s/o do you aspire to, or believe you are doing, "school at home"

[Mimm]

My dd17 has been in school since 6th grade. What I stated as my definition of school is what we have experienced during her years in school (complete with standardized test "boot camps" the kids attend to get them ready to do well on the test). It's the truth as we experience it. And I don't do it at home. So, to me, we don't do "school at home."

 

Tara

 

History is a history textbook, science is a science textbook, grammar is a grammar textbook, writing is a writing assignment from the English/grammar textbook, etc. Student knowledge is tested by multiple choice, matching, fill in the blank worksheets w/the odd short answer or essay question. Grade 5 has this list of scope/sequence standards that all 5th graders complete.

 

That isn't a "value judgment." That is simple school reality. It is also how I view ordering a program like Seton and completing it as is at home.

 

Education does not have to be about "school." Education can be content-driven w/completely variable content depending on the needs of the individual, however not in a standard school setting.

 

I'm not trying to deny that schools can have many of these negative qualities or that you experienced them. I'm just trying to point out that those negatives aren't inherently part of the definition of the word school. Which I feel like I'm getting repetitive at this point and not getting my point across apparently, so oh well. :p

[8filltheheart]

When John Paul II said that the family is a "school of love," he didn't mean that parents teach their children to love through textbooks and scope/sequence standards. :confused:

 

I know you're Catholic, and I'm sure you know that the Latin root of "school" is "schola" (leisure). And that many classically oriented schools in past centuries were based more on teacher-student interaction than on textbooks. There weren't even printing presses until the 15th century. How could there have been worksheets?

 

I can understand not wanting to copy the mainstream school system of our time. I'm just not getting this negativity toward the whole concept of school itself.

 

:confused: The context of "school at home" is at its essence comparing to modern public schools and not historical education. Even American public education 100 yrs ago was not reflective of my definition. One room school houses worked students by ability, not age. They didn't have grade-leveled textbooks for every subject.

 

I have no problem w/school at home methodology for those that choose that approach. Nor do I have a problem w/sending kids to school. (We sent our 19 yr to school for 1/2 of 10th and all of 11th.) Simply defining something based on standard acceptable methodology is not "negativity toward school itself." It is a definition. Textbooks, confined subjects, etc. are how public schools teach. It is basic "public school methodology."

 

I don't think any of us need anyone else's approval for our personal methodology. However, there has to be some frame of reference for conversation. Simple definitions should be simply that.....a reflection of that which they are attempting to define.

[Joyofsixreboot]

In some ways I do aspire to school at home. I want dedication, hard work and a desire to do well. I do want my kids to care about grades, but unlike school there's a pedagogy I've chosen, an ability to speed up or slow down or adjust for each kid and a teacher who cares. Really, deeply cares (me:D). We focus hard each morning and really work hard so afternoon can be about their unschooled/delight driven/obsessive interests.

[mom31257]

This is why I haven't been to this forum in a while. I realized homeschool parents are just as judgmental as every other group. :( It was very disheartening.

 

I, too, loved school. So, yeah...maybe my homeschooling is more like "school at home." We have real school desks in front of a chalk board and white board. I do sometimes ring a bell to get the boys to come to the room. (which they love, by the way) I do use worksheets (again, which they love), specific books for each subject. It works.

 

I really think I am going to start having my boys raise their hands in some situations. It's something they need to know. When we go to the library story hour they need to raise their hand to talk. In class at church they need to. It's one of those life skills and why not teach it along with everything else?

 

I have felt like staying away, but I do come here often because it's just the best place to get the advice and ideas I need. I've just learned to weed through and look for what matters to me. I'm glad you've found what works for you. :001_smile:

[ElizaG]

:confused: The context of "school at home" is at its essence comparing to modern public schools and not historical education.

This is where some of us would disagree. Why does it have to be limited to modern public schools? Even if we set aside historical education, there are many other types of schools out there right now: Montessori, Steiner, constructivist, various implementations of "classical," etc. If I set up a room in my house with shelves, put out a bunch of Montessori apparatus, and brought my children in there for a 3-hour work period, I'd be doing "school at home," even though there would be no textbooks anywhere.

