s/o reporting for educational neglect

[Night Elf]

So, the other thread about reporting a family for educational neglect has me wondering, exactly what do you consider to be a bare minimum for a family to do be doing in order to avoid being thought of as neglectful? (I have a feeling that by some people's definitions, I would be considered woefully uneducated.)

[hsmom]

I am uneducated compared to 95% of the people here. But to me what that family is doing in the last thread is worth reporting. Just because you homeschool is not an excuse to allow your children to fall behind, even if it is stressful on you to schedule and enforce it daily. That is the job as parents we took on when we decided to homeschool.

 

As for the bare minimum I would say the three R's. No less, but still that is cutting it close, children need to be exposed to so much more than that. And if the parent is not able to do it then it is time for the parent to step aside or someone else to step in and take over.

[Parrothead]

Depending on the society the bare minimum is that in which the individual is capable of providing for self and offspring.

 

If in one's society that means learning how to hoe a straight line and plant a seed so be it.

 

If in one's society that means a certain level of the Three R's than that is the level the individual needs to be educated.

[thescrappyhomeschooler]

Bare minimum to not be considered neglectful? Basic math computation skills; reading at grade level; general knowledge of how to write a sentence, paragraph, and basic business letter; how our system of government works; and how to take care of one's body.

[Mommyfaithe]

I believe children need to learn to read well, write well and be able to understand arithmetic. I believe children should have access to books, art and music. Just as I believe children should be fed a healthy diet, dressed appropriately ( as to weather/ element), I also believe they should be provided an adequate education.

 

Faithe

[Ester Maria]

I believe a homeschooled child should have equivalent knowledge of the core areas as defined by the state / country standards or national curriculum (if there is one). IOW, I would apply the logic of some European countries towards homeschoolers (and private schools): you can certainly do more than xyz, but you cannot less than xyz, and if your child fails equivalence exams two years in a row (without a huge medical excuse), something is wrong enough to force school attendance. Homeschooling cannot be an excuse not to teach core subjects (native language literacy and literature, mathematics, whatever are the basic standards for science and social scences, etc.) and to keep the child ignorant - whether deliberately, or because one is simply not doing one's job properly. While there are no universally defined common standards, each society has some minimum standards, whether official or semi-official, and I believe the parent's duty is to make sure those are met at least to a minimum level expected.

 

What I *personally* shoot at and recommend is to look up to the BEST of one's culture's tradition in education, or to the stringent schools, and provide an education in that spirit (in accordance with the child's abilities), rather than emulate the bare bones standards, but it is only the minimum that I believe ought to more clearly defined and imposed onto everybody.

[Night Elf]

Bare minimum to not be considered neglectful? Basic math computation skills; reading at grade level; general knowledge of how to write a sentence, paragraph, and basic business letter; how our system of government works; and how to take care of one's body.

 

Oops, I was doing well until the government thing. Political science has always been so hard for me to understand. I don't know why. I can name key things but I couldn't tell you what they do. And I've supposedly learned that information several times. I can memorize just about anything for a test, and then forget the information soon after. I had a PolySci class in college and the best part about it was the very cute graduate student instructor. But I did the bare minimum requirements for that class and was happy to pass with a C. It is the MOST boring topic I can think of at the moment. (Obviously my idea of U.S. politics isn't going to jive with many people here.) However, I truly enjoyed my college Economics class and got a very strong A.

[Night Elf]

IOW, I would apply the logic of some European countries towards homeschoolers (and private schools): you can certainly do more than xyz, but you cannot less than xyz, and if your child fails equivalence exams two years in a row (without a huge medical excuse), something is wrong enough to force school attendance.

 

You see, this is where I get worried. Would these be equivalent tests in individual subjects? To what grade level? I have a feeling I would have trouble passing some of them, unless they are very basic. Even then, I would probably do poorly in Science and Social Science. Math is very iffy. I think I'm fairly confident through Algebra 1, but I wouldn't bet money on it. It would certainly be an interesting thing to do.

[Jenny in GA]

IOW, I would apply the logic of some European countries towards homeschoolers (and private schools): you can certainly do more than xyz, but you cannot less than xyz, and if your child fails equivalence exams two years in a row (without a huge medical excuse), something is wrong enough to force school attendance.

 

 

What exactly does "failing an equivalence exam" mean? We take the ITBS. Would scoring below 50% be "failing" by that standard? If you mean another type of test, what exactly are you referring to, and where does one go to purchase one.

 

Both this and the other thread are very interesting to me. I struggle daily with "whether we are doing enough," OR whether I'm unduly stressing myself and my children by trying to hard to "keep up."

 

I know we do nowhere near what many people on these forums seem to do. Does that mean I'm neglectful? That my kids are getting a poor education? I don't know. What is that point? *IS* there even one.

 

I've said many times that I used to be a part of the unschooling community and know a lot about it. Many of those folks are adament about having no problem letting their kids watch 30+ hours of TV a week if they want, never requiring or insisting that their kids read (and thinking it's fine that their kids can't read by even age 12), and "never doing any math" (their own words) until late teens.

 

Yet these same people have had their kids be successful in college and/or career with absolutely NO regrets on either the part of the children or parents.

 

Frankly, I don't get it.

