State/Gov't Regulation of HS: Good or Bad?

[SamanthaBea]

I will agree to the state tests if they give me the state money. If I am to teach to the states tests, use the state's scope and sequence, which I would need to do to for my children to do well on the tests, then They should give me the same money they give my local public school.

 

 

:iagree:

 

 

Yes, I would like the money and I would also like the high school diploma to be accredited too!

 

Maybe allowing homeschoolers to be tested and accredited by private organizations other than the government would be a possible compromise.

[Ester Maria]

I agree to a point, but the government doesn't own a child and their life either. Responsibility lies with the parents. Period.

Please take time to read the rest of my posts, this isn't my central point but more of a by-the-way remark. Of course that fundamentally it's parents' responsibility, but...

 

In a nutshell, it's about ACADEMIC CREDIBILITY of the person who issues the grade and signs it. You can't call something Italian I and expect me to trust your word it really WAS Italian I - but if you get me an Italian professor's signature next to your grade as a guarantee of it the standards and the knowledge, it's a bit different situation. That's why I advocate getting our children tested by subject experts - or, at least, by giving them (by a third party, who will grade them too) grade-appropriate final yearly tests their school peers are getting to ensure the minimum of education was actually done and is comparable to what kids in gov't schools are getting. Otherwise, anyone can claim pretty much anything on their own transcript - and when somebody abuses the system, it's a problem for ALL of us because then we get all those generalizing talks about homeschoolers who do nothing.

[Avila]

First off, I am in Texas, and ALL my friends actually homeschool. No pretenders where I am that I have met. Our laws are very lax, but I don't personally know people taking advantage of them here.

 

One big problem with regulation is that education in America is very much a local issue. There is NO standard education across the board for this country. A fourth grader in Illinois will not be studying the same thing as a fourth grader in Texas, and maybe not even the same thing as a fourth grader a county over. This is true even with math. This is also true even inside school districts, where a teacher may be using the same books but not covering the same material in either quantity or quality as another teacher two rooms down the hall.

 

Experts also vary wildly. Having an education degree doesn't make you a subject matter expert. It makes you educated in classroom management. At my public university, English majors took almost twice the number of English classes as secondary education English majors, and education majors only needed a C to pass and be certified in their subjects.

 

Testing also varies wildly. And many, many times, the test scores prove only that your child is good at TESTING and not what they actually know. Passing the standardized tests is a skill. Some very smart kids struggle with testing, and it is neither the best way nor the most accurate way to show what a child knows. It is the easiest way for large groups to assess, and it is something that the general public sees as less biased than personal assessments. But it doesn't mean much objectively.

 

And then there is the problem of what is included in the tests. Who gets to decide that? This ends up a value judgement of what is or isn't important, and it is often being made by bureaucrats with neither subject matter knowledge nor educational knowledge. Just look at the committees to adopt textbooks. These are people elected to school boards in many places, and why would anybody feel like these people are more qualified than a homeschool parent to make that call?

 

When the schools start doing a better job than homeschoolers, maybe I will take them seriously. But I think education should be a lot broader than the testing suggests, and trying to box it into that test is one of the reasons so many kids AND teachers are struggling at this point.

[mommaduck]

They make the test, grade the test, examine the child orally afterwards, assign the final grade and sign that final grade, thus guaranteeing - as experts in the field and teachers of the material - by their signature that the child in question has mastered the material in question to the grade in question according to the standards that were in question on a date in question.

Which is different than if mom does it. A lot less subjective. A lot more credible.

I wouldn't, under the conditions that:

(i) At the time of criticising, you are living mostly in Italy, and are criticising your current reality - not something you got to know via mass media;

(ii) At the time of criticising, you have been living mostly in Italy for about a decade or so, i.e. you're not somebody that came there yesterday and is now all smart about how things should be done, but somebody that has been there for a while, observed things, thought about things, compared with previous experiences, took into account specific cultural atmosphere of Italy;

(iii) Despite being originally, or even de iure, a foreigner, you are de facto a member of the society and quite much an "insider" in the culture - you speak the language, mingle with actual Italians now and then, you are quite well acquainted with the society at large, access the media all Italians access, have made considerable effort to 'make up' for the lack of Italian education in childhood (by reading important literary pieces, checking out the important things in culture that lead to cultural associations that all Italians will be familiar with and so forth) and can pretty much say that you're, if not a full insider, than at least a very competent outsider that has been there for a while and understands the Italian reality.

 

You don't need to be an Italian citizen, but if you fulfill the three conditions above, you're as competent and as WELCOME to criticise Italian reality as I am.

If you don't have the three conditions above, you can still criticise - but it would be nice if you preceded your critique by a disclaimer regarding the language, the length of the stays in the country, the lack of cultural knowledge, bla bla. But you could still have an educated outsider's say about what you think.

Well, I guess you'd have to understand that I don't know who you are or how long you've been here. So as far as I know, you may or may not meet any of the above criteria.

 

My apologies, your posts just came off to me as holier than thou and without complete understanding of what it really takes for some of us to homeschool. The requirements I'm under do not take "just a few days" out of my year. It does cause some unnecessary stress. Your views do not take into consideration a child's individual needs and a family's individual lifestyle and subculture (this does not mean that the child is not being educated appropriately, but rather differently than the "expert" may desire). I laughed over your "Which is different than if mom does it. A lot less subjective. A lot more credible." I've yet to meet a completely objective teacher or professor (another reason I homeschool my children). Your criteria for a test and an expert does not exist. I can only imagine the kind of stress and cost it would place on the homeschool community at large, let alone being able to find people that would be able to do such a thing for each individual family. I know the local evaluators are overloaded with just interviewing families and looking at portfolios. I actually had trouble with one evaluator (he wasn't objective...I hadn't converted to his religion like my in-laws wanted and he got nasty with me), had trouble finding another evaluator because they all had more homeschoolers than they could handle (found out that some were evaluating families only halfway through the school year, signing papers that stated the families had fulfilled the year's requirements when 180 days had not even passed, just to get through all of them). I did find one that I drive a bit of a distance to see.

 

I'm simply saying that your expectations are a bit unrealistic.

[Murmer]

Please take time to read the rest of my posts, this isn't my central point but more of a by-the-way remark. Of course that fundamentally it's parents' responsibility, but...

 

In a nutshell, it's about ACADEMIC CREDIBILITY of the person who issues the grade and signs it. You can't call something Italian I and expect me to trust your word it really WAS Italian I - but if you get me an Italian professor's signature next to your grade as a guarantee of it the standards and the knowledge, it's a bit different situation. That's why I advocate getting our children tested by subject experts - or, at least, by giving them (by a third party, who will grade them too) grade-appropriate final yearly tests their school peers are getting to ensure the minimum of education was actually done and is comparable to what kids in gov't schools are getting. Otherwise, anyone can claim pretty much anything on their own transcript - and when somebody abuses the system, it's a problem for ALL of us because then we get all those generalizing talks about homeschoolers who do nothing.

 

The problem with this currently in the US is that we don't have tests that measure knowledge acquired about a subject but rather measure know compared to others that same grade. Thus nationally normed (meaning compared to others) as opposed to nationally standard, which the only state I know that does this is Utah. Even still they throw in nationally normed questions that are pulled for NCLB. Ester's thoughts are great if we had experts, if we tested standards not compared, and if everyone was held to the same standards...but sadly in the US we are not and I don't think it will change anytime soon so for now I want less government interference.

[bluemongoose]

In my state we are required to do standardized testing in certain years, not every year. I do not agree with it. I dont think the schools have their act together enough to police those outside of their school.

 

I also disagree with the fact that I am not allowed to administer the test myself, but required to pay for a "qualified" administer to give my child the test. The PS kids are required to take this same test, but the tax dollars pay for their test. Do I not also pay into this pool of tax dollars? Why is my student not allowed to come to test day if they are required to take it?

 

The State has been so shamed by the higher test scores of homeschoolers that they now no longer want to even see my child's test score. Not only that, but the requirement for passing is 15% on the test. That is a low F for crying out loud! They want me to pay money to prove that my kids are capable of at least an F!

 

So I have to pay for this formality just so the gov schools boards feel as though they are policing homeschoolers. It is expensive, unproductive, and lame. Much like PS often is itself these days:glare:.

 

I used to work in these PS. I got out because I could not stand being forced to teach to tests. I cannot teach that way. It is not really "teaching" IMO. I remember getting my first taste of "teaching to the test" when I was a student teacher in College. I was told to give a fourth grade class a their first lesson in division. I started the lesson and realized right away that the students didnt understand multiplication, so I decided to ditch the division lesson and step back to multiplication. I was strongly reprimanded by the head teacher for throwing the student schedule off track for the test. My supervisor was called in and I had to go before a board of review. This was all because I wouldn't conform to blindly leading these kids to the test. After all, I had gone to school to be a teacher!

 

This is why the gov ed. are not welcome to tell me how to homeschool and why I think their test is pointless.

[Ester Maria]

My apologies, your posts just came off to me as holier than thou and without complete understanding of what it really takes for some of us to homeschool.

