm now on a quest to learn enough statistics to not have to take anyong else's word for it.

 

Well, assuming it's the same study that they are using in this graphic, the test score numbers are useless. Like I said, I have no idea about HSLDA. I just think it's crazy how people are so quick to jump on something like this as untrue. Sheesh...

 

And for the record, I formally salute the public education system for all it's done to combat child labor :patriot: .



#24 regentrude

regentrude

    Qualified Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13092 posts

Posted 28 September 2013 - 10:47 PM

I have a  few issues with those numbers

The comparison that homeschoolers spend $500 vs public schools that spend $9,963 is pointless and misleading.

For a fair comparison one must take into account the loss of income of the homeschooling parent who usually stays home or at least reduces work hours to make homeschooling possible, as well as the loss of retirement contributions for that person. That is WAY more than $500 per year (and for a highly educated parent a lot more than the 10k ps spends). Public schools pay teachers a salary, health insurance, and pensions - so comparing those numbers is utterly meaningless.

 

I agree about the unreliability of information about testing and performance. In our state, there is no reporting, no mandatory testing - only high performing homeschoolers take tests.

 

And the statement "1840: 55% attended school, the rest was educated at home or with private tutors" is missing "or not at all". How many kids did have to work? I see a free public education for all children, even those whose parents can not educate them at home and who do not have the funds for private tutors, as a very positive thing.

 

It is sure nice to think that homeschooling is superior, but I do not like propaganda like this.


  • duckens, soror, farrarwilliams and 4 others like this

#25 regentrude

regentrude

    Qualified Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13092 posts

Posted 28 September 2013 - 10:54 PM

The study was conducted by an organization who had an interest in the study turning out well.  It was funded by an organization who had an interest in the study turning out well.  Those two factors right there make me unsure.

 

This, exactly.



#26 Crimson Wife

Crimson Wife

    Qualified Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12543 posts

Posted 28 September 2013 - 11:10 PM

For a fair comparison one must take into account the loss of income of the homeschooling parent who usually stays home or at least reduces work hours to make homeschooling possible, as well as the loss of retirement contributions for that person. That is WAY more than $500 per year (and for a highly educated parent a lot more than the 10k ps spends). Public schools pay teachers a salary, health insurance, and pensions - so comparing those numbers is utterly meaningless.


This makes a big assumption that the homeschooling parent would otherwise be employed FT. Many homeschoolers also have preschoolers or younger and would be SAHP's regardless of whether or not they homeschool their older children. It's not a cost directly related to homeschooling unless the parent only has 1st graders and up.

#27 GGardner

GGardner

    Hive Mind Level 5 Worker: Forager Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 933 posts

Posted 28 September 2013 - 11:17 PM

The study was conducted by an organization who had an interest in the study turning out well.  It was funded by an organization who had an interest in the study turning out well.  Those two factors right there make me unsure.

 

And, to be fair, aren't most high-stakes tests in the public schools administered by the same schools who have the most to gain or lose from the results of the tests?


  • WTMCassandra and Dialectica like this

#28 sagira

sagira

    Amateur Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 5263 posts

Posted 28 September 2013 - 11:21 PM

Aw, I was reading with my rose-colored glasses on. You ladies are right. This study does not hold water.

However, I do not know if we can find "unbiased non-homeschoolers". I'm afraid most people who do not know what hsing is all about automatically discredit it and thus have an anti-hsing bias. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to have an objective study of homeschoolers.

#29 regentrude

regentrude

    Qualified Bee Keeper

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13092 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 07:53 AM

This makes a big assumption that the homeschooling parent would otherwise be employed FT. Many homeschoolers also have preschoolers or younger and would be SAHP's regardless of whether or not they homeschool their older children. It's not a cost directly related to homeschooling unless the parent only has 1st graders and up.

 

But eventually every parent will only have 1st graders and up: for twelve years. So, even if you take the income of those twelve years only and spread it over the entire home schooling career, that would be more than $500 per year (unless you combine a very lowincome with a very large number of kids)

I know very few parents of older children who stay home until their kids are 18 if they are not homeschooling; in my community, most mothers of school students work.


