this article on homeschool accountability was in my local paper this morning

[Joker]

I get this is a homeschool forum, but I'm shocked so many think his education was okay. Now he's worried about his siblings and doesn't want it to be as hard for them and he's called a know-it-all in a snit? He wasn't given many basic skills and wasn't allowed to attend school to learn them. He's not at Georgetown because of his parents or his home education. He's there because of his own hard work.

[melmichigan]

I get this is a homeschool forum, but I'm shocked so many think his education was okay. Now he's worried about his siblings and doesn't want it to be as hard for them and he's called a know-it-all in a snit? He wasn't given many basic skills and wasn't allowed to attend school to learn them. He's not at Georgetown because of his parents or his home education. He's there because of his own hard work.

 

Exactly.

 

 

Nathan Powell, 17, hopes to go to art school. He was very worried; he knew some of his books this spring were ninth-grade level, but even though he wanted to catch up, he would often find himself just daydreaming or doodling or falling asleep. Some of his siblings play video games most of the day, he said.

But his older brother got him signed up for GED classes and pointed toward community college, so now he’s hopeful. “It’s just my knowledge and education that is lacking, not my brain power,†Nathan said.

 

[pdalley]

But was it truly "remediation"? I'm thinking this young man was very literate when he began taking classes at the community college. That he didn't do algebra at home is irrelevant. He was capable of researching his options, and has successfully made his own path as an adult. Algebra at home wouldn't have made him any more capable.

 

What about the public school students who spent 12 or 13 years in school who must be remediated because they were functionally illiterate when they graduated? Public schools do whatever the heck they want. They regularly come up with some new idea that will Fix Everything, and they continually fail. To whom are they accountable in any meaningful way?

 

Yes. I have no doubt my oldest would be passed up to 11th grade - unable to read on grade level - because they refused to test him for dyslexia. They repeatedly denied he had any reading issues. I argued for them to hold him back a grade and they refused to do that. So we pulled him out, saved up a nice chunk of change to have him tested and now have spent a nice chunk of change to have him remediated by a certified reading tutor. He's still trying to catch up because I spent too much time trying to get the school system to do what they should do. And yes, he has other LD's. Should I be held accountable if he has to take remedial classes at the community college? Or the school who let him go undiagnosed for two years before we pulled him out and brought him home?

 

The idea that ALL public schools do give a 'free appropriate education' is a joke. Some do - I hope that most do - but some you would have to have a pretty high powered lawyer on retainer and fight like crazy to get them to provide it. Sadly we live in an area that has one of those systems. 

 

I didn't read the article. I do think ALL parents have the responsibility to make sure their children are learning what they need to learn. The method - public, private, charter, online, homeschool - does not matter. Preparing the child for adulthood is the responsibility of the parent, IMO.

 

 

[bettyandbob]

Yes. I have no doubt my oldest would be passed up to 11th grade - unable to read on grade level - because they refused to test him for dyslexia. They repeatedly denied he had any reading issues. I argued for them to hold him back a grade and they refused to do that. So we pulled him out, saved up a nice chunk of change to have him tested and now have spent a nice chunk of change to have him remediated by a certified reading tutor. He's still trying to catch up because I spent too much time trying to get the school system to do what they should do. And yes, he has other LD's. Should I be held accountable if he has to take remedial classes at the community college? Or the school who let him go undiagnosed for two years before we pulled him out and brought him home?

 

The man in the article has no known LDs. Someone with serious LDs would not likely have been able to turn himself around without someone's (parent/guardian/caring adult friend) assistance in the manner that the man in the article did. 

 

If you have tons of data you could build a case to hold the school system accountable. It is possible to do that, some people have been successful. The road to being successful is expensive though and you are probably making the best use of your time and money. Your situation is not comparable to the article because of the fact that the young man profiled had no known LDs. 

 

In the state of Virginia, if you are homeschooling not using the religious exemption you can show progress using portfolios. I know people who have done that. It is a good way to handle accountability with LDs because testing is not needed. 

[chiguirre]

I'd like to know at what age this kid took those remedial classes. Given that he's only 21 and is already at Georgetown as a transfer student, I think it may have been before he was 18. In which case, they aren't really remedial. The sister is transferring to UVA from CC at 20, that's right on schedule so her remedial classes were also probably taken before she would have graduated from high school. He also talks about a home school coop he attended before the GED class and the CC remedial classes. His story doesn't add up unless he was enrolled in CC when he would normally have still been in high school.

 

I'd be mortified if my son decided to trash me in the WaPo. I'm not sure his parents deserve all the opprobrium that's being heaped on them.

[bettyandbob]

I'd like to know at what age this kid took those remedial classes. Given that he's only 21 and is already at Georgetown as a transfer student, I think it may have been before he was 18. In which case, they aren't really remedial. The sister is transferring to UVA from CC at 20, that's right on schedule so her remedial classes were also probably taken before she would have graduated from high school. He also talks about a home school coop he attended before the GED class and the CC remedial classes. His story doesn't add up unless he was enrolled in CC when he would normally have still been in high school.

 

I'd be mortified if my son decided to trash me in the WaPo. I'm not sure his parents deserve all the opprobrium that's being heaped on them.

 

 

The article does not say either the young man or his sister transferred to universities with full junior status. So, what you think appears to be on schedule may not be as it seems. 

 

The Georgetown person noted the young man was taking an unusually heavy load -- so perhaps he is still making up for lost time. 

 

The community college system in Virginia offers multiple options for length of courses, not just traditional semesters. If you figure out how it works and go all year round, then yes he could have worked through remedial courses, plus basic requirements for admission if he was truly driven, which he was and that was the reason Georgetown said they admitted him. 

