2 hours homeschooling equals a whole day of public schooling

[chepyl]

We spent 30-45 minutes a day in K; my son could already read at a high level independently and he was well past learning basic addition facts. So that 30-45 minutes was spend memorizing poetry, and studying basic history/geography/science through him reading aloud to me (I always try to tackle two subjects in one activity if I can).

 

First grade took an hour. That was grammar, handwriting, reading aloud, spelling, 1-2 Singapore exercises a day, science twice a week, history 3 days a week, and Bible.

 

Second grade took 2 hours. We did everything above plus we added Latin.

 

Third grade takes him about 3 hours. We have added a writing program.

 

He is a quick and motivated worker. He wants to get his work done and be free to play. He is required to read everyday.

 

My DD, is not so easy. She easily spends an hour on K. She tags along on memory work, science, and history. She is retaining a lot of that. She listens to the Latin lessons on CD. She does not yet read independently. She is working on learning basic addition facts. If we spend 30 minutes on reading, the most math I get is counting to 20 or 30. If we spend 20-30 minutes on math, I can get a few words read and copied. So her focused seat work time never exceeds 30 minutes.

 

I work to my kids focus level. I have found what I was told by many local homeschool moms - 1 hour per year/grade level of school - to be very true. They retain more, when I stop. Are they learning? Yes. Are they getting a better education than if they were in PS? Undeniably! Do I need to spend 6 hours with my 5 year old? Not on "School" work.

 

They both dance, do theatre, play a sport, watch their dad gut fish, help in the garden, cook and bake with me, and they play! They learn through exploratory play. Yes, I believe it is possible to provide an education superior to the PS, with only 2 hours of seat work a day, for elementary school. Jr high ad high school is different. But, I don't think all kids will need 6 hours a day. Especially a student who works more than 180 days in a year.

[jennynd]

As exmaple

 

Here is the desciption of what My DS who is in PS 4th will do this year for ELA, SS and Science... they also work on Lego mindstorm.. and I know I don't have the knowlege nor ability to cover all what she plan to do

 

 2013-2014 School year: Patterns of Change

• The goals of the Language Arts units are to develop students' skills in literary analysis and interpretation, persuasive writing, linguistic competency, and oral communication, as well as to strengthen students' reasoning skills and understanding of the concept of change. The units engage students in exploring carefully selected, challenging works of literature from various times, cultures, and genres, and they encourage students to reflect on their readings through writing and discussion. The units also provide numerous opportunities for students to explore interdisciplinary connections to the language arts and to conduct research around issues relevant to their own lives.

• The concept of cyclic patterns of change was chosen as the unifying theme for this unit. Selected literary works deal with cycles in nature, knowledge, history, and human life. Students are introduced to some of the important approaches and ideas of literary criticism. Students are encouraged to use journals, literature webs, essays, and visual projects to organize and express their ideas about various literary selections. Works studied in the unit include Conrad’s My Daniel, "The Helpful Badger" by Lawrence Yep, and poetry by Dickinson, Sandburg, Angelou, and Shakespeare.

 

• Students will use the following strategies while reading:

  • Make connections to their own lives, other literature, and the world around them

  • Question before, during, and after reading

  • Infer from the text in order to create meaning and grasp the deeper essence of the text

  • Determine importance and purpose

  • Synthesize information by sifting and sorting through text

 

 

2013-2014 School year: The 1930s in America: Facing Depression

• The social studies unit emphasizes primary source analysis, critical thinking, and concept development to help students develop understanding of high-level social studies content in key areas. Thus, the unit reflects the focus of national and state-level standards on historical thinking and research and on the integration of major concepts across disciplines.

• This unit explores Depression-era America from the perspective of many different groups of people, utilizing a variety of primary sources to illustrate events and the  social-political context. The concept of cause and effect is employed to support student understanding of the complexity of history. The unit emphasizes the interplay of changes in geography, government, and the economy, as well as the influence of particular individuals and groups, to deepen student understanding of the period.

Unit Goals:

• Develop understanding of the concept of cause and effect and its relationship to events and eras in history

• Develop reasoning skills with application to social studies

• Develop interpersonal and social group process skills

• Develop skills in historical analysis and source interpretation

• Develop understanding of key events of the 1930s in America and the social, economic, and political context of the period

2013-2014 School year: Electric City: A Problem-Based Unit (Under review)

• Electric City provides a creative and interdisciplinary approach to introducing students to electricity. In this simulated activity, a large recreational complex is being built in the middle of a city, and the students' role is to plan the site's electrical needs, as well as create additional backup plans. This real-world problem requires students to analyze the situation, determine what type of research is needed, conduct experiments, and evaluate solutions.

[8filltheheart]

Attending school 180 days a year (or so) out of a year does not—despite misperceptions to the contrary—eliminate children's opportunities to engage in creative play.

 

I don't undervalue creative play, but also know that the law of diminishing returns can set in, and what is good in moderate doses can devolve into simple neglect if that is all there is.......

 

. They do not (alone) replace academic learning. It is best to strike a balance, whether a child is educated at home or in a school. Two hours a day of academic work will not match what is happening in good schools.

 

Bill

And this is where we disagree. I think the fundamental question is what is most important for young kids and provides the better long-term gain. I do not believe there is that much actual academic learning that is necessary for children under 5-7, whereas I believe there are innumerable cognitive connections that need to be fostered in brain development and are what lead to the critical thinking foundation for essential problem-solving skills as they mature.

 

You believe that there is a vast amt of knowledge and academic skills that they need to be exposed to and master during these yrs as the foundation for upper academic achievement.

 

My contention is that there are basic amts of academics skills that they should master and that upper academic achievement is fostered upon foundational cognitive skills achieved through self-discovery/exploration/imagination.

 

You say that kids aren't in school 24/7 and have plenty of time for the other. I say that kids are spending greater amts of time the creative exploration and that 2 hrs of academics is plenty for those early ages.

 

I know what my kids have been able to achieve and they are great independent, critical thinkers and based on any graduation criteria, they exceed anything even remotely labeled avg. their academic records span from typical honors level diploma to so far beyond a typical diploma that they are approaching college jr status. Conversely, I have met way too many ps graduates that do not know how to think for themselves at all. They are calculator dependent. They accept what they read at face value. They are entertainment level thinkers, etc.

 

So, no, I do not accept your contention that knowledge-based academics should have a higher priority for young kids. Discovering is learning and thinking without someone else giving you the answer. You have to think and make the connection on your own. Exploring is learning. You explore, observe, think about what your observations mean, and often make your own discovery. Dramatizing is imaginative. Imagination is creative thinking. Creative thinking is a higher cognitive skill than knowledge.

 

But.....and here is where we do agree. It has its limits bc it is ridiculous to attempt to re-discover all discoveries, etc. There is a tipping pt with mental development and maturity where more knowledge is necessary to frame understanding which are in turn used in problem-solving.....around 8 is when I think that 2 hrs starts to be inadequate and over time, the balance starts to tip toward longer academic days.

 

(Ok, I just read that and it is jumbled and full of mistakes. I don't have time to correct it and I think it is still readable enough to be understood. ;) ).