  • Spy Car, duckens and HoppyTheToad like this

#30 farrarwilliams

farrarwilliams

    Expert Cat Herder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10762 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 08:00 AM

Aw, I was reading with my rose-colored glasses on. You ladies are right. This study does not hold water.

However, I do not know if we can find "unbiased non-homeschoolers". I'm afraid most people who do not know what hsing is all about automatically discredit it and thus have an anti-hsing bias. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to have an objective study of homeschoolers.


There are some researchers studying homeschooling in a relatively non-biased way. The problem is that the studies have been small or anecdotal. I think as homeschooling grows, so will the number of statistically valid studies, but it's still low.
  • duckens and soror like this

#31 momma2three

momma2three

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2142 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 08:01 AM

It's not even about the income...the $10k number includes building maintenance, utilities, staff salary, technology, security, and everything else that gets shared among the students.  The numbers will NEVER make sense, because of course one person working for free will always cost less than paying someone a salary for it (Hey, guys!  Did you know that in the olden days when everyone had to own their own bucket and turn out when the church bells rang, it was cheaper than paying for a modern fire department?  I have a GREAT way to save some municipal dollars!).  But I bet if I actually sat down to compute how much electricity, running water, and heat we use during the day when the kids are here, plus the computers/iPads they use, and the building wear and tear (and there's A LOT of that) from having the kids around all day, that $10k a year wouldn't actually be that far off.


  • duckens, regentrude and HoppyTheToad like this

#32 SparklyUnicorn

SparklyUnicorn

    Radioactive

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 47936 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 08:17 AM

And then there is the issue of what are you comparing when you compare homeschools vs. public schools.  Homeschools don't necessarily have much in common. 


  • Dialectica likes this

#33 farrarwilliams

farrarwilliams

    Expert Cat Herder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10762 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 09:27 AM

A lot of public schools don't have little in common too.

 

In addition to the issues of income, I wonder how you adjust for the fact that there might be a larger percentage of kids with learning differences in the homeschool community - especially a lot who have undiagnosed learning issues.  Of course, that's just a guess based on the fact that many people begin homeschooling when kids are having problems in school or have needs that aren't being met.  We don't really know.  Nor do we know much about homeschoolers and socio-economic class.  We know so little.


  • duckens likes this

#34 Dialectica

Dialectica

    Hive Mind Level 6 Worker: Scout Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2419 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 01:56 PM

A lot of public schools don't have little in common too.

 

In addition to the issues of income, I wonder how you adjust for the fact that there might be a larger percentage of kids with learning differences in the homeschool community - especially a lot who have undiagnosed learning issues.  Of course, that's just a guess based on the fact that many people begin homeschooling when kids are having problems in school or have needs that aren't being met.  We don't really know.  Nor do we know much about homeschoolers and socio-economic class.  We know so little.

 

On the other hand, there is probably a larger percentage of gifted students too — because their needs are not being met within public schools either.


  • duckens, farrarwilliams, regentrude and 1 other like this

#35 Dialectica

Dialectica

    Hive Mind Level 6 Worker: Scout Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2419 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 04:02 PM

The question is — is the "average" performance of "the" homeschooled child really relevant to us as individual families? Even accurate statistics don't mean much to me personally, because homeschools are clearly much more heterogeneous than public schools and the likelihood is that none of the other families incorporated into studies do what I do. Homeschooling is such a diverse thing, it is terribly hard to make any conclusions about it as a phenomenon. 

 

Homeschooling was recently legalized in my country. A local journalist wrote badly about it, saying that "the practice is allowed in many western countries but with highly dubious results". Now, if statistics could be used to accurately show this person how ignorant she is, because she didn't bother to do the tiniest bit of research before writing that sentence, that would be great. But another family's success or lack thereof says nothing about homeschooling overall.