[Joker]

I'd like to know at what age this kid took those remedial classes. Given that he's only 21 and is already at Georgetown as a transfer student, I think it may have been before he was 18. In which case, they aren't really remedial. The sister is transferring to UVA from CC at 20, that's right on schedule so her remedial classes were also probably taken before she would have graduated from high school. He also talks about a home school coop he attended before the GED class and the CC remedial classes. His story doesn't add up unless he was enrolled in CC when he would normally have still been in high school.

 

I'd be mortified if my son decided to trash me in the WaPo. I'm not sure his parents deserve all the opprobrium that's being heaped on them.

 

It looks from the article he did three years at community college and figured out how to take his SAT at age 20. Then, he applied to Georgetown. In regards to the bolded, he had to search out and do those things on his own as well. This doesn't appear to be something his parents helped him with. He even stated right after in the article that since his parents weren't going to help him, he would figure it own on his own. Now it appears he's having to do the same for his siblings. Why aren't the parents?

 

[PeacefulChaos]

Sigh.  

There is, I believe, a lot more to this story than what this article tells. 

First off, I will say that I do NOT know this guy, his family, or their church, or their beliefs, etc.  I do have friends who do - I recognized his name (as well as where he's from) when I first saw the article and went on FB to check.  Anyway...

Personally, I don't really understand the religious exemption law for VA.  I know it says something about being opposed to going to school because of religious beliefs.  I don't know what religious beliefs would make one opposed to going to school.  Just saying.  I have always *assumed* it was in place because of the large amount of Amish and Mennonite families that our state has -- since, after all, they don't vote or participate in the draft, either, it made sense to me (in a weird way, I guess) for them to not necessarily need to worry about what the PS system thought about them homeschooling their children.  

While I do, personally, have religious beliefs - strong ones - I feel that it would be misusing the religious exemption law for me to use it.  I do know people who do, though - mainly because they are of the mindset that they want to keep the school as far away from their children as possible.  Not necessary, IMO (I've never had any problems hsing under the regular VA law), but to each their own.  I do have a little bit of a hard time with those that profess the same religious faith as I do, since I know that nothing in our faith makes us opposed to attending school.  :blink:

Now...

As for Josh and his family, I do agree with some PPs that he currently does not agree with his family and their religion or practices.  I don't know that it's his fault, necessarily - I know that (just from former knowledge of similar churches) there are things about their faith which *most likely* do not agree with his current lifestyle.  Hopefully his family is working through all that, etc. 

I don't really understand the mindset that they seemed to have - but, this family seems very traditional and religious, given his father's comment about kids learning all these other things - homemaking, selling a bull calf, etc.  So I won't understand their mindset.  If it were me, even if I HAD chosen a particular route for my children, I would at the very least work to provide more for a child who wanted more education.  What I don't understand THE MOST is their unwillingness to try to help him with that.  (Granted, I don't take to the whole approach in general, but that isn't for me to judge)  

Buckingham County doesn't have awesome public schools, either.  I don't know that he'd have been ANY better off there, tbh.  Central, rural VA has, really, not good schools.  Their best option for him would have been to try to do something for him that would have still been at home, but much more rigorous - online, etc.

FTR, there are private schools that are JUST AS BAD.  I know adults who went to college not knowing how to write a book report or essay because they had never done one.  There are some Christian schools in the area who do workbooks.  That's it.  The kids sit in their little cubicles and do workbooks.  Most don't, obviously, but those do exist.  So to try to say this is a 'homeschooling problem' isn't true at all.

In the end, I don't think more regulation will change anything.  I just don't really feel that it's necessary.  I also agree with what another PP said - they need to get their own schools in order before they worry about homeschooling.  

There will always be people who will try to bend the rules or find a way around them.  Unfortunately, those are the ones who get all the media attention and paint the rest of us in a bad light.  ;)  

 

I think that was about all I was going to say... I may be back if I forgot anything lol.  :)

[MinivanMom]

This young man is at Georgetown in spite of his parents, not because of them.  I am surprised that anyone would defend them after reading the details in the article.

[meena]

I get upset when I hear about public school students who graduate without the necessary skills to continue on their desired path (whether it is further education, tech school, apprenticeship, mission work, etc). So it makes sense to me to be upset at these parents who seem to be dropping the ball on preparing their 11 children for their next stage of life, especially under the auspices of their "religious freedom". If they can't handle educating their children themselves, they need to be responsible enough to recognize that fact and outsource whether that be through online education, tutors, co-ops, or even (gasp!) the public school system. With that said, there is also some responsibility on the student to also be working on those skills that will help them move toward their next stage in life. The article makes it sound like the young man did indeed try to take responsibility to find ways to educate himself but he and his parents didn't agree on how that should happen. It also sounds like there was rejection on both sides of the options presented (student goes to co-op and takes GED classes but those don't pan out; student asks to go to public school, parents say no, school district must adhere to parents' wishes). 

 

I don't think that additional government oversight is going to stop these types of situations. There are always loopholes and those who want to find them, will. It might help in a situation such as this where the student wants a traditional, public-school style education. But is that worth the potential harm for the parents who do want to be responsible and do want to formulate an educational plan that perhaps isn't traditional but truly has the student's best interests in mind?

