20/20 episode last night

[nmoira]

In early colonial days, there was a very high degree of literacy in their society - all without regulation and oversight

 

Really? This is an excerpt from the The Massachusetts School Laws of 1642:

 

 

This court, taking into consideration the great neglect of many parents and masters in training up their children in learning, and labor, and other implyments which may be profitable to the common wealth, do hereupon order and decree, that in euery towne the chosen men appointed for managing the prudentiall affajres of the same shall henceforth stand charged with the care of the redresse of this evill, so as they shalbee sufficiently punished by fines for the neglect thereof, upon presentment of the grand iury, or other information or complaint in any Court within this iurisdiction; and for this end they, or the greater number of them, shall have power to take account from time to time of all parents and masters, and of their children, concerning their calling and implyment of their children, especially of their ability to read and understand the principles of religion and the capitall lawes of this country, and to impose fines upon such as shall refuse to render such accounts to them when they shall be required

 

http://www.quaqua.org/pilgrim.htm

[creekland]

In early colonial days, there was a very high degree of literacy in their society - all without regulation and oversight - without government schools and without 13 plus years of formal education.

Beth

 

I'd love to see your support for this as it is contrary to everything I've learned. As I was taught both in school and from my relatives (not Colonial days, but late 1800 - early 1900s) it was the wealthy who could read and were highly educated. The "farmers" you talk about were the wealthy land owners. The common man who tended to work under him (slave or otherwise) had very little education and many couldn't read. Having a signature that was some form of an "x" was common. Public schools were invented so the average and poor had a chance to get an education. The rich had it anyway - farmer or otherwise. Prior to my grandmother's 4th grade education, women in her family couldn't read. Most (poor) men couldn't read much either.

[Anne in CA]

It is always intriguing to me that some people have good experiences with the government and put trust in it, and discount people who have had poor experiences. I, myself, used to be a card carrying liberal, however a very ugly experience with support enforcement changed my whole view of government many years ago. When things started to go south with my oldest's education my husband and I pulled her out when we could see that the same sort of people who knew we did not owe child support but were trying to extort it from us were also trying to get us to educate our child at home when she was tired and hungry and wanted to play, so that they could have fun in school all day and take credit for her education.

 

If you do not have a child who has attended public school you might be surprised at how little school work is actually corrected and returned to students for them to learn from. My oldest dd did not have much school work that was ever corrected until she was home schooled, and boy, did she resent it by the time she was 10 after not having any corrected for years. She had been issued a calculator in 2nd grade and had learned very little math. We did mountains of remedial education with her. She had no LD's that I know of. She was very quiet and flew under the radar so to speak.

 

Many people have good reasons for wanted the government out of their lives. People with good reasons are not paranoid and they are not under educating their kids. FLDS are not people with good reasons, they are subversive. There is a big difference between them and someone like me who has been though a lot with different government agencies and is leery for good reasons.

 

My dh worked in a CC math lab for a year and was shocked at how many people with high school diplomas need to learn fractions and other very simple math. When America was more industrial that was not such a disaster. Now that we are service oriented it is an issue.

[usetoschool]

Here is a page that includes ELL and LD information in the statistics. Subtracting those out still leaves millions illiterate, and not just "functionally" illiterate.

 

http://www.ncsu.edu/csleps/service/Resource_Sheets_Service/Facts%20on%20Literacy.pdf

 

And just for fun, the BBC has a story today about the latest comparisons of countries and education results. The US is 17th...

[brownie]

Regulation in my state doesn't bother me, though it gets on my nerves once in a while just because of the tediousness of handling it. We have required testing in certain grade levels. Although a pain, I think this is fine because I think a parent should know how their kid is doing. So many HS parents think they are doing a great job. IMO the test can provide a needed wake-up call to well-meaning parents. We also have to submit a portfolio. It's a nice keepsake and helps me to re-evaluate what we're doing, reflect on where we've been, and on where we're going. Again, it can be a stressful, time-consuming undertaking but I'm OK with it. Nobody EVER questions what we are doing.

 

Brownie

[psychmom]

Thanks, Ladies! I knew if I posted this here it would generate thoughtful discussion. I don't agree with everything posted, of course, but it has helped to clarify my own thoughts about this topic. Still don't have all of the answers but at least my opinions are better formed. You all are truly awesome!

[Sahamamama]

Not completely on topic, but depending upon where in NJ you are, consider Delaware. You file a registration in September/October that lists your students with basic demographics, and in July you report days attended. That's it.

 

There is no actual attendance requirement, testing, etc.

 

Pretty easy state, and we try to keep it that way. We don't want the same people who have bungled public education screwing things up by trying to tell us what we should do. When we find parents not getting it done (DE is a small state) usually someone tries to mentor the parents or gently nudge them back towards school. In cases of true educational neglect, there are sully other forms of neglect happening at the same time.

Thanks, Jen, for posting this information. We just got back from a week in VA, and I've been crying ever since. You see, we really loved it there -- sigh -- and so now we are wondering how and IF we can leave my elderly parents, so we can (selfishly?) go make a better life for ourselves in a lower-tax, prettier, friendlier, rural, and peaceful part of Virginia.

 

Delaware is lovely, we have friends there and visit a few times a year. But I think my husband is in love with the Shenandoah Valley now, LOL.