 

Anyway, all this to say that I think about this a lot, and I'm curious what other people think.

[Meriwether]

Bare minimum to not be considered neglectful? Basic math computation skills; reading at grade level; general knowledge of how to write a sentence, paragraph, and basic business letter; how our system of government works; and how to take care of one's body.

 

 

I haven't spent a lot of time thinking of where I would draw the line, but most definitions would be problematic. Reading at grade level? (My kids have all done well with reading so far; I'm not being personally defensive here.) Do you know how many kids in public school do not read at grade level? I would not assume neglect based on this or many other things others will list.

[Ester Maria]

You see, this is where I get worried. Would these be equivalent tests in individual subjects? To what grade level? I have a feeling I would have trouble passing some of them, unless they are very basic. Even then, I would probably do poorly in Science and Social Science. Math is very iffy. I think I'm fairly confident through Algebra 1, but I wouldn't bet money on it. It would certainly be an interesting thing to do.

It is a different modality of homeschooling altogether.

 

In the US when you homeschool, you are OUT of the system, doing your own thing. In (most of) Europe when you homeschool, you are IN the system, only in a different modality of the system - you have a student that is typically even formally enrolled, but without the attendance obligation, only with testing obligation. The testing is typically done on a yearly basis, in all the "grade level" mandatory school subjects, but the CONTENT is rather well defined (there are actual catalogues of what one is supposed to know and which textbooks are approved for that content, you can get recommendations what to use based on what your testing location uses, etc.). In practice, nobody cares WHAT you do at home, as long as at the end of the year your children can pass those equivalence exams (and "pass" means with the minimum passing grade, not with flying colors - it is not like they would force you to school if your child is getting Cs). It also saves a lot of administration fuss for the parents, as the child is officially tested in such a way and can be provided with the official records (which eliminates the doubt in "mommy grades" too).

 

I know, there are downsides to that system too, but it is a possible way of ensuring minimal standards met and the children are educationally comparable with their public schooled peers.

[nono]

Well in NJ, we have to produce an equivalent outcome. So, I'm able to choose the path to get there, but I am still bound by law to produce a child who can function equivalently to a public schooled child. I would imagine if that were brought into question, test scores plus an examination of what's been done along the path, would be where a judge would being his/her inquiry.

 

As to what anyone else thinks of what I'm doing, it's irrelevant. But I better have my ducks in a row if I ever have to appear before that judge. Because it will matter a whole heck of a lot to that one person and impact my children's lives greatly.

[Ester Maria]

What exactly does "failing an equivalence exam" mean?

It means that the child is given a 5th grade math test, by the official standards (which you are familiar with and you are also familiar with the possible textbooks to use to get there or references of what is covered), and they must earn the lowest passing grade. And so for all the core curriculum subjects. Think of it this way: it is like the child is enrolled in school, but does not attend, only does "credit by examination". So what the child does is, in effects, that examination - and that is what they ought to pass on the minimal level.

Yet these same people have had their kids be successful in college and/or career with absolutely NO regrets on either the part of the children or parents.

Nobody is denying a theoretical possibility of excellent outcomes out of seemingly weird methods. The problem is that such an approach is essentially a gamble - and that you are gambling with ANOTHER person's future, education, intellectual and emotional development, comfort in general society knowledge, etc. We can talk parental freedoms all we want, but your children are still distinct people - physically, emotionally, and intellectually. There are situations where their freedoms - to a minimum education as to societal norms - come before yours (I am using a general "you" obviously). You do not "own" their minds any more than you own their bodies. Just like you can make health decisions, you can make decisions on parental choices and some educational aspects, and that is fine, but you cannot justify starving a child (whether physically or intellectually) by parental freedoms, for example. Sure, there may be unusually good outcomes, but there is a reason why those are anecdotal stories. There are very many "other" stories as well, unfortunately. :(

[Impish]

Depending on the society the bare minimum is that in which the individual is capable of providing for self and offspring.

 

If in one's society that means learning how to hoe a straight line and plant a seed so be it.

 

If in one's society that means a certain level of the Three R's than that is the level the individual needs to be educated.

:iagree:

[Stacy in NJ]

as am I :001_smile: in someone's mind.

 

I think all children should be taught reading and a basic understanding of math. I don't happen to believe that if they reach the age of 18 and haven't mastered calculus or persuasive essay writing that their lives are ruined. While it can be a real deficit to be poorly educated, it can be just as damaging to be brought up in morally chaotic surroundings - yet we as a culture have a high tolerance for this.

 

There was a story out of a wealthy suburb of NYC (Great Neck, Long Island - home of Bernie Madoff) the other day about how students from a prestigious ps were paying up to $3,600 for a phony to take their SAT for them. Some of their parents and teachers were aware of what was going on. Now that is parental and social neglect -moral neglect- that promotes a kind of rot at the highest levels. When the best and the brightest are a bunch of grubby cheaters, what are we as a society?

 

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/education/on-long-island-sat-cheating-was-hardly-a-secret.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

 

 

So, the other thread about reporting a family for educational neglect has me wondering, exactly what do you consider to be a bare minimum for a family to do be doing in order to avoid being thought of as neglectful? (I have a feeling that by some people's definitions, I would be considered woefully uneducated.)