No problem, I actually have issues with it - no kidding. I often come across way more fervent and "holy" than I actually intend to, no matter the disclaimers I try to put into my posts all the time. I rarely see what's wrong with my posts and I always take maximum care of the wording and disclaimers, and yet so many people find them borderline offensive at times. I guess internet communication is just really not my forte. :(

 

I'm just sharing what it's like somewhere else, a system I consider fairly good. One of the reasons why it's fairly good, and why things are done that way, is because it caters to a lot less people than in the US. I don't know the statistics, but in all of Rome you maybe have as many homeschoolers as in your neighborhood - really. It's just very uncommon, albeit not illegal, so it doesn't take a lot of effort on anyone's part to take care of those small bothersome formalities such as examining a child in a school milieu every year. To my knowledge, my daughters are the only "students" they examine that way in their school, and sometimes it's literally all done very quickly - maybe not in a single day, but in a week or so, yes, without much stress. It reduces my personal stress of having to grade so I'm happy, and makes "the system" happy too, so we're all happy in the end. I don't even know if such a thing is realistically applicable to the US - I'm just sharing my two cents on what I think to be a good system that I have some experience with. No "holier than thou" intents behind it!

Your views do not take into consideration a child's individual needs and a family's individual lifestyle and subculture (this does not mean that the child is not being educated appropriately, but rather differently than the "expert" may desire).

No, they don't. They talk only about the portion of education that's common to ALL children within certain grade, I don't think that kids should be formally examined on every single thing they study at home. Regarding SNs, I really don't know how it works, I suppose kids would be given adequate tests that "the system" gives to children with similar diagnoses, but I don't know what that looks like in practice.

 

Kids being educated differently... I hear you here, I really do, but... I'm not required to teach Catholicism to my daughters (and their school has it), but if I were (we're secular Jews), I'd teach it as a required area, without the value added to it. We'd go through the program, but keep a personal distance from it. Nobody should ever require of them to cross themselves (I'd probably in the moment of anger send a lawsuit straight to Strasbourgh if that were the case :D), but if there were such an obligatory area, I would be able to teach the theoretical basics and have the kids examined on those theoretical basics - while allowing them the freedom to not adhere to any sort of religious practice. The same way, I don't see anything problematic with you having to teach certain things you disagree with - you can always keep a personal distance and approach it only theoretically, thus giving your child the knowledge the society considers important enough to put as obligatory in schools, but without adhering to it.

 

After all, "the intelligence is an ability to entertain the idea without accepting it." ;) I'd view it that way if I had to teach things that were against my worldview - and I'd still teach what I consider valuable in addition to it.

I've yet to meet a completely objective teacher or professor (another reason I homeschool my children).

It's not only about minimized chances of subjectivity... it's also about, I repeat, academic credibility. Their say is not more important because it's not yours, but because they have a degree in the field and teach the subject to a lot of different kids, and you don't and teach only to your own. They have knowledge and experience that you don't have. None of this is being written as snarky, but in an honest, calm fashion - I admit that there are better authorities on most of the things I teach, and I actually WANT my children to be examined by them rather than by me, and to give ME the feedback on where my kids stand.

I'm simply saying that your expectations are a bit unrealistic.

It may be. But I still thought it would be valuable to share my experience, no? :)

[cathmom]

s

 

First of all, I've seen WAY too much intellectual dishonesty in the homeschool world to buy into the idea that freedom comes first and God forbid anyone ever wishes to control anything you do.

 

All of it made me realize that Italy is not a crazy dictatorship which requires my children to take yearly exams in ALL prescribed subjects and be accountable to a certain specific school because it "wants to control me and my kids" or "interfere in our lives and know what exactly we are doing in America during the year", but instead, a perfectly normal country (I cannot believe I'm saying that something in the practice of Italian laws is normal, let alone perfect :D) that has learned a thing or two from the experiences of other countries (unusual for Italy, but this is a positive example).

 

 

 

 

Eh, for THOSE people, some regulations should exist. For the sake of their children and their children's right to receive at least the minimal "standard package" of education that's established as a minimum in their society, and to ensure they are doing something to get it and are successfully getting it.

 

 

go against the normal experience of the society you live in, not teaching what you should be teaching.

 

One of the reasons why society exists in the first place is to give up on little freedom to ensure little safety. That's why normal societies have obligatory some kind of health care, some educational experience, it

 

you have it darn well compared to Europe and if I were to make your laws, they would be a lot less flexible and a lot less free to minimize the theoretical possibility of abusing that freedom. For now, the theoretical possibility of abusing it is VERY high - and the freedom we're talking about is potentially dangerous.

 

 

 

I found this very interesting, especially the bolded parts. Last year I read a series of novels about Swedish immigrants to the US, and it struck me that basically the people who emigrated to the US from Europe were the ones who could not live in the system for whatever reason. The ones who were odd or different, who wanted to do things more individually, the ones who were poor and locked out of making enough for their families to be able to eat, the ones who wanted freedom to follow whatever religious beliefs they wanted, etc. Then it struck me that if those sorts of people LEAVE and go elsewhere, you are left with the people who consider society more important than individuals, who can work within the system. The people who stayed in Sweden transformed the country over that 100 year period. And then, if all the individualists go to another country, you are going to have a country that emphasizes individuality even at the expense of what seems like common sense to the ones who stayed behind. And there you have Europe and the US. :001_smile:

 

In what way is it problematic if I say that I'm pro that each student gets tested yearly in the subjects that are a part of the "standard package"? Basically I'm talking about a yearly testing in English, Maths, societal and scientific literacy that's age-appropriate and in high school, about taking official tests for the subjects you're learning. Such testing takes a few days yearly, you can an official confirmation by an expert in the field that you know the material, nobody doubts "mom's transcript" because somebody other than mom guarantees for the level of studies, and that's it. A few DAYS in every YEAR. And you still study at home, and do whatever you like, and teach your children non-standard areas that you find important.

 

But I don't think anyone should be exempted from doing the required minimum, I think there should be some sort of control that a required minimum is being done and I don't think that "they aren't doing it properly at public school either!" is a good argument against it.

 

The amount of intellectual dishonesty that's going around is often striking - I'm RELIEVED by the fact that Italy requires yearly testing and thus somebody else signs the grade on the transcript, who actually has the qualifications needed to do it. I can do it only for few areas with a complete, perfect peace of mind, knowing that I have the education needed and know the standards well to be able to apply it and "measure" somebody's knowledge.

 

In America, such things actually happen and I don't think they should be happening. The problem of defining what enters the "package" is a big one, but I think we can all more or less agree on what are the basic areas that would have to be tested in a system which tests homeschoolers. It's a sacrifice of a few days a year, and a huge burden off your chest.

 

Ester Maria, who are these testers? What would the cost be? Would homeschoolers be required to pay for it all out of pocket? I have 3 school age children, and the kind of testing you're talking about, in every subject, could easily cost me over $1000, which I do not have. My oldest child would have been fine with this kind of testing, but some of my other children are not so extraverted. What happens to the children who don't test well AND are shy or introverted?

 

I am probably one of the most pro-European Americans you can find, and even I shudder at some of this. The idea of having someone else sign off on my school, on my children, just really bothers me.

 

 

It's horrible when someone claims to be homeschooling when they are really not doing so, but it's also horrible to assume that children are basically the property of the state. We don't have a normed, uniform society in the States, and so we really have no good basis to 'standardize' our children. It's different in Europe, where societal norms carry so much more weight.

 

 

Here's one of my stock arguments in favor of homeschooling, to people who are unfamiliar with it or even hostile to it (always delivered with enthusiasm and good cheer, not angrily):

'One of our most basic principles of education is 'local control'. Our fallback for children having trouble in school is 'private tutoring'. Homeschooling is the ultimate in 'local control' and the 'private tutoring' that is available to homeschoolers is superb. We are the epitome that 'regular schooling' reverts to as the best possible scenario. What's not to like?'

 

 

 

Exactly to the bolded part. See my comments above.

 

Don't forget "parental involvement." Local control, private tutoring, and parental involvement. That pretty much describes homeschooling.

 

 

I think we could have free public schools without the *compulsory* part.

 

If there were a ps option for just the 3R's, an intense half-day. Many HSer's would jump on that boat (esp those who realize life is getting in the way of the basics at home), jmho.

 

Interesting idea. I don't remember hearing of that before. Keep the schools, just get rid of the compulsory part. I bet most people would keep their children right where they are now.

 

And as for the half-day, yes. In Germany the younger grades are half-day. I've always thought that was so much better. I could not send my 5yo away for 8 hours a day!

 

 

 

 

THAT's what I lobby for here. :) The need to put our children through such exams for all obligatory subjects and in high school, for all subjects they take for credits, i.e. for formal diploma to be issued by somebody else for the sake of credibility.

 

 

I don't know, maybe I just have too good experiences. I found my kids' "school" to be very helpful, offer concrete and helpful insight as well as issue papers from which you can hardly tell they were actually homeschooled. They don't face any sort of discrimination because of the lack of formal papers or expert oversight in education.

 

But neither do many homeschoolers. I have the authority in my state to make my graduation requirements and issue my diploma. Colleges accepted my transcript for my oldest child with no question.

 

It's about the person who issues the grade and signs it.