 

[back to our regularly scheduled broadcast.....]

[AnnaM]

Regulation in my state doesn't bother me, though it gets on my nerves once in a while just because of the tediousness of handling it. We have required testing in certain grade levels. Although a pain, I think this is fine because I think a parent should know how their kid is doing. So many HS parents think they are doing a great job. IMO the test can provide a needed wake-up call to well-meaning parents. We also have to submit a portfolio. It's a nice keepsake and helps me to re-evaluate what we're doing, reflect on where we've been, and on where we're going. Again, it can be a stressful, time-consuming undertaking but I'm OK with it. Nobody EVER questions what we are doing.

 

Brownie

 

Testing does very little to tell parents how their children are doing. What about those using a mastery curriculum like MUS? Most using that math will have low test scores until upper elementary or even into jr high. What happens when those students don't do well? Will the government assume they aren't learning? If there is a standardized test, there has to be a standardized curriculum. That is the only way to get "accurate" results. I homeschool because I am against standardizing education.

[Murphy101]

Testing does very little to tell parents how their children are doing. What about those using a mastery curriculum like MUS? Most using that math will have low test scores until upper elementary or even into jr high. What happens when those students don't do well? Will the government assume they aren't learning? If there is a standardized test, there has to be a standardized curriculum. That is the only way to get "accurate" results. I homeschool because I am against standardizing education.

 

WSS. Though I will clarify. I personally have a standard for the curricula I use and I'm against the the govt telling me what the standard should be.

[creekland]

Testing does very little to tell parents how their children are doing. What about those using a mastery curriculum like MUS? Most using that math will have low test scores until upper elementary or even into jr high. What happens when those students don't do well? Will the government assume they aren't learning? If there is a standardized test, there has to be a standardized curriculum. That is the only way to get "accurate" results. I homeschool because I am against standardizing education.

 

PA requires testing in 3rd, 5th, and 8th. It doesn't seem like it would conflict with what you say happens.

 

I also disagree that testing isn't useful. It was very useful for me. I pulled my guys out after 8th, 6th, and 4th respectively. With my middle son testing showed me he didn't know how to do fractions. I had assumed he did, but he had only learned to do them with a calculator at school and somehow I had missed that in the two years he'd been home. Two days later he was right on track.

 

Youngest was 2 years behind in math when he came home. Testing showed me he was catching up nicely and by 8th grade he was testing at the 85% nationally (higher within our local school).

 

I agree that there's no need to test the very early grades, but after a bit of learning has gone on, it becomes quite useful.

 

I've never seen anyone who has actively been homeschooling "fail" the tests. I've seen some where gaps were found out (and filled), but unless you consider learning basic math and reading to be "teaching to the test," we never had to do it for my guys to do well. They did absolutely no test prep for these tests.

[jenbrdsly]

What I would like to see is an overall better public school to homeschool relationship. I wish we could work together to improve education, rather than bringing the other down. I love talking to the teacher friends that I do have to ask questions, get ideas, and listen to what they have trouble with. It would be nice to be able to go into the schools for help for say my dyslexic son. However, in some homeschooling circles the mentioning of public schools will be greeted with scorn and contempt. Public schooled children are heathens and inferrior, their parents must hate them, etc. I have heard it all! If we could work together to improve education for every child we would be able to see those that are slipping through the cracks for whatever reason.

 

 

 

YES! I'm an Afterschooling mom and former ps teacher. I believe that teachers have a lot to learn from Homeschool parents and vice versa.

[jenbrdsly]

I'd love to see your support for this as it is contrary to everything I've learned. As I was taught both in school and from my relatives (not Colonial days, but late 1800 - early 1900s) it was the wealthy who could read and were highly educated. The "farmers" you talk about were the wealthy land owners. The common man who tended to work under him (slave or otherwise) had very little education and many couldn't read. Having a signature that was some form of an "x" was common. Public schools were invented so the average and poor had a chance to get an education. The rich had it anyway - farmer or otherwise. Prior to my grandmother's 4th grade education, women in her family couldn't read. Most (poor) men couldn't read much either.

 

 

Yes! This isn't a colonial example, but even Abraham Lincoln's own mother couldn't read.

[nmoira]

 

 

Yes! This isn't a colonial example, but even Abraham Lincoln's own mother couldn't read.

 

 

Women, servants, and slaves didn't count.

[creekland]

Women, servants, and slaves didn't count.

 

I'm glad that changed... education is a right for all.

 

Any chance you have a reputable link for the literacy rate at the time? I'm curious. I might have time to google later today. Time will tell.

[Murphy101]

, on 25 November 2012 - 06:08 PM, said:

What I would like to see is an overall better public school to homeschool relationship. I wish we could work together to improve education, rather than bringing the other down. I love talking to the teacher friends that I do have to ask questions, get ideas, and listen to what they have trouble with. It would be nice to be able to go into the schools for help for say my dyslexic son. However, in some homeschooling circles the mentioning of public schools will be greeted with scorn and contempt. Public schooled children are heathens and inferrior, their parents must hate them, etc. I have heard it all! If we could work together to improve education for every child we would be able to see those that are slipping through the cracks for whatever reason.