Edited December 3, 2011 by Stacy in NJ

[Pamela H in Texas]

I so could not answer this question. The problem is that I believe that parents have the responsibility to educate their children in the way they deem appropriately as long as they are providing for them to be educated. So yes, I think there *should* be a standard, but what exactly that is, isn't my business.

 

I think providing an educationally rich environment could be appropriate. I think doing 3R's could be appropriate. I think a basic public school education could be appropriate. I think "doing school" 3 mornings per week could be appropriate. I think doing WTM could be appropriate. I think an accelerated traditional education leading to college at 12 could be appropriate. Starting formal schooling at 18months or waiting until 11years old could be appropriate.

 

Whether any of the above (or any other option on the continuum) *is* appropriate would depend on many factors, most of which I'm not privy to about any family or individual child other than my own.

 

I do think there is a HUGE issue of "do-nothingness" in the homeschool community. That is not the same as picking a method I may or may not agree with for my family or children.

 

I simply cannot imagine me trying to judge whether someone else was homeschooling appropriately to the point of being able to call the authorities.

[PhotoGal]

I define the minimum as what it takes to keep the child's options open until he/she is at an age to decide for his/her own future plans.

 

For Kinder, I don't think academics need to be required, but as you go forward there should be enough academics in a child's life that college will be a choice.

 

Some kids can learn to read at 12, but others will miss a window of opportunity by then. When I used to tutor reading, there was a 12 year old who never learned to read in school (his school used strictly whole language - no phonics at all). His family actually sued the school district for not teaching him to read and the district was paying for his tutoring. He was learning with phonics, but it was slow going. This boy was so frustrated, thought he was "dumb" and was really checked out. 12 years old was really too late for him. By then his attitude and self-esteem had taken such a hit, it was a struggle to get him to do anything. Can you imagine if your friends were reading Harry Potter and you could barely sound out words?

 

Anyway, I don't know why anyone would want to do the minimum. I guess it is a different mindset!

[LaxMom]

...

 

Nobody is denying a theoretical possibility of excellent outcomes out of seemingly weird methods. The problem is that such an approach is essentially a gamble - and that you are gambling with ANOTHER person's future, education, intellectual and emotional development, comfort in general society knowledge, etc. We can talk parental freedoms all we want, but your children are still distinct people - physically, emotionally, and intellectually. There are situations where their freedoms - to a minimum education as to societal norms - come before yours (I am using a general "you" obviously). You do not "own" their minds any more than you own their bodies. Just like you can make health decisions, you can make decisions on parental choices and some educational aspects, and that is fine, but you cannot justify starving a child (whether physically or intellectually) by parental freedoms, for example. Sure, there may be unusually good outcomes, but there is a reason why those are anecdotal stories. There are very many "other" stories as well, unfortunately. :(

I agree with this. I think, when you select a non-standard approach (i.e. homeshcooling), you are obligating yourself to produce an equivalent or better result than the standard. Now, that obviously covers quite a spectrum, given individual differences, but there is still the obligation to educate to the individual's potential.

[Meriwether]

I so could not answer this question. The problem is that I believe that parents have the responsibility to educate their children in the way they deem appropriately as long as they are providing for them to be educated. So yes, I think there *should* be a standard, but what exactly that is, isn't my business.

 

I think providing an educationally rich environment could be appropriate. I think doing 3R's could be appropriate. I think a basic public school education could be appropriate. I think "doing school" 3 mornings per week could be appropriate. I think doing WTM could be appropriate. I think an accelerated traditional education leading to college at 12 could be appropriate. Starting formal schooling at 18months or waiting until 11years old could be appropriate.

 

Whether any of the above (or any other option on the continuum) *is* appropriate would depend on many factors, most of which I'm not privy to about any family or individual child other than my own.

 

I do think there is a HUGE issue of "do-nothingness" in the homeschool community. That is not the same as picking a method I may or may not agree with for my family or children.

 

I simply cannot imagine me trying to judge whether someone else was homeschooling appropriately to the point of being able to call the authorities.

:iagree:I agree emphatically.

[NanceXToo]

"I so could not answer this question. The problem is that I believe that parents have the responsibility to educate their children in the way they deem appropriately as long as they are providing for them to be educated. So yes, I think there *should* be a standard, but what exactly that is, isn't my business.

 

I think providing an educationally rich environment could be appropriate. I think doing 3R's could be appropriate. I think a basic public school education could be appropriate. I think "doing school" 3 mornings per week could be appropriate. I think doing WTM could be appropriate. I think an accelerated traditional education leading to college at 12 could be appropriate. Starting formal schooling at 18months or waiting until 11years old could be appropriate.

 

Whether any of the above (or any other option on the continuum) *is* appropriate would depend on many factors, most of which I'm not privy to about any family or individual child other than my own."

 

Well said, Pamela!

Edited December 3, 2011 by NanceXToo

[mommaduck]

Depending on the society the bare minimum is that in which the individual is capable of providing for self and offspring.

 

If in one's society that means learning how to hoe a straight line and plant a seed so be it.

 

If in one's society that means a certain level of the Three R's than that is the level the individual needs to be educated.