[Spy Car]

That's what I'm (vaguely) curious about, because it is so far away from any real life experiences I've ever had with public education.

 

Of course public schools eliminate opportunities for creative play. How could they not? Between going to school, homework, extracurricular activities (when applicable), and the work that more and more schools--especially "good" schools--are expecting children to complete over the summer, children are often left with little free time for creative play and exploring their own interests. And what we don't use, we lose. When the majority of a child's time is spent doing adult directed study, play, activities, and games, I do believe children are at risk of losing the ability to play creatively, to entertain themselves, and to explore subjects just because they're interesting.

 

We're all going to err; that probably goes without saying. When I err, I'd rather it be on the side of giving my kids too much free time to play and explore their own interests.

 

School is in session about 180 days a year. I don't know of any elementary school in our area that assigns any summer work. None. I'm fairly confident that is the case in Middle Schools too. I understand that some High School programs (not all) have summer reading lists. 

 

I'm not seeing a lack of creative play time. We have school, piano lessons, and sport teams, and the kiddo still has time to play (both alone, and with friends). If children are not spending their hours glued to a TV or indulging a Mindcraft addiction, it is amazing how much they can get done in a day. Including having time just to be. 

 

Bill

[Guest rdsmw7c]

This questions reminds me of a famous quote:

 

 

I have never let my schooling interfere with my education  (Samuel Clemens - Mark Twain)

 

I don't think the actual number of hours matters.  If you're counting hrs of 'schooling' then you're probably not looking at the right things.

 

If you want to see a great animation / talk about the current challenges of schooling - see this:

 

http://www.thersa.org/events/rsaanimate/animate/rsa-animate-changing-paradigms

 

Enjoy!

[ErinE]

nm

[Spy Car]

And this is where we disagree. I think the fundamental question is what is most important for young kids and provides the better long-term gain. I do not believe there is that much actual academic learning that is necessary for children under 5-7, whereas I believe there are innumerable cognitive connections that need to be fostered in brain development and are what lead to the critical thinking foundation for essential problem-solving skills as they mature. 

You believe that there is a vast amt of knowledge and academic skills that they need to be exposed to and master during these yrs as the foundation for upper academic achievement.

 

You mischaracterize our differences. I believe the early years of childhood are a vital time for building the neural network in the mind. Connections are either (literally) made or not made. A stimulated mind is healthier and denser than one than is unstimulated.

 

I think we probably agree on this point. The emphasis should be focused on developing brain function, the ability to reason, etc. And not on "knowledge acquisition" alone (although is is good to learn things too).

 

 

 

My contention is that there are basic amts of academics skills that they should master and that upper academic achievement is fostered upon foundational cognitive skills achieved through self-discovery/exploration/imagination, and would argue it take more work on the part of adults than doing "straight seat-work type" academics. that is what I mean by "busting a hump." It takes work and preparation if one want to help facilitate discovery, exploration, and imagination.

 

I do not have a fundamental difference of opinion with this, except to say that parents/teachers can foster and help create environments that promote self-discovery/exploration/imagination. Or they can fail to do so.

 

Where we differer (I believe, and I don't want to put words in you mouth, is that you seem to believe children can accomplish the full range of benefits of discovery, exploration, and imagination on their own. Without the energy and input of parents, teacher, and other adults. On this point, we differ. I think the creative energies of adults can augment and extend the benefits and the brain-building. Without in any way devaluing "creative play" (for lack of a better term), as it has tremendous benefits, it also has its limits.

 

 

 

You say that kids aren't in school 24/7 and have plenty of time for the other. I say that kids are spending greater amts of time the creative exploration and that 2 hrs of academics is plenty for those early ages.

 

By any measure children are not in school 24/7. And in the best class-rooms they spend a lot of time being creatively engaged. I simply disagree that the same degree of "brain-building" will happen with 2 hours a day of home education.

 

 

I know what my kids have been able to achieve and they are great independent, critical thinkers and based on any graduation criteria, they exceed anything even remotely labeled avg. their academic records span from typical honors level diploma to so far beyond a typical diploma that they are approaching college jr status. Conversely, I have met way too many ps graduates that do not know how to think for themselves at all. They are calculator dependent. They accept what they read at face value. They are entertainment level thinkers, etc.

 

So? There are brilliant kids that graduate from Public Schools, and "homeschooled" children that can't read. So what? There are multiple paths to good (and bad) education. Do you need me to acknowledge many public schools are failing? If so, consider it acknowledged. But doing better than failing schools is a lousy standard to better at home, IMO.

 

 

So, no, I do not accept your contention that knowledge-based academics should have a higher priority for young kids.

 

But neither do I. You are arguing against a stray-man here.

 

 

 

Discovering is learning and thinking without someone else giving you the answer. You have to think and make the connection on your own. Exploring is learning. You explore, observe, think about what your observations mean, and often make your own discovery. Dramatizing is imaginative. Imagination is creative thinking. Creative thinking is a higher cognitive skill than knowledge.

 

I agree. Have you read any of my posts over the years? :D

 

 

But.....and here is where we do agree. It has its limits bc it is ridiculous to attempt to re-discover all discoveries, etc. There is a tipping pt with mental development and maturity where more knowledge is necessary to frame understanding which are in turn used in problem-solving.....around 8 is when I think that 2 hrs starts to be inadequate and over time, the balance starts to tip toward longer academic days. 

 

And I think it is better to intentionally promote this same sort of learning much earlier. In ways that respect the age difference. One can capitalize on children's love of play and thirst for discovery and exploration in ways that are intentional, and don't just involve setting them loose in drainage ditches for endless hours. Facilitating creative learning takes work.

 

Bill

[8filltheheart]

Ok, Bill, I don't have time to keep discussing this. I do disagree that it needs to be adult lead. I'll skip over most of it bc I think we are talking past each other. Some I agree with and I think we probably do agree more than disagree, other parts, not so much.

 

But I am curious as to what kinds of academics---and I mean knowledge-based---require more than 2 hrs for a 6 yr old that will impact their long-term academic success if they don't receive it?

 

How about the success in countries that don't even start school until 7?

[Spy Car]

Ok, Bill, I don't have time to keep discussing this. I do disagree that it needs to be adult lead. I'll skip over most of it bc I think we are talking past each other. Some I agree with and I think we probably do agree more than disagree, other parts, not so much.

 

But I am curious as to what kinds of academics---and I mean knowledge-based---require more than 2 hrs for a 6 yr old that will impact their long-term academic success if they don't receive it?

 

How about the success in countries that don't even start school until 7?

 

The countries that supposedly don't start until 7, like (famously) Finland, pour huge resources into creative pre-schools that actively engage children in the sort of discovery, exploration, and imagination (that is lead by well-paid and well-trained teachers) that I would advocate for. Finland is not a case of "benign neglect" leading to success. They have very intentional ways of educating and building the minds of young children.

 

Finland also has social welfare programs that aim to wipe-out the poverty, hunger, and despair that we—as a society—tend to accept in the United States. 

 

Young children ought to be engaged more than 2 hours a day, as is the case in Finland (where they are not just sent loose in the snow). There is massive government run (and tax-payer supported infrastructure) that supports the whole enterprise). 