[AFwife Claire]

We have friends here in VA who did the religious exemption.  I thought she told me that it was for people who were never going to use the public school system.  She and her husband never were, because they believed they were responsible for the training of the children in all ways, and I was under the impression (may not be accurate because to be honest I never really thought about the option or asked many questions) that she didn't think that, having taken the exemption, she could ever have her kids be admitted into the public schools.  I'm sure that's not totally accurate, and there are ways to get out from under an exemption, but just saying that maybe the family in this article had that impression too.  My friend did, however, test each year, just for herself, because she wanted to keep track of progress and be aware of weaknesses, so obviously not at all the same situation with her kids!

[Lisa R.]

I'm on a tear on this one....

 

Some people (and kids) just aren't content. He didn't get the education he wanted....he had to go to CC.... Blah. Blah. His tone in the article was one of bitterness and discontentment. Just because you didn't get what you wanted doesn't mean the education system needs to be revamped - or that the route you're on is such a burden. I think he should be thankful that his parents provided him with enough of an education to sound articulate (albeit ungrateful) in a national news article, have the initiative to get the help he needed to get intonthe college he wanted and attend an excellent college. It may not be what he "wanted" but I'm sure "Georgetown" would be listed on any high school guidance counselor's list of "where I helped kids go to college". Honestly, for some people good is never enough.

 

Yes, this is a child that isn't content. He isn't content because he saw the importance of an education while he was still in high school and wasn't able to get that education. He had to go to CC in order to get remedial classes that covered the material that he was supposed to get earlier. Yet, he should be grateful for the education he did receive at home? Isn't the whole point of unschooling that if the child desires to learn a certain topic (in this case it wasn't a topic but just *education* in general) that the parent provides opportunities and resources so their child can pursue these areas? One could argue he wasn't even unschooled then. If your read the article, this is kid tried to learn and tried to get more opportunities. He wasn't able to get these until he was old enough to go to CC and get remedial help.

 

No, what he received at home wasn't "good enough". Why should he be grateful for a substandard education? He was admitted to Georgetown based on his own intelligence, hard work, and perseverance. He was admitted to a university *in spite* of what happened, or didn't happen, at his home. 

[Sunshine72]

According to his Facebook page he started Piedmont Community College in 2009 and graduated in 2012, started Georgetown in 2012 and has listed himself as graduating in 2014. I have a hard time believing that his home education was totally inadequate based on that timeframe.

[Mergath]

I find it horrifying that so many people here, on a classical education forum, still defend the rights of parents to give a very substandard education to their kids.  The mindset that children are property, and we can choose to not educate them whether they like it or not, makes me ill.  I honestly believe that the people who so vehemently defend the right of a person to fail at educating their kids are the ones who probably do the same thing in their own homes.

 

And blaming the boy for not giving himself a good enough education as a child is demented.  When we homeschool, we take on the responsibility of educating our kids.  That doesn't mean we can throw our hands up in the air and say, "Go teach yourself algebra if you want to learn it so badly."

 

 

[Dmmetler]

I grew up in a highly Mennonite area, and the religious exemption was in place, as I understand it, for those who follow the old-order path, where formal education ends at the end of Elementary school and children, at that point, apprentice with someone who is a master at whatever skill they're talented at and focused on. I never saw it as a way to neglect education-only a recognition that for some individuals, it may not be the best path. I know one family who had three daughters. The first went on to the Mennonite high school and college, and became a teacher. She currently teaches in a small private school, has five children, and is happily married. The second went on to the Mennonite high school and college, and then on to graduate school-she's a writer for CLE.  The third left school at 8th grade, started an apprenticeship and now has a cottage bakery business that sells at local farmer's markets and to restaurants. She was talented in that area even in elementary school, and probably has learning disabilities-so for her, focusing her secondary education on developing her talents and learning the skills needed to use them simply made sense.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest submarines]

"Josh Powell, now 21, wonders how much more he could have accomplished if he hadn’t spent so much time and effort catching up."

 

Or he could've gone to a public school and wondered how much more he could have learned if he didn't have to spend years with overworked teachers, bullies, and mindless busy-work.

 

Or he could've done well, but even with top grades he might not have had anything unique in his application to be admitted to Georgetown. And he would wonder...

 

Not many public school students realize that they have an option to be homeschooled, because it is such an out of the box endeavor. Not many of them would think they can complain about their parents not homeschooling them, even if they had vastly substandard experiences in school--emotionally, socially and academically.

 

He is privileged to "wonder" exactly because he was homeschooled. He'll see it in ten years or so. He's still too young.

[Reflections]

IF his education was so wonderful, so perfect, so educational WHAT in the World are we all doing on this board?  If these parents formula is so great - where in we don't teach past the age of 4 AND then all of our kids have a chance at getting into Georgetown - why should any of us be researching curriculum? Asking questions?  What is the point of it all??  

[beaners]

"Josh Powell, now 21, wonders how much more he could have accomplished if he hadn’t spent so much time and effort catching up."

 

Or he could've gone to a public school and wondered how much more he could have learned if he didn't have to spend years with overworked teachers, bullies, and mindless busy-work.

 

Or he could've done well, but even with top grades he might not have had anything unique in his application to be admitted to Georgetown. And he would wonder...

 

Not many public school students realize that they have an option to be homeschooled, because it is such an out of the box endeavor. Not many of them would think they can complain about their parents not homeschooling them, even if they had vastly substandard experiences in school--emotionally, socially and academically.

 

He is privileged to "wonder" exactly because he was homeschooled. He'll see it in ten years or so. He's still too young.

 

Well, I guess all the parents who lament that their child doesn't have a "hook" can give this a try....