 

Simply defining something based on standard acceptable methodology is not "negativity toward school itself." It is a definition. Textbooks, confined subjects, etc. are how public schools teach. It is basic "public school methodology." (...) Simple definitions should be simply that.....a reflection of that which they are attempting to define.

Then we can call it "public school methodology at home." I don't see how this can be phrased in any simpler terms without compromising the meaning. It would be like assuming that "food at home" meant frozen pizza and take-out hamburgers, or that "work at home" meant a 9-5 office job.

 

Sorry for being such a pain, but I have no intention of letting the contemporary American public education system dictate the meaning of the term "school." To me, it's too important of a concept.

[Just Robyn]

In some ways I do aspire to school at home. I want dedication, hard work and a desire to do well. I do want my kids to care about grades, but unlike school there's a pedagogy I've chosen, an ability to speed up or slow down or adjust for each kid and a teacher who cares. Really, deeply cares (me:D). We focus hard each morning and really work hard so afternoon can be about their unschooled/delight driven/obsessive interests.

 

Interestingly, these are ways in which I would say we differ from public schools. I don't find that dedication, hard work, or a desire to do well are considered important in the public schools here, and it is one reason we homeschool.

[Haiku]

:confused: The context of "school at home" is at its essence comparing to modern public schools and not historical education.

 

Yup. What's the point of asking whether we school at home if we are using the word school to mean what was done during Aristotle's time, or in modern-day Singapore, or in Laura Ingalls Wilder's time? People generally homeschool because they don't want their kids in schools ... the schools that are present in today's (generally American, as this board is heavily American) society.

 

Tara

[Just Robyn]

This is where some of us would disagree. Why does it have to be limited to modern public schools? Even if we set aside historical education, there are many other types of schools out there right now: Montessori, Steiner, constructivist, various implementations of "classical," etc. If I set up a room in my house with shelves, put out a bunch of Montessori apparatus, and brought my children in there for a 3-hour work period, I'd be doing "school at home," even though there would be no textbooks anywhere.

 

Then we can call it "public school methodology at home." I don't see how this can be phrased in any simpler terms without compromising the meaning. It would be like assuming that "food at home" meant frozen pizza and take-out hamburgers, or that "work at home" meant a 9-5 office job.

 

Sorry for being such a pain, but I have no intention of letting the contemporary American public education system dictate the meaning of the term "school." To me, it's too important of a concept.

 

No one is saying it does that. The argument is that specifically in the jargon phrase school-at-home it is the American public education system that is being compared to the homeschool method. School can mean something more broad, but school-at-home is used with a very specific meaning. I have never seen it used any other way except right now.

 

Obviously everyone who homeschools, including unschoolers, is doing some version of school, based on their own definition, and they're doing it at home (or in the car, or the park, whatever). That's not the same as school-at-home.

 

ETA: Found a definition on wikipedia:

 

All-in-one homeschooling curricula (variously known as "school-at-home", "The Traditional Approach" "school-in-a-box" or "The Structured Approach"), are methods of homeschooling in which the curriculum and homework of the student are similar or identical to what would be taught in a public or private school; as one example, the same textbooks used in conventional schools are often used. These are comprehensive packages that contain all of the needed books and materials for the whole year. These materials are based on the same subject-area expectations as publicly run schools which allows for easy transition back into the school system. These are among the more expensive options for homeschooling, but they require minimal preparation and are easy to use. Step-by-step instructions and extensive teaching guides are provided. Some include tests or access information for remote testing. Many of these programs allow students to obtain an accredited high school diploma.

Edited October 1, 2011 by crstarlette

[ElizaG]

No one is saying it does that. The argument is that specifically in the jargon phrase school-at-home it is the American public education system that is being compared to the homeschool method.

I don't dispute that people are using it this way. I just think this particular "jargon phrase" is US-centric, ahistorical, and grammatically bizarre. (After all, "school at home" and "homeschool" are made up of the same two words, just in a different order.)

 

Perhaps this is why, even among those who agree that it has something to do with PS, there seems to be no consensus on what it means.

[Just Robyn]

I don't dispute that people are using it this way. I just think this particular "jargon phrase" is US-centric, ahistorical, and grammatically bizarre. (After all, "school at home" and "homeschool" are made up of the same two words, just in a different order.)

 

Perhaps this is why, even among those who agree that it has something to do with PS, there seems to be no consensus on what it means.