 

Saying students in Finland don't start until 7 gives a very misleading impression of the reality.

 

Bill

[garddwr]

nm

 

[8filltheheart]

The countries that supposedly don't start until 7, like (famously) Finland, pour huge resources into creative pre-schools that actively engage children in the sort of discovery, exploration, and imagination (that is lead by well-paid and well-trained teachers) that I would advocate for. Finland is not a case of "benign neglect" leading to success. They have very intentional ways of educating and building the minds of young children.

 

Finland also has social welfare programs that aim to wipe-out the poverty, hunger, and despair that we—as a society—tend to accept in the United States.

 

Young children ought to be engaged more than 2 hours a day, as is the case in Finland (where they are not just sent loose in the snow). There is massive government run (and tax-payer supported infrastructure) that supports the whole enterprise).

 

Saying students in Finland don't start until 7 gives a very misleading impression of the reality.

 

Bill

Lol, I wasn't even thinking about Finland. I was actually thinking about Regentrude's posts about Germany. I am pretty sure she has mentioned 7 as the normal age there. (I tried to find a post, bit couldn't.)

 

As far as the rest.....I am insulted that benign neglect is being used to define how my children are educated. Jeepers. Your defined path of education is not the only valid one to well-educated children, regardless to your opinion otherwise.

 

Eta: I couldn't find Regentrude' s post about age7, but I did find her post about her own homeschool. Her kids only do 4 hrs of academics in 6th , 4.5 in 7th. The thread is on the logic board about length of day for 7th grade. http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/480528-hours-for-your-school-day-7th8th-grades/?p=5086345

 

How do you acct for such high levels of academic achievement with such few hrs? Regentrude manages to do it with far fewer hrs than we do! I think the idea that "time" and "instruction" are the most important variables is questionable.

[garddwr]

Lol, I want even thinking about Finland. I was actually thinking about Regentrude's posts about Germany. I am pretty sure she has mentioned 7 as the normal age there. (I tried to find a post, bit couldn't.)

 

As far as the rest.....I am insulted that benign neglect is being used to define how my children are educated. Jeepers. Your defined path of education is not the only valid one to well-educated children, regardless to your opinion otherwise.

 

8, I will take your many years of experience raising and educating a large family over Spycar's experience with one young child any day. You are one of the people I most look up to on these boards. I hope you stay around for a long time so I can glean from your wisdom.

[Crimson Wife]

As a afterschooler Mom with kids go to a GREAT public school. I will have to agree with this. There is no doubt that academically, HS (good one) give kids a lot more personal attention and need. But there is no question in my mind that a regualr school (Good one) also provide lots of oppurtunities that I don't feel I can provide if I have to homeschool. for example... this is very obvious that I can't teach grammar :laugh: . and I can't provide the varies activies done in school

And there is no doubt a PS teacher with 32 kids including English Language Learners and mainstreamed special ed students cannot tailor the challenge level to the individual student the way a HS teacher can. Even 10 minutes' worth of math at the appropriate level is better than sitting through a full hour of material that the student mastered years earlier. Not saying that we only spend 10 minutes per day, but if I wanted my kids to make any progress academically while enrolled in PS, I'd have to "afterschool" in addition to the 30 hrs/week they'd be sitting in the classroom. And because of the time needed to "afterschool", our schedule would not permit them to do all the activities that will actually help them build an impressive resume for their college applications like we can while HS.

 

Now if we had the $$$$$ for the private GATE school or lived somewhere that offered a GATE magnet school, then the pros to attending B&M school might very well outweigh the cons. If we win the big Powerball jackpot, you can bet I'd make a big donation to the famous prep school that my grandfather attended on scholarship and another one to the famous prep school my uncle attended in the hopes of securing my kids' slots (as well as helping out some other families afford the tuition there).

[Spy Car]

Lol, I want even thinking about Finland. I was actually thinking about Regentrude's posts about Germany. I am pretty sure she has mentioned 7 as the normal age there. (I tried to find a post, bit couldn't.)

 

As far as the rest.....I am insulted that benign neglect is being used to define how my children are educated. Jeepers. Your defined path of education is not the only valid one to well-educated children, regardless to your opinion otherwise.

 

I did not use the term "benign neglect" to describe how you raise your children, I used it to describe what is NOT happening in Finland. Don't feel insulted.

 

Bill

[Haiku]

 

Here is the desciption of what My DS who is in PS 4th will do this year for ELA, SS and Science... they also work on Lego mindstorm.. and I know I don't have the knowlege nor ability to cover all what she plan to do

 

What you quoted is a lot of vague education-ese that doesn't actually tell what the students are doing or how it's accomplished. I used to work in educational/textbook publishing, and I know overblown bs when I smell it. ;)

[briansmama]

I think the amount of time spent doing seat work is not the amount of time overall learning takes place. 2 hours of focused seat work, especially 1 on 1, is a lot of time in my mind! My sister taught and had to spend over 2 hours on language arts with her 2nd graders. Because the class took turns reading from the book, a student might read 1 or 2 sentences the entire period. At home, 15 minutes of focused reading instruction goes very far with my 1st grader. He will finish the entire reader and play a phonics game.

 

However, students (4th grade) in our local ps get 25 minutes of science 2xs per week. We spend a lot more time on science than that (3 hours per week at least).

 

We might only spend 2 hours of focused seat work per day, but we also have music lessons, math games, science field classes, Ted Talks, documentaries, audiobooks in the car, art studio time, videography, football practice, etc throughout the day that is not done at the school table and adds great value to dc education and learning (some might argue more value than the seat work).

 

Of course, many children in school have enrichment classes/activities too and learn tons outside of class time as well. So, even if 2 hours of focused seat work is the equivalent of overall seat work done for the day in the local ps, I agree with the pp who said that is not the standard to go by. Music and art is often lacking in many ps (and maybe even in some homeschools) and both are proven to be important for learning and education. While it's certainly true that some ps kids aren't getting those things outside of school, it's possible that some homeschooled kids aren't getting them either.

[Spy Car]

And there is no doubt a PS teacher with 32 kids including English Language Learners and mainstreamed special ed students cannot tailor the challenge level to the individual student the way a HS teacher can. Even 10 minutes' worth of math at the appropriate level is better than sitting through a full hour of material that the student mastered years earlier. Not saying that we only spend 10 minutes per day, but if I wanted my kids to make any progress academically while enrolled in PS, I'd have to "afterschool" in addition to the 30 hrs/week they'd be sitting in the classroom. And because of the time needed to "afterschool", our schedule would not permit them to do all the activities that will actually help them build an impressive resume for their college applications like we can while HS.

 

Now if we had the $$$$$ for the private GATE school or lived somewhere that offered a GATE magnet school, then the pros to attending B&M school might very well outweigh the cons. If we win the big Powerball jackpot, you can bet I'd make a big donation to the famous prep school that my grandfather attended on scholarship and another one to the famous prep school my uncle attended in the hopes of securing my kids' slots (as well as helping out some other families afford the tuition there).

 

And those good schools that you would hope to attend (if you hit the lottery) are doing more than the equivalent of 2 hrs a day of engagement with children. You are proving my point.

 

If you are trying to argue that 2 hours a day of great work at home bests what happens in failing schools, I say, so what?