:iagree:

 

And IMO, teaching a child to continue to learn and encouraging learning. At the very least, bare basics of History and Science, one would hope for. Another issue, such as in my BIL, is at least a BASIC understanding of the society they live in (come on, a child that is entirely ignorant of what a military is and what it does?).

Edited December 3, 2011 by mommaduck

[mirth]

I agree with this. I think, when you select a non-standard approach (i.e. homeshcooling), you are obligating yourself to produce an equivalent or better result than the standard.

 

 

I disagree with this in the legal sense. There is no legal education standard I need to meet. It is the state's burden to prove that I am *not* educating my children. An analogy exists in day-to-day home cooking. Food at home is assumed. Further, there is no active standard I need to meet to prove that I've properly fed the children. But if their doctors and and our neighbors notice the kids especially thin and hungry, then yes, this is evidence that I have not provided enough food. And then yes, I will be and should be legally compelled to provide more/better food or give them up to an entity that will.

 

As far as educating to meet personal potential, that is a moral standard -- one that I, and many on this board, take very seriously. Way more seriously than we would bet our last dollar our ps systems would.

[Jenny in GA]

I do think there is a HUGE issue of "do-nothingness" in the homeschool community. That is not the same as picking a method I may or may not agree with for my family or children.

 

 

But see, that's kinda what the question boils down to: What is "do-nothingness"? You say it's a huge problem. What (or who) definites "doing nothing"? What makes you think it's a problem? And, in your opinion, what does "doing nothing"? look like

 

I know unschoolers whose kids watch 30+ hours of sitcoms for a straight month. They are quite proud of it and claim the kids learned a lot from it -- about plot, characters, etc.

 

I've also heard people say their teens spending the day hanging out with friends was "school" because they were learning about interpersonal relationshps and social skills.

 

It's not "nothing" to them, for sure. But surely some other people would consider it nothing.

 

Is "nothing" staring at a blank wall all day? Is "nothing" spending only 15 minutes of schoolwork? Only one hour? Is "nothing" free reading all day? Is it "nothing" if you're not using a school book.

 

Unschoolers will tell you there's no such thing as "doing nothing" or "learning nothing" unless the child is in a coma or -- possibly -- if they are in a very very sterile environment -- no books, no TV, no outings, no conversation, no Legos, etc.

[milovany]

I simply cannot imagine me trying to judge whether someone else was homeschooling appropriately to the point of being able to call the authorities.

 

I agree with this quite a lot.

 

I think, when you select a non-standard approach (i.e. homeshcooling), you are obligating yourself to produce an equivalent or better result than the standard

 

And I disagree with this quite a lot. I obligated myself to no such thing when I chose to homeschool. That's not to say I disregard the result, but I'm not trying to prove myself to anyone else, or nor am I comparing myself to anyone else. I obligated myself to my kids and tailor their education to them on a case by case basis.

 

For us, the "bare minimum" is the 3 R's, a lifestyle that includes being interested in our kids and the unique way they were made, and having lots of interesting conversation that can lead to new learning opportunities.

Edited December 3, 2011 by milovaný

[Mergath]

I agree with the pp who said we need to prepare our children to the point that they can operate in society. Here, that definitely means, at minimum, reading, writing, math, and civics.

 

I also think that, as homeschoolers, each of us needs to do the best we can. If you aren't giving your child the best education you are able to, something should probably change.

[milovany]

If you aren't giving your child the best education you are able to, something should probably change.

 

I think a "good" education suffices, it doesn't have to be "the best."

[Mergath]

I think a "good" education suffices, it doesn't have to be "the best."

 

Not the best in the whole world, but the best you are able to do at any given time, based on things like education and circumstance. For many of us, the best we are able to do is merely good, but that's much better than most kids get in the public schools.

 

That's my opinion, anyway. :001_smile:

[Karen in CO]

I believe children need to learn to read well, write well and be able to understand arithmetic. I believe children should have access to books, art and music. Just as I believe children should be fed a healthy diet, dressed appropriately ( as to weather/ element), I also believe they should be provided an adequate education.

 

Faithe

 

I agree with Faithe, but add in physical education. I think that not all public schools do this well just like not all homeschools to it well, or even adequately. I don't want to judge if someone is feeding their kids a healthy diet or educating them properly, but I believe they should.

[regentrude]

I have a huge problem with this question because there are two different measures: the process, and the outcome.

I can probably define the desired outcome: an 18 y/o should be able to read, write, do math and know about the world (science, history, government...) to a degree that allows him to function as a productive adult (and we can be more specific what is required there).

BUT, and this is a huge but: this does not say anything about the process that gets the student there. For example:

I do not "get" unschooling, but I know of unschoolers who have marvelous educational outcomes, so whatever they have been doping for twelve years gets their student to the goal.

I lean towards starting formal academics later and would not have taught my child to read in K.

We do not school over the summer, just travel and read - anybody witnessing us during this time would consider us slackers (but we make up for it plenty by doing rigorous academic work.)

So, taking a snap shot at any given month or semester, I think it might be completely impossible for an outsider to evaluate what, and how much, learning is taking place and whether the student is on track for meeting the goal.

[milovany]

Not the best in the whole world, but the best you are able to do at any given time, based on things like education and circumstance. For many of us, the best we are able to do is merely good, but that's much better than most kids get in the public schools.

