S/0 Public School Thread: Do you believe in the 5 yr rule?

[JenC3]

I've been reading through the other threads and although I often agree, especially with writing, I tend towards the 5 year rule of hsing, which says after 5 years of consistent ACTUAL homeschooling most students will test higher than their PS peers. My dh and I watched Waiting for Superman the other day and while it was primarily about disadvantaged students it profiled one upper middle class student in CA whose parents realized their daughter would not graduate prepared if she continued at the local HS which "tracked" its students. I've also read statistically that once students reach middle school they start to fall behind, more each year until HS. Without the pressure of "socialization," homeschooling students might indeed start to learn more than their counterparts.

 

So Hive do you think this rings true or false in your experience? We have friend who has homeschooled for 5 years and came close to enrolling their 10 & 11 yr olds in a classical school this year and both boys tested well. Another hsing family (schooling less than 5 yrs) enrolled both of their boys put in the same grade (1st) due to poor results. So it did seem to prove true for these 2 cases.

BTW:

Our local system is supposed to be the best in the state, which also says little, but nonetheless, my dd's friend attends a magnet (French-speaking for Math/Science) PS and the work he does is NOT challenging. His mother complains all the time. I've seen his books and they are well below what dd is doing. He is also in 1st grade where most of dd's work in 2nd & 3rd grade. If she had gone into PS she would have missed a cut-off and been in 1st this year. Of course if I had to enroll her for some desperate reason she would be well ahead of her peers which is fine by me. He does however do more writing than I required of her last year. This year I have her writing paragraphs daily.

Edited February 24, 2011 by JenC3

[Jean in Newcastle]

Well, you would have to define what "actual homeschooling" is - does that mean following any curriculum everyday? You would have to define how you know if someone is part of the "most of homeschoolers" group that is held to this standard or if they fail the standard is it because they are legitimately part of the "some of homeschoolers" subset. In other words, I think it is too big of a generalization.

[MIch elle]

false

[regentrude]

I've been reading through the other threads and although I often agree, especially with writing, I tend towards the 5 year rule of hsing, which says after 5 years of consistent ACTUAL homeschooling most students will test higher than their PS peers..

 

What is that supposed to mean? It may mean that

- every homeschooler will test better than every PS kid, or

- every homeschooler will test better than the average PS kid, or

- the average homeschooler will test better than the average PS kid, or

- the average homeschooler will test better than every PS kid...

or - this particular homeschooler will test better than the average of the kids who went to the PS in his district,

or in all districts in his state, or in the whole country....

 

And what is "consistently homeschooled"?

 

My kids tested higher than their PS peers WHILE in PS, and will presumably test much higher now that they have been homeschooled for a few years.

OTOH, some parents homeschool because their children have learning disabilities and who, even with homeschooling, may not be on "grade level".

 

I think statements like this make no sense.

[amy g.]

I taught in two very low income schools. The differences were interesting. In the first school, the teachers were very consistent, but not inspired. They faithfully followed the state's mediocre curriculum day after day. If we had a Science field trip during Math time, we made the Math lesson up the next day.

 

The kids made huge strides. It was very fulfilling to see how quickly they learned. Each day, it felt as though their future became brighter.

 

Next, I taught at a low income school where the teachers were outstanding. The kindergarten teacher had a masters in Latin. There were grants for cutting edge curriculum across all grade levels. There was also much less predictability and consistency.

 

It was so depressing to see these children fall farther and farther behind. It felt as though they had no hope for a better life.

 

Although both schools had kids from poverty stricken homes, the kids from the first school had much more family support, so that could have made all of the difference.

 

I'm not trying to draw any conclusions from my experience, but it has kept me from becoming a curriculum junkie.

 

I think the best results come from giving children a loving family, and providing predictable, consistent instruction. I don't think it matters that much if the instruction is from home or school.

[lionfamily1999]

I taught in two very low income schools. The differences were interesting. In the first school, the teachers were very consistent, but not inspired. They faithfully followed the state's mediocre curriculum day after day. If we had a Science field trip during Math time, we made the Math lesson up the next day.

 

The kids made huge strides. It was very fulfilling to see how quickly they learned. Each day, it felt as though their future became brighter.