 

What is the standard of measure? If it is "better than failing," I will withdraw.

 

Bill

[briansmama]

The countries that supposedly don't start until 7, like (famously) Finland, pour huge resources into creative pre-schools that actively engage children in the sort of discovery, exploration, and imagination (that is lead by well-paid and well-trained teachers) that I would advocate for. Finland is not a case of "benign neglect" leading to success. They have very intentional ways of educating and building the minds of young children.

 

Finland also has social welfare programs that aim to wipe-out the poverty, hunger, and despair that we—as a society—tend to accept in the United States.

 

Young children ought to be engaged more than 2 hours a day, as is the case in Finland (where they are not just sent loose in the snow). There is massive government run (and tax-payer supported infrastructure) that supports the whole enterprise).

 

Saying students in Finland don't start until 7 gives a very misleading impression of the reality.

 

Bill

I agree with your point that although children in Finland do not begin formal education until age 7, they are still engaged and are offered plenty of enrichment in preschool programs. However, the country's social welfare program cannot be used to explain Finland's educational success (which is actually pretty recent, only after a huge reform in the 60s did Finland begin enjoying educational success). Norway has a similarly low childhood poverty level and social welfare program yet they are not performing nearly as high as Finland, and are in fact comparable to the US. Socioeconomic factors only account for 3 percent of of the variance.

 

I'm currently listening to the audiobook The Smartest Kids in the World and How They Got That Way by journalist Amanda Ripley and it's actually very eye-opening.

[Spy Car]

I agree with your point that although children in Finland do not begin formal education until age 7, they are still engaged and are offered plenty of enrichment in preschool programs. However, the country's social welfare program cannot be used to explain Finland's educational success (which is actually pretty recent, only after a huge reform in the 80s did Finland begin enjoying educational success). Norway has a similarly low childhood poverty level and social welfare program yet they are not performing nearly as high as Finland, and are in fact comparable to the US. Socioeconomic factors only account for 3 percent of of the variance.

 

I'm currently listening to the audiobook The Smartest Kids in the World and How They Got That Way by journalist Amanda Ripley and it's actually very eye-opening.

 

Children that go to school hungry (or stay home and are hungry) have a much more difficult time learning and developing their minds than children who are well-fed and nurtured.

 

Bill

[briansmama]

Bill, I agree completely. But I did want to share what the research shows regarding the educational success of Finland. There are other factors that are making a significant difference.

[LaughingCat]

I don't think 2 hours vs. 6-7 hours is a valid comparison - because I don't believe that the amount of time children are in PS school is directly related to how long it takes to teach them.   Can you imagine if they tried to say "well, it only takes this long to do math, and this long to do science, so we're going to shorten the school day to 4 hours this year" or  "I'll let my kids out early because we finished everything we need to do today"?  The very constraints of being "public" school do not allow these type of changes.   

 

Not to mention that many dual working parents are pushing for more time in school for economic reasons not educational ones.  As an example, in my area we have both 1/2 day K and full day K.   The 1/2 day K kids have no trouble keeping up w/ the full day K kids in 1st - but far more parents put their child in full day K.  It's the obvious choice if your only other option is paying for childcare for the afternoon  - but  completely unrelated to how much they are actually learning during that extra time.

 

 

[Spy Car]

Bill, I agree completely. But I did want to share what the research shows regarding the educational success of Finland. There are other factors that are making a significant difference.

Yes. They are getting good results from the money poured into creating creative Pre-schools. I don't think they'd get the same results with children who were hungry or malnourished, or that simply feeding children (without stimulating their minds) would have the same effect either.

 

It is one of those "necessary vs sufficient" type things.

 

Bill

[8filltheheart]

Yes. They are getting good results from the money poured into creating creative Pre-schools. I don't think they'd get the same results with children who were hungry or malnourished, or that simply feeding children (without stimulating their minds) would have the same effect either.

 

It is one of those "necessary vs sufficient" type things.

 

Bill

Do you believe that children that are living in a loving, nurturing home that does not attend a creative pre-school and is simply parented is going to be able to achieve the same levels of success (pretend intelligence being equal.)

[Spy Car]

Do you believe that children that are living in a loving, nurturing home that does not attend a creative pre-school and is simply parented is going to be able to achieve the same levels of success (pretend intelligence being equal.)

I'm sure it depends. Do I believe it is more likely that a child from a loving, nurturing home that does attend an amazing resource filled pre-school will get more cognitive stimulation and outlet for creative play than the average student that does not? Yes.

 

It that always the case? No. I'm sure there are many homes where people creatively engage their children and live lifestyles that are enriching.

 

But just turning kid's loose, which has its place, is not what is producing the sort of results we are seeing in Finland. These results come via adult effort and an investment of resources. Aka, "busting a hump."

 

Bill

[KathyJo]

School is in session about 180 days a year. I don't know of any elementary school in our area that assigns any summer work. None. I'm fairly confident that is the case in Middle Schools too. I understand that some High School programs (not all) have summer reading lists. 

 

I'm not seeing a lack of creative play time. We have school, piano lessons, and sport teams, and the kiddo still has time to play (both alone, and with friends). If children are not spending their hours glued to a TV or indulging a Mindcraft addiction, it is amazing how much they can get done in a day. Including having time just to be. 

 

Bill

 

Then we are seriously comparing apples and bananas here. The "best" schools around here, the ones parents are trying to get their kids into, send kids home with a packet for summer, and homework every night. My sister finally pulled her kids from one of those sorry excuses when my niece failed a grade (first, I think) NOT because she couldn't read, but because she didn't read fast enough according to their timed tests.

 

In the less desirable schools, kids are more likely to come home with a packet of weed than a packet of homework.  :glare:

 

I definitely agree that once one gets rid of crap TV and video games, or at the very least, severely restricts their use, it's amazing how much can be done in a day.

 

Re: the actual amount of time for school, I'm never sure what people mean. So much of our homeschooling is just reading books, talking about them some, writing about them some. And part is lifestyle. We either homeschool for a few hours a day, or all waking hours, depending on how one looks at it.

[Spy Car]

But you know, a lot of these things sound a lot better than they really are. Many of the classes I took my son to were funish...but in terms of what he got out of it? I don't really know. They'd spend an hour on an art project. 99% of that is just setting up and cleaning up. It's fun, but is it building valuable skills? I think letting my kid scribble with crayons on a big piece of paper would accomplish the same thing without the "class".

 

I'm not dissing these things exactly. I'm just questioning the insistence that they are absolutely necessary or better than other experiences.

 

A lot of places don't have money for "amazing resources".

 

One of the few pre school classes I had any chance to come in contact with was at a local YMCA. They had the class in the rock climbing room that we were in (I just happened to be there with my kids at the same time). Most of the time the instructors screamed at the kids. Great... So I really didn't feel like my kids were missing out on anything.

 

I don't even understand what we are all arguing about. You seem mad because some people dis public schools. Some homeschoolers are mad because it feels like you dis home schools. Sure not all homeschools are great. But not all public schools are great either. So..where is the argument? I don't know everyone personally here, but I can't imagine that all of them are sluffs. I give them the benefit of any doubt. Asking about hours of one on one instruction at home verses what goes on in school is just a discussion. No way is 6 hours of school in a class of 30 the same as 6 hours of one on one instruction. Unless either instructor is in a coma or something. So it's a fair question. How much is somewhat equivalent? There is no easy answer to that.