 

That's my opinion, anyway. :001_smile:

 

One that I agree with! Thanks for clarifying.

[Hannah C.]

I think that up to the age of about 12, what a family is or isn't doing to teach their child is completely up to them.

 

Some kids will learn to read very early. Others won't learn to read until later - but maybe it's better for those kids to learn to read at 9 instead of 5. Some kids will struggle with math, and they will be behind grade level. Some kids will struggle with reading. But when you're under the age of 12, it doesn't matter all that much in a homeschool environment. I wouldn't want to even TRY and judge another family's homeschooling when their kids were that age.

 

I think about age 12 is where grade level really starts to matter - because grade level matters in high school. If a kid gets to the age of 12 and can't read, write, or do basic math, my thought is that either they have (probably severe) learning difficulties, or their parents are being neglectful.

[QueenCat]

I define the minimum as what it takes to keep the child's options open until he/she is at an age to decide for his/her own future plans.

 

 

:iagree:You said it so well! I can't tell you the number of times I've heard "oh, we don't need to do "x", our family doesn't go to college, we go right to work at 18". The other is "only the boys need that, the girls will be homemakers, they don't need college". That's fine if that's what the child wants when he/she becomes an adult but to not give them the background they need should they desire to buck the family trend and go to college (or something else the parents didn't choose but is still ethical) is shameful.

[Ann]

Depending on the society the bare minimum is that in which the individual is capable of providing for self and offspring.

 

If in one's society that means learning how to hoe a straight line and plant a seed so be it.

 

If in one's society that means a certain level of the Three R's than that is the level the individual needs to be educated.

:iagree:For me educational neglect is when you are consciously making a choice which will keep your child from being able to function in the society they are living in.

[NanceXToo]

I don't know. I'm a pretty relaxed homeschooler. I do think kids should be able to read to the best of their ability, write, and do at least basic math. But other than that, I think that the beauty of homeschooling is being able to take a very individualized approach, and I do think it is quite possible to educate your children without using textbooks and such if you prefer not to, without being guilty of "neglecting" them. I think there are a lot of ways to learn, not just from textbooks and worksheets and such. Especially in the elementary school years.

 

I do use curricula (in a fairly relaxed way) but even if I stripped all or most of it away I still think that I'd be pretty happy with what my family was learning just by living our lives, looking at what we've been doing the past couple of months since starting this school year, for example.

 

My 11 y/o daughter for example, since September has done:

 

Extracurricular activities: Girl Scouts (this recently included some sewing which is good since I can't sew lol), Judo (she even gets to learn a little bit of Japanese here), Guitar Lessons, Library Book Club, Homeschool Bowling League, occasional homeschool wilderness club meetings, occasional homeschool group kickball games.

 

Lots of reading: She reads on her own for fun, she reads assigned books through her library book club, and we read books together for the 52 Books In 52 Weeks challenge, which we have been doing together. Many of the books are fictional, some are about specific topics such as street safety or drug abuse. She also has a few magazine subscriptions, including Cricket Magazine, Back to Homeschool online magazine for girls, and a National Geographic type magazine.

 

Arts and Crafts: She's made potholders, paints, draws (sometimes on her own, sometimes with how-to-draw type books), Wordtoons, etc.

 

Board Games: She plays lots of board games such as 5 Second Rule, Monopoly, The Allowance Game, Checkers, Bingo, various card games, and others I can't think of right now.

 

Writing: She's written short stories, letters, kept a dream journal, etc. for fun.

 

Field Trips and Outings: Attended a local heritage day festival, went to the Statue of Liberty, tour and fire safety program at a local fire hall, a homeschool day program at an Environmental Education Center, the Crayola Factory, a nature hike/scavenger hunt at the lake, a tour of our local courthouse, a free "So You Want To Be a Geologist?" program at a county park, farmer's markets for fall festival type things, Fort Hunter Park and Mansion for a Native American Homeschool Day Program, an airport where she got a tour of the airport, including the control tower, and a free flight in a small plane through the Young Eagles program, a homeschool day program at the National Watch and Clock Museum where we even got to make our own clocks, a tour of McDonald's, a tour of a local radio station, a tour of a local food pantry where we also donated some food, a library tour and program, the Turkey Hill Experience tour, a science museum.... As you can see we particularly enjoy outings and field trips and try to do as many as we can.

 

Chores: Helped with things around the house from helping to clean the house, to helping with laundry, to occasionally helping me cook or bake something, to helping with yardwork, to helping with petcare (cleaning the cat's litterbox, catching crickets for the gecko, etc).

 

Foreign Language: We are learning Spanish together using Getting Started With Spanish because she wants to, not because I made it a school requirement.

 

Geography: Learning about different countries via the Little Passports subscription we have for fun.

 

Learning new hobbies: Her dad has lots of hobbies and he's always teaching her things. He's got a big saltwater aquarium with a huge filtration system that comes up from the basement and she knows lots about the care and terminology and names of different corals and so on. He enjoys making balloon animals for fun and sometimes they sit and watch videos together and he teachers her how to make them. He's recently getting into blowing glass again, and so he takes her with him into the basement and she gets to watch him and he talks to her about what he's doing and what's happening and tells her the terms for things and so on.