 

In Italy it's still common to ask a young engineer who is clueless at work "Who gave you a grade X in a class Y?", and it sort of shows what I'm talking about. Issuing a grade is a HUGE responsibility and cannot be done just about anyone. There are standards per grades, there are people who specialize in doing certain things, and who can estimate one's knowledge a lot better. It's also a shame of each school if they have people working there who are issuing grades that they cannot stand behind (i.e. have too low criteria so their kids have 9s and 10s on the knowledge that would be barely a 7 in some other school, etc.).

 

Nearly all homeschool parents (barring the theoretical option that somebody specialized in everything they teach) CANNOT issue grades they can fully stand behind in the vast majority of classes. Thus the need for the testing done via a third party, to check if things were done lege artis and if the child knows the material according to the standards.

 

And even if you work ABOVE standards, it doesn't hurt you the least to have the formal verification that you satisfy the standards as well. It's a bit of bother, but really, a few days a year.

 

This is an entirely different view of grading than I have ever encountered. The fact that a question like that even could be asked of someone at work is mind-boggling. Italy must be a much smaller country with a lot less people LOL!

[mommaduck]

No problem, I actually have issues with it - no kidding. I often come across way more fervent and "holy" than I actually intend to, no matter the disclaimers I try to put into my posts all the time. I rarely see what's wrong with my posts and I always take maximum care of the wording and disclaimers, and yet so many people find them borderline offensive at times. I guess internet communication is just really not my forte. :(

 

I'm just sharing what it's like somewhere else, a system I consider fairly good. One of the reasons why it's fairly good, and why things are done that way, is because it caters to a lot less people than in the US. I don't know the statistics, but in all of Rome you maybe have as many homeschoolers as in your neighborhood - really. It's just very uncommon, albeit not illegal, so it doesn't take a lot of effort on anyone's part to take care of those small bothersome formalities such as examining a child in a school milieu every year. To my knowledge, my daughters are the only "students" they examine that way in their school, and sometimes it's literally all done very quickly - maybe not in a single day, but in a week or so, yes, without much stress. It reduces my personal stress of having to grade so I'm happy, and makes "the system" happy too, so we're all happy in the end. I don't even know if such a thing is realistically applicable to the US - I'm just sharing my two cents on what I think to be a good system that I have some experience with. No "holier than thou" intents behind it!

 

No, they don't. They talk only about the portion of education that's common to ALL children within certain grade, I don't think that kids should be formally examined on every single thing they study at home. Regarding SNs, I really don't know how it works, I suppose kids would be given adequate tests that "the system" gives to children with similar diagnoses, but I don't know what that looks like in practice.

 

Kids being educated differently... I hear you here, I really do, but... I'm not required to teach Catholicism to my daughters (and their school has it), but if I were (we're secular Jews), I'd teach it as a required area, without the value added to it. We'd go through the program, but keep a personal distance from it. Nobody should ever require of them to cross themselves (I'd probably in the moment of anger send a lawsuit straight to Strasbourgh if that were the case :D), but if there were such an obligatory area, I would be able to teach the theoretical basics and have the kids examined on those theoretical basics - while allowing them the freedom to not adhere to any sort of religious practice. The same way, I don't see anything problematic with you having to teach certain things you disagree with - you can always keep a personal distance and approach it only theoretically, thus giving your child the knowledge the society considers important enough to put as obligatory in schools, but without adhering to it.

 

After all, "the intelligence is an ability to entertain the idea without accepting it." ;) I'd view it that way if I had to teach things that were against my worldview - and I'd still teach what I consider valuable in addition to it.

 

It's not only about minimized chances of subjectivity... it's also about, I repeat, academic credibility. Their say is not more important because it's not yours, but because they have a degree in the field and teach the subject to a lot of different kids, and you don't and teach only to your own. They have knowledge and experience that you don't have. None of this is being written as snarky, but in an honest, calm fashion - I admit that there are better authorities on most of the things I teach, and I actually WANT my children to be examined by them rather than by me, and to give ME the feedback on where my kids stand.

 

It may be. But I still thought it would be valuable to share my experience, no? :)

And I'm afraid I tend to react (strongly) at times. I'm sorry. Yes, you of course may share your experience. I'm afraid that old American side can be like a donkey...if we feel pushed, we tend to kick :lol: I'm afraid I rarely see anyone that is an expert in anything anymore. It's one thing that sadly disheartens me. I've known some really wonderful English teachers in my time, one would think they were experts, but when presented with a stylised paper (one that is imitated in tone and writing of a known author) they not only could not recognise it, but marked it up as being full of mistakes. Once explained to them and made to listen to it orally, the one grabbed the paper back and regraded it as it had compound this and compound that...goodness, it was the work of a sophomore in college, not expected out of a sophomore in highschool! I'm afraid most of my experiences with the so called experts have been like this. When I reach a point where I'm unable to teach something, I find another way for them to be taught (and admit my limitations...the reason my oldest is now in a private school). I do know someone that has limited their child's education. Heaven forbid their children should learn more than he did (and he has learning disabilities). I find it a crying shame and yet am unable to interfere. However, he is in a self sustaining subculture, one that relies on trade more than academics. Half his children will probably run the moment they are of age and have the opportunity to acquire a higher education (something that IS offered to most anyone in the US, unlike how I understand it is in Europe...feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). So in a sense we do have a net for those who either the parents or the system has failed. At the same time, I do not trust the bureaucrats in this country to set standards in this country at this time. Much as I love this country and our individuality, there are those that do NOT have our children's best interests at heart. More is not equal to better here, as you've seen. Here, I've found that those places and people with less, strive more. Such has been the nature of our country...and why people have immigrated here. I've found that families are the ones with the best interests at heart for their children...most of the time, and even if they don't make the best decisions, it's often better than left to the government.

[mommaduck]

I found this very interesting, especially the bolded parts. Last year I read a series of novels about Swedish immigrants to the US, and it struck me that basically the people who emigrated to the US from Europe were the ones who could not live in the system for whatever reason. The ones who were odd or different, who wanted to do things more individually, the ones who were poor and locked out of making enough for their families to be able to eat, the ones who wanted freedom to follow whatever religious beliefs they wanted, etc. Then it struck me that if those sorts of people LEAVE and go elsewhere, you are left with the people who consider society more important than individuals, who can work within the system. The people who stayed in Sweden transformed the country over that 100 year period. And then, if all the individualists go to another country, you are going to have a country that emphasizes individuality even at the expense of what seems like common sense to the ones who stayed behind. And there you have Europe and the US. :001_smile:

 

 

:lol: This is definitely America!

[Laura Corin]

Colleges know. For example, colleges in NC know that an A at Highschool X is comparable to a C at Highschool Z.

 

But how does it work nationally? Husband went to high school in Texas, then went to university in Texas - easy. But are there databases of high schools for inter-state university applications? And how about a good high school with, for example, a useless physics teacher: how can a university assess an 'A' without knowing each individual teacher and marking scale?

 

Still bemused....

 

Laura

[Renee in NC]

But how does it work nationally? Husband went to high school in Texas, then went to university in Texas - easy. But are there databases of high schools for inter-state university applications? And how about a good high school with, for example, a useless physics teacher: how can a university assess an 'A' without knowing each individual teacher and marking scale?

 

Still bemused....

 

Laura

 

You are right that they can't - it isn't even reasonably possible for this to happen. I *like* the UK system personally because it seems to "level out the playing field" a bit. Some schools are more "well known" to a college than others, so students at that school may get in easier.

 

I do think this is why some schools use SATIIs in admissions.

[cdrumm4448]

[quote name=Ester Maria;2021125

In a nutshell' date=' it's about ACADEMIC CREDIBILITY of the person who issues the grade and signs it.

 

We don't have "experts" as you describe falling all over themselves to test (orally or otherwise) school children in the US. We predominantly have teachers with a Bachelor's degree or possibly a Master's degree. In 40 years I have never met a person such as you describe. I am a product of public elementary and private high school.

 

I understand you are saying we *should* have these experts.

[FaithManor]

I think that Ester Maria is coming from a culture in which grading, being an "expert", standards for what subject materials and topics should be addressed at each age, etc. are more streamlined and agreed upon. I also think she comes from a country in which the word "expert" means something other than "I read about that thing once so I'm an expert."

 

Unfortunately in America, we are having a real problem with this. Grading is completely subjective and is never a topic of conversation in the work place. One teacher's version of an "A" in science is completely different from another teacher's view. The same is true of consulting an "expert". We can no longer define an expert in any subject material as someone who majored in that subject and then is also state certified. This is because even our colleges and universities have wildly different versions of the same "class" therefore it is difficult to transfer between institutions, get credits accepted, etc. One might graduate from one college certified to teach math and be an excellent mathematician plus having also taken a wide variety of math methods classes so that one understands how to teach those concepts to a variety of learners and personalities. Another may graduate certified to teach math and yet be a lousy mathematician and have taken only one math methods class. In the state of Kentucky, one can teach high school math having scored only a measly 55% on the state algebra 1 test for high school teachers!!!!