 

Well, "girl who is my friend" and "girlfriend" are made up of the same nouns too, and have different specific meanings as well. In defense of the phrase school-at-home, saying funded-by-and-carried-out-by-the-parents-but-otherwise-identical-to-public-school-at-home is kind of a mouthful. Your public-school-methodology-at-home is slightly better (but getting closer to ambiguous), but is still a longer phrase than anyone is likely to spit out repeatedly.

 

I'll not be the person to tell you you can't complain about English phrases not making perfect sense. Complain away! I'll join you! :cursing: you weird phrases! :D

[ElizaG]

Well, "girl who is my friend" and "girlfriend" are made up of the same nouns too, and have different specific meanings as well.

But they both have specific meanings. Whereas "school at home" means, specifically... hmm... well, I tried to copy all the different meanings that were given in this thread and other recent ones, but soon ran out of time and space. ;)

 

FWIW, if we're going to vote on it, I think "distance learning from an outside school" is the most clear and objective definition that's been suggested. It's also one I've seen used on several intro-to-homeschooling sites.

[Just Robyn]

But they both have specific meanings. Whereas "school at home" means, specifically... hmm... well, I tried to copy all the different meanings that were given in this thread and other recent ones, but soon ran out of time and space. ;)

 

FWIW, if we're going to vote on it, I think "distance learning from an outside school" is the most clear and objective definition that's been suggested. It's also one I've seen used on several intro-to-homeschooling sites.

 

I realize this is getting way off topic, but I don't think either of those words has a meaning that will be agreed on by everyone. Yes, they each have a definition in the dictionary, but so do "school" and "home". My definition of "friend" is apparently very different from the definition the general public has, and so I will not use facebook. My definition of "girl" varies according to context.

 

ETA:Sorry, clearly I read too fast and misunderstood.

 

I am saying that school-at-home has a specific meaning. Wikipedia is saying it too. This thread shows, imo, that a lot of people do not know the definition and have made up their own incorrect one.

Edited October 1, 2011 by crstarlette

[Hedgehogs4]

 

I have know just a tiny number of homeschoolers who really were doing "school at home." They had up seasonal bulletin boards, they rang a bell, they had hall passes for the restroom, etc. They usually have early childhood teaching degrees for some reason. :D BUT.... if that made them happy, who cares? Some kiddos thrive on that.

 

yeah...that is what i would be striving NOT to produce in my homeschool!!! Mercy, me! Hall passes for the restroom? It's your house for crying...never mind. We do have dedicated school space, but we do not use textbooks for the most part. We have a "routine" more than a "schedule" which I think is important for accomplishing set goals. It's a life skill as much as it is a useful thing for getting school work done. It's pretty loosey-goosey but we get it done. We have fun. We all love our sunny school room with our table and map. It's also where we play, watch tv, have pizza and movie nights, and wrestle. It's home. It's school.

Edited October 1, 2011 by Hedgehogs4

[ElizaG]

I am saying that school-at-home has a specific meaning. Wikipedia is saying it too. This thread shows, imo, that a lot of people do not know the definition and have made up their own incorrect one.

Maybe so. Or perhaps it shows that the term has no clear definition, but that whoever wrote the Wikipedia entry happens to agree with yours. ;) I'm not sure we should be so quick to make them the arbiter.

[Lisbeth]

We did that the first year. Now our days flow a little more - no exact demarcation between school and life. I have goals we try to hit, but it's nothing like regular school. We do use curriculum and have set times for some things (violin, piano, Latin, etc lessons.) Otherwise we have days that are more math days and other days that are more science days, etc...no "45 min of this, 45 min of that." We use what I consider to be good curriculum and always are ahead, so it works out for us.

 

We don't always sit in the same places to do work. Sometimes it's on the go, or outside, or on the couch. Some days...lunch takes 30 minutes, some days, and hour and a half... and so it goes. We are also night owls, and I work mornings part time...with hubs at home in the morning. The kids are often not up til 9:30 am.

[Rivka]

Yup. What's the point of asking whether we school at home if we are using the word school to mean what was done during Aristotle's time, or in modern-day Singapore, or in Laura Ingalls Wilder's time? People generally homeschool because they don't want their kids in schools ... the schools that are present in today's (generally American, as this board is heavily American) society.