 

And there have been educational television shows pertaining to science and history and holidays and so on, lots of conversations about lots of different things, time spent with family, time spent pursuing own interests, video and computer games, at least some of which have to be educational....and I'm sure there are other things I'm just not thinking of.

 

We did our curriculum stuff, too (granted, sometimes we're behind on it lol- but we always manage to catch up) but I do feel that even without it, there is always so much that we're learning all the time. So I'd have a really hard time being one to "judge" anybody for not "teaching" their kids- I think there are a lot of ways to "teach," and a lot of ways to "learn," and that even unschoolers can often have a valid education if their hearts are in it and they aren't just calling themselves that because they don't want to be bothered with anything...an unschooler I know, I'm amazed by how out of her way she goes to help her kids achieve any goal they could possibly have for themselves.... and again, this is part of the beauty of homeschooling.

 

Of course, this IS a classical educational board and so a lot of people are going to have much stricter standards as to what would be considered "enough" I suppose, but I think without really being in a person's life on a daily basis and seeing beneath the surface and knowing the kinds of things they do together that might constitute teaching and learning outside the box, *I* wouldn't want to be the one to make snap judgments on them.

 

P.S. This also reminds me of a blog post I wrote last January called "What Does A Homeschooler Do Every Day?" which sort of describes how there IS no "typical" day in a homeschooling household and tells (and shows with lots of pics) how I used a random month of our lives to show how different our days can be and how judgments can't really be made by peeking in on us on any given, random day but rather that our lives should be looked at as a whole. Take a peek if you're interested. :)

 

http://nancextoo.livejournal.com/175611.html

 

ETA: Sorry! I see that was quite a novel! I don't blame you all if none of you read it LOL.

Edited December 3, 2011 by NanceXToo

[ErinE]

I have a huge problem with this question because there are two different measures: the process, and the outcome.

I can probably define the desired outcome: an 18 y/o should be able to read, write, do math and know about the world (science, history, government...) to a degree that allows him to function as a productive adult (and we can be more specific what is required there).

BUT, and this is a huge but: this does not say anything about the process that gets the student there. For example:

I do not "get" unschooling, but I know of unschoolers who have marvelous educational outcomes, so whatever they have been doping for twelve years gets their student to the goal.

I lean towards starting formal academics later and would not have taught my child to read in K.

We do not school over the summer, just travel and read - anybody witnessing us during this time would consider us slackers (but we make up for it plenty by doing rigorous academic work.)

So, taking a snap shot at any given month or semester, I think it might be completely impossible for an outsider to evaluate what, and how much, learning is taking place and whether the student is on track for meeting the goal.

 

Agreed. Great point.

[9763653]

I believe a homeschooled child should have equivalent knowledge of the core areas as defined by the state / country standards or national curriculum (if there is one). IOW, I would apply the logic of some European countries towards homeschoolers (and private schools): you can certainly do more than xyz, but you cannot less than xyz, and if your child fails equivalence exams two years in a row (without a huge medical excuse), something is wrong enough to force school attendance. Homeschooling cannot be an excuse not to teach core subjects (native language literacy and literature, mathematics, whatever are the basic standards for science and social scences, etc.) and to keep the child ignorant - whether deliberately, or because one is simply not doing one's job properly. While there are no universally defined common standards, each society has some minimum standards, whether official or semi-official, and I believe the parent's duty is to make sure those are met at least to a minimum level expected.

 

What I *personally* shoot at and recommend is to look up to the BEST of one's culture's tradition in education, or to the stringent schools, and provide an education in that spirit (in accordance with the child's abilities), rather than emulate the bare bones standards, but it is only the minimum that I believe ought to more clearly defined and imposed onto everybody.

 

I agree, while keeping in mind that homeschool curricula may tackle materials in a different order, which may mean that a homeschooler could have knowledge and skills a public school doesn't, and vice versa.

 

I do wonder about some of the state standards, and how they are put into practice though. For instance, the first grade standards for California mention that first graders should understand the difference between direct and indirect democracy. Is that something that is taught in most schools at that point? I am not convinced.

[LaxMom]

I'm sorry, I was ambiguous. When I said one obligates oneself, I was not speaking to legal obligation (though in plenty of states, it IS a legal obligation... that just wasn't part of my thought), but moral/ethical obligation to one's children, as Chucki so eloquently said, to enable them to function in their society.

[butterflymommy]

I can't imagine reporting a family for educational neglect. What about radical homeschoolers? Should they be reported? I would never report a family unless there was outright physical abuse or neglect taking place.

[nukeswife]

I think it's hard to say, but in general I agree that the end result should be that the child be able to support oneself and their family if they choose to have one. Now how one gets there and at what speed is hard to pin down.

 

Take those that said kids should be reading on grade level, well then you better call the authorities on me, my dd and youngest son are not. My dd has vision issues that nobody would notice if they looked at her, and goes to therapy for it, but then there are people that think vision therapy is a bunch of bunk and it's just pure slacking on my part. My youngest isn't because I don't believe he's been ready for it. Just now he's starting to show what I consider signs of being ready to start learning to read. My oldest is one of the worst writers I've encountered, but he tries, does this make me neglectful, I've tried everything I can, but writing is just not his thing. He certainly wouldn't write what is considered "On grade level" in some states, but then again in others he just might.