[MrsJewelsRae]

If all he says is true then I think his parents failed him somewhat. I get that you've got 12 kids to keep up with, I have no problem with big families, always wanted one myself. But that's a cop out. That's not his problem. He's not whining over not getting designer clothes, or concert tickets or fancy vacations. His mother has a responsibility to at least facilitate his educational desires and needs! She may not have had the $ to buy expensive curriculum, she may not have the ability to teach higher subjects, but certainly if you have time to mother all those babies you darn well better make time to provide for the needs of the older ones too! She could have helped him find the resources he needed either online, at used book stores, borrowed from a friend at chirch or hs group, or the library. If you cannot or refuse to provide the education he needs then don't stop him from going about it the only way he knew how! I hope and plan to hs my kids through high school, I have a conviction about it- so I get that. But that means my responsibility is greater, because I don't want to have to go with plan B (ps), its up to me to either provide it, or facilitate it in some way.

 

I will say, on the flip side, he must have gotten some value from home education if he's going to Georgetown (either from or in spite of his parents I can't say). And tbh, it's yucky to publicly trash your parents like that if they were good loving people who meant well. It does sound like he has more problems with his family than just being short- changed on his education...

[ChocolateReignRemix]

"Josh Powell, now 21, wonders how much more he could have accomplished if he hadn’t spent so much time and effort catching up."

 

Or he could've gone to a public school and wondered how much more he could have learned if he didn't have to spend years with overworked teachers, bullies, and mindless busy-work.

 

Or he could've done well, but even with top grades he might not have had anything unique in his application to be admitted to Georgetown. And he would wonder...

 

Not many public school students realize that they have an option to be homeschooled, because it is such an out of the box endeavor. Not many of them would think they can complain about their parents not homeschooling them, even if they had vastly substandard experiences in school--emotionally, socially and academically.

 

He is privileged to "wonder" exactly because he was homeschooled. He'll see it in ten years or so. He's still too young.

Are you serious?

[Joker]

I think people are missing the part where he states he's still close with his family and loves them. The article isn't about him trashing them and he didn't write it himself. It's about him wanting changes in regulation regarding religious exemptions in his state. He doesn't want others, specifically his siblings, to have to go through what he has. He realizes receiving an education shouldn't have been so hard and would like it to be better for others. I just don't see him as some whiner. :huh:

[Farrar]

:iagree:

 

I have yet to read an article in the Washington Post that is pro homeschooling.  I think we should get the reporters in touch with another homeschooling family in VA - Kathy in Richmond!

 

FYI, my family was featured in an article in the Post two years ago that wasn't at all anti-homeschooling.  I don't know if I'd say it was pro exactly, but it was a positive article.  The photographer made my kids look cute and a big picture of ds reading on the sofa ran on the cover of the Post Local.

 

Dh and I were talking about this one earlier.  I can't quite get a picture of what this young man's home and homeschool experience was really like.  In places it sounds terrible, in others it sounds fine, even if it wasn't what he wanted.  The article was a bit all over the place.

[snowbeltmom]

FYI, my family was featured in an article in the Post two years ago that wasn't at all anti-homeschooling.  I don't know if I'd say it was pro exactly, but it was a positive article.  The photographer made my kids look cute and a big picture of ds reading on the sofa ran on the cover of the Post Local.

 

 

That's good to know.  

 

What type of regulations would prevent this situation from happening?  Would the regulations that other homeschoolers in VA have to follow be effective in discovering this problem?

 

I live in what is considered a moderately regulated state, and I would bet that this family would have no trouble meeting the homeschooling requirements each year.

[LisaKinVA]

My dh and I went to pretty good PS (dh's was rated nationally...I went to a variety of PS/Private and home), and both of us wonder what we could have done had we not been hindered by doing mindless busywork.  There was a time in my education where my parents did not give me what I needed, and didn't see a problem with it (it didn't really occur to them to think anything...they trusted the professionals at that time).  

 

While I don't understand the parents' mindset, I think there may be cultural issues at play (given where they are, and the general mindset of the schools and circles they may run in).  Maybe they are doing for their kids what their parents did for them?  I know I hear that from plenty of parents (PS was good enough for me....blah, blah, blah), they don't question what their kids are (or are not) learning.  The kids bring home good grades, and the parents are happy.

 

I know our local schools (which are considered pretty good, by and large) will adjust grades at the end of the year to keep kids OUT of summer school.  Kid gets an F...but by some miracle between the last day of school and the day before the beginning of summer school he accumulates enough points to get a D...and does not have to report.

 

I feel badly for the child...but I feel badly for numerous children who I've heard begged their parents to go to school at home and the parents refuse.  They are bored.  They are boxed in.  They are jealous of my kids -- and my kids don't make home schooling sound glamorous, either.  And every summer, they will tell me and dd (or one of my ds) how much they want to go to school at home, too, and could they go to school at my house?

 

It's really a rare parent who teaches to the needs of their children...because that requires letting go of some of our own preconceived notions, ideas, ideals, possibly admitting we're wrong, and more.  I hope the boy continues to help his siblings to the best of his ability -- maybe at some point, his parents will become more supportive of their children, who knows. 

 

 

[AimeeM]

Expecting young children to take the initiative to self teach rarely turns out well. When I was 15/16, the last thing I wanted to do was learn math... but I should have been made to, regardless. We CANNOT hold CHILDREN responsible for not educating THEMSELVES - that isn't their responsibility.

When children go hungry do we wonder why they aren't out scouring the streets in search of their own food, or do we wonder why the parent isn't feeding their child... their responsibility?

 

I feel bad for the boy, but I don't think the answer is more accountability on the parents.

 

That's hard if the son wants to go to public school and the parents say no.  But they probably

had a good reason.

 

i am very against the government supervising homeschoolers' education.  I live in a regulation-free

state.