 

I want absolutely zero relationship with public primary schools. In fact, I'm radical in that I don't even think they should exist. Or more accurately, I don't think they should be mandatory. I think our nation's children would be better served with community schools, charity schools, and so forth.

[Murphy101]

I found this rather quickly and interesting.

 

http://www.history.org/foundation/journal/winter11/literacy.cfm

 

[nmoira]

 

 

I'm glad that changed... education is a right for all.

 

Any chance you have a reputable link for the literacy rate at the time? I'm curious. I might have time to google later today. Time will tell.

 

IIRC, the literacy rate among those who count was higher in the US colonies than in England (and higher in the northern colonies than the south), perhaps approaching 90% by 1700. But I think the main variable was the use of signature vs "x." For the purpose of the study, I don't know how "literate" was defined.

 

Hopefully someone will post some good links. I'm utterly unconvinced by the Freakonomics guys on this one.

 

 

 

[zenjenn]

Lisbeth - you hit the nail on the head.

 

That is always the analogy I make. Now, if there is evidence that a parent is starving a child or feeding in a way that is making the child ill, then of course CPS should come in and investigate, provide counseling, and in the worst cases, charges of neglect should be on the table. Yes, there are people who feed their child a diet of McDonald's and doughnuts. Yet just about *anyone* would find it totally an intrusion of freedom for the government to come in and monitor family meals.

 

I think the same policy should exist for education. If there is evidence of educational neglect - if children are not provided with the opportunity to learn and are being kept at home, then I do think it is appropriate for the government to be involved - but otherwise, no.

 

Our state has virtually no regulation (in fact, even the minimal regulation that does exist, I do not think is monitored or enforced at all.) That's fine with me. By the same token, if I lived in a state with more regulations, I think I'd roll with it - but I do find something intrusive about the government telling you you MUST show up with your child at this time and place - like you need to meet with your parole officer or something.

 

I'm not sure where you draw the line precisely, but I do think if you want to preserve freedom (in this or any other area), you have to accept that it is going to come at a cost.

[Murphy101]

I am more interested in this link, which is mildly off topic.

 

http://thriceholy.net/literacy.html

 

I went to it searching for info on whether the slaves were at all literate before they became slaves. Basicly, I suspect the colonist would have viewed literacy as knowing a European language. But the slaves were not plucked from the air. They came from societies and those societies had a culture and those societies had to have some method of communication, however primitive it might have seemed to white men.

 

"Literacy" is a very nebulous term.

 

Is literacy reading on what we currently call a 3rd grade or 6th grade level? (nm that what we require of a 6th grader is far easier than what I suspect Aristotle required of young Alexander the Great or that George Washington endured from his tutors.)

Is literacy the ability to recognize and write one's own name?

Is literacy being able to figure out how to purchase needed items with some level of reliability?

Is literacy knowing the basic laws of the land and ones basic religious doctrines?

 

 

[ElizabethB]

Here is another S/O thread for those interested in historical literacy stats and literacy:

 

http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/442541-historical-literacy-factors-affecting-literacy-rates/page__gopid__4509402#entry4509402

 

Now, off to work on making my children literate!

[creekland]

I found this rather quickly and interesting.

 

http://www.history.o...11/literacy.cfm

 

That link was very interesting! Thanks for sharing it.

 

I'm definitely not seeing where everyone (meaning men) were superbly educated back in the older days... If anything, it seems more common to now (with less xs needed for signatures today), but I personally think (based upon my observations at our average ps) that there are less 18 year olds who are functionally illiterate now than before (functionally defined by being able to read what they need for daily life - not meaning they could talk about the Federalist papers after having read them). I also think the more highly literate folks (can understand the Federalist papers and similar - whether "due" to a college education or "life" experiences) are also a higher percentage of the population now. To get those thoughts I think of just how many colleges are out there and the professors who teach in them - then add other highly educated folks. These will still not be the majority overall as most simply don't care to know that much, but I don't believe there were nearly the same numbers (percentages) back then. The highly educated class was far more rare vs the common class.

 

However, I'm wondering how that number (now) will decline due to technology (texting, internet, etc) and lowering the document levels to 3rd grade level. There is certainly less of a "need" for knowledge now (for the masses) than ever before - except for reading in general. I've seen more and more of a decline in ability just in my 13 years of teaching at the ps. Kids are more dependent on the technology now.

[creekland]

Continuing on with my thoughts from the last post... I think there were more functionally "math" able folks back then. I think technology really put a dent into our common math knowledge. It's just the reading I was talking about in that last post.

[nmoira]

However, I'm wondering how that number (now) will decline due to technology (texting, internet, etc) and lowering the document levels to 3rd grade level. There is certainly less of a "need" for knowledge now (for the masses) than ever before - except for reading in general. I've seen more and more of a decline in ability just in my 13 years of teaching at the ps. Kids are more dependent on the technology now.

 

 

I'm terrified by the idea of a post-literate culture, but whenever I start to despair about the state of the Internet, I go hang out on reddit for awhile. There's something reassuring about huge walls of text.

[ElizabethB]

If you go to my thread linked above for the literacy links, studies that use spelling as a proxy for literacy show higher literacy rates in the late 1800's and early 1900's than now for students who were In school. However, black literacy rates were very low at the time. There are some interesting methods with various marked prints used to educate illiterate black adults.

