Let's talk about basic differences between homeschooling and conventional school.

[Catherine]

The "lack of history dates knowledge" thread got me thinking of the differences, but not just that. I've been tutoring an eighth grader (never homeschooled) in math and what is most striking is the gaps in his basic math. But despite that he is not failing math, or even coming close, though his test scores are not good. What is very noticeable to me is his heavy reliance on memorized algorithms, and seeming lack of basic understanding. "Knowing and Teaching Elementary Mathematics" comes to mind. I also think of my nephew, who is in a ninth grade remedial English class, and my SIL's description of it makes me think the teacher makes no attempt to address her student's weaknesses, but simply chooses shorter books and gives them more time to do assignments.

 

My impression from this n of two (LOL) is that conventional schools have a concept of achievement as being fixed, rather than a model of "minimum competence". IOW schools see students as having an unchanging level of capability to learn, whereas in homeschools (generalizing here) students are seen as needing to be brought up to a level of competency, which will not be the same for every student. For some that may mean years spent remediating dyslexia, or struggling through math facts, for others, that may mean completing algebra before age 10.

 

My strong impression of school based math pedagogy, based on my student, is that review is insufficient for some students, and faster pace, at the expense of deep understanding, is the goal.

 

I also have to be brutally honest, though. Even though I consider math vital to functioning as an adult, it's not. His Mom told me she doesn't know how to read the small lines on a ruler either, and she's got a graduate degree and a decent job and is managing fine. Educational purist that I am, I so want this not to be true, but it is. I learned very little substantive history, and I think I'm managing fine in the adult world. So there is a tension, IMO, between the requirements for living as an adult and being competent in one's adult role, and my own internal gauge of what qualifies as "well-educated."

[....]

One difference (from our experience): the school wasn't teaching any science.

[Catherine]

I think science and history suffer most from being "dumbed down", and are made painfully dull in the process.

[Monica_in_Switzerland]

All students in a grade learn the same "level" material, in all subjects, as their peers, regarless of their individual strengths or weaknesses.

[Peela]

I learned very little substantive history, and I think I'm managing fine in the adult world. So there is a tension, IMO, between the requirements for living as an adult and being competent in one's adult role, and my own internal gauge of what qualifies as "well-educated."

 

For me any reasonable definition of a classical education- such as this one I just grabbed off google:

 

a classical education is the cultivation of wisdom and virtue by nourishing the soul on truth, goodness, and beauty by means of the seven liberal arts and the four sciences

 

is such a different paradigm to the practicalities and utilitarian function of a public school education. Yet they both have their place and truth is, most people aren't so interested in the above.

We can survive pretty well without history, science, algebra- even without grammar and reasonable writing skills. I guess the "masses" did survive without those things for most of history, too, and they were reserved for the elite. But the masses were probably a lot better at all sorts of survival skills, crafts etc than we are, too.

 

I tend to think of schools as training for the culture, for the workplace, for the society- they are places of enculturation into the mainstram modern culture nowadays. I think of a "good education" as a completely different paradigm- inclusive of the practicalities but so much more.

[MelanieM]

For me, one of the biggest differences is that most school experiences seem to involve a child being taught, and at home I get to be a facilitator rather than a teacher. Not that I never play the role of teacher, but rather that the teacher/student model is not the primary face of education in our home. That's a very important distinction for me, and one of the biggest reasons I have for choosing a home education.

 

I do have some specific things I would like my kids to learn, but generally speaking there isn't a set body of information they need to know in order for me to consider it a quality education. If they understand how to search out information to learn whatever it is they are interested in, feel empowered to do that regardless of the subject, and know how to apply that learning to their lives, then I will feel they have a strong foundation for a successful life.

[Chris in VA]

What an interesting question, and well-written replies.

As someone who has sent her kids to public school, I'd say a big difference for me is that, as a homeschooler, I have the opportunity to pause at any time in our studies and talk about what we are reading or working on. I can give my opinion, correct what I perceive to be an error, bring in a Christian worldview, or ask my child what they think and get feedback to see where they are.

 

This not only means I can tell rather quickly if they are absorbing and learning the material, but also that I can see if it is influencing their moral/spiritual/emotional development. This has multiple implications--I can tailor curricula, find curricula in the first place that more closely meet their needs, and redirect if they start walking down an erroneous path. All done, I might add, in the context of the relationship that such discussion and care can foster, and the trust that comes about when you know, as a child, that Mom and Dad are doing what is right for you, because they listen to you and watch how you learn--they are as much a student of you as you are a student of the curricula. And this is evaluation is not in the multiple-choice test kind of way, but in a much more organic and natural way.

 

The other big difference,imo, is that I can guide who my child spends time with during the day. Negative peer interaction has been highly detrimental to my middle child. Had I been aware of all that was happening, or even SOME of what he was thrown in with, I'd have tried harder to either counter it at home by further developing our relationship, or yanked his...bad self...out of there. That is, of course, unless I had remained lulled into complacency by the false advertising of our community regarding the "excellence" of our public schools.