  • duckens, farrarwilliams and a27mom like this

#36 momma2three

momma2three

    Hive Mind Queen Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2142 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 05:39 PM

And it's all so individual... there is no one thing called "homeschooling" that you can measure.  Even if you're looking at one school, you have a few hundred kids (who are, given the way that school districting works in the US probably a fairly homogeneous in most ways), and you can adjust for whatever other key factors you care about, and you can come up with numbers that can at least be considered applicable to other schools that meet certain criteria.  There's also the fact that most public schools are pretty much the same, and even if you change a couple of things to make it considered unusual (a Montessori-inspired magnet school, or a single-sex education school, or a school that keeps all class sizes under 15), the rest of the package is still the same.  Add to that that, realistically, there are only a handful of curricular materials that 99% of public schools use, and (the great TERC/traditional math divide excepting) they're not actually all that different.  Someone evaluating, say, Reading Street versus Treasures might prefer one over another... but at the end of the day, they're not that dramatically different and if implemented properly they'll lead to roughly the same place.

 

Homeschoolers, on the other hand... where to begin?  

 

There are hundreds, maybe thousands, of curriculum options... many of which really are truly unique and would never be used in a public school (some probably for good reason).  Even if you ignore whatever out-to-lunch fringe curriculum you might be able to find online (Ron Paul/Gary North, I'm looking at you), so many of the popular homeschooling curricula use really divergent systems to teach really divergent subjects... I plan on teaching sentence diagramming, for example, while plenty of people (and most schools) think that's a waste of time.  

 

And families are so wildly different... You have your homeschoolers making their kindergartners memorize Latin declensions, and those who don't think you should start formal education until 12.  You have "class" sizes that range from 1 to 20.  You have parents who think that their child should be heading off to MIT by age 14, and those who think that girls should only be educated to be mothers and boys don't need to know much more.  Education level of parents ranges from people without high school degrees all the way up to brilliant rocket scientist-types with multiple PhDs.  Teaching training/experience ranges from nil to former educators.  Parents prioritize different subjects... sometimes based on what they're most comfortable with, sometimes based on what they think their kids will need, sometimes just based on what the kids want.  So you'll have a homeschooling family where the kids do math for 4 hours a day, and another where the parent says "well I never use math... they can learn what they need through cooking and we won't bother with anything else."

 

Other factors that can really make a difference are geographical location and finances... ime these matter a lot more in homeschooling than in bricks and mortar schooling.  A rich school district and a poor one will have a lot more in common with eachother than a homeschooling family who makes do using only free online resources and a sub-par library does with billionaires who overnight anything their child wants and uses professional tutors who travel with the family around the world taking private tours of museums.

 

So, honestly, I don't think that homeschooling CAN be studied as a homogeneous unit, and if someone ever claims "homeschoolers do..." then I I usually immediately discount what they're saying, because I doubt that there's much that is universally true among homeschoolers.  I certainly don't think there's a way to do monolithic studies, except of broad cultural trends and demographic information about families.  You could probably do smaller studies, where you define your target group very narrowly, and get some reasonable results.  But I doubt anyone is really interested in paying for and going to the trouble of such a study.

 

 


  • duckens and Dialectica like this

#37 farrarwilliams

farrarwilliams

    Expert Cat Herder

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10762 posts

Posted 29 September 2013 - 06:10 PM

I was definitely thinking of gifted kids too being a greater percentage of the homeschool population.  I think there are a lot of 2E homeschoolers - the kids we used to have labeled GT/LD back when I was school teaching.

 

I'm also a little dubious about how much this sort of analysis can tell us about homeschoolers in terms of educational results.  On the other hand, I think it can tell us something and the most basic stuff, like that question of the demographics of homeschooling, would be nice to know because it could be a potential starting point for other research.  Another possibility would be comparing homeschoolers to each other.  I saw once a very small study that had compared, IIRC, homeschoolers whose parents self-identified as unschoolers to ones who self-identified as "relaxed" and ones who self-identified as more rigid to traditional school students.  Stuff like that is interesting to me.


  • duckens and Dialectica like this

#38 Dialectica

Dialectica

    Hive Mind Level 6 Worker: Scout Bee

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2419 posts

Posted 30 September 2013 - 03:36 AM

It would probably be possible to measure the educational outcomes of students whose parents have frequented these forums for years (in an unscientific way), and I would be interested in seeing something like that. However, even those who come here follow the WTM to various extents or not at all.

 

So, what do you say to people who question whether homeschooling produces good educational outcomes? 




What's with the ads?