 

Heck, there are Sudbury schools out there! So why not say that even the unschoolers are doing "school at home?" :lol:

[ElizaG]

Heck, there are Sudbury schools out there! So why not say that even the unschoolers are doing "school at home?" :lol:

Because they would beat you up. Or use their D&D spells on you. Or get you with the trebuchet they built last weekend. ;)

[Mrs Twain]

Because they would beat you up. Or use their D&D spells on you. Or get you with the trebuchet they built last weekend. ;)

 

Ha ha ha ha ha. That is great.

[helena]

We have a bell.. a really cool old one. We have a bulletin board because it's a great way to make a separate and noticeable space for poetry and nature studies. We have a funky green classroom chock full of rules.

We have a beautiful balance of influences that guide us through our homeschooling. I pull from many schools of thought.

 

My panties aren't in a twist. But, I don't enjoy the constant feeling that there's eye rolling, judging, and superiority complexes galore in the home school world. Too much ego trippin for my taste. I'm getting to the point where I'd rather talk to curious (even skeptical) strangers about homeschooling than actual homeschoolers.

 

 

OP, I have no idea how many people are trying to replicate "school". But, I would imagine a lot of parents are just doing the best they can with the experience they have, and that they evolve and grow with time (or realize it's not for them, and send their kids back to school).

 

 

I'm curious...

What is it that you (random you) think you can assume about me, now that you know I ring a school bell?

Edited October 1, 2011 by helena

[Mama2Many4]

I also have a bell that I ring to signal the "start of our day". I have a wonderful school room, we use books, we have loads of art supplies, notebooks, pencils, pens, etc. We have quizzes and play games. We do science experiments and learn a ton. We have a school name, and we ARE a school. We just aren't a PUBLIC school.

 

I'm not, in any way, shape or form trying to replicate the public school system set up at all! We homeschool for the reasons that we don't put them into school. Because of the freedom and the actual love of learning here.

[8filltheheart]

Maybe so. Or perhaps it shows that the term has no clear definition, but that whoever wrote the Wikipedia entry happens to agree with yours. ;) I'm not sure we should be so quick to make them the arbiter.

 

The wiki definition pretty much fits w/my understanding of the definition of "school-at-home" since I started doing this 18+ yrs ago. Back then, the plethora of materials didn't exist that do today, but we still pretty much classified ourselves into categories. THose using Seton or Calvert were boxed-curriculum, school-at-home homeschoolers. Unschoolers existed and that definition is still pretty much the same. There was also the Konos unit-study/hands on crowd. Then there were the eclectic do your own thing homeschoolers that incorporated bits and pieces of whatever philosophies fit their needs.

 

Co-op schoolers, they, otoh, did not exist. ;) They are a new breed of homeschoolers.

 

I don't know why anyone sees "school-at-home" as pejorative, though. The people that I know that are "school-at-homers" are content w/what they do. Ironically, my experience "historically" :lol: is that "school-at-homers" believe that their approach is far superior to any "put it together yourself" eclectic philosophy. There was actually a huge split in certain Catholic homeschooling circles sometime around 95-98 (can't remember exactly when) b/c of the insinuation that not using a pre-fab Catholic provider meant you were not providing your children authentic Catholic education.

 

So.....while the definition may not fit what the new generation of homeschoolers believe it should mean, it pretty much is what has been used by homeschoolers in the past as a means of clarification when speaking.

 

Back when I started homeschooling, "school-at-home" homeschoolers outnumbered the eclectic homeschoolers that I met. Now the %ages have definitely flipped. The % of academic-oriented homeschoolers that I meet has also flipped.....% wise, the number of academic-oriented homeschoolers was much higher in the past. So.....maybe there is a nugget of revelation in there. ;)

 

As far as bulletin boards, bell-ringing, circle time.....they don't really fit in my definition of "school-at-home" since I see it more as content and "input/output" on academic materials vs. simple daily structure.

[Trez]

I do follow a very planned and scheduled approach. We use texts and workbooks and we use DVDs, online exercises, books, field trips, experiments etc to solidify the learning. We have somewhat set timeslots in the day and breaks.