 

This is a board filled with homeschoolers who ask questions about homeschooling. Swooping in and calling them nutso because you have access to a great school seems unfair to me. That wasn't, to me, the essence of this thread. I can understand why it might be insulting to you, but surely you realize that not everyone has the same circumstances. We aren't talking about other kids and parents in your school who walked away and said they could do a better job and you felt they were wrong. You don't know what goes on at my district schools. So using your experience to say everyone else is nuts just seems unfair.

For the record, I didn't call anyone "nutzo" for not having access to a good school. People who only have substandard schools available to them, and take charge of their children's education (with true committent) are heros as far as I'm concerned. Same for parents who do have access to god school, but feel they can do even better.

 

On the other hand, I'm not too impressed with the attitude that all schools suck, and the minimum effort (or just sending children to play in drainage ditches all day) is equivalent to what happens in highly functioning schools. It ain't the case.

 

BTW, we have had some parents who have walked away from our school because it wasn't somehow the right situation for their child. I have helped several parents get material together to help them home school. One is now back, another moved to a school that was not as difficult for her child with learning disabilities (and had resources to meet her needs).

 

After whatever number of years I've been here, I hardly think I'm "swooping in." Sometimes I think this board needs a voice of reality. And 2 hours a day of homeschool will not get you the equivalent of a full day's instruction at a highly functioning school.

 

I have no doubt that very effective learning can (and does) take place in homeschooling environments. I use some of the very same programs and materials many of you use to have the same opportunities for my child that you have with your children. KWIM?

 

Bill

[kitten18]

What you quoted is a lot of vague education-ese that doesn't actually tell what the students are doing or how it's accomplished. I used to work in educational/textbook publishing, and I know overblown bs when I smell it. ;)

Exactly what I was thinking.  I was a teacher, I can read edu-speak.  It sounds like this, "blah, blah, blah...blah, blah, blah, blah".

It almost never has any correlation to actual outcomes.

[KathyJo]

 

As exmaple

 

Here is the desciption of what My DS who is in PS 4th will do this year for ELA, SS and Science... they also work on Lego mindstorm.. and I know I don't have the knowlege nor ability to cover all what she plan to do

 

 

As Tara pointed out, these are just course descriptions. I could write a similar one to describe what we do every year. These are just written in eduspeak, which I normally avoid like the plague.

 

One of the major differences, unless your children are in a truly exceptional school, is that my children will be interacting with these types of topics through the medium of quality literature instead of textbooks. To me, this makes a huge difference.

[KathyJo]

I love eduspeak.  It is thoroughly amusing.

 

It makes my eyes cross, and I suspect I drool a little.

[Spy Car]

Everything you have said here sounds perfectly reasonable. But I do bristle when you say "people are kidding themselves". That's rather insulting. Like I'm kidding myself that I can't do a decent job. Maybe that isn't what you meant, but that is what I took from it.

I said I think people are kidding themselves if they think 2 hours of homeschooling is equivalent to a full day of instruction at a highly functioning school. I stand by that statement.

 

That is not meant to suggest or imply I think you (or anyone else) isn't doing a decent job.

 

Bill

[8filltheheart]

For the record, I didn't call anyone "nutzo" for not having access to a good school. People who only have substandard schools available to them, and take charge of their children's education (with true committent) are heros as far as I'm concerned. Same for parents who do have access to god school, but feel they can do even better.

 

On the other hand, I'm not too impressed with the attitude that all schools suck, and the minimum effort (or just sending children to play in drainage ditches all day) is equivalent to what happens in highly functioning schools. It ain't the case.

 

BTW, we have had some parents who have walked away from our school because it wasn't somehow the right situation for their child. I have helped several parents get material together to help them home school. One is now back, another moved to a school that was not as difficult for her child with learning disabilities (and had resources to meet her needs).

 

After whatever number of years I've been here, I hardly think I'm "swooping in." Sometimes I think this board needs a voice of reality. And 2 hours a day of homeschool will not get you the equivalent of a full day's instruction at a highly functioning school.

 

I have no doubt that very effective learning can (and does) take place in homeschooling environments. I use some of the very same programs and materials many of you use to have the same opportunities for my child that you have with your children. KWIM?

 

Bill

Bill, I think the issue, from my perspective, is simply that you believe that unstructured play.....be that whatever it is--digging outside, building with Legos, putting on plays, playing with dolls, whatever--is inferior to "what happens in highly functioning schools." You claim that is the case. I say prove that unstructured play is inferior. ;) You expect us to accept a premise that to me doesn't fall under the "presumed true" category. I am not even saying compared to bad schools bc that is an absurd pt of comparison. I want the best for my children. Period.

 

I do not accept that preschool is better than a loving, nurturing home environment. (and trust me, that definition does not include any formal academics at all in my definition.) They play. They learn the invaluable skill of self-entertainment. We read. We talk. I parent. We hike. I take them to parks......the same things that all good parents do. Nor do I accept that full school length days are necessary for great primary grade outcomes. The difference is a fundamental pov of what is important for cognitive development. I do not accept that formal environments or adult-lead projects are superior to imaginative play for young children.

 

You are welcome to disagree. I have no doubt that your ds is experiencing a great school environment. I am not suggesting that what he has isn't wonderful for him.

 

But, what you are saying is what I am giving my children is inferior and ultimately deprives them being able to achieve the same quality outcome. You say:

Do I believe it is more likely that a child from a loving, nurturing home that does attend an amazing resource filled pre-school will get more cognitive stimulation and outlet for creative play than the average student that does not? Yes.

I would say that the REAL outcomes of my kids disproves your contention.....which is simply that, what you believe. It is not given.

 

FWIW, I did find several of Regentrude's posts bc I was pretty sure she was the one that posted similarly. She did. She explicitly states not doing preschool with her kids. That the only do very short hrs of academic work. (and if you missed my edit up above, there is a link there where she states that her kids only do 4 hrs in 6th grade and 4.5 if 7th.) So, unless we are both complete anomalies, there are 2 families with completely different POV from yours that have somehow managed to have kids that were apparently not the slightest bit deprived by not attending "an amazing resource filled pre-school" in order to get "more cogntive stimulation and creative play" than simply being at home with mom.

[msk]

"Home school is attitude, philosophy, and all the time you can give.  Public schools are saying that your life is more important than your child's and hoping the public school eventually delivers an adult you'll be able to live with and eventually be proud of."  (Quote from a post earlier in this thread)

 

Statements like this make it sound like the writer believes all homeschooling parents love their children more than all PS parents, and that all PS parents are utterly selfish and neither have nor want anything to do with their kids.  Saying "I obviously love my kids much more than you love yours" is just about the rudest thing you can say to a person, in my opinion.

 

Perhaps this is not quite what this poster meant (although I know there are people here who honestly believe this).  When I occasionally open the agony threads here about "my sister/mother-in-law/rival at church is anti-homeschooling and is being mean to me" I often wonder whether these mean, passive-aggressive conversations begin because the HSer has been saying things like what I quoted above, either by accident or knowingly.