 

Michigan, my home state, is not doing a good job. Given that my high schooler, now paramedic student virtually taught the chemistry classes at our local public high school without a college class of any kind because the teacher who was certified to teach science could not do the math, I can honestly say that I would not have asked this female teacher's opinion of my homeschooling nor would I have felt she should have any official say in it. But, if "reporting" became mandatory in Michigan, I am sure that I could easily be required to submit to her opinion of my child's high school science program simply because she is certified and I am not.

 

In our county, the number one foreign language expert is not state certified to teach. But if I cared to have my child evaluated to see what his or her proficiency in a variety of European languages was, this man would be the one to do it. He lived in Europe for YEARS and was a diplomat. He is fluent in Italian, French, German, Danish, Spanish, and Russian. He is a virtual walking encyclopedia of information for these languages. He has seven children and though all of them were born state-side and have never lived outside the country, they are each of them fluent in four languages besides English. Yet, though foreign language instruction is abyssmal in this county, he cannot enter a classroom and assist because he is not an "expert".....because expert means state certified. The funny thing is that Michigan only requires a 45% score on a foreign language test for teachers to be certified to teach that language. Good gravy! I am no where near fluent by any stretch of the human imagination but I guarantee you that I can score a 45 on that French exam and I haven't spoken or studied it in years!

 

So, for Americans, because our government does not perceive an expert as someone who actually, truly is an expert in a specific subject matter but is someone who completed what has become a watered down teacher education program with a smattering of a lot of different topics but not a lot of meat in any one specific area, homeschoolers are quite loathe to have our children evaluated by "experts". I think we all wish that the people making decisions about textbooks, scope and sequence, competency in each subject, etc. were made up of boards of "experts" in subject materials plus child development and pediatric neuro psychs because then we would feel we really could trust their opinions. Unfortunately, those making decisions about what should be learned and when are quite often, the least qualified amongst us...ie. politicians!

 

Oh and I wonder if the tenure system is different in Italy. Here, if you teach ten years, you are tenured and you really have to do something AWFUL, as in illegal, in order to be fired. Incompetency will not get you out of the educational system and very rarely that is a criteria for firing non-tenured teachers. Plus there is a seniority system. So, if the calculus math position pays more than the remedial math position, the most senior - in terms of tenure - teacher gets the higher paying job even if that person is less qualified for the job. This is why my dear friend who has been teaching for 15 years is going out of his mind. He is literally an expert math teacher but he has been stuck teaching high school remedial math because the three other math teachers in the school have more tenure, yet they are essentially incompetent in teaching upper divisional math. One gives full credit for daily work just for turning it in no matter how much of that work is wrong and the other gives 10 points to each person in the class who does not fall asleep!

 

I think that until these types of issues are resolved favorably in the U.S., most homeschoolers are going to be unwilling to have "experts" evaluate their children. Also, as long as standardized testing is a multiple choice affair, we will continue to baulk. Children can be taught to "guess" the right answer out of four possible choices just by eliminating the most outrageous answers. But those same children may not actually be able to demonstrate that concept on paper!

 

Now, in defense of American teachers, I would like to say that our public schools address a wider range of academic ability levels than mainline European schools do and all in one classroom with limited help. My understanding, Ester Maria correct me if I am wrong, is that special needs children are not mainstreamed and may in fact, have special schools in Europe. In America, most school districts must accept into the least restrictive regular classrooms, students with IQ's as low as 70. I am no big fan of IQ tests for most people, but where special needs are concerned, 70 is very low functioning in terms of making quick and steady progress in math, grammar, etc. When there are 35-45 children per classroom and a teacher is very lucky if he or she has another adult, then either the children near the bottom are getting completely left behind and the children at the upper ends are bored out of their skulls and not learning anything near what they could be or no one is learning because everything is geared towards the special needs student. What I have read is that European classrooms are by in large, much smaller in student to adult ration, that the ability levels are not so widely varied, and that the minimum ability level to attend regular classes is higher than in the U.S. Those factors alone are going to seriously affect outcomes. Again, all of this makes establishing nationally agreed upon norms, very, very difficult for Americans.

 

But, I do see Ester Maria's point that when things are far less subjective and the testing has substantative meaning and is administered by those who not only know the subject material in depth but are experienced with children, there is definitely value in appropriate evaluations of progress made.

 

Faith

[Carol in Cal.]

...standard Italian curriculum for each type of Italian school is...

 

Those requirements don't ruin my life. I don't even specifically teach my kids for those tests (roughly a third of what we do at home - if not a fourth - is what the state prescribes them to know).

...

My kids don't get tested by some vague "authorities", but by concrete professors in a concrete school that during the academic year actually teach that content a bunch of other kids and grade them.

That's IMO a good system and when I say I agree there should be more regulations, that's what I'm talking about. It's all about credibility and having the diploma issued by somebody other than an anonymous mom that has been working on what she felt like with her kids and decided to call it X subject and decided on her own it's enough or good enough or grade level enough.

...

 

 

Here's what you're missing.

 

There is no standard American curriculum. Here we are enshrined with local control. There are standards for each state, and those are interpreted and used differently by different school districts. There are huge turf and policy wars every time the state standards are reviewed and updated. In CA, in just 10 years, we went from developmental K to insanely over academic K as a matter of policy. We don't seem to be able to stop any pendulum in the middle. We have had pure whole language as a policy and pure Open Court in some charter schools as a reaction. We insist now on Algebra 1 in 8th grade, so that everyone can take calculus in their senior year, and then most of our high school courses don't even fulfil the requirements to enter our very fine state university systems. We are nuts. No one who cares about education would want to have this system regulate homeschoolers.

 

Furthermore, we know how they feel about us. They lie and say that homeschooling is illegal. They tell us one thing and then the opposite. They don't keep their word. They would do anything to keep special needs kids from accessing services--all the way to faking results. They are a power mad nightmare of prioritizing the best interests of the institution rather than the children, often. They do not have the credibility to which you refer.

[Carol in Cal.]

You don't think that even America could learn a thing or two from how things are done in other countries? :tongue_smilie:

 

...

Regarding the format of the tests, seriously... 6th grade math is a 6th grade math. You cannot fail a 6th grade math knowing the material, no matter how stupid the test. You cannot fail a 6th grade History no matter how stupid the test if you know your dates, facts and can make a coherent narrative of the events on the essay questions. Also note that tests are accompanied by oral examinations, so even those that are test-smart are required to produce coherent, concrete knowledge when asked in front of the commission. They can certainly lower your test grade if they consider it unrealistic, but tests are rarely the type of tests where you can guess (multiple choice and alike). They want step-by-step math to see you understand it, elaborated answers in humanities, concrete sentence analysis, etc.

 

No, you really don't understand what it is like here.

Yes, we could learn from Italy or Japan. No, we could not implement such a system here--we are too big and diverse and entrenched in, you guessed it, local control.

 

And, frankly, the idea of allowing oral testing makes my stomach turn. I have seen kids give such different results depending on the attitude of the teacher that I'm sure that something that non-standardized would work against homeschoolers. You don't seem to realize how prejudiced public school teachers are against homeschoolers.

Edited September 10, 2010 by Carol in Cal.

[Lolly]

No control is best.

 

There is no such thing as a 6th grade math class standard or a 6th grade history standard. There is no such thing as an unbiased expert to examine our children. All grading is subjective in some manner. (I can even argue with a true/false or multiple choice answer.) What if the "expert" has a bias against a certain group of people or even a certain individual? He/she will, unknowingly perhaps, judge their answers more critically. There is not even a set mathematical procedure to lead to an answer. (Though there may only be one correct answer.) An expert in the field of mathematics may or may not allow a procedure (follow these steps) to arrive at the correct answer.

 

No control. The government has to trust that we will do what is right by our children. Besides, what goes on in a home is what usually determines the success or failure of a student in any academic setting.

[Ester Maria]

You don't seem to realize how prejudiced public school teachers are against homeschoolers.

Nobody can take your knowledge away from you; it's only you who can allow yourself to get intimidated and thus show less knowledge than you have.

 

I repeat that phrase probably every week to my daughters, and I grew up on it too.

The bottomline is, it doesn't matter what's their personal attitude towards you. They have to ask you concrete questions regarding concrete material and judge you based on your performance. If you get intimidated, it's your fault. Nobody can make you feel intimidated without your consent. Nobody can take your knowledge away from you, it's only you who can block yourself from showing it on an oral exam.

 

Oral exams are a perfectly normal part of an Italian academic tradition, on all levels of education, precisely because people understand what are the downsides of testing and essays. On the other hand, tests are important as to eliminate the amount of "subjective impressions" in the air, and show black and white what you wrote about concrete questions that were asked. It's the combination of both that ensures a relatively fair grade - as fair as a grade can ever possibly be.

[Ester Maria]

And then, if all the individualists go to another country, you are going to have a country that emphasizes individuality even at the expense of what seems like common sense to the ones who stayed behind. And there you have Europe and the US. :001_smile:

:lol: Brilliant!

Ester Maria, who are these testers? What would the cost be? Would homeschoolers be required to pay for it all out of pocket? I have 3 school age children, and the kind of testing you're talking about, in every subject, could easily cost me over $1000, which I do not have. My oldest child would have been fine with this kind of testing, but some of my other children are not so extraverted. What happens to the children who don't test well AND are shy or introverted?