 

So there is another rub, who gets to decide what is "on grade level" ?

[catz]

I've said many times that I used to be a part of the unschooling community and know a lot about it. Many of those folks are adament about having no problem letting their kids watch 30+ hours of TV a week if they want, never requiring or insisting that their kids read (and thinking it's fine that their kids can't read by even age 12), and "never doing any math" (their own words) until late teens.

 

I've come across a few families like this on my journey. And they have children that have become self supporting, responsible, in many cases college educated adults. So maybe this is where I have a hard time reporting a family that isn't educating by my standards. If I suspected a parent was teaching a child enough to have basic reading, writing, math skills and was employable by adulthood, it wouldn't ring a bell for me. If I suspected a parent was purposefully not allowing their child to have access to books or explore the world, that would qualify as neglectful to me.

 

There are so many factors at play. What this families day looks like would make a big difference in if I would report them. Are their kids wandering the streets or staring at TV all day? That is neglectful. Are they cooking, cleaning, gardening, sewing, building, with their math and bible? That is what an unschooler's day could potentially look like. I prioritize my day differently of course, but is their way wrong for their kids? How could I possibly know. I don't assume my values are the same as everyone else. Not every homeschooled child needs to be on a college prep track. There are many reasons why a child might not be reading or writing at grade level. I tutored first graders in reading that barely knew their letters in PS while classmates were reading Harry Potter. They were exposed to literacy based curriculum for hours and hours and it still wasn't clicking. Some of these kids just started reading later.

 

 

I think providing an educationally rich environment could be appropriate. I think doing 3R's could be appropriate. I think a basic public school education could be appropriate. I think "doing school" 3 mornings per week could be appropriate. I think doing WTM could be appropriate. I think an accelerated traditional education leading to college at 12 could be appropriate. Starting formal schooling at 18months or waiting until 11years old could be appropriate.

 

Whether any of the above (or any other option on the continuum) *is* appropriate would depend on many factors, most of which I'm not privy to about any family or individual child other than my own.

 

I do think there is a HUGE issue of "do-nothingness" in the homeschool community. That is not the same as picking a method I may or may not agree with for my family or children.

 

I simply cannot imagine me trying to judge whether someone else was homeschooling appropriately to the point of being able to call the authorities.

 

:iagree: wholeheartedly.

[kolamum]

Bare minimum: 3rs. :D

 

Mind you, I'd be content with reading and math for bare minimum, going through a rough patch, but don't want my children to fall behind. If a child can read they can teach themselves anything. You can assign them books to read about the other topics that need covering as you manoeuvre through your rough patch..

[KarenC]

I think each child should be on grade level in reading, writing, and math, or there should be a plan in place to help the child reach grade level.

 

Karen

[Mandy in TN]

So, the other thread about reporting a family for educational neglect has me wondering, exactly what do you consider to be a bare minimum for a family to do be doing in order to avoid being thought of as neglectful? (I have a feeling that by some people's definitions, I would be considered woefully uneducated.)

So, this is what I would consider the bare minimum and not what the state considers bare minimum.

 

For me the bare minimum of educational instruction for the average student would leave the door to college open even for a student who was highly, highly unlikely to attend college. It could look something like this:

 

K-3

1. Daily reading instruction for at least 10 min/ day (ex. reading to the child, listening to the child read, or phonic/ word study)

2. Daily math instruction for at least 10 min/ day (this could include counting objects and all kinds of manipulatives)

 

 

4-6

1. Daily reading instruction for at least 20 min/ day (ex. reading to the child, listening to the child read, silent reading or spelling)

2. Daily math instruction for at least 20 min/ day (This should include mastery of the four operations with whole numbers by the end of grade 6)

3. Consistent writing instruction (could be copywork)

 

 

7-9

1. Daily language arts instruction for at least 30 min/ day (ex. reading with the child, silent reading, or spelling/ vocabulary Also, an overview of grammar should be included by the end of grade 9.)

2. Daily math instruction for at least 30 min/ day (This should include mastery of the four operations with fractions, decimals and percents by the end of grade 9)

3. Regular, perhaps 2x weekly, composition instruction (This should include the ability to compose a well-formed basic essay by the end of grade 9.)

4. Regular, perhaps weekly, coverage of history topics (The goal being a general understanding of the flow of major events from pre-history to present by the end of grade 9.)

5. Regular, perhaps weekly, coverage of science topics (The goal being to cover wide range of topics in Earth, life, chemistry, physics and technology by the end of grade 9.)

 

 

10-12

1. Daily language arts instruction (should include at least some basic literary analysis, basic American Lit and basic British Lit)

2. Daily math instruction (This should include at least basic algebra, basic geometry and personal finance)

3. Regular composition (This should include business letters as well as essays)

4. Daily instruction of history topics (At least world history, world geography and US history including govt)

5. Daily instruction for at least 2 years (The goal being to cover at least high school level biology and chemistry.)

 

 

Some kids may be able to score high enough on college testing to go to college and even be highly successful with less preparation than this, but I would think that the average student would need at least this much for college to be a realistic option.