 

It's great that people are proud of their choices and believe in their reasons for them, but please know that implying that everyone who is different from you is selfish and unloving is the kind of thing that puts some people off homeschooling, too.  (I realize almost nobody is reading this thread by now, but I had to try...)

[boscopup]

K-2 can easily have a meaningful education in 2 hours. 3-12, not so much.

 

And I don't bust my hump at all. I talk to my children, read to them, and parent them. I don't spend much time trying to do anything educational for my PreK kids, and I largely let them go play outside (in pastures, since we have no drainage ditches to play in). My kids are incredibly imaginative, self-entertaining, inquisitive, and good at thinking. Though the two that didn't go to school for K-1 are a bit better at problem solving and critical thinking. I can't say whether that was due to school or just personality differences. I will say that my oldest actually regressed a bit in school, losing his enthusiasm for learning and reading. He was so physically tired at the end of the day, that he really wasn't up to reading or doing much of anything really. When I brought him home, he started reading a LOT more, started studying things that interested him (history and science topics), and became more creative again. It was a striking difference. And he had not been at a failing school (it was a decent private school, where a lot of the parents are engineers and other professionals).

 

My middle son's K year included about an hour of formal school. That really was sufficient. I could not do my 4th grader's school in 2 hours. One hour per grade level is about right for a good education, one on one.

[Spy Car]

Bill, I think the issue, from my perspective, is simply that you believe that unstructured play.....be that whatever it is--digging outside, building with Legos, putting on plays, playing with dolls, whatever--is inferior to "what happens in highly functioning schools." You claim it isn't the case. I say prove that it isn't. ;)

I believe unstructured play is "necessary" but not "sufficient." I also believe that a great deal of learning can (and should be) done in ways that capitalize on young children's love of play.

 

You can have both.

 

You expect us to accept a premise that to me doesn't fall under the "presumed true" category. I am not even saying compared to bad schools bc that is an absurd pt of comparison. I want the best for my children. Period.

I have no doubt you want the best for your children. Me too.

 

I do not accept that preschool is better than a loving, nurturing home environment.

Me neither. One can have a loving home and have a great preschool experience. A loving nurturing home Is certanly the more important of the two. But people can have both.

 

(and trust me, that definition does not include any formal academics at all in my definition.) They play. They learn the invaluable skill of self-entertainment. We read. We talk. I parent. We hike. I take them to parks......the same things that all good parents do.

I don't doubt you are a good parent.

 

Nor do I accept that full school length days are necessary for great primary grade outcomes. The difference is a fundamental pov of what is important for cognitive development. I do not accept that formal environments or adult-lead projects are superior to imaginative play for young children.

Depends in part on ones definition of *formal*. If it means "with intention" (my accepted definition) I think *formal*has a place. If *formal* is being used as a synonym for "stiff" or "age-inappropriate," I'm with you.

 

There is also a big difference between "adult lead projects" (which are "easy," and have their place) and adults creating and facilitating opportunities for creative discovery (which take a lot of work behind the scenes). I'm a big fan of children learning though playful means melded with "intention."

 

You are welcome to disagree. I have no doubt that your ds is experiencing a great school environment. I am not suggesting that what he has isn't wonderful for him.

Thanks for that.

 

But, what you are saying is what I am giving my children is inferior and ultimately deprives them being able to achieve the same quality outcome. You say:

 

I would say that the REAL outcomes of my kids disproves your contention.....which is simply that, what you believe. It is not given.

 

FWIW, I did find several of Regentrude's posts bc I was pretty sure she was the one that posted similarly. She did. She explicitly states not doing preschool with her kids. That the only do very short hrs of academic work. (and if you missed my edit up above, there is a link there where she states that her kids only do 4 hrs in 6th grade and 4.5 if 7th.) So, unless we are both complete anomalies, there are 2 families with completely different POV from yours that have somehow managed to have kids that were apparently not the slightest bit deprived by not attending "an amazing resource filled pre-school" in order to get "more cogntive stimulation and creative play" than simply being at home with mom.

You snipped my quote to create a different impression than what I actually wrote in full context. That isn't kosher.

 

I never said any child that doesn't go to Pre-school is deprived. That is false. You know better than that. Please do not take the low road.

 

Bill

[chiguirre]

I said I think people are kidding themselves if they think 2 hours of homeschooling is equivalent to a full day of instruction at a highly functioning school. I stand by that statement.

What is a full day of instruction at a highly functioning school? Seriously, what do they do all day at an excellent public school?

 

How much time is spent having one kid solve a math problem while the rest are supposed to be watching (but, ime, are actually daydreaming or reading under their desk)? How much time is spent filling out short answer, T/F, multiple choice and matching worksheets? How much time is spent copying definitions from the glossary? How much time is spent in taking turns reading aloud from a textbook? I remember spending full days doing these mind numbing tasks for hours on end at my well regarded public school.

[Spy Car]

What is a full day of instruction at a highly functioning school? Seriously, what do they do all day at an excellent public school?

 

How much time is spent having one kid solve a math problem while the rest are supposed to be watching (but, ime, are actually daydreaming or reading under their desk)? How much time is spent filling out short answer, T/F, multiple choice and matching worksheets? How much time is spent copying definitions from the glossary? How much time is spent in taking turns reading aloud from a textbook? I remember spending full days doing these mind numbing tasks for hours on end at my well regarded public school.

Well, this year we have the most out-of-the-box teacher in the whole school. A guy filled with enthusiasm, love of technology, great literature, and learning.

 

Oh, and did I mention he is a homeschooler? His wife obviously takes the lead while he's working, but he is very active with his children's educations as well.

 

There is no time wasted in this class. And, as he says when we speak, he is trying to bring some "homeschool" into the classroom.

 

Bill

[KathyJo]

Well, this year we have the most out-of-the-box teacher in the whole school. A guy filled with enthusiasm, love of technology, great literature, and learning.

 

Oh, and did I mention he is a homeschooler? His wife obviously takes the lead while he's working, but he is very active with his children's educations as well.

 

There is no time wasted in this class. And, as he says when we speak, he is trying to bring some "homeschool" into the classroom.

 

Bill

 

After spending all this time telling us how it would be hard for homeschoolers to replicate the PS atmosphere, the example you finally give is that the teacher is trying to simulate homeschool.  :lol:

[Spy Car]

After spending all this time telling us how it would be hard for homeschoolers to replicate the PS atmosphere, the example you finally give is that the teacher is trying to simulate homeschool. :lol:

I think there are some great aspects of home education—which is why I am deeply involved in home education in my home too. I'm very happy to have a teacher who embraces the best of many worlds. That is my best case scenario.

 

With regard to my comments about it being virtually impossible for anyone to recreate the Kindergarten experience children enjoy in our school, the comments stand. There is too much for an individual to attempt to duplicate. It would be fool-hearty, and just lead to "burn out."

 

That does not mean the K experience we had is the only valid K experience a child could have, or that people are depriving their children by using home appropriate methods, or any other such nonsense. I'm just saying, that for a school experience our K program "rocked."

 

I was pretty blown away. And I think we had a pretty good thing going at home.