The testers are the school professors, the ones that would be teaching them and testing them if they actually attended school. However, as it's an all-year exam and a bit more of a big deal than if they had actually attended school, then they form a sort of comission for it, so you get a few professors doing it instead of one.

 

Cost? I'm seriously trying to recall if we ever had to pay for those testings. The school treats the girls as their students de iure (albeit non-attending ones), so it's their right as their students to access those exams.

 

Regarding those who don't test well and are shy... There are such kids "in the system" too. You can't really fail if you know the material, we're talking about a shade of a single grade or so that can be attributed to being shy, not having been your day and so forth. In practice it doesn't happen that a kid knowing for 8 fails. He maybe gets 7, but he doesn't fail the test. They have "better" tests there, no multiple choice nonsense - usually open ended assignments, essay-type questions, as well as very precise questions overall, plus an oral exam in which you can clear up on some confusion if there was in the test, and in which they ask you more things. But it's always very concrete things, not vague questions that are a subject to manipulation, and they have understanding if the child blocks, need a minute or two to pull himself together and so on.

This is an entirely different view of grading than I have ever encountered. The fact that a question like that even could be asked of someone at work is mind-boggling. Italy must be a much smaller country with a lot less people LOL!

It's not asked with the purpose of actually finding out who it was (most of the time). It's asked as to say, "who was that idiot who issued you a diploma?" when one is totally clueless, it's said like an expression of bitter amazement that somebody could have passed a certain obligatory part of their academic preparation and not learn the material well.

 

I've heard such things a thousand of times... "Who taught you Latin?", "Who gave you your driver license?" (that one used to be popular in Rome :lol:) and alike. You're not expected to reply (usually), but it does show that people value the authority of the one who officially grades and officially promotes, and don't think "anyone" should be allowed to do it, but a competent person only.

[Avila]

I've heard such things a thousand of times... "Who taught you Latin?", "Who gave you your driver license?" (that one used to be popular in Rome :lol:) and alike. You're not expected to reply (usually), but it does show that people value the authority of the one who officially grades and officially promotes, and don't think "anyone" should be allowed to do it, but a competent person only.

 

Ok, but WHO defines competent? A degree? A certification? I don't think you are getting the fact that we can't agree on competent. Not the definition of it. Not who determines it. Not who qualifies for it.

 

Is it my job, as a parent, to define competency? I think so, but you don't. What about defining it for the person evaluating my student? Because let me tell you, I wouldn't agree that local school boards, superintendents, or teachers are necessarily competent. And if you want to go further up the food chain in academics, maybe you don't understand how political the universities are here and how it is who you know and not what you know that often determines getting hired and getting tenure. And if you do get tenure, you can keep your job no matter how badly you do it. There are certain political overtones to getting a job or even getting a PHD here. Have the wrong one, and you will have a hard time ever getting your degree or a job. Have the right one, and you can almost certifiably be an idiot and keep teaching.

 

Maybe I am cynical, but when no one can agree on the standards OR who sets them OR who is qualified to decide either, I feel much better off completely out of the system.

[Ester Maria]

I also think she comes from a country in which the word "expert" means something other than "I read about that thing once so I'm an expert."

An expert is a person with a university preparation in a given field. A specialization to teach that comes later (making sure one meets pedagogic competences and has classics such as didactics, etc.) - but primarily, that one has a high education in a specific field.

 

Italian high education is very different than the American one. We don't have so much scattered electives, but actually focus on the chosen field. Italian BA is quite often the equivalent of the American MA with regards to the specialist knowledge in a certain area. We also don't have such things as pre-med or pre-law: we go quite straight to that which we wish to study. To revoke an earlier thread, breadth is heavily emphasized on the primary and secondary levels of education, but on tertiary, it's all about depth. Once you enroll in the department for X, you go through a systematic, thorough study of X, barring a few random electives.

In our county, the number one foreign language expert is not state certified to teach. But if I cared to have my child evaluated to see what his or her proficiency in a variety of European languages was, this man would be the one to do it. He lived in Europe for YEARS and was a diplomat.

I lived in America for years and I wouldn't dare to teach English. Or French, or Hebrew, due to stays in the countries where those languages are spoken. Sure, I know something, but did I study the languages in-depth the way I studied my own? Am I truly literate? Is my English, or my French, distinct, not just average? Am I truly capable of transmissing the cultural part of the studies of those languages, or literature, just from having lived a little bit in the countries where they're spoken and mingled a little bit with native speakers?

Not even every native speaker is able to teach their native language and literacy after 12+ years of formal schooling in it - let alone a foreign one.

 

Formal study of a language and literature results in very different knowledge than your conversational abilities acquired abroad. I met a bunch of people who had lived in Italy and thus "spoke Italian" afterwards - and in reality, lacked some very basic distinctions in the language, let alone high level literacy. Not saying that's the case with your friend - there are many experts who became such informally - but it does happen a lot. I would usually trust people in high formal competences in the field when it comes to grading.

 

Also, as long as standardized testing is a multiple choice affair, we will continue to baulk. Children can be taught to "guess" the right answer out of four possible choices just by eliminating the most outrageous answers. But those same children may not actually be able to demonstrate that concept on paper!

Standardized testing of the kind you talk about is not what I advocate for here. I agree with the quote above, but that's a whole other topic and a whole other problem.

 

(May I recommend Liessmann's book again?)

What I have read is that European classrooms are by in large, much smaller in student to adult ration, that the ability levels are not so widely varied, and that the minimum ability level to attend regular classes is higher than in the U.S.

Usually, yes. In Italy the situation is not very brilliant regarding that though, but the minimum ability level (with regards to cognitive, not physical special needs) to attend regular classes is significantly higher.

 

However, if not before, on high school level these things quit being a problem as we have different types of high schools in Italy, not all of them are a college-prep equivalent. It's also quite common to give up on more demanding schools if kids can't keep up and transfer to an easier school.

[Ester Maria]

The last "I love Italy" comment, I promise. :)

(something that IS offered to most anyone in the US, unlike how I understand it is in Europe...feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).

There is no numerus clausus in Italy, tertiary public education is free for Italian (and EU, I think) citizens lest they fail at it at some point (of course that the country will not finance you endlessly if you joke around and do nothing and fail a year, but in the principle, you don't pay), most of the best universities are public and not private (there are exceptions - say Bocconi - but most of the rest are still accessible to everyone), you have an entire set of benefits for university students (from food to traffic discount stuff) and Italian youths definitely don't begin their adult lives in a debt because of their university education as it's typical in America.

 

It's a system that's quite easy to come in and quite hard to finish, but the principle is that it's open for people. Quite "socialist", but I think it's brilliant that good quality education is not the privilege of the upper class only. In the US, you pretty much need to go to a private school to get a decent education - in Italy, the best institutions can usually be accessed free of charge.

 

(In about two months, I'll be opening threads about the horrors of Italian bureaucracy and the state of Roman traffic, but for now, I still can't wait to get back so it's still a heaven on Earth in my eyes. :D)

[LauraQ]

1. The DOE can't even regulate its *own* schools well--drop-outs, bullying, bad behavior, failing grades, plumeting standards, etc. are all rampant. Why assume they can do better with HSs than they can do now with PSs? (And if they can't stop bullying, cyber-bullying, child abuse, child neglect, molestation of students by their parents, teachers and even fellow students when the kids are enrolled in the PS then what makes them think that HS oversite to prevent these things in HS?)

 

2. If a parent is dedicated to providing a good education, they will do so even without regulation. If a parent wants to sit around eating pork rinds and watching the boob tube all day instead, they will do so even with heavy regulations in place, and sometimes not even get caught.

 

3. Your sister is making a HUGE assumption that the standards to which the DOE would hold your children are the BEST or even ONLY standards that matter. There are many different scopes and sequences one could follow.

She is also assuming that not being held to them would mean that most children would simply fall below them, that parents don't often have much higher standards, or that children don't often excede expectations and standards on theri own.

[In The Great White North]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renee in FL

Colleges know. For example, colleges in NC know that an A at Highschool X is comparable to a C at Highschool Z.

 

But how does it work nationally? Husband went to high school in Texas, then went to university in Texas - easy. But are there databases of high schools for inter-state university applications? And how about a good high school with, for example, a useless physics teacher: how can a university assess an 'A' without knowing each individual teacher and marking scale?

 

Still bemused....

 

 

Yes. There are databases that colleges use that rank high schools across the nation. They also create their own personal databases relating previous students from a given high school and their performance in that particular college. Individual teachers they don't track because one fluke out of twenty classes isn't very representative of a student or a school. Several "odd" teachers would skew the ranking of the entire school.

 

FWIW, homeschoolers and students from small rural schools are similarly unquantified in these rankings, unless siblings apply to the same college.

[cdrumm4448]

- in Italy, the best institutions can usually be accessed free of charge.

 

How is public school in Italy paid for? If the Italian government provides the education and pays for that education, where is the money coming from? Here, about half of my property taxes goes to the local schools (around $5000 a year.) They still complain they don't have enough money.

 

How high are your taxes? I'm very curious.

[Carol in Cal.]

Nobody can take your knowledge away from you; it's only you who can allow yourself to get intimidated and thus show less knowledge than you have.