 

But this is a sad story, because the child was not happy.  I am wondering if the boy could

have done a little more to self-teach.  If he had a laptop, just googling stuff points to hundreds

of sites.  My DS often learns things about mathematics that I don't even know exist.  He just

looks up more and more difficult stuff, starting with Wikipedia, then going to specific websites.

 

I guess I don't know why the child couldn't sit there and watch Khan?  (I didn't read all 5 pages,

just sort of skimmed.)  Maybe they didn't have any computers?  Why couldn't the boy go to

the library and just check out books for everything he wanted to learn?  (again, maybe it's in 

the article and I didn't see it.)  My library has a bunch of textbooks that are actually up to date.

But you could get a 100-year old algebra book and do just fine.

 

It's a hard situation.  If the parents want the child to "Unschool" and the child doesn't want to,

that is hard.

 

I personally know 2 die-hard Unschooling families (the children are all on board) who are

walking the talk and the kids are turning out amazing academically--the parents don't teach

anything, but the kids look things up and read all the books in the library.  One of 

them is in college with merit scholarships.  The kids taught themselves what they

needed--they ordered books online themselves and did great.  (Of course, in these families,

all the kids liked being Unschooled.)

[Dmmetler]

I think there are three questions here:

 

1) Was what this family did adequate for this child. He says "no". I agree, based on the article and with the caveat that we only have one side of the story.Even though a different student might be able to self-teach successfully, he apparently needed/wanted a structured classroom and, once he got it, has done well.

 

2) Does this case indicate that more regulation is needed/wanted. He says "Yes".

3) Would more regulation have prevented this?

 

That's where I disagree with him. First of all, in my state, which doesn't have a blanket exemption, the same thing could have happened-the only difference was that the parents would have had to jump a couple more hoops. But unschoolers exist, and so do non-schoolers. And there are a lot of marginally educated kids in traditional schools, too. So regulation probably wouldn't have helped as far as homeschooling goes.

 

I do think, though, that this might be a case where maybe there should be a public safety net-say, letting an 18 yr old who has been homeschooled go to PS to get courses that were not taught at home and get a high school transcript/diploma if requirements are met, instead of giving a choice of GED basics (which are light years away from a full high school program) or paying for remediation at a community college.

[K&Rs Mom]

I find it horrifying that so many people here, on a classical education forum, still defend the rights of parents to give a very substandard education to their kids.  The mindset that children are property, and we can choose to not educate them whether they like it or not, makes me ill.  I honestly believe that the people who so vehemently defend the right of a person to fail at educating their kids are the ones who probably do the same thing in their own homes.

 

And blaming the boy for not giving himself a good enough education as a child is demented.  When we homeschool, we take on the responsibility of educating our kids.  That doesn't mean we can throw our hands up in the air and say, "Go teach yourself algebra if you want to learn it so badly."

 

 

Defending the right to something is not the same as agreeing with that thing.  

 

I totally agree that we take on a big responsibility, and it sounds like these parents failed at that responsibility, but they may not think they failed - their goals may have been different than ours.  It sounds like their goals were definitely different than their son's goals, and I also agree with you that blaming him is wrong.

 

Why do outschool parents have more of a right to fail their kids' educations?  There will be outschooled AND homeschooled kids who turn 18 unable to do algebra, for many reasons, sometimes the fault of their parent, sometimes not.  For some reason we call them "graduated" anyway.  Adding regulations on homeschooling (or outschooling) isn't going to prevent that.

 

BTW, not that it's anyone's business, but algebra and essays are both happening here, and we've only made it to 6th grade so far, so I'm pretty sure I'm not failing to educate my kids and I take offense at the declaration that my political opinions mean otherwise.

 

[SadieMarie]

http://homeschoolersanonymous.wordpress.com/

 

 There are problems with schools.  There are problems with homeschools.  I think if you are a child receiving a substandard education in either situation you deserve some assistance.  I personally have no problem with oversight by the state I live in.  I like the idea of school districts and parents working together and supporting eachother, whether the children are being homeschooled or going to public school.

 

[Jane Elliot]

 I honestly believe that the people who so vehemently defend the right of a person to fail at educating their kids are the ones who probably do the same thing in their own homes.

 

You couldn't be more wrong on this.

[pdalley]

 

 

Defending the right to something is not the same as agreeing with that thing.  

 

I totally agree that we take on a big responsibility, and it sounds like these parents failed at that responsibility, but they may not think they failed - their goals may have been different than ours.  It sounds like their goals were definitely different than their son's goals, and I also agree with you that blaming him is wrong.

 

Why do outschool parents have more of a right to fail their kids' educations?  There will be outschooled AND homeschooled kids who turn 18 unable to do algebra, for many reasons, sometimes the fault of their parent, sometimes not.  For some reason we call them "graduated" anyway.  Adding regulations on homeschooling (or outschooling) isn't going to prevent that.

 

BTW, not that it's anyone's business, but algebra and essays are both happening here, and we've only made it to 6th grade so far, so I'm pretty sure I'm not failing to educate my kids and I take offense at the declaration that my political opinions mean otherwise.

 

 

I graduated high school still not knowing any algebra and I took two years of it. I barely knew how to write a research paper or an essay. I was entirely public schooled. Eons ago but still...

 

My boys will learn Algebra, how to write book reports, research papers, essays, etc. They will go as far in math as they possibly can. Ditto history, science or any other subject. But they may not do this in a regular time frame due to LD's and that's fine by me. I will not shirk from teaching them these things because they have LD's. Far from it, in fact.