 

Next, I taught at a low income school where the teachers were outstanding. The kindergarten teacher had a masters in Latin. There were grants for cutting edge curriculum across all grade levels. There was also much less predictability and consistency.

 

It was so depressing to see these children fall farther and farther behind. It felt as though they had no hope for a better life.

 

Although both schools had kids from poverty stricken homes, the kids from the first school had much more family support, so that could have made all of the difference.

 

I'm not trying to draw any conclusions from my experience, but it has kept me from becoming a curriculum junkie.

 

I think the best results come from giving children a loving family, and providing predictable, consistent instruction. I don't think it matters that much if the instruction is from home or school.

:iagree: If that's what the OP meant.

 

I do think that hopping around and around and around can be counter productive. That being said, I imagine it must be very hard for parents who cannot find that 'perfect' curriculum.

[Parrothead]

after 5 years of consistent ACTUAL homeschooling most students will test higher than their PS peers.

You'll have to define "consistent ACTUAL homeschooling."

[unsinkable]

I've been reading through the other threads and although I often agree, especially with writing, I tend towards the 5 year rule of hsing, which says after 5 years of consistent ACTUAL homeschooling most students will test higher than their PS peers. My dh and I watched Waiting for Superman the other day and while it was primarily about disadvantaged students it profiled one upper middle class student in CA whose parents realized their daughter would not graduate prepared if she continued at the local HS which "tracked" its students. I've also read statistically that once students reach middle school they start to fall behind, more each year until HS. Without the pressure of "socialization," homeschooling students might indeed start to learn more than their counterparts.

 

So Hive do you think this rings true or false in your experience? We have friend who have homeschooled for 5 years and came close to enrolling their 10 & 11 yr olds in a classical school this year and both boys tested well. Another family had both of their boys put in the same grade (1st) due to poor results. So it did seem to prove true for these 2 cases.

 

BTW:

Our local system is supposed to be the best in the state, which also says little, but nonetheless, my dd's friend attends a magnet (French-speaking for Math/Science) PS and the work he does is NOT challenging. His mother complains all the time. I've seen his books and they are well below what dd is doing. He is also in 1st grade where most of dd's work in 2nd & 3rd grade. If she had gone into PS she would have missed a cut-off and been in 1st this year. Of course if I had to enroll his fr some desperate reason she would be well ahead of her peers which is fine by me. He does however do more writing than I required of her last year. This year I have her writing paragraphs daily.

 

I need the "math" explained to me for the family I bolded. :confused:

 

How old are these kids? A typical 1st grader around 6 years old and some turn 7 during the school year. Even if the kid in the example is 8 (a year older) I can't see how they homeschooled for 5 years?

 

IMO, you don't "homeschool" a 1 yo, a 2 yo, a 3yo...you parent them.

[JenC3]

I need the "math" explained to me for the family I bolded. :confused:

 

How old are these kids? A typical 1st grader around 6 years old and some turn 7 during the school year. Even if the kid in the example is 8 (a year older) I can't see how they homeschooled for 5 years?

 

IMO, you don't "homeschool" a 1 yo, a 2 yo, a 3yo...you parent them.

 

One family had homeschooled for 5 yrs and the kids tested at and above level whereas the other family had not homeschooled through the elementary years and the children were behind. The "rule" suggests that after 5 yrs you will achieve at or above level with home instruction, before that homeschool kids often test below their PS peers.

Edited February 24, 2011 by JenC3

[JenC3]

:iagree: If that's what the OP meant.

 

I do think that hopping around and around and around can be counter productive. That being said, I imagine it must be very hard for parents who cannot find that 'perfect' curriculum.

 

Yes, consistent instruction in math, reading, writing, and grammar.

[JenC3]

You'll have to define "consistent ACTUAL homeschooling."

 

Daily instruction in the 3 R's.

[JenC3]

What is that supposed to mean? It may mean that

- every homeschooler will test better than every PS kid, or

- every homeschooler will test better than the average PS kid, or

- the average homeschooler will test better than the average PS kid, or

- the average homeschooler will test better than every PS kid...

or - this particular homeschooler will test better than the average of the kids who went to the PS in his district,

or in all districts in his state, or in the whole country....

 

And what is "consistently homeschooled"?

 

My kids tested higher than their PS peers WHILE in PS, and will presumably test much higher now that they have been homeschooled for a few years.