 

I repeat that phrase probably every week to my daughters, and I grew up on it too.

The bottomline is, it doesn't matter what's their personal attitude towards you. They have to ask you concrete questions regarding concrete material and judge you based on your performance. If you get intimidated, it's your fault. Nobody can make you feel intimidated without your consent. Nobody can take your knowledge away from you, it's only you who can block yourself from showing it on an oral exam.

 

 

 

Yes, I totally agree that that is the right response to a hostile oral testing situation. However, I'm talking about a BIASED hostile oral testing situation. Biased against homeschooled children. And I would under no circumstances want the government to make me subject my child to that annually, starting in second grade; which is the pattern of testing in my state.

[Ester Maria]

Yes, I totally agree that that is the right response to a hostile oral testing situation. However, I'm talking about a BIASED hostile oral testing situation. Biased against homeschooled children. And I would under no circumstances want the government to make me subject my child to that annually, starting in second grade; which is the pattern of testing in my state.

But you're talking about it as if they were going to torture the child there: biased, HOSTILE, etc. What exactly are you afraid of? Could you be more precise, maybe I'd understand it better?

 

Besides, isn't there an option of disagreeing with a grade and requesting an examination in front of the commission (which then they make from people outside of that specific school) if you think you've been examined wrongly and biasedly?

[mommaduck]

But you're talking about it as if they were going to torture the child there: biased, HOSTILE, etc. What exactly are you afraid of? Could you be more precise, maybe I'd understand it better?

 

Besides, isn't there an option of disagreeing with a grade and requesting an examination in front of the commission (which then they make from people outside of that specific school) if you think you've been examined wrongly and biasedly?

#1 there is no such thing.

 

#2 here hostility is shown is various ways. A child is easily intimidated. Adults know this and take advantage of it. You can't argue it as arguing a grade. It simply does not work that way here even if they did do this oral testing.

 

Ester Maria, please take it from someone who has experienced verbal and physical abuse from teachers. Yes, each school is different. In all the schools I've attended across this country, I've only had two good experiences (one being a private school in Guam and the other being 6mos of kindy in Washington state). The rest was like a child walking through hell and expecting them to just "deal with it". There was no one to appeal to. You could be discriminated against because of your colouring, your socio-economic status, the fact that you weren't an alpha personality, because you weren't "tough enough", because you weren't raised in the town you lived in, etc, etc. I was assaulted by a guy and got suspended because I hit him. Nothing happened to him, because he was the "pet" of the person on staff that day. When a teacher has a grudge here, there is rarely any getting around it.

Edited September 9, 2010 by mommaduck

[Ester Maria]

#2 here hostility is shown is various ways. A child is easily intimidated. Adults know this and take advantage of it.

But HOW? I still don't get. Give me concrete examples, okay? Maybe then I'll understand what you're all talking about and I seem to be missing. :)

[In The Great White North]

Originally Posted by Ester Maria

I've heard such things a thousand of times... "Who taught you Latin?", "Who gave you your driver license?" (that one used to be popular in Rome :lol:) and alike. You're not expected to reply (usually), but it does show that people value the authority of the one who officially grades and officially promotes, and don't think "anyone" should be allowed to do it, but a competent person only.

 

 

The person who gave me my driver's license was in no way qualified to do anything but enter the data in the computer and take the picture - I don't value him/her at all, or even remember what he/she looked like. My Dad, who actually taught me to drive and is an expert (no certification either), I do value.

 

Furthermore, I do not value the authority of anyone who officially grades and promotes, authorizes, certifies, etc. They are usually bureaucratic bottlenecks, created by the relevant union or professional organization lobbyists to increase job security. Although these certifications are ostensibly to ensure proficiency, I have run into enough incompetent, yet certified, examples of teachers, plumbers, electricians, hair-dressers, etc to know that these certification requirements have not increased public confidence in the "professional." You still have to ask around, get references, etc.

 

I do think this attitude (about certifications) is primarily an American one. Our friends and relatives overseas all act like a government certification is a quality guarantee of some sort.

 

 

Back to the OP, I don't believe we get anything out of increased gov't regulation of homeschooling (I live in a "red" HLDA state.)

 

A generally accepted principle of government in the US is that a law must actually accomplish it's intended aim, without creating an unreasonable burden.

 

Governmental regulation of schooling, public, private or home, while having the aim of ensuring an educated society, has achieved only a modest improvement in literacy (93.8% in 1990 to 99.6% in 1979) while causing an immense burden (Federal education budget for 2000 was $45,000,000!!, not including state and local funding, which sounds unreasonable to me)

 

Statistics here:

 

http://social.jrank.org/pages/1024/How-Educated-are-We-Data-Presentation.html

 

 

Info on compulsory education laws in the US here:

 

http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED119389.pdf

 

In 1900, there was no universal compulsory education in the US and what did exist was virtually unenforced. In other words, with no governmental oversight, no testing, no authorization, no certifications, etc. the literacy rate was only 6% less.

 

I also get questions about "proving" that I can educate my dc. In a "red" state. With regulation and oversight. Additional government regulation doesn't stop nosy neighbors.

[mommaduck]

But HOW? I still don't get. Give me concrete examples, okay? Maybe then I'll understand what you're all talking about and I seem to be missing. :)

There is no concrete. Have you never experienced someone trying to intimidate a child?! Seriously, what world do you live on??? (and I don't mean that in a demeaning way) Honestly, I don't know what there isn't to understand.

Edited September 9, 2010 by mommaduck

[Gretchen in NJ]

LOL, you are so right. A few years ago, I called our municipal offices to inquire about raising CHICKENS (just hens). I was told that we had to have "at least 5 acres of contiguous land" in order to legally raise any hens -- they are considered "farm animals."

 

I told the man on the phone, "Sir, anyone with five acres of land in central New Jersey doesn't NEED to raise chickens." He agreed, and went on reminiscing about his childhood days here (in this same town), when nearly all the neighbors had a few hens and the mothers had "egg money." Sigh.

 

So I asked him about keeping a Burmese python. "Oh," he said, "a python would be fine, it's not a farm animal." :001_huh:

 

So I asked him about rabbits. "Welllllllll," he said, "a rabbit is a pet, right?"

 

Me: "But what if you eat your pets."

 

Him (laughing): "That's between you and your, um, pet.... (pause). Rabbits are quiet animals, aren't they?" ;)

:lol:In my town chickens are allowed since they could be considered pets by some.:001_huh: I asked hoping he would help me with my girls who have been asking to raise chickens. Thank goodness, I asked when they were out of ear shot.:lol:

[Ester Maria]

There is no concrete. Have you never experienced someone trying to intimidate a child?! Seriously, what world do you live on??? (and I don't mean that in a demeaning way) Honestly, I don't know what there isn't to understand.

Maybe it's a personality thing. I'm extremely difficult to intimidate, both my daughters are extremely difficult to intimidate too.

 

In an exam situation (not talking regular school attendance situation with all the innumerable possibilities of all types of bullying, just an exam), they ask you concrete questions on concrete material that's agreed upon in advance. No matter how uncomfortable they can be, if you know, you KNOW, and there is no way they can fail you. At worst, they can lower your grade, for about a grade or so. But they cannot FAIL you - not if you know the prescribed content.

 

I've met dozens of what you would call intimidating professors, but at the end of the day it comes to your concrete knowledge. They cannot manipulate your grade and do you wrong very much - especially not if there's a commission, i.e. a few people rather than a single person. What CAN happen is that you're so blocked that you can't think anymore - exams on whole can be a stressful situation.

 

We had an Art History professor in school and there were "correct" answers to questions such as "Which is your favorite church in Rome?". She could really favor somebody on the grounds of such things, and go in an overall easier direction with kids who agreed with her on Art taste. But still, even if you didn't agree with her... she couldn't ask you things that weren't in the program. And if you knew, you knew, no matter her nasty comments on your lack of artistic taste and appreciation and degradation of our culture because of people like you. Likewise, if she failed you, she failed you because you didn't know concrete things she asked you - even if those were more difficult questions, you could never be asked things that weren't in the program, and everybody knew it.

 

It's nearly impossible to fail somebody who knows things, kwim?

[Georgiana Daniels]

Here I am, bringing up the rear, as usual.

 

All I can say after reading this entire thread is I AM SO GLAD TO LIVE IN ARIZONA.

 

Seeing as how we're either 50th in the nation (or really close) for education, I know I can do better than the system. ;)

 

I've heard sad stories about people who claim to be home educating, but are really slacking (by all appearances, at any rate) and they do make the rest of us look bad. Even worse, they are not allowing their kids to reach their full potential.

 

Not trying to make any generalizations here, just so thankful that once we fill out the intent to homeschool, we are basically on our own. And with the condition of our schools, it's a beautiful thing.

[mommaduck]

Maybe it's a personality thing. I'm extremely difficult to intimidate, both my daughters are extremely difficult to intimidate too.

 

In an exam situation (not talking regular school attendance situation with all the innumerable possibilities of all types of bullying, just an exam), they ask you concrete questions on concrete material that's agreed upon in advance. No matter how uncomfortable they can be, if you know, you KNOW, and there is no way they can fail you. At worst, they can lower your grade, for about a grade or so. But they cannot FAIL you - not if you know the prescribed content.