 

I'm sorry this young man's parents did not make sure he had access to the education that he wanted and needed. I still fail to see how more oversight would have prevented this. More oversight in our state would probably mean that my kids would not be able to learn at their own pace but at some pace decided by someone who does not know them or their limitations. And if that worked for MY kids then they'd be in public school.

 

One size fits all is not going to work in education. Period. Either as regulation or standards or whatever. People are just too different. There will ALWAYS be those who abuse their freedom. There is no way to regulate that out of existence. IMO.

 

FWIW I have zero problems meeting the regulations in our state nor do I object to them.

 

And my kids are outsourced for math.  I know my limitations. I am trying to learn algebra and have more of an understanding now that I did back then. My husband is very good in math and can help them with anything they don't understand.  I learned how to write well in college. And I freely confess I did not work to my potential in high school. I went to a very good public school with good teachers. I was shocked when our local district (not the same) was so hard to work with concerning our kids. 

[Parrothead]

Expecting young children to take the initiative to self teach rarely turns out well. When I was 15/16, the last thing I wanted to do was learn math... but I should have been made to, regardless. We CANNOT hold CHILDREN responsible for not educating THEMSELVES - that isn't their responsibility.

When children go hungry do we wonder why they aren't out scouring the streets in search of their own food, or do we wonder why the parent isn't feeding their child... their responsibility?

 

It may not be all their responsibility but I believe teens bear a great deal of responsibility toward their education. Is the teen going to slack of and coast along? Or is he going to take as many advanced classes as he has time for? Is he going to self study for the AP or SAT2 tests because his school doesnt offer the classes he needs or is he going to skateboard the afternoon away?

 

By the time a teen is in high school his education is a great deal his responsibility . There are kids in some of the most impoverished inner cities of the country who are doing everything they can to self educate in order to get themselves and their families out of the cesspool of drugs and violence they live in.

 

So yeah education isn't all the responsibility of the teachers and parents. Like anything else in this life education is hard work and if one wants it one will work for it instead of waiting for it to be handed to one.

[Joker]

It may not be all their responsibility but I believe teens bear a great deal of responsibility toward their education. Is the teen going to slack of and coast along? Or is he going to take as many advanced classes as he has time for? Is he going to self study for the AP or SAT2 tests because his school doesnt offer the classes he needs or is he going to skateboard the afternoon away?

 

By the time a teen is in high school his education is a great deal his responsibility . There are kids in some of the most impoverished inner cities of the country who are doing everything they can to self educate in order to get themselves and their families out of the cesspool of drugs and violence they live in.

 

So yeah education isn't all the responsibility of the teachers and parents. Like anything else in this life education is hard work and if one wants it one will work for it instead of waiting for it to be handed to one.

 

Yet this kid wasn't able to do many of these things even though he wanted to do them. He asked the district to allow him to enroll in school (so he would have an opportunity to take those AP classes and such) yet was turned down. He then sought out other means and eventually was old enough to enroll in CC. His point is that he shouldn't have had to fight so hard to be given the opportunities to succeed just because his parents didn't want the same things.

 

If a teen should be expected to take all that responsibility, why can't he decide to attend school even against his parents wishes? He's either old enough to make those decisions or he's not. If he's not, I don't see how he can then be blamed for not learning enough on his own without any guidance.

[Parrothead]

Yet this kid wasn't able to do many of these things even though he wanted to do them. He asked the district to allow him to enroll in school (so he would have an opportunity to take those AP classes and such) yet was turned down. He then sought out other means and eventually was old enough to enroll in CC. His point is that he shouldn't have had to fight so hard to be given the opportunities to succeed just because his parents didn't want the same things.

 

If a teen should be expected to take all that responsibility, why can't he decide to attend school even against his parents wishes? He's either old enough to make those decisions or he's not. If he's not, I don't see how he can then be blamed for not learning enough on his own without any guidance.

So you want the schools to override parental decisions? That is what it would have taken for the school to let him enroll. Or the school could have called CPS with a complaint of educational neglect. Some kid calls the school and says he wants to go to school but his parents won't let him and they aren't educating him and a phone call wasn't made to follow up on that? Who dropped the ball there?

 

The kid in question was 17 when he started community college if he is 21 now. He graduated CC at, what? 20? Sounds about average to me. The vast majority of high schoolers don't start college until 18.

 

A teen under 18 does not have the privilege of making the kinds of decisions you cite above in this country. Should he have been able to enroll if he wanted? Probably. But that is a totally different legal aspect than him not liking the education his parents provided.

 

It is one thing to not be able to attend the school of his choice. It is totally up to him as to what he make of the cards he was dealt.

[Reflections]

In regards to the education of children and whether more regulation is needed - we as a board have discussed something similar:  http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/379354-do-american-children-have-a-legal-right-to-access-to-education/

[Parrothead]

I don't think this has anything to do with the article though. I agree, the whole you can lead a horse to water thing, but he wanted to do it and his parents were practically going out of their way to make it difficult for him. I'm only going by what he said because that is all I have to go by.

 

And lets say his parents didn't actually do anything to get in his way. And that it really was a matter of him not taking the initiative to find ways to learn what he wanted to learn. Not everyone knows exactly how to do that. Not everyone is necessarily resourceful. As a teen I wouldn't have had any clue how to teach myself algebra or how to write an essay.

I didn't see where his parents went out of their way to make thing difficult for him.

 

When we were teen we didn't have the information superhighway at our fingertips. So I don't buy he couldn't figure out how to figure out how to learn what he wanted.