 

Theoretically, the state of TN has higher standards than these. :glare:

Mandy

[oldskool]

I think each child should be on grade level in reading, writing, and math, or there should be a plan in place to help the child reach grade level.

 

Karen

 

 

:iagree:

 

I want my kids to be able to easily slide into their public school grade level if they have to. I home educate with the thought in mind that I cannot guarantee tomorrow.

 

Also, it worries me that some homeschooling families would put others in a bad light, thereby, jeopardizing the legality of homeschooling in the future. I know that many public schools don't live up to educational standards that are set, but IMO that doesn't mean that homeschoolers should then point to that as an excuse for having low expectations for themselves. Like it or not, public schools will never have the same spotlight put on them as homeschools do. I think it is important to make sure we then work to achieve more rather than less.

 

Lesley

[QueenCat]

Also, it worries me that some homeschooling families would put others in a bad light, thereby, jeopardizing the legality of homeschooling in the future. I know that many public schools don't live up to educational standards that are set, but IMO that doesn't mean that homeschoolers should then point to that as an excuse for having low expectations for themselves. Like it or not, public schools will never have the same spotlight put on them as homeschools do. I think it is important to make sure we then work to achieve more rather than less.

Lesley

 

Homeschoolers that aren't actually homeschooling (and I'm NOT referring to unschoolers, most I know are actually educating their children) but using it as a shield for truancy already put the rest of us in bad light.

[swellmomma]

This was an interesting topic from last week. My bare minimum is doing whatever is necessary to pass the meeting with my facilitator each spring. Over all I agree with you all, BUT there is too much grey area imo due to learning disabilities that are not always even recognized, or due to other family obligations. For example between medical and therapy appts just for the 2 boys this year we are down to a 3 days school week. In addition to that I have been told by both the SLP and the OT to stop of reading and writing instruction with ds8 until further notice. He has multiple learning and visual issues at play that are still being sorted out. He can only read and write at an early K level, it is not due to laziness on the part of myself or him, but until a month ago we didn't know why. MY oldest son has auditory processing issues, and often when introduced to a new concept I have to let him stew on it for a few days for him to really make sense of it, so it might look like he only does math sporadically but it is with a reason. Neither would pass grade equivalent testing, but they are still doing school. We still learn all the time, but it is done at a much slower pace than the schools. I have been accused of educational neglect by other homeschoolers, but until a system that deemed my 5 yr old unteachable improves he is doing much better at home than elsewhere even if they are not at grade level. My personal goals for them by 18 is basic literacy and math skills, essentially enough to read and write forms, read for fun and math skills to handle which ever trade they go into. At age 16 each of my kids will begin a trade, if they chose to go to college great, but if all they can acheive is basic math and basic reading I am fine with that, I have bigger fish to fry with them.

[Laura Corin]

 

I want my kids to be able to easily slide into their public school grade level if they have to. I home educate with the thought in mind that I cannot guarantee tomorrow.

 

 

I did have Calvin on a very strange schedule for a while (delayed writing, lots of work out loud) but a state school would have recognised the developmental delay which made it a sensible plan.

 

If I had dropped dead, the boys would have gone to school. I needed for them to be prepared for that.

 

Laura

[Lizzie in Ma]

I so could not answer this question. The problem is that I believe that parents have the responsibility to educate their children in the way they deem appropriately as long as they are providing for them to be educated. So yes, I think there *should* be a standard, but what exactly that is, isn't my business.

 

I think providing an educationally rich environment could be appropriate. I think doing 3R's could be appropriate. I think a basic public school education could be appropriate. I think "doing school" 3 mornings per week could be appropriate. I think doing WTM could be appropriate. I think an accelerated traditional education leading to college at 12 could be appropriate. Starting formal schooling at 18months or waiting until 11years old could be appropriate.

 

Whether any of the above (or any other option on the continuum) *is* appropriate would depend on many factors, most of which I'm not privy to about any family or individual child other than my own.

 

I do think there is a HUGE issue of "do-nothingness" in the homeschool community. That is not the same as picking a method I may or may not agree with for my family or children.

 

I simply cannot imagine me trying to judge whether someone else was homeschooling appropriately to the point of being able to call the authorities.

 

What she said.:iagree:

[PeacefulChaos]

I would say Math and LA, particularly if it is for a short period of time (like on our busy days - dress rehearsal week last week - we didn't do history or science. I just didn't have it in me.) Also for younger kids, Math and LA is the 'main' stuff that I think they need.

Older kids...I really don't know.

[Carpe]

IMO the bare minimum is for the kids to be proficient at reading, writing and arithmetic, as well as knowing how to take care of themselves physically by the time they're 16. Before that any level of progress that will meet or exceed that standard. (Or whatever the law requires in their area if it's more than this.)

 

But honestly I would expect people to do much better than that. And I may judge them poor educators, or bad parents, but not neglectful ones if they do just the bare minimum. Just like people can feed their kids processed junk and fast food 3 meals a day and not be neglectful, but I'd still think that's some lousy nutrition and/or bad parenting.

 

I think there's a very obvious line where it's definitely neglect, followed by a wide gray area where I wouldn't call it neglect but some might, and then another line above which everyone is sure is an adequate education.

Edited December 10, 2011 by Carpe
Clarity