 

I am coming at this from a different perspective as both of my children are freshly out of the public school system. One attended to the end of grade 6 and one until grade 4. My reasons for removing them from school were that they were not being taught the important academics (as I see them) to the level that was challenging for them. This is partly a result of overcrowding and partly a result of special interest groups affecting the curriculum (more info regarding how to behave socially than math, english, science, etc.) I have nothing against the elementary school system in general, but at the moment it does not give them the education that I want them to have.

 

My kids will be re-entering the public school system at the high school level. This is the main reason that I am working hard to ensure that they have their bases covered.

 

I do get snide comments from another local home schooler who thinks that it is not right of me to not be "out of the house" more. I think as with general parenting, we all do what works. That is different for everyone.

[Penelope]

 

I don't know why anyone sees "school-at-home" as pejorative, though.

 

Back when I started homeschooling, "school-at-home" homeschoolers outnumbered the eclectic homeschoolers that I met. Now the %ages have definitely flipped. The % of academic-oriented homeschoolers that I meet has also flipped.....% wise, the number of academic-oriented homeschoolers was much higher in the past. So.....maybe there is a nugget of revelation in there. ;)

 

 

Hmmm. I see a connection. :)

[Hedgehogs4]

 

I'm curious...

What is it that you (random you) think you can assume about me, now that you know I ring a school bell?

 

I'd assume that you really thrive on order. And perhaps I'd even be jealous and amazed at what you get done in a day and how well-behaved your kids are. EVEN SO...the bells and rules would not work for ME. I apologize if my tone sounded mocking.

Edited October 1, 2011 by Hedgehogs4

[Hedgehogs4]

I do follow a very planned and scheduled approach. We use texts and workbooks and we use DVDs, online exercises, books, field trips, experiments etc to solidify the learning. We have somewhat set timeslots in the day and breaks.

 

I am coming at this from a different perspective as both of my children are freshly out of the public school system. One attended to the end of grade 6 and one until grade 4. My reasons for removing them from school were that they were not being taught the important academics (as I see them) to the level that was challenging for them. This is partly a result of overcrowding and partly a result of special interest groups affecting the curriculum (more info regarding how to behave socially than math, english, science, etc.) I have nothing against the elementary school system in general, but at the moment it does not give them the education that I want them to have.

 

My kids will be re-entering the public school system at the high school level. This is the main reason that I am working hard to ensure that they have their bases covered.

 

I do get snide comments from another local home schooler who thinks that it is not right of me to not be "out of the house" more. I think as with general parenting, we all do what works. That is different for everyone.

 

Makes perfect sense...I have a friend whose three kids came from ps into homeschooling, and that was their expectation. They worked very well under that type of scheduling, etc. She also had a military background and early starts and regular hours and scheduled snacks and breaks were effective for their family.

[angela in ohio]

Oh I know, i should have lengthened that sorry. I meant to say that it seems in the classical method there is so much writing.... narrations, dictations etc. It seems to be an overwhelming mount for us right now. We do plenty of writing for what they are capable, but I dont' want to take it to the point of tears, and THEN back off a little if that makes sense. I would rather not get to that point. I guess it also depends on your kids. Mine are not apt to complaining about work so I know when upset happens, it's usually the work load or being overwhelmed. I don't know many people in real life who HS so it's really hard for me to gauge how much we do or if it is "enough" for this age. I tend to be very critical of myself if I read a book on a method and can't put it to practice 100%

 

One thing that was very helpful to me was to read *more* books about classical education. Once you see that there are many interpretations, many ways of achieving the same objectives (and it really is about the overall goals, not anyone's specific day-to-day recommendations,) youstart to feel freer to adapt to what works fro your own dc. :001_smile:

[Penelope]

One thing that was very helpful to me was to read *more* books about classical education. Once you see that there are many interpretations, many ways of achieving the same objectives (and it really is about the overall goals, not anyone's specific day-to-day recommendations,) youstart to feel freer to adapt to what works fro your own dc. :001_smile:

 

Care to recommend some?

 

I only know of LCC (liked) and Doug Wilson's book (didn't like so much). Oh, and Trivium Pursuit.

 

Thanks.

[angela in ohio]

FWIW, if we're going to vote on it, I think "distance learning from an outside school" is the most clear and objective definition that's been suggested. It's also one I've seen used on several intro-to-homeschooling sites.