 

For example, Burnz used her pronouncing print with black adults with great success:

http://www.donpotter.net/pdf/burnz-step-by-step-primer.pdf

 

And Leigh's Pronouncing Print made it easy for ELL students in the late 1800's:

http://www.thephonicspage.org/On%20Reading/leighprint.html

 

 

[LibraryLover]

 

 

 

However, I'm wondering how that number (now) will decline due to technology (texting, internet, etc) and lowering the document levels to 3rd grade level. There is certainly less of a "need" for knowledge now (for the masses) than ever before - except for reading in general. I've seen more and more of a decline in ability just in my 13 years of teaching at the ps. Kids are more dependent on the technology now.

 

I have a little bit of a different take on this as a parent (what you see in your classroom is valid, and I am not debating your observations). My dyslexic child was highly motived to become 'more literate' when DC started role playing (many years ago) on an art website. DC has an amazing imagination, is a good thinker, and was frequently asked to participate. However, early on, DC was kicked out of one group of older kids with a harsh "Learn to spell! Learn to puncturate!" DC cried about it, but was determined to be better. That note was more powerful in moving DC forward than any curricula, my edits. Even DC's tutor saw the change. DC started daily on writing on Word, self-correcting, running spell and grammar check etc. The change was profound.

 

Even I find myself wanting to be a more careful writer; nobody wants to look like a total idiot.

 

I think most of us who have been on the internet for a long time want to sound literate. I do not see young people being immune to that pressure.

[creekland]

If you go to my thread linked above for the literacy links, studies that use spelling as a proxy for literacy show higher literacy rates in the late 1800's and early 1900's than now for students who were In school. However, black literacy rates were very low at the time. There are some interesting methods with various marked prints used to educate illiterate black adults. For example, Burnz used her pronouncing print with black adults with great success: http://www.donpotter.net/pdf/burnz-step-by-step-primer.pdf And Leigh's Pronouncing Print made it easy for ELL students in the late 1800's: http://www.thephonicspage.org/On%20Reading/leighprint.html

 

It wouldn't surprise me at all for spelling to have been better back then. It's rare to find a good speller now. Kids are taught to use spellcheck and trust it from elementary school on. That works a bit, but not all the time. Today I had seniors who didn't realize census was supposed to start with a c... These kids can easily read higher than a 3rd grade level, but it doesn't mean they know how to spell when writing.

 

I have a little bit of a different take on this as a parent (what you see in your classroom is valid, and I am not debating your observations). My dyslexic child was highly motived to be come 'more literate' when DC started role playing (many years ago) on an art website. DC has an amazing imagination and was frequently asked to participate. However, early on, DC was kicked out of one group with a harsh "Learn to spell! Learn to puncturate!" DC cried about it, but was determined to be better. That note was more powerful in moving DC forward than any curricula, my edits. Even DC's tutor saw the change. DC started daily on writing on Word, self-correcting, running spell and grammar check etc. The change was profound. Even I find myself wanting to be a more careful writer; nobody wants to look like a total idiot. I think most of us who have been on the internet for a long time want to sound literate. I do not see young people being immune to that pressure.

 

Actually, I think "the masses" (majority?) will stay with a basic level of literacy and will utilize spell-check, grammar-check, and anything else at their disposal. I expect the literacy rate overall to increase as long as we can reach every child (the original intent of my posts - wanting someone to be certain every child is reached). I just think there will be fewer wanting to delve deeper - just as it is in math now. Many know how to do calculations on their calculator. Few know why they push the buttons they do. Most will trust their calculator over their brain when they get answers even if the answers are horribly off. I doubt that would have happened in the 1800's or early 1900's if we could magically transport a calculator back.

[LibraryLover]

It wouldn't surprise me at all for spelling to have been better back then. It's rare to find a good speller now. Kids are taught to use spellcheck and trust it from elementary school on. That works a bit, but not all the time. Today I had seniors who didn't realize census was supposed to start with a c... These kids can easily read higher than a 3rd grade level, but it doesn't mean they know how to spell when writing.

 

 

 

Actually, I think "the masses" (majority?) will stay with a basic level of literacy and will utilize spell-check, grammar-check, and anything else at their disposal. I expect the literacy rate overall to increase as long as we can reach every child (the original intent of my posts - wanting someone to be certain every child is reached). I just think there will be fewer wanting to delve deeper - just as it is in math now. Many know how to do calculations on their calculator. Few know why they push the buttons they do. Most will trust their calculator over their brain when they get answers even if the answers are horribly off. I doubt that would have happened in the 1800's or early 1900's if we could magically transport a calculator back.

 

 

There will always be people who struggle with math (or anything, really), no matter. Yet the number of tech savvy young students using math, but are not are not math or engineering majors, is staggering. I'm talking about art /design majors. You can not do anything in that world without math. Good drawing skills only get you so far. My artist child is forever measuring, calculating etc in her university art classes. If you don't know basic math, you can't sculpt, you can't design games etc.

 

PS My oldest has a new phone with technology that the guys who walked on the moon didn't have. He thought the learning curve was a bit of a challenge. lol Seriously, even my iPhone challenges me daily. ;) I learn something new about it very frequently. There really is a lot going on in the brain when you've got that teen-y tiny computer in your hands. I think using technology can help us become more intelligent, not less.