 

(Oops, couldn't help editorializing a bit.)

Edited March 27, 2011 by Chris in VA

[Haiku]

Having a child in public school, I would say that the main difference I see is that schools are about herding children through a pre-set curriculum without much worry or concern that the kids understand or incorporate what they learn. Marching in lock-step is the ideal.

 

Getting the grade is the greatest goal.

 

Tara

[Greenmama2]

I think science and history suffer most from being "dumbed down", and are made painfully dull in the process.

:iagree: My DD became interested in science just after she turned four. While researching stuff for her I looked at the PS science curriculum here. The things she found most interesting AT FOUR were not covered at all until fifth grade. Really :( What do they do until then? How boring!

[stripe]

Who's homeschooling? Or whose homeschool? I don't really see a (single) type of homeschool. But then, many of the people near me appear to be unschooling, plus the occasional Calvert user.

[Luckymama]

The basic difference I see is that in any school (public, private, whatever) the teachers do not have a choice in the textbooks used, though they can/may choose supplementary materials they wish to use. As a homeschooling teacher, I am able to select textbooks and materials to best fit my student.

 

There are so many different types of schools and so many different types of homeschools. Just because one may only be familiar with failing public schools or insular, ineffective private schools does not mean that all schools are that way.

[Catherine]

Even though my own kids would be considered "successful" by the school definition of the word, the whole winner\loser aspect of modern schooling is awful to me. I wish it did not have to be this way.

[Crimson Wife]

All students in a grade learn the same "level" material, in all subjects, as their peers, regardless of their individual strengths or weaknesses.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

The schools here have all kids from special ed to gifted plus English Language Learners in a single class of 31 students. And with NCLB, the bulk of the attention is paid to the "bubble" kids, the ones who may or may not pass the STAR. The high achievers are often used as tutors at the expense of their own education.

[stripe]

All students in a grade learn the same "level" material, in all subjects, as their peers, regarless of their individual strengths or weaknesses.

Well, I am not sure all students do learn the same level material, anyway, although they may all be taught the same thing.

 

I attended public school from 6th grade onward (not all in the same part of the US or within the same city) and did not take identical classes as my classmates. There was tracking by ability (honors and AP classes) and a test to determine who got to go to the biology/chemistry track and who was put into the non-named science classes, and there were also electives (drama, art, etc), and a choice of which language to learn. We were also advised at some point as to what requirements were for college admission to the state universities, which required a bit more than the school did to graduate. So I don't really think all public schools have such a strict system of teaching the identical thing to everyone in a grade level.

 

I agree with Luckymama that we cannot say there is one type of homeschool and one type of public school. There are some homeschoolers who use school-in-a-box type programs; they may find themselves attempting to teach the student in grade X what the program says they should be learning. Even the "what your -- grader should know" programs take this approach.

[angela in ohio]

I don't think you can generalize. There is such variety in schools, and such variety in homeschools.

[Rosie_0801]

In homeschool, it's much easier to negotiate with the "powers that be."

 

:D

Rosie

[ocelotmom]

I think science and history suffer most from being "dumbed down", and are made painfully dull in the process.

 

Yes.

 

We were part of a school district independent study program for K and 1st, and they provided curriculum, which we weren't obligated to use.

 

Direct quote from his science book:

 

"Are there trees where you live? A tree is a plant. It has many parts. The Explore Activity shows that leaves can be different. The leaves are one part of a tree. Leaves make food for a tree. Roots are another part of a tree. Roots take in water. Roots grow under the ground. Roots hold a tree in place."

 

That, combined with an activity where you look at leaves with a magnifying glass (which didn't actually explicitly address how or why leaves are different) was a week's worth of science.

 

The first chapter, which I read aloud to DS, claimed that stars could not be seen when the sun is out. To which he responded, "But the sun is a star!"

 

We quickly returned the book.

 

(To be fair to the local schools... I talked to a public schooling friend about it, and she said that the schools actually do way more than that for science - raising chicks and gardens and so on. We also discussed it with a friend who teaches 1st grade to primarily ESL kids in an inner-city school, and she said those books are written for her kids.)

[BabyBre]

Having a child in public school, I would say that the main difference I see is that schools are about herding children through a pre-set curriculum without much worry or concern that the kids understand or incorporate what they learn. Marching in lock-step is the ideal.

 

Getting the grade is the greatest goal.

 

Tara

 

 

:iagree:

 

Stop by the Afterschooling Board and scroll through some of the threads. There you have homeschoolers and public schoolers who've experienced both.

[ElizabethB]

Homeschooling is more like tutoring than like school. You choose your own materials and go at the pace of the student.

 

School is more like, well, school.