 

Historically, homeschoolers have not used the term for public cyber charters. The term "school at home" predates their existence, even. It has always meant pretty much what the Wikipedia article says, though I think they limit is too narrowly. (Of course, I never let my students use Wikipedia as a source, and particularly I think their homeschool article has usually been a mess.) The term, a somewhat valid way to describe a specific homeschool approach, has been muddied by its increasing use as a pejorative for anyone who schools in a more formal way than the speaker, especially unschooling advocates.

[mytwomonkeys]

i don't attempt to replicate public school, nor do i follow their scope & sequence. we do however, use curriculum and study specific subjects and topics. we also have specific hours in the day scheduled for school time between the hours of 9-2. i do have expectations of what my children need to accomplish for the day, week, month, and year. we have flexibility of course and take days off, enjoy field trips, and have time for interest-led topics.

[ElizaG]

FWIW, if we're going to vote on it, I think "distance learning from an outside school" is the most clear and objective definition that's been suggested. It's also one I've seen used on several intro-to-homeschooling sites.

Historically, homeschoolers have not used the term for public cyber charters. The term "school at home" predates their existence, even.

Sorry for being unclear; I didn't mean public cyber charters specifically. I meant following any complete outside curriculum with lesson plans. That would include programs like Calvert or Seton, which both consider themselves to be "home study schools."

 

Back then, the plethora of materials didn't exist that do today, but we still pretty much classified ourselves into categories. THose using Seton or Calvert were boxed-curriculum, school-at-home homeschoolers. Unschoolers existed and that definition is still pretty much the same. There was also the Konos unit-study/hands on crowd. Then there were the eclectic do your own thing homeschoolers that incorporated bits and pieces of whatever philosophies fit their needs.

 

I've seen the books and web sites that divide homeschoolers into these categories. You're right that that's not something I've experienced. Going by their descriptions, nearly all the homeschoolers I know in real life (and, I think, most people on this board) would fall into the "eclectic" category.

 

I've also been told by relatives about the disputes in the Catholic homeschool community during the mid-90's. By contrast, I joined during the era where it was fashionable to reject Seton (ooh, that sounds bad... "Do you reject Seton?" :lol:) and everyone was supposed to be strewing picture books everywhere. Strewing with gentleness. And lots of pictures of little girls running through fields of flowers. In this context, "school at home" was absolutely used in a pejorative way, and was often extended to refer to anything formal or structured. Because that would be making your home like a school, and school isn't "real."

 

It took me a few years to figure out that this was just the older generation reacting to what they were told they were supposed to do, 10-15 years ago. By that point, I was pretty much fed up with everybody's opinions. So now we just do our own thing, which seems to include a bit of everything. (Except strewing. In my world, that's something children do, and then adults remind them to clean up. And besides, it sounds too much like "spewing" for my liking. ;))

 

So, yeah, we are coming at this from very different directions. As usual with these sorts of threads, we probably agree on 95% of everything. :)

Edited October 1, 2011 by Eleanor

[TracyP]

The definition given by Wiki is exactly how every IRL homeschooler I know would define school-at-home. I know two families who have chosen that route and are perfectly happy with it. I recommended K12 to my SIL for various reasons. It's not right for me, but it is right for some.

 

It would have never crossed my mind that ringing a bell, raising hands, sitting at a desk, and writing on a whiteboard would be included in that meaning. Having a schedule, being dedicated, working hard, and striving for excellence seem to me like common sense, not "school at home".

 

ETA: Eleanor, I completely agree with your last line. The devil's in the details, right?:tongue_smilie:

[Superfly]

This is where I make my big confession...

 

...I bought my daughter a couple of school uniform skirts the last time I hit the thrift store. :blushing:

 

In my defense, she absolutely refuses to wear pants, and these sturdy khaki skirts with built-in shorts are the closest possible dress equivalent to jeans. She has decided that the pleats make them feminine enough. But yeah. There are the people who homeschool in their pajamas, and then there's my kid in her school uniform skirt.

 

My girls wear uniform skirts and polos. :blush:

We all have ADHD and I've learned over the last 3yrs that we need a lot of structure/routine. The uniforms make the mornings go quickly, and they prevent the girls from changing clothes 4 times to be fashionable. Plus we are on a tight budget and they are very economical. Plus they are super stinking cute!