 

Please don't be defensive. There is more than one way to approach learning. Not all schools are wasting children's time, just like all homeschoolers aren't spending their day eating bon-bons and playing World of Warcraft (or is it Mindcraft? :D).

 

Bill

[chiguirre]

Well, this year we have the most out-of-the-box teacher in the whole school. A guy filled with enthusiasm, love of technology, great literature, and learning.

 

Oh, and did I mention he is a homeschooler? His wife obviously takes the lead while he's working, but he is very active with his children's educations as well.

 

There is no time wasted in this class. And, as he says when we speak, he is trying to bring some "homeschool" into the classroom.

 

Bill

That's great! But, seriously, what do they do all day? What does a typical day actually consist of?

 

I'm looking for nitty gritty details of what a great public school does. All I've got around me are mediocre public and private schools that spend their days filling out worksheets, reading out loud in turn, having each kid take a turn for math and then more worksheets.

[LaughingCat]

That's great! But, seriously, what do they do all day? What does a typical day actually consist of?

 

I'm looking for nitty gritty details of what a great public school does. All I've got around me are mediocre public and private schools that spend their days filling out worksheets, reading out loud in turn, having each kid take a turn for math and then more worksheets.

FWIW  I know at my local PS (above average?  I have not ever heard "great" as a descriptor for it )they do some of the same "extras" that people here talk about doing - dissecting a owl pellet is the one that has stuck in my head for some reason.

[jennynd]

 

 

As Tara pointed out, these are just course descriptions. I could write a similar one to describe what we do every year. These are just written in eduspeak, which I normally avoid like the plague.

 

One of the major differences, unless your children are in a truly exceptional school, is that my children will be interacting with these types of topics through the medium of quality literature instead of textbooks. To me, this makes a huge difference.

 

 

 

 

What you quoted is a lot of vague education-ese that doesn't actually tell what the students are doing or how it's accomplished. I used to work in educational/textbook publishing, and I know overblown bs when I smell it. ;)

 

 

We do have weekly newspaper and you guys like it or not. It was quite fantaic. The teacher took last year newsletter off the internet or I sure will send you the link., Kids work as teams and the read, they discuss and they present what they learnd. They kids does secience experiement. They plan it, brain storm it, and make to work. The kids also does mini project like spegathtti bridge, they raise grayfish and obesrve each day. I think I saw a picture of last year kids dissect it at the end. There are parents vounteer come in to do projects with the kids based on what their own real life knowlege.

 

I know I can not match that. I do not have the varity of background and I do not have the knowledge and resource to do them all. I can teach science and math, that is it....Sure you can deny all you want but there are great PS. Our principal made it very clear when we visit school that he pays no emphasis on standardized test and I only see one practice booklet about standardized test all year long and yet this new pricipal have a quite good standardise test results this year. (this is his 3rd year). I feel he IS doing what is right for the kids, and I trust him.

 

 

I am sure many of the Mom here knows math upside down, knows science inside out. Knows everything related to literature/art/instruments that can teaches your kids. I know I can not and we happen to have a great school. therefore, I send my kids to school.

 

As for you super Moms can do it all. Good for you.

 

And again, I do not see a kids in school doing seat work for 3 hours and spend the rest of days does what you all are doing with kids like music, PE/art  are so bad. especially they are taught by professional.. free. Sure some school works are boring, and yes, DS did have summer work from school that took him 5 mins a day....so I really don't understand what is the problem...

 

many of the benifit, especially the oppurtunity that the kids interact with kids their age. that is very important in my book

[jennynd]

Then we are seriously comparing apples and bananas here. The "best" schools around here, the ones parents are trying to get their kids into, send kids home with a packet for summer, and homework every night. My sister finally pulled her kids from one of those sorry excuses when my niece failed a grade (first, I think) NOT because she couldn't read, but because she didn't read fast enough according to their timed tests.

 

MANY of the homeschooler kids doesn't even have summer here. they work through summer. So why a little summer work from PS is so bad??

 

DS had summer work took him 5 mins/day to finish

[Haiku]

As for you super Moms can do it all. Good for you.

 

You seem defensive. Remember, this is a homeschool forum. The people here are generally going to be of the opinion that homeschooling is better than schooling.

 

In our family, 2/3 of the kids are/were homeschooled. We adopted an older child for whom homeschooling didn't work. We put her in school. She got a good education and is now in college. I know that schools are not all bad. For me, however, the downsides tend to outweigh the upsides, and school is not my first choice.

 

I think that debates about how much time people spend relative to schools and whose environment is richer and more stimulating are fruitless. Evidence shows that homeschooled kids do fine pretty much regardless of the approach their parents took to educating them at home. Elite schools woo homeschoolers. It's widely recognized that homeschooled kids make good college students. Imo, we are past the "Can homeschooled kids keep up?" debates, but when people come along and insist that schools have some magic quality that kids really need, I see that we've not all reached that understanding yet ... even those of us participating on a homeschooling board.

 

Bill comes across to me as somewhat antagonistic to homeschooling, despite his strident assertions that he's not, but I find it interesting that even though his kid apparently goes to an amazing school that the rest of us could never hope to emulate, he still feels the need to supplement with home-based instruction. I don't feel the need to supplement my kids' main education (at home) with part-time school.

[Spy Car]

Remember, this is a homeschool forum.

No it's not. It is a forum for people who are I interested in classical education at home. and it specifically includes "afterschoolers" (like me). We even have out own sub-forum.

 

Bill comes across to me as somewhat antagonistic to homeschooling, despite his strident assertions that he's not, but I find it interesting that even though his kid apparently goes to an amazing school that the rest of us could never hope to emulate, he still feels the need to supplement with home-based instruction. I don't feel the need to supplement my kids' main education (at home) with part-time school.

Good grief.

 

Bill

[Haiku]

No it's not. It is a forum for people who are I interested in classical education at home. and it specifically includes "afterschoolers" (like me). We even have out own sub-forum.

 

True, but the majority of people who post here are homeschoolers, so coming here and getting offended that people think homeschooling is the best way to educate their kids is a little silly.

 

 

 

Good grief.

 

That's how you have always come across to me. Imo, you seem to feel that good schools are better than good homeschools. Maybe you don't intend it, but that's how your comments strike me.

[KathyJo]

MANY of the homeschooler kids doesn't even have summer here. they work through summer. So why a little summer work from PS is so bad??

 

DS had summer work took him 5 mins/day to finish

 

My kids work through the summer. The difference is the way the hours add up. During the school year, the majority of a child's time is spent on going to school, doing homework, and meeting the essentials for life (eating and sleeping). That's a huge number of hours. How many hours are left for the child to engage in creative play and pursuing his own interests?

 

See, hours are limited. Then there's the stress factor. You can call it something else if you like, but children need some downtime, too. Creative play and pursuing one's own interests generally don't happen when one is tired and possibly stressed.

 

That leaves children with summertime. EXCEPT, now many are getting school work then, too. Of course, I maintain an earlier argument that I made, that children who have been so limited in opportunities for creative play and pursuing their own interests are going to have a more difficult time getting back to that place in the quarter of a year they have to themselves.