[AimeeM]

I want absolutely zero relationship with public primary schools. In fact, I'm radical in that I don't even think they should exist. Or more accurately, I don't think they should be mandatory. I think our nation's children would be better served with community schools, charity schools, and so forth.

 

A woman after my own heart.

[creekland]

There will always be people who struggle with math (or anything, really), no matter. Yet the number of tech savvy young students using math, but are not are not math or engineering majors, is staggering. I'm talking about art /design majors. You can not do anything in that world without math. Good drawing skills only get you so far. My artist child is forever measuring, calculating etc in her university art classes. If you don't know basic math, you can't sculpt, you can't design games etc.

 

This has not changed through the years. Math has always been necessary for many, many things. It's not just abstract. It's seldom meant to be just abstract no more than the letters of the alphabet are (vs words). The difference is that more people now use technology and have forgotten how to do the actual math. A contractor called hubby less than a month ago because he couldn't figure out the diagonal of a rectangle he was building (house foundation). He didn't have his equipment with him to do it and didn't know how to find it out without it... That would likely not have happened in the earlier days when more people knew the math they were working with. Now many are only knowledgable with the equipment (many, not necessarily all). I have had students (regularly) who can do no multiplication at all (not even 2 x 4) without a calculator. If/when they push buttons wrong or have no buttons to push, they are sunk.

 

 

When it comes to math did you see that TedTalk with Wolfram who said we should skip the computation part of math and leave that to computer programming? His reasoning is that computers are a part of our daily life and we can move onto much more advanced equations. He suggests we should skip writing out math problems by hand. :eek:

I really don't like the idea of not learning the why in math. I do like the idea of being able to see it and play around with it more. Somewhere inbetween using his technology and teaching the why behind it would give those who may not be mathy, but more artistic the ability to grasp it better.

 

Obviously I strongly disagree with him - for practical reasons.

[Elizabeth in MN]

Back to the original post - Sunday night some of the FLDS kids from the 20/20 episode were on the Sister Wives episode titled "Mentor Night". It told a little bit more to the whole story.

[LucyStoner]

Children have a fundamental right to a sufficient enough education to get them to a point where THEY can choose how far they wish to go educationally. Anything less IMO exits the territory of "neglect" and enters the territory of abuse. Parents do not own their children and should not proscribe where their adult children can go educationally. I have the right to teach my child at home. I don't misconstrue that as a right to teach them diddly squat or that, say, Lucy Stone or a blue unicorn was the first president of the US.

[LucyStoner]

 

 

Yes! This isn't a colonial example, but even Abraham Lincoln's own mother couldn't read.

 

 

Nor could his father. However his step-mother could and did encourage him a bit and showed pride in his inclination for the written word. If left up to his dad, Abraham Lincoln would have died a subsistence farmer who cared little to nothing for the written word rather than President of the United States.

[Reya]

When the states correct the educational neglect in public schools, then *maybe* I'll bother to listen to this nonsense that more regulations equals better.

 

If 7% of the kids are on grade level, they're doing better than Detroit....

[Reya]

But your children are, in some ways, fed, clothed, and educated by the state, albeit indirectly. The government subsidizes certain crops, like cotton and corn, which means that it's paying for part of your food and clothing. The big states, like Texas and California, have a huge say in what goes into public school textbooks, and some of those changes eventually trickle down to the hsing industry whether we want to admit it or not. Unless you live completely off the grid, grow every crumb of your own food, and weave your own fabric, the government is helping to care for your children, and you are part of the system. So that's really not an effective argument against hsing regulation.

 

It is if you are against subsidies. Just because they are forced on you doesn't mean you have to agree with them.

 

That said, we pay FAR more than our "share" of taxes.

[Mom0012]

I live in a state that requires testing, but it is really a joke. All my child has to do is score above the 21st % on a multiple choice test and he "passes". Also, I can select any test I want and some can be administered at home. If I wasn't teaching my kids, I guess I'd just take the test myself.

 

And I do not mind the testing. I actually do it through our local school system so my kids get practice testing in a group environment. I just don't see its value as a regulator.

 

I also do not believe the government has any business regulating homeschoolers, when they are doing such a poor job with the public school system. It's not a "the ps sucks, so we can suck too". It's that the government stinks at regulating, so what's the point? Furthermore, they could undermine the quality of my homeschool if they were to implement requirements like following the core standards.

[cdrumm4448]

I completely agree that the thought of a bunch of unknown bureaucrats making decisions that affect what I do in my own home is incredibly uncomfortable. But I'm not sure I agree that government regulation in all circumstances is bad...and I think in some cases it is necessary. For example, I believe stricter gun control laws would reduce gun crime, although obviously there will always be law breakers. I've seen a couple of examples of edcuational neglect through homeschooling in my own community--and in both cases, the children had caring parents who did not intend to deprive their children of education. It just ended up working out that way. I don't know what the answer is, but I have a bad feeling that increased regulation will be heading our way one way or another...

 

 

Um, I live outside Chicago (very strict gun laws and an extremely high murder rate). That logic doesn't play out in real life.