 

Yes, you would be a rarity, unlike the rest of us mere humans that were children once.

 

On the second paragraph, several people have tried to explain to you that that is not how it works here.

[Ester Maria]

Yes, you would be a rarity, unlike the rest of us mere humans that were children once.

:confused:

So, now I'm not human if I was a relatively self-confident kid and have relatively self-confident kids and consider that to be normal and the overall insecurity in the air the abnormal state of things?

On the second paragraph, several people have tried to explain to you that that is not how it works here.

Yes, and I get that (lack of clear standards, local guidelines, etc.), I'm familiar with those problems (IMO it's one of the biggest problems of the American school system in general). What I wonder is, in a hypothetical situation that testing were such, you would obviously need a certain framework that's expected, and you'd have it in advance and could prepare, right? I mean, nobody would make you do some testing without letting you know quite clearly what to expect.

 

Then the child comes for an exam. What can possibly go so wrong as you describe the situation? How can they possibly intimidate the child to the point in which s/he totally blocks? What can they say? How can they phrase questions?

You speak of bias regarding socio-economic status, skin color, etc. - but how would that manifest CONCRETELY in such a short time frame in which the exam takes place?

[In The Great White North]

In an exam situation (not talking regular school attendance situation with all the innumerable possibilities of all types of bullying, just an exam), they ask you concrete questions on concrete material that's agreed upon in advance. No matter how uncomfortable they can be, if you know, you KNOW, and there is no way they can fail you. At worst, they can lower your grade, for about a grade or so. But they cannot FAIL you - not if you know the prescribed content.

 

Here's an example:

 

In Michigan, when I grew up, swimming was a required class for graduation. I was on the high school swim team and had been on an age group swim team since I was 9. I qualified for the State Championships in freestyle all four years. I could definitely do freestyle. The gym teacher had each student swim one length of the pool freestyle. She gave the kids who could barely stay on top of the water a C.

 

She failed me.

 

No, nothing ever happened to her. She had years and years of tenure. She continued to teach at the school and continued to give failing grades to students she didn't like.

[mommaduck]

:confused:

So, now I'm not human if I was a relatively self-confident kid and have relatively self-confident kids and consider that to be normal and the overall insecurity in the air the abnormal state of things?

 

Not saying you aren't human. Saying that you are the rarity...so no, you are not normal as in not common. The average child can be intimidated by those larger than them and those seen as "authorities". It sounds like you were MORE than "relatively" anything, but rather made of armor.

 

Yes, and I get that (lack of clear standards, local guidelines, etc.), I'm familiar with those problems (IMO it's one of the biggest problems of the American school system in general). What I wonder is, in a hypothetical situation that testing were such, you would obviously need a certain framework that's expected, and you'd have it in advance and could prepare, right? I mean, nobody would make you do some testing without letting you know quite clearly what to expect.

 

Then the child comes for an exam. What can possibly go so wrong as you describe the situation? How can they possibly intimidate the child to the point in which s/he totally blocks? What can they say? How can they phrase questions?

You speak of bias regarding socio-economic status, skin color, etc. - but how would that manifest CONCRETELY in such a short time frame in which the exam takes place?

You just don't get it, because you don't understand and never will. You never experienced it and obviously have lived a privileged life for that lack. Poor comparison, but it's like someone trying to explain what it's like to be on the receiving end of racism to someone that's lived a sheltered and privileged life in upper white society.

[Ester Maria]

In Michigan, when I grew up, swimming was a required class for graduation. I was on the high school swim team and had been on an age group swim team since I was 9. I qualified for the State Championships in freestyle all four years. I could definitely do freestyle. The gym teacher had each student swim one length of the pool freestyle. She gave the kids who could barely stay on top of the water a C.

 

She failed me.

Thanks for sharing the example.

 

Did you have any options of complaining for the grade to higher authorities, requesting the exam to be repeated, requesting commission rather than a single professor; was there anything in the school policy and laws that guaranteed you the right to file a complaint (especially as somebody who competed in the area and thus had some formal documentation of their abilities) and request a new exam?

 

The kind of exams that I advocate for would definitely have such an option - and would happen in front of the commission to start with, after a written exam.

[Guest Dulcimeramy]

Ester Maria, I am getting the impression that Italian children are tested on the content of their lessons. They are learning academic facts, such as geographical locations, dates, scientific knowledge, grammar, Latin, or whatever.

 

Fourth graders have a test on material that all fourth graders should know by the time they finish fourth grade. It is quite black-and-white, and the bias of the test administrator does not come into play because either the child knows the periodic table or he does not.

 

This whole concept does not exist anywhere, anywhere, anywhere in American public education and has not existed for several decades.

 

Fourth graders are not learning concrete material about geography, history, science, mathematics, grammar, or languages. They are guinea pigs in various experiments of pedagogy, and no two school districts are experimenting on the children in the same way.

 

Lessons are not equal. Tests are not equal. Qualifications of teachers are not equal.

 

Nothing is actually measurable.

 

Teachers scramble around trying to prepare children for tests that are primarily psychological and sociological evaluations. The children aren't going to be asked what is the capital of Massachusetts. They are going to be filling in little bubbles on scan tron tests to prove that they absorbed whatever educationist jargon they were exposed to over the last 9 months.

 

The children have zero assurance that their lessons or their exams have anything at all to do with getting into university, or even advancing to the next grade in grammar school. They are being tested on their feelings, on their prejudices, and on their group-think skills.

 

If homeschoolers get sucked into this bizarre vortex in the same dreamlike way that Alice fell down the rabbit hole, the teachers (who are the ones who administer tests) are suspicious of the child's performance because they know for a fact that he has not been sitting through this year's educational experiment. And who knows what psychology his ignorant parents have been practicing on him. And so the judgment begins.

 

If he does better than his peers academically, they suspect his parents of being cruel. If he seems to hold a different worldview, they suspect his parents of brainwashing him. If he is a loner but quite content, they suspect he is a sociopath.

 

He isn't tested on history or science. He is tested on current theories held by people who do not have academic degrees but teaching certificates.

 

In some school districts, a child educated with The Well-Trained Mind or the Latin-Centered Curriculum will test as "behind" in a public school, even though the public school never, ever teaches phonics, grammar, ancient history, or languages.

 

He's "behind" because he hasn't learned to play the fake education game his peers have been playing since they went to school.

 

Italian Education: Oranges.

American Education: Apples.

Edited September 9, 2010 by Dulcimeramy

[mommaduck]

 

Are we speaking about reality here or idealism? I'm trying to tell you that the one is to the extreme opposite of the other.

 

I have to say it: Bless your heart, I really think you mean well, but you just aren't getting it.

 

 

Edited September 9, 2010 by mommaduck

[Ester Maria]

I have to say it: Bless your heart, I really think you mean well, but you just aren't getting it.

 

*sigh*

Okay.

*gives up*

 

(Thanks Dulcimeramy for the nice post above. Makes some sense, and sums up some of the things I don't like here.)

[mommaduck]

*sigh*

Okay.

*gives up*

 

Ditto here.

[Tullia]

Sigh...I had a friend who felt the same way. She wasn't obnoxious, just concerned. I regret that she passed away before my ds started college so that she could see how well he's doing. I've been told that one reason the state education department agreed to drop the requirement for standardized testing when the NM law was changed several years ago, it was because the aggregate home school scores were noticeably higher than the ps scores. When the government schools do a better job of educating the students they've been given authority over, I might be willing to consider the benefits of their system. I laugh when I hear school officials say that graduates of the system aren't qualified to teach their own children. I guess that tells you what they think about the quality of their state certified, officially approved diplomas and transcripts.

 

So, I think the freedom was good. We had the freedom to use TWTM as our guide, and did real history and social studies instead of what Rob from Greenleaf Press used to call "The Fireman is Our Friend" curriculum repeated year after year after year in elementary school. We also had the freedom to do math everyday instead of 1 or 2 times per week. As the old saying goes, "The proof's in the pudding." Of course you and your dc have to follow through, but I'm sure you will. :D

[Rosie_0801]

I think we could have free public schools without the *compulsory* part. Would it not be a better use of our tax dollars to focus like a laser beam at the 3R's in K-3rd grade???

 

Yes, I expect it would be a better use of tax dollars and would lower most people's stress levels.

 

Dropping compulsory schooling would be a darn silly thing to do, though. Schooling didn't become compulsory only as a babysitting measure to get those lazy housewives out into the workforce. I don't think there is anything wrong with requiring kids in their parents' education setting of choice from six to sixteen as it is here. I think what they are doing in school during those ten years could be done better, which is why I'm homeschooling. What do you really think would happen if people chose not to school their kids because they had that choice? What would happen if a LOT of people made that choice?