[AimeeM]

It may not be all their responsibility but I believe teens bear a great deal of responsibility toward their education. Is the teen going to slack of and coast along? Or is he going to take as many advanced classes as he has time for? Is he going to self study for the AP or SAT2 tests because his school doesnt offer the classes he needs or is he going to skateboard the afternoon away?

 

By the time a teen is in high school his education is a great deal his responsibility . There are kids in some of the most impoverished inner cities of the country who are doing everything they can to self educate in order to get themselves and their families out of the cesspool of drugs and violence they live in.

 

So yeah education isn't all the responsibility of the teachers and parents. Like anything else in this life education is hard work and if one wants it one will work for it instead of waiting for it to be handed to one.

But if a teen is raised with no knowledge of WHAT is expected of him, no intentional instruction, no guidance in study skills, no "hey, this is the sequence you need to take in order to succeed in what you want to do"... no INTENTIONAL EDUCATION... ever - how is he supposed to KNOW how to go about taking charge of his education? How is he supposed to know what to study, when, how to come by these resources?

We aren't talking about a teen who was intentionally guided in the younger years, by parents who attempted to educate him through the teen years, but "slacked off".

[Joker]

So you want the schools to override parental decisions? That is what it would have taken for the school to let him enroll. Or the school could have called CPS with a complaint of educational neglect. Some kid calls the school and says he wants to go to school but his parents won't let him and they aren't educating him and a phone call wasn't made to follow up on that? Who dropped the ball there?

 

The kid in question was 17 when he started community college if he is 21 now. He graduated CC at, what? 20? Sounds about average to me. The vast majority of high schoolers don't start college until 18.

 

A teen under 18 does not have the privilege of making the kinds of decisions you cite above in this country. Should he have been able to enroll if he wanted? Probably. But that is a totally different legal aspect than him not liking the education his parents provided.

 

It is one thing to not be able to attend the school of his choice. It is totally up to him as to what he make of the cards he was dealt.

 

If a teen can't decide how to be educated, why are many here saying it was his responsibility to be more educated? Why does he get blamed for not learning more if he wanted, but his parents are said to do the best they could? It makes no sense to me. He wanted help but they couldn't/wouldn't give it. He asked to go to school and was denied. He is now the one helping his younger siblings figure out how to go to CC and better themselves (and they back up that claim in the article). Why aren't the parents?

 

I just really don't get the attitude in this thread that the parents did the best they could and this young man (their CHILD) could have done more.

 

[Parrothead]

He wanted to go to school and they would not let him nor would they provide him with the education he wanted. How is that not standing in his way?

 

 

And this is where we don't have the parents' side of the whole story. I can see it happening the way you say. I can slap see the parents thinking they are the best teachers for their children the way so many of us do. The economy crumbled when this kid was starting high school and it sounds like the dad is self employees. Maybe they didn't have the resources to purchase materials. Maybe they were overwhelmed trying to feed the family. Maybe they are crazy religious nuts who lock their kids in a church for 8 hours a day and told them to pray.

 

I don't think this kid had it easy by any means. But when I quoted Aimee earlier I was rebutting her comment that parents hold the responsibility for their children's education. My point was that teens should be shouldering a great deal of that responsibility by the time they are in high school. And I think this kid is no exception. If there was the slightest way he had the means to self educate he should have been doing just that. Not waiting for his parents to spoon feed him knowledge.

[unsinkable]

 

 

I wonder if the boy's parents figured if the didn't help him, he'd give up.

[StephanieZ]

I personally think the parents are guilty of educational neglect.

 

I think they were wrong to fail to provide for a good education for their children.

 

I imagine Josh feels desperate to help his siblings and has pursued the only means he can find. He is young. I am sure he's doing the best he can. Personally, I think he is entitled to resent his parents' failures to provide him with a proper education, and I think he is right to try to help his siblings.

 

I think the parents are wrong. I hope Josh can continue to mentor his siblings to help them find their way out of the educational desert.

[Parrothead]

If a teen can't decide how to be educated, why are many here saying it was his responsibility to be more educated? Why does he get blamed for not learning more if he wanted, but his parents are said to do the best they could? It makes no sense to me. He wanted help but they couldn't/wouldn't give it. He asked to go to school and was denied. He is now the one helping his younger siblings figure out how to go to CC and better themselves (and they back up that claim in the article). Why aren't the parents?

 

I just really don't get the attitude in this thread that the parents did the best they could and this young man (their CHILD) could have done more.

 

I don't know why a teen can't chose his educational setting. I didn't make that law. What chaos if kids could chose where and when they wanted to be educated. It just doesn't work that way. Never has.

 

No where did it say his parents were withholding books and materials, locking him int the house with no access to a library or the Internet. It doesn't say he had no friends that were public schooled that he could study with. What was this kid doing with his spare time?

 

I never said the parents did the best for this family. I was originally rebutting Aimee's comment that parents bear all responsibility for educating their children. Maybe in the beginning. But once that person is high school age the kid starts shouldering responsibility for his education. A person has to decide to study and work hard with what they have to get into college or they have to study and work hard at trade school or they have to study and work hard to apprentice or they bum around all day and do nothing.

 

This kid started community college at 17. Most teens don't graduate high school until 18. Sounds like he got an early start. If he had to remediate all of high school in his first year he did some serious studying without parental interference.

[Parrothead]

But if a teen is raised with no knowledge of WHAT is expected of him, no intentional instruction, no guidance in study skills, no "hey, this is the sequence you need to take in order to succeed in what you want to do"... no INTENTIONAL EDUCATION... ever - how is he supposed to KNOW how to go about taking charge of his education? How is he supposed to know what to study, when, how to come by these resources?