 

ETA

 

Sorry, but I cannot and will not be responsible for a small amount of parents who don't actually educate. I'm too busy teaching my kids to spend one second on meaningless paperwork or any other ridiculous stuff the state manages to dream up, as I told Christopher Koch last year (the IL Superintendent).

[duckens]

What would reasonable regulation look like?

 

I believe that in Iowa, we have regulation, but it has many roads and choices.

 

Please forgive me or gently correct me if I get some of this wrong. Our oldest is only in K.

 

1) Starting in 1st grade, we must send in a 1-page form to the school system that declares our intent to homeschool. I believe this must be submitted each year.

 

2) By third grade, your child must do one of the following:

 

a) Take the ITBS standardized test. I have never heard of the school caring one way or another if the child does poorly on this test. Perhaps it is the school's way of saying to the parent,"If you thought your kid was doing alright in math, this is a wake-up call! You can't say you didn't know, and don't complain when they flunk out of algebra!"

 

OR

 

b ) Portfolio: I have no idea to whom this is submitted or what is expected

 

OR

 

c) Visiting Teacher (Option 1) : The school system provides one for free. The teacher visits your home a certain number of times throughout the semester, and the teacher communicates you via telephone or email a certain number of times throughout the semester. The best visiting teachers aspire to be a bridge for the families and the public school system.

 

OR

 

d) Visiting Teacher (Option 2) : If you are unhappy with the idea of the school system providing a visiting teacher, you are welcome to hire one privately and pay for it out of your own pocket. With this option, you do not need to meet as often as the teacher in C is required.

 

--This solves the issue of kids who are test phobic.

--This solves the issue of kids who are unschooled. (My unschooling friend just records as portfolio that they worked on math and measurement by making cookies, and they did science by feeding the worm farm).

--This solves the issue of not wanting a representative of the school system in your home and turning you in to DHS because you have the option to hire your own visiting teacher.

 

On top of all this, I believe that we, as homeschoolers, get to deduct a certain amount or percentage of educational costs from our state taxes. The amount went up this year. ???? Or was on the docket at the statehouse to go up this year???? At least that was in the propaganda released by the state homeschooling organization.

 

 

Just putting this out there:

Another poster, on another thread, mentioned that in states that have regulation, the homeschoolers are respected as actual educators, rather than just truants. It is acknowledged that as homeschoolers, we are not just lazing around, but that we are active (even as unschoolers) in giving our kids the best start possible.

[staceyobu]

 

Just putting this out there:

Another poster, on another thread, mentioned that in states that have regulation, the homeschoolers are respected as actual educators, rather than just truants. It is acknowledged that as homeschoolers, we are not just lazing around, but that we are active (even as unschoolers) in giving our kids the best start possible.

 

I don't think homeschoolers in low regulation states are seen like this. In fact, homeschooling is immensely popular in many states with no regulation. The popularity seems to make it more acceptable because everyone has a friend or neighbor homeschooling.

 

The items you list seem like a lot of busywork...

 

Take the time to fill out a paper that is filed away and nothing is done with it.

 

Take a test but no one checks on the scores.

 

Pay a teacher out of pocket for them to agree that what you are doing is okay.

 

If regulations don't actually prevent kids from "failing" at homeschooling, what good do they actually do?

[duckens]

The items you list seem like a lot of busywork...

 

Yeah, one page of affidavit per year is busywork. :confused1: Compared to many states, I suspect this is NOTHING. We don't have to count days or hours or anything like that. How many pages need to be filled out to register your kids at the local elementary school?

 

This is personal for me. I have children from my past that I love dearly, but were messed up because their mom kept them out of school and "on the run" for over a decade. If even one of the towns/school systems could have caught them for truancy because the paperwork didn't match up, would it have made a difference for those kids?

 

------------------------------------------------------------

 

Take a test but no one checks on the scores.

 

This seems to mostly be a tool for parents, so the parents can't say later, "I didn't know Johnny couldn't do math." If the parents don't know, then they can't help their kids. Giving parents this information (test scores) will keep kids from failing.

 

One mom I spoke to said, "She earned a 22%ile on her math ITBS, so that next year, we did a LOT of math! She brought it up to a 67." In that case, regulation DID keep a child from failing in homeschooling. She resented her mom and the math, but she is competent in a subject that requires a certain amount of skill to succeed in life (checkbook, taxes, insurance, interest rate).

 

------------------------------------------------------------

Pay a teacher out of pocket for them to agree that what you are doing is okay.

 

The teachers are still educated and licensed by the state. They are mandatory reporters, and if abuse is occurring in a home, the teacher can lose her license (and her income) for not reporting. However, some homeschoolers are hostile toward anything from the school system. Sometimes this is for good reason; sometimes this is from the fear sold by those who will benefit financially from that fear. The option of choosing one's own visiting teacher is a fair compromise. Many people find someone through their local church.

 

Teachers go to college for 4+ years because they want children to learn. It's not for the money, and it's certainly not for the glory. Do you really think the teacher, ANY TEACHER, would not speak up if a 17yo was reading and writing on a 1st grade level? Who here wants a home visiting teacher that would not try to make a difference for that 17yo? I sure wouldn't.

 

---------------------------------------------------------

 

If regulations don't actually prevent kids from "failing" at homeschooling, what good do they actually do?