 

I would say we do school at home. Since we have special needs our curriculum and classroom is tailored to those needs. Instead of a schedule we stick to a routine. I also have an agenda for the week and we check off as we go.

[Penelope]

I like the school uniform idea, even if I don't know that I'd use it.

 

I bet I would get fewer questions about why they are not in school when we are out during the day.

[Haiku]

I like the school uniform idea, even if I don't know that I'd use it.

 

I do too. I get tired of laundry and of the super-bizarro outfits my kids come up with. But my husband would never be on board, and my kids would think I'd lost my mind.

 

When I was little, the neighbors (who had six kids and a house with all the bedrooms upstairs, which I thought was the neatest thing ever) went to Catholic school. Occasionally they would give me an outgrown jumper and I was in h.e.a.v.e.n. :blushing: I felt very Sound-of-Music.

 

Tara

[Haiku]

Well ... knock me over with a feather. Dh said he doesn't think it's a bad idea and that he would make some cool polos on Cafe Press ... and when I asked the kids, "How would you like to have school uniforms?" they chorused, "Yeah!!!"

 

Of course, ds then asked, "What's a uniform?" :lol:

 

Dd says she wants a pink polo and a khaki skirt. Ds said he doesn't care what he gets.

 

:001_smile:

 

Tara

[K&Rs Mom]

When I was little, the neighbors (who had six kids and a house with all the bedrooms upstairs, which I thought was the neatest thing ever) went to Catholic school. Occasionally they would give me an outgrown jumper and I was in h.e.a.v.e.n. :blushing: I felt very Sound-of-Music.

 

 

We found a plaid uniform jumper at a thrift shop a couple years ago, and my now-9yo loves it. She is going to be crushed when she grows out of it (which is likely soon). Plus they each have a couple of polos with our "school logo" on them, which I made when they were jealous of their cousins' school shirts (inkjet iron-on paper). I do usually expect them to be dressed (in something, not really uniforms) before breakfast, and try to start school after breakfast.

 

I've always thought of "school at home" to be things like "grade X in a box" and saying the pledge of allegiance before you start - kind of a combination of several pp definitions. We don't do it that way, and don't aspire to, but I don't see it as a negative for the people who choose that: I figure they have their reasons.

Edited October 1, 2011 by K&Rs Mom

[cello4life]

I like the school uniform idea, even if I don't know that I'd use it.

 

I bet I would get fewer questions about why they are not in school when we are out during the day.

 

I might have to try uniforms just for that reason!! 6 kids 9 and under brings so many comments in itself.:lol:

[lisabees]

We have a bell.. a really cool old one. We have a bulletin board because it's a great way to make a separate and noticeable space for poetry and nature studies. We have a funky green classroom chock full of rules.

We have a beautiful balance of influences that guide us through our homeschooling. I pull from many schools of thought.

 

My panties aren't in a twist. But, I don't enjoy the constant feeling that there's eye rolling, judging, and superiority complexes galore in the home school world. Too much ego trippin for my taste. I'm getting to the point where I'd rather talk to curious (even skeptical) strangers about homeschooling than actual homeschoolers.

 

 

OP, I have no idea how many people are trying to replicate "school". But, I would imagine a lot of parents are just doing the best they can with the experience they have, and that they evolve and grow with time (or realize it's not for them, and send their kids back to school).

 

 

I'm curious...

What is it that you (random you) think you can assume about me, now that you know I ring a school bell?

 

 

Love this post! :001_smile: Thank you for saying this.

 

OP, if you want your kids to have a fairly rigorous high school education, watch out! Much of the day will be filled with "school at home" work.

[linguistmama]

I should look for a bell. Our library let's 1 child ring the bell to start story time and my girls love it! They would probably also love uniform skorts and I'd be very happy if they hold up well. They love dresses and wear biker shorts underneath so they can hang upside down at the park. We had desks for a little while when the girls were jealous that one of their friends did. :)

[Hedgehogs4]

funny, I just asked my ds 10 if he'd like a school uniform and he wailed "noooooooo! that's horrible!" I have no idea where he'd get the idea that they were horrible (except that he'd do school in his pj's every day if I let him, which I don't).

 

I would have thought that was totally cool when I was a kid.