 

Your child participated in a school newspaper. My oldest son is writing a book on zoology for young children. The next two make board games. Opportunities abound, wherever one is.

 

I am not a Super Mom, though I may make my children call me that for the rest of the day. It saddens me that you feel like you couldn't do what I do every day. Ten years ago, *I* couldn't do the things I do now, and I didn't know the things I know now. I grow and learn with my children.

 

Bottom line: I have yet to see one single thing mentioned here that made me think, "Aw. I wish I could provide that." And don't get me wrong; I do occasionally hear about some awesome event that I wish we could replicate. But I can't think of one that a public school provided. Y'all can love your public schools. I'm not asking you not to. You're certainly free to think your child is getting better there than mine is at home. I have no chip on my shoulder about homeschooling. I am the freakiest of freaky homeschoolers who wouldn't trade it for anything. That's not what this argument is about, not for me.

 

What I believe, from experiences in the classroom as a child as well as in the homeschool as a parent, is that public schools can never give back as much as they take away. For every awesome class project, an opportunity for an equally awesome project tailor-made to the child's needs and interests was lost. 

[Spy Car]

True, but the majority of people who post here are homeschoolers, so coming here and getting offended that people think homeschooling is the best way to educate their kids is a little silly.

You are inventing untruths to play to the crowd. It is an ugly tactic. I fully appreciate the value of home education, and admire people who take on the task of educating their children with dillagence. There are some inherent advantages to the sort of one-on-one tutoring and mentoring that can happen in the home, as well as the freedom to tailor learning to an individual child.

 

Schools can have advantages in bringing a lot of resources to the classroom, and ones that may be beyond what an individual could pull off.

 

Does that mean there is only one good road to a good education? Of course not!

 

We home educate/afterschool (call it what you will) because I STRONGLY believe it the power of home education, and want to share those benefits with my child. And I hope it will make the education he gets at a good public school more excellent.

 

I know it goes against the grain (and the strident ideology of some) to suggest that there are some good schools in America. But that's the case. Like it, or not.

 

People who believe all schools are like "rat cages" or just wasting kids time, are wrong. Those who think 2 hours a day at home will match the instruction that happens in a good school (at any grade level) are deluding themselves.

 

Are there failing public schools? Sure. Are the public schools that skate by with the minimum? Sure. Are there excellent public schools? Yes, there are. I'm pretty sure all the same could be said of homeschools too.

 

That's how you have always come across to me. Imo, you seem to feel that good schools are better than good homeschools. Maybe you don't intend it, but that's how your comments strike me.

Well, it think that has to do with you, and not the words I've actually written (which you dismiss) as somehow not reflective of my thinking, when they are.

 

Bill

[KathyJo]

I think there are some great aspects of home education—which is why I am deeply involved in home education in my home too. I'm very happy to have a teacher who embraces the best of many worlds. That is my best case scenario.

 

With regard to my comments about it being virtually impossible for anyone to recreate the Kindergarten experience children enjoy in our school, the comments stand. There is too much for an individual to attempt to duplicate. It would be fool-hearty, and just lead to "burn out."

 

That does not mean the K experience we had is the only valid K experience a child could have, or that people are depriving their children by using home appropriate methods, or any other such nonsense. I'm just saying, that for a school experience our K program "rocked."

 

I was pretty blown away. And I think we had a pretty good thing going at home.

 

Please don't be defensive. There is more than one way to approach learning. Not all schools are wasting children's time, just like all homeschoolers aren't spending their day eating bon-bons and playing World of Warcraft (or is it Mindcraft? :D).

 

Bill

 

Honestly, you still haven't given an example of what I can't duplicate. Or rather, what you think I'd want to, because you seem to be working on the presupposition that just because it rocked for y'all, that other people would care about the same activities.

 

And I'm not sure why you think I'm defensive. I disagree with you, but Bill, I've been doing this for more than a decade. I am happy where I am, wouldn't trade places with you for the world, and I'm content that you feel the same way. :-) What I do feel is frustrated that you're telling other homeschoolers here, many of whom don't have years of experience under their belts to call on, they they can't do it as well. Maybe that's not your intention, but it is how it comes off. 

 

The reality is quite simply which experiences we each feel are most important. I reject the ones you obviously find most important, if they can only be found in the classroom. And you reject mine as less important. That's okay. If y'all were just arguing the pros and cons of different types of activities, honestly, I probably would have gotten bored with the discussion and wandered off instead of commenting. But when you start arguing that no one could possibly do what a good public school can do, well then I want to argue, because of that presupposition in there that I would want to.

 

Make my bon-bons 70% dark chocolate, but you can keep the Warmindcraft. :-)

[Haiku]

Does that mean there is only one good road to a good education? Of course not!

 

You needn't convince me of that. Remember, I have a child who graduated from a public school and is now enrolled in a private liberal arts college (with a large scholarship, I might add ... and this child came to us at 11 working on at a 1st grade level, so I fully recognize that the schools she attended benefited her enormously educationally). My first choice was to homeschool her, but that didn't work, and I was flexible enough to realize that there is not only one good road to a good education.

 

Well, it think that has to do with you, and not the words I've actually written (which you dismiss) as somehow not reflective of my thinking, when they are.

 

Perhaps that is the case, but I have read what you have written over several years, and I have always gotten the feeling that you think home education is ok, but really, the kids who went to the excellent public schools are going to the be the ones ahead in the end. I accept your words at face value if you say it's not true, but you still come across that way.

 

You are inventing untruths to play to the crowd. It is an ugly tactic.

 

The comment about being offended that homeschoolers think homeschooling is better was not directed at you ... it was to the woman who listed some vague objectives of her kid's class and said she could never do that at home and then called those of us who are satisfied with our children's home educations "Super Moms" in a rather pejorative way.

[8filltheheart]

. Those who think 2 hours a day at home will match the instruction that happens in a good school (at any grade level) are deluding themselves.

Bill

It is this repeated comment that makes me believe I did not distort your comments in my snip of your post. You have stated it and restated it repeatedly. (Eta: my snip was not a distortion bc if we are delusional that they are receiving the same quality of education, then that must mean they are being deprived of something that they would be receiving in an institutional setting. If they are not being deprived of something, how is it delusional to believe it is equal or better academically?)

 

I am not delusional. I know exactly the education my children are receiving. I am most definitely NOT comparing them to some crappy school. I really don't compare my kids' education to ps education bc I philosophically disagree with how public schools approach education, excellent or otherwise. I compare their educations to what I believe is the best methodology and outcomes for them individually at each stage of their development.

 

But, for the sake of discussion, I am willing to compare the 2 and I in no way believe that an excellent classroom environment is better than what my kids receive at home. And for little children, that includes in under 2 hrs----hence delusional by your words.

 

While our family does require much longer hrs as our kids are older, I am confident that Regentrude is not delusional in believing her kids are getting a superior middle school education in 4 hrs than an excellent ps. I am actually confident that they are based on her posts and the outcomes of her children.

 

If we are "delusional," logically the long term outcomes of this educational approach would be inferior to excellent public schools. It is not simply an anomaly that our kids are academically, not only successful, but advanced beyond peers.

 

It really is insulting to be repeatedly told we are delusional.