 

1) Regulations DO prevent kids from "failing" at homeschooling. Are they 100% in effectiveness? No, but what is?

 

--Most American kids learn to read, write, and do math in the public school system. If the public school system met 100% of kids educational/emotional/developmental needs, none of us would be homeschooling.

--Milk is a nutritious drink, and I'll bet that nearly all of us have a couple of gallons in the fridge, but is not effective for those who are lactose intolerant.

--We drive a Toyota Corolla because it gets great gas mileage and has few breakdowns. For anyone needing to put three carseats in a car, a Corolla is not an effective choice.

 

2) I think some regulation is better than no regulation. I also think that some regulation is better than a lot of regulation. Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

3) With the specter of regulation, some people opt to not homeschool because they know they couldn't do what was required, no matter how minimal (like filling out a single page affidavit once a year.) If you're not willing to do that tiny amount (ooooo, one page :scared: ), then you shouldn't be homeschooling.

 

4) These regulations also help keep the parents on track. To file with the school system, it says, "I have a plan."

[cdrumm4448]

duckens, the education of my kids is none of the state's business. None. IL is a TRAIN WRECK. No amount of interference, oversight, regulation, legislation will change that. We have plenty of that now and it gets in the way of success. People need FREEDOM. Freedom to succeed and freedom to fail. Over regulation of homeschooling is one small step away from over regulation of parenting. I'm tired of hearing I need to report to anyone other than my own conscience. Personal responsibility brought our country to the top of the heap. Lack of it is tearing it down.

[duckens]

The OP asked our opinions of what "reasonable regulation" would look like, and I gave it.

 

I'm sorry that IL is a train wreck. It sounds like you have to put up with a lot. If I had to do what is required by IL law, it is possible that I would feel the same way as you, Cdrumm. Please try to consider how your world would be different if there was less regulation (instead of the no regulation that the boy in the story experienced).

 

Over regulation of homeschooling is one small step away from over regulation of parenting.

 

I do agree that OVERregulation of homeschooling is one small step away from overregulation of parenting.

 

I do not agree that reasonable regulation of homeschooling is one small step away from overregulation of parenting; and the things I listed in my former post aren't nearly as draconian as what you have to deal with, I'll bet. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

 

Personal responsibility brought our country to the top of the heap

 

Here, again, we'll have to disagree. Responsibility for our fellow man is one of the best things about America, rather than saying, "You're not my problem."

 

Roads, hospitals, fire stations. police, our court system,and, yes, public education are all things that are done cooperatively because we care for one another in our communities.

 

I care about kids that are not my own. I have seen the results of what happens when kids do not have proper education, and I've seen more of that out of the school system than in it. It sincerely saddens me.

 

***Disclaimer: I know people both in the school system and out of it that have been failed educationally.***

 

Consider the young man in the 20/20 piece. He is 18, and trying to learn what he needs (educationally) to be functional in society. He started at a 1st grade educational level, and it is against the odds that he will even reach a high school equivalency test.

 

This saddens me personally because he will have difficulty supporting himself and any children he has. He will have trouble keeping stable work. He will have trouble saving for any of the normal crises in life (illness, car breaks down, invitation to a wedding or birthday party). It is heartbreaking to live that way.

 

Then the fiscal conservative in me kicks in, and I calculate the amount he will drain from society because he never got the basic education he deserved. Housing, food, medical care, legal needs, and any further education will be subsidized by the taxpayer, no matter how hard he works for most of his life. And any children he has will most likely be in that category, too, because they are almost guaranteed to grow up in poverty.

 

So, yeah, I'm willing to jump through the hoop of filling out ONE sheet of paper a year (per child), and I will send my child once a year for testing, and I will welcome our visiting teacher into our home. To me, this is a small sacrifice to try to save even one kid like the guy in the story. I want kids like him to get the very best education so they can get good jobs, create lots of jobs, add value to our economy, and pay taxes into the system. I want that for ALL of our kids, homeschooling, private schooled, and public schooled.

 

I'm sorry that even the limited amount of regulation we have in Iowa is still too big a price for you to pay.

[creekland]

I'm with you Duckens. There's no way I can say "I've got mine," or "I'll take care of mine," and "tough luck to those of you who lost the birth lottery and didn't get caring parents."

 

I care that ALL kids have a chance to get a basic education and support reasonable legislation to try to ensure that it happens.

 

A basic education is a right not a privilege.

[stripe]

Where are the shows highlighting the positive aspects of homeschooling? Maybe I just haven't run across it, but it seems pretty one sided to me.

I have, but they usually involve child prodigies, or other such geniuses.

 

I just read an article about a homeschooled boy in Pennsylvania who had been groomed by his father to have sex with his mother from the age of eight, which went on for years, and he never knew this was wrong. Somehow it was implied that the kid didn't know this was wrong because he'd been homeschooled; I was rather troubled by this idea given that a) it's not really his job for a victim, much less a child, to know something wrong, and it's also not really the job of a school or a kid's classmates to point out that incest and child molestation are wrong, it's the responsibility of the parents and potential abusers to know something is wrong and not do it, and b ) Pennsylvania is a higher regulation state and it didn't stop this anyway.