OTOH, some parents homeschool because their children have learning disabilities and who, even with homeschooling, may not be on "grade level".

 

I think statements like this make no sense.

 

This isn't my rule, just one I've heard in HS circles. I interpret it to mean that PS are not doing a horrible job in the elementary years, but that once kids reach middle school, the gaps between HS and PS are much wider.

I also wonder if realizes that even if you repeat some concepts with your kids to the mastery level and they "seem" behind that all the hard work WILL pay off if you stick with it for 5 years or more.

[elegantlion]

One family had homeschooled for 5 yrs and the kids tested at and above level whereas the other family had not homeschooled through the elementary years and the children were behind. The "rule" suggests that after 5 yrs you will achieve at or above level with home instruction, before that homeschool kids often test below their PS peers.

 

I don't think you can base a generalization based upon ONE homeschool family. :001_huh:

 

Did the homeschool family teach to the test? So many variables.

 

If you used my ONE family you might have to reverse the generalization. We don't do yearly testing but after five years of homeschooling he probably wouldn't have tested at his peers. But they wouldn't have tested his Latin, or his ability to do algebra problems in his head, or his ability to have a deep conversation in 5th grade. At that point his writing was behind, his reading was just catching up, and he didn't like to sit still. We're now in our 7th year and I'll start thinking about high school testing next year. I'm not giving him a public school education and I don't care too much for testing either, so the comparison would be irrelevant to me anyway.

 

I guess one things that always bugs me about the comparison is that it doesn't have to be either or. I'd love to see better scores in public schools, I'd love to see homeschoolers tested on what they are taught, not just a standardized test. We can all do well, it's not a competition with each other.

[unsinkable]

One family had homeschooled for 5 yrs and the kids tested at and above level whereas the other family had not homeschooled through the elementary years and the children were behind. The "rule" suggests that after 5 yrs you will achieve at or above level with home instruction, before that homeschool kids often test below their PS peers.

 

OK...so the 2nd family DIDN'T homeschool for 5 years. I think I got it!

[JenC3]

I don't think you can base a generalization based upon ONE homeschool family. :001_huh:

 

Did the homeschool family teach to the test? So many variables.

 

If you used my ONE family you might have to reverse the generalization. We don't do yearly testing but after five years of homeschooling he probably wouldn't have tested at his peers. But they wouldn't have tested his Latin, or his ability to do algebra problems in his head, or his ability to have a deep conversation in 5th grade. At that point his writing was behind, his reading was just catching up, and he didn't like to sit still. We're now in our 7th year and I'll start thinking about high school testing next year. I'm not giving him a public school education and I don't care too much for testing either, so the comparison would be irrelevant to me anyway.

 

I guess one things that always bugs me about the comparison is that it doesn't have to be either or. I'd love to see better scores in public schools, I'd love to see homeschoolers tested on what they are taught, not just a standardized test. We can all do well, it's not a competition with each other.

 

LOl, I'm not basing ANYTHING on one family. It's just a question, just a blurb spouted out that I felt had some relevance to the current discussion.

 

No she used VP all the way through and is still now homeschooling.

 

I don't care much for testing either. I feel strongly about the basics though and hope that in those areas we achieve level and above if my dc were tested. Everything else is extra, they will learn it if they have the foundation to understand it.

 

IME the education I received went down drastically once I left parochial school. Our district was consolidated from 8-12th grades so I had 7 years of solid work, went to a gigantic HS and fell through the cracks. HS was a total waste of time. I don't think the lower grades are awful and there are many great things to be said, but by middle/high school I do think the system begins to fall short.

Edited February 24, 2011 by JenC3

[regentrude]

This isn't my rule, just one I've heard in HS circles. I interpret it to mean that PS are not doing a horrible job in the elementary years, but that once kids reach middle school, the gaps between HS and PS are much wider.

 

 

It has been our personal experience that the local ps did a good job at the elementary level and that everything went downhill in middle school. that's when I pulled my kids out. In our local ps, learning pretty much stopped in 5th grade.

 

But other schools and other homeschoolers will differ.

[Renee in NC]

One family had homeschooled for 5 yrs and the kids tested at and above level whereas the other family had not homeschooled through the elementary years and the children were behind. The "rule" suggests that after 5 yrs you will achieve at or above level with home instruction, before that homeschool kids often test below their PS peers.