 

Here, for the moment, all we have to do is send in a letter of intent, and providing no one dobs us into CPS, and CPS doesn't find anything wrong, we are fine. I'm not even sure if we have to do the standardized tests, Keptwoman and MelissaL would know. I'd be fine with a yearly visit from an inspector person, providing that person did not consider the PS curriculum to be the epitome of a good education and recognised that there were many ways educating well and that education is both a short and long term process. That person should expect to see medium to long term goals and a decent plan for achieving them; and if we are not making progress, should consider whether the child just needs more time, or if I need to read up on a different approach. I don't see anything wrong with this, and I see good in this, if there is a review process so I or the inspector, could get a second opinion. This needn't be argumentative. There is no reason why we should be enemies. We ought to remember we are interested in the same goal, that the children in question are making progress in their education. That means we are on the same team. If the inspector discovered gross neglect, such as no progress in most subjects, perhaps even a loss of skill, then I certainly think they should order the child to school. Unless the child had been terribly ill for months, then school couldn't fix that so there's no good reason to send them. I see nothing bad, except for our self esteem, to be told "I know you mean well, but your kid is bombing in this area and I need to see significant improvement by our next annual appointment." If the kid just needed time to mature, in most cases they'll have done it by then.

 

Rosie

Edited September 9, 2010 by Rosie_0801

[Sahamamama]

Americans have a thing about people from other countries telling how they think we should do things and I'll be the first to admit it. I could list all the things that I think Italy should and shouldn't do. I think you'd be just as offended. If I thought Italy's laws were "superior" and oh so wonderful, then I'd move there. I happen to like my country, even with it's flaws. America started becoming subject to "Europe's way of doing things" hundreds of years ago. May I suggest that we've learned from those mistakes.

 

Not everyone feels this way. FWIW, I think your comments toward Ester Maria are harsh and inappropriate. I, for one, value her contributions to this discussion.

 

Can we please keep it civil?

[Rosie_0801]

Ester Maria, you keep talking about these "experts". Let me tell you, they don't exist. These so called experts are the ones that are ruining education in America.

 

Maybe what Ester Maria calls an expert is not the same as what you call an expert.

 

And you really have to quit comparing Italy and the US. They are two very different places.

 

Heaven forbid we might learn something from others? In comparing Italy with the US, the rest of us are being introduced to different ideas that might actually be worth considering. If we don't think so, we can ignore Ester Maria.

 

 

We OBVIOUSLY are doing better than that as home educators.

 

"We" doesn't include those non-schoolers, does it? No one is trying to prevent homeschoolers who are doing better than PS from doing what they do. It's the ones who do worse that we're all worried about.

 

Rosie

[Tabrett]

Ester Maria,

 

Here are some concrete examples for questions you asked.

 

When my now 16 yo dd entered public school in the middle of 2nd grade she was "tested" to see what level math class she should enter. While homeschooling I was doing 2nd grade Saxon math. She was not behind in anyway and was doing well in her studies. The public school used Everyday math. When the placement exam was given, my dd was placed in the lowest level. This confused me because I KNEW she was not working at that low a level. I asked to see the math placement test. The VOCABULARY used in Everyday math was very different than Saxon. A number sentence in everyday math was what Saxon called a story problem. A number sentence in Saxon was an equation. My dd wrote an equation for the problem and not a story problem. She missed the question because terminology was different. The addition problems in the placement test were in a grid format. Saxon never used a grid to help align problems. I asked my dd why she missed the problem. Whe said that she didn't know what the "grid" was asking her to do. She KNEW how to add, but the unnecessary grid caused her to be confused. I confronted the teacher about the differences in the placement test verses how she had been taught and the reply I received was that the lower lever class had more room!

The school did not care if my child KNEW how to do the math. They were more concerned what class had more room to receive a student. 2nd grade math is not 2nd grade math everywhere.

 

The school also did not give grades. It only gave written evaluations. The teacher of the class said that she was not going to make my dd repeat the 2nd grade because she would be in a multilevel classroom next year (all 2nd and 3rd grades were combined in the school). The teacher did not have any grades to support her desire to retain my dd. The teacher also did 3rd grade work with the entire class (even though half the class was in 2nd grade). How do I know this? Because I am a certified teacher and I know how to read the textbook code to depict the level. I pointed this out the the teacher and made her mad! I was able to transfer my dd to a different school the next year because, AND ONLY BECAUSE, I was a teacher working in the same district and teacher were allowed to request out of district school changes! At my dd's new school, grades were given and she was in a 3rd grade only class. My dd made A's and B's all year.

 

I could give other examples, but don't have time at the moment.

Edited September 9, 2010 by Tabrett

[Barry Goldwater]

The person who gave me my driver's license was in no way qualified to do anything but enter the data in the computer and take the picture - I don't value him/her at all, or even remember what he/she looked like. My Dad, who actually taught me to drive and is an expert (no certification either), I do value.

 

Furthermore, I do not value the authority of anyone who officially grades and promotes, authorizes, certifies, etc. They are usually bureaucratic bottlenecks, created by the relevant union or professional organization lobbyists to increase job security. Although these certifications are ostensibly to ensure proficiency, I have run into enough incompetent, yet certified, examples of teachers, plumbers, electricians, hair-dressers, etc to know that these certification requirements have not increased public confidence in the "professional." You still have to ask around, get references, etc.

 

I do think this attitude (about certifications) is primarily an American one. Our friends and relatives overseas all act like a government certification is a quality guarantee of some sort.

 

 

Back to the OP, I don't believe we get anything out of increased gov't regulation of homeschooling (I live in a "red" HLDA state.)

 

A generally accepted principle of government in the US is that a law must actually accomplish it's intended aim, without creating an unreasonable burden.

 

Governmental regulation of schooling, public, private or home, while having the aim of ensuring an educated society, has achieved only a modest improvement in literacy (93.8% in 1990 to 99.6% in 1979) while causing an immense burden (Federal education budget for 2000 was $45,000,000!!, not including state and local funding, which sounds unreasonable to me)

 

Statistics here:

 

http://social.jrank.org/pages/1024/How-Educated-are-We-Data-Presentation.html

 

 

Info on compulsory education laws in the US here:

 

http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED119389.pdf

 

In 1900, there was no universal compulsory education in the US and what did exist was virtually unenforced. In other words, with no governmental oversight, no testing, no authorization, no certifications, etc. the literacy rate was only 6% less.

 

I also get questions about "proving" that I can educate my dc. In a "red" state. With regulation and oversight. Additional government regulation doesn't stop nosy neighbors.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

 

Especially the bolded. That's because we live in a FREE COUNTRY, where the GOVERNMENT is supposed to answer to the CITIZEN, not the other way around. LAWS ARE NECESSARY, but should be MINIMALLY INVASIVE TO FREE PEOPLE. Back to my original comment, OUR DEFAULT IS ALL IS PERMISSIBLE, UNLESS EXPRESSEDLY FORBIDDON. (Not yelling, just emphasizing :))

 

Ask them to PROVE YOU CAN'T EDUCATE YOUR OWN KIDS...THE PS system surely has proven they can't!

[Barry Goldwater]

Ester Maria, I am getting the impression that Italian children are tested on the content of their lessons. They are learning academic facts, such as geographical locations, dates, scientific knowledge, grammar, Latin, or whatever.

 

Fourth graders have a test on material that all fourth graders should know by the time they finish fourth grade. It is quite black-and-white, and the bias of the test administrator does not come into play because either the child knows the periodic table or he does not.

 

This whole concept does not exist anywhere, anywhere, anywhere in American public education and has not existed for several decades.

 

Fourth graders are not learning concrete material about geography, history, science, mathematics, grammar, or languages. They are guinea pigs in various experiments of pedagogy, and no two school districts are experimenting on the children in the same way.

 

Lessons are not equal. Tests are not equal. Qualifications of teachers are not equal.

 

Nothing is actually measurable.

 

Teachers scramble around trying to prepare children for tests that are primarily psychological and sociological evaluations. The children aren't going to be asked what is the capital of Massachusetts. They are going to be filling in little bubbles on scan tron tests to prove that they absorbed whatever educationist jargon they were exposed to over the last 9 months.

 

The children have zero assurance that their lessons or their exams have anything at all to do with getting into university, or even advancing to the next grade in grammar school. They are being tested on their feelings, on their prejudices, and on their group-think skills.

 

If homeschoolers get sucked into this bizarre vortex in the same dreamlike way that Alice fell down the rabbit hole, the teachers (who are the ones who administer tests) are suspicious of the child's performance because they know for a fact that he has not been sitting through this year's educational experiment. And who knows what psychology his ignorant parents have been practicing on him. And so the judgment begins.

 

If he does better than his peers academically, they suspect his parents of being cruel. If he seems to hold a different worldview, they suspect his parents of brainwashing him. If he is a loner but quite content, they suspect he is a sociopath.

 

He isn't tested on history or science. He is tested on current theories held by people who do not have academic degrees but teaching certificates.

 

In some school districts, a child educated with The Well-Trained Mind or the Latin-Centered Curriculum will test as "behind" in a public school, even though the public school never, ever teaches phonics, grammar, ancient history, or languages.

 

He's "behind" because he hasn't learned to play the fake education game his peers have been playing since they went to school.

 

Italian Education: Oranges.

American Education: Apples.

 

Brilliantly articulated...belongs on a very large t-shirt or bumper sticker.

 

I can 100% confirm this reality from my personal experiences as a child and from friends who are trained as 'certified' educators...as well as friends with kids in PS...this is why we fight against any oversight, because the over-seers in the US are not interested in genuine education...in fact they conspire to frustrate and hobble it.