 

But no matter how exceptional the freaky homeschoolers are, whether they are victims or perpetrators of crimes, or just weird, I am tired of it. And I wish freaks wouldn't use homeschooling as a cover for their devious activities. Also, in some cases, someone is really a truant or a victim of educational neglect, and the use of the term "homeschooling" to describe complete educational neglect irritates me.

[stripe]

duckens, the education of my kids is none of the state's business. None. IL is a TRAIN WRECK. No amount of interference, oversight, regulation, legislation will change that. We have plenty of that now and it gets in the way of success. People need FREEDOM. Freedom to succeed and freedom to fail. Over regulation of homeschooling is one small step away from over regulation of parenting. I'm tired of hearing I need to report to anyone other than my own conscience. Personal responsibility brought our country to the top of the heap. Lack of it is tearing it down.

I do think the state has an interest in making sure its citizens are educated.

 

And personal responsibility ends when destruction of one's child begins.

 

Everyone who talks about how parents know best for their children forget the parents who don't.

 

WILKES-BARRE, PA. — A couple were convicted Friday of sexually abusing their young son, who testified he had frequent sexual encounters with his mom while his dad offered him instructions or tips on what to do.

 

The 14-year-old boy told jurors at his parents' sex abuse trial that he began having intercourse with his mom on his eighth birthday, about a year after his dad began showing him pornography.

http://www.clarionle...-son-dad-helped

 

Here's a different family.

The couple [Paul Alan Drake, 45, and JoAnn Marie Drake, 44] reportedly locked their 13-year-old adopted daughter and 14-year-old adopted son in the basement for three to four weeks, feeding them under a locked door and allowing them out only to attend school, according to police reports.

http://ankeny.patch....ids-in-basement

http://blogs.desmoin...?nclick_check=1

 

For some people, school is a refuge and a break from horrible abuse. Some people need intervention. Not all parents know what they are doing. Some parents have alcohol and drug abuse problems, and others are mentally ill.

 

To say, let one, two, or dozens, or hundreds, or thousands, or millions of children suffer, in the name of parental freedom seems to me to miss the point. I think we already have too many children who've been given the "freedom" to fail, and too many adults, too. We seem to have no problem as a society, the home of the brave, no less, in having the largest per capita incarceration rate in the world. Guess what -- those without a high school diploma are disproportionately represented in that prison population, and all that imprisonment is mighty expensive! California now spends more than 10% of its budget on prisons, and less than 8% on education. How awful. Isn't it possible we could SAVE ourselves some of this expense and some of this horror (both the crimes and pain of the victims AND the unpleasant impacts of imprisonment on the innocent including the children of prisoners) by investing in measures that prevent crime and promote everything that is good?

 

Some freedoms require fighting for, not passivity.

 

I think we should fight for the rights of our children -- by which I mean, all children -- to succeed. There's enough failure and hardship already.

[creekland]

I do think the state has an interest in making sure its citizens are educated.

 

And personal responsibility ends when destruction of one's child begins.

 

...

 

To say, let one, two, or dozens, or hundreds, or thousands, or millions of children suffer, in the name of parental freedom seems to me to miss the point. I think we already have too many children who've been given the "freedom" to fail, and too many adults, too. We seem to have no problem as a society, the home of the brave, no less, in having the largest per capita incarceration rate in the world. Guess what -- those without a high school diploma are disproportionately represented in that prison population, and all that imprisonment is mighty expensive! California now spends more than 10% of its budget on prisons, and less than 8% on education. How awful. Isn't it possible we could SAVE ourselves some of this expense and some of this horror (both the crimes and pain of the victims AND the unpleasant impacts of imprisonment on the innocent including the children of prisoners) by investing in measures that prevent crime and promote everything that is good?

 

Some freedoms require fighting for, not passivity.

 

I think we should fight for the rights of our children -- by which I mean, all children -- to succeed. There's enough failure and hardship already.

 

 

Well stated! So much of life is dependent upon the results of our birth lottery - and while that is ok, even fun, for the diversity of life, it's not ok when it comes to having access to a basic education (or food, etc). I will always fight or vote or whatever for someone elses child to have the basics of life - including an education. I want ps to be better for those involved and I want hs to exist when people say that is what they are doing. I'm ok with parents choosing either way as long as they get the kids to school (and help where needed) or truly hs (whatever method/curricula as long as it's working for the student). I just want the kids to get an education up to at least a basic amount. Ideally I'd like it to be up to what they are capable of (and desire), but life isn't always ideal, so I'll settle for some minimums.

[duckens]

I want ps to be better for those involved and I want hs to exist when people say that is what they are doing. I'm ok with parents choosing either way as long as they get the kids to school (and help where needed) or truly hs (whatever method/curricula as long as it's working for the student). I just want the kids to get an education up to at least a basic amount.

 

:iagree:

 

I support the public schools because

1) I care about those kids, too!

2) My children will have to live in the society created by the children of today -- most of whom attend public school.

3) There is a very good chance that my children will spend at least some of their education in the public school system.*

 

*I really believe that most homeschool kids ask to go to public school sooner or later. In some cases, the parents say, "We're your parents, and we make the decisions [for social, religious, or quality of education reasons]" (And this is fine!) But, I suspect, that most parents say, "Well, let's talk about it....."