 

That doesn't work here. My 12, 9, and 8yo boys are all below grade-level. My 6yo girl is above grade-level. We homeschooled for 8 years before they went to ps this year.

 

BUT, they have LDs, so it doesn't really fit your scenario.;)

[Amy loves Bud]

Not really. Particularly when you consider the types of parents who homeschool. They are very involved. If you compared the homechool students to the students with very heavily involved parents, I don't think you'd see a difference.

 

I say this because I know what my kids are capable of, and I will make sure they achieve it regardless of the educational setting. I've got one at home and one in PS for the first time this year, and I'm very, very involved with what he is learning. I'm guessing there are a lot of parents with kids in PS who feel the same way.

[missmoe]

All the discussion about homeschoolers not doing as well as public schoolers drives me crazy!:001_smile: Of course my child entering a program mid-way might not be up to par with his peers in what the program is teaching. But that does not mean my child is not up to par with his education. One of the reason many of us choose to homeschool is so we can teach what we feel is important. For some that is latin--for others is might be home improvement.

 

Perhaps the family sending their child into 1st grade focused on imaginative play and nature studies for K--something some on this board choose to do--so therefore this student wouldn't be on par with the students who were taught a different curriculum. It in no way means the school could have done a better job. And perhaps the older students' parents did follow a curriculum similiar to what the school taught, so that is why they are on track with the school.

 

There are schools doing well academically. There are homeschoolers doing well academically. There are schools doing poorly academically. There are homeschoolers doing poorly academically.

 

I hope that as homeschoolers we can look beyond the academics and look at educating the whole child. I hope we can stop worrying about a school doing a better job. And worry about doing the best for our children.

 

Okay, stepping down from my soapbox!

[Penelope]

I don't know but I have heard the same rule for public vs. private school.

 

That in elementary level they tend to look the same and have similar outcomes. It is when you get past about fourth grade that the quality begins to diverge.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I think that you cannot compare educational methods until you are at a point where you can realistically compare. That means that you can't compare math until you've reached a point where certain skills have all been taught - no matter what order they are presented. I think that will be different for different subjects. For math, it will be by the time Algebra is taught usually because by then all other operations etc. will have been taught. For writing, it will be when essays are expected for all writing programs. Then you can see if your alternative method matches, exceeds or doesn't meet the common standards. For some subjects it will be in 5th grade but not all.

[....]

All the discussion about homeschoolers not doing as well as public schoolers drives me crazy!:001_smile: Of course my child entering a program mid-way might not be up to par with his peers in what the program is teaching. But that does not mean my child is not up to par with his education. One of the reason many of us choose to homeschool is so we can teach what we feel is important. For some that is latin--for others is might be home improvement.

 

Perhaps the family sending their child into 1st grade focused on imaginative play and nature studies for K--something some on this board choose to do--so therefore this student wouldn't be on par with the students who were taught a different curriculum. It in no way means the school could have done a better job. And perhaps the older students' parents did follow a curriculum similiar to what the school taught, so that is why they are on track with the school.

 

There are schools doing well academically. There are homeschoolers doing well academically. There are schools doing poorly academically. There are homeschoolers doing poorly academically.

 

I hope that as homeschoolers we can look beyond the academics and look at educating the whole child. I hope we can stop worrying about a school doing a better job. And worry about doing the best for our children.

 

Okay, stepping down from my soapbox!

 

 

:iagree: I am very neurotic about providing a rigorous education for my kids and I STILL completely agree with you. I have to take a step back sometimes, too. What are my goals in this homeschooling business???

[Peela]

I am not understanding the need to do all this comparing.

Homeschooling is so much more than test scores. ANy 5 year rule sounds completely arbritary to me.

Kids are individuals and some may not test well, some may not be academically inclined, many are homeschooled because they have special needs, from allergies to learning difficulties to autism etc

What conclusion could you draw from any generalisation that is relevant to your own individual child or situation?

Some parents are probably just better at homeschooling than others- thats an area we don't venture into very often, isn't it?

I dont think there is any way to be confident your kids will do well unless you do the work. There is no way to rest on your laurels.

And success to one may not be success to another.