We aren't talking about a teen who was intentionally guided in the younger years, by parents who attempted to educate him through the teen years, but "slacked off".

Friends? Internet? Homeschool message board? Other family? Minister? Stop some random stranger who looks successful and ask? Maybe ask his mom who graduated from college what it took to get in. Co-OP? Didn't the article say he want to co-OP?

 

I think he may have been intentionally educated at home in his younger years. His mom taught him to read at age 4.

[Parrothead]

Oh that would be heavenly. I would have chosen a way better school than the one I was assigned to attend.

You and me both, sister.

[Mergath]

I usually agree with you.  You know that.  But I don't think this is necessarily true.  I actually support many things that I would never actually do myself.  I'm not saying I support a person's right to fail their children, but my issue with more regulation is that it often ends up hurting and hindering the people who don't need it and does very little for those who do.  If someone is hell bent on being crappy they will find a way to do it. 

 

I hate to use this as a comparison, but it's the easiest and quickest way for me to give you an example.  I'd never have an abortion, but I fully support a woman's right to have one.  There are people out there who have abortions for reasons I could never support, but that doesn't change my mind.  For example, I don't think a woman should use it as her main source of birth control and have an abortion several times because hey what's the big deal.  As crazy as that might sound I did once know a woman who had several abortions who had that mindset (don't ask me how she freaking afforded it...I couldn't tell ya).  Now lets say we decided we are going to regulate this so we can catch these women who do this.  How would we even go about doing that without getting extremely invasive?  Who would get to decide what the limits are?  What is a good enough reason?  Etc. 

 

I'm not talking about people who support minimal regulations, though.  I disagree, but I understand the reasoning behind their thinking.  I'm talking about the people who think it's perfectly fine and dandy for homeschooling parents to provide almost no education for their child.  I think that even most zero-regs supporters think that parents have a moral obligation to provide a decent education, but some people seem to think that there's nothing wrong with teaching your kid to read and add, and nothing else.  That's the thinking I just can't understand.  I don't know why someone would support the right to simply not educate your kid unless they were doing a poor job themselves.

[Farrar]

I do think, though, that this might be a case where maybe there should be a public safety net-say, letting an 18 yr old who has been homeschooled go to PS to get courses that were not taught at home and get a high school transcript/diploma if requirements are met, instead of giving a choice of GED basics (which are light years away from a full high school program) or paying for remediation at a community college.

 

I agreed with your whole post, but I want to highlight this.  I like this idea, but I would actually say it should go a step farther.  IMO, kids should have the right to decide at some age to attend public school.  Perhaps it should be the drop out age.  Is that still 15 or 16 in most states?  At that age, you can drop out of homeschooling too.

 

Of course, in the end, while stories like this are sad, I do still think they're not the norm.

[LisaKinVA]

We're making a lot of assumptions about what the parents did or did not do, based upon assumptions we're making about things we feel they should have known.

 

What if they didn't know?  Seriously.  What if they didn't?

 

My dad went to Stanford -- on a full ride as a CA Scholar (NMS semi-finalist).  One would think he would have known that I was supposed to take the PSAT in 11th grade to qualify for the same type of scholarship he received.  He didn't.  He knew I had to take the SAT/ACT, but it was left up to me to figure out how/where that was supposed to happen.  He was working 3 jobs to support the family (my mom was working 2).  I didn't have the internet, either...I had a phone book.  

 

There were things my parents did not know about college prep...and one would have thought they would.  Guess what?  I helped my little brother prep for college acceptances.  I helped my parents understand what needed to happen.  They did their best with what they knew.  I didn't agree with all of their decisions -- and they don't agree with mine.

 

Also, in VA -- it is very rare to be in a county that allows home school kids to take classes PT at the local school.  It is a county-by-county decision.  It's not an option where we live.  

 

Lastly, even if they hadn't taken the religious exemption option in VA, most likely there would have been zero issues -- as VA only requires a person meet the 4th stanine on standardized testing (which is below average).  

 

 

[jhschool]

It may not be all their responsibility but I believe teens bear a great deal of responsibility toward their education. Is the teen going to slack of and coast along? Or is he going to take as many advanced classes as he has time for? Is he going to self study for the AP or SAT2 tests because his school doesnt offer the classes he needs or is he going to skateboard the afternoon away?

 

By the time a teen is in high school his education is a great deal his responsibility . There are kids in some of the most impoverished inner cities of the country who are doing everything they can to self educate in order to get themselves and their families out of the cesspool of drugs and violence they live in.

 

So yeah education isn't all the responsibility of the teachers and parents. Like anything else in this life education is hard work and if one wants it one will work for it instead of waiting for it to be handed to one.

:iagree:

[Murphy101]

According to his Facebook page he started Piedmont Community College in 2009 and graduated in 2012, started Georgetown in 2012 and has listed himself as graduating in 2014. I have a hard time believing that his home education was totally inadequate based on that timeframe.

Indeed. He has done better than most in my state who graduate from public school.

 

And for patents who "didn't allow" him to have much of an education, they don't seem to have a problem with him helping out younger siblings. It also doesnt sound like they kicked him to the curb for going to college. I guess they could just love his younger siblings more. Or maybe, just maybe, there is a heck of a lot more to this than just his side of the tale which is not very sad at all IMO.

 

I also think many here are giving way way too much credit to assuming public schools would have helped him with college. Many don't. Despite my high scores, obvious desperate boredom, and completely uninvolved parents, my school never gave me any help whatsoever in any career or education planning. Not once. Of course, they never gave me algebra or biology either.

 

I don't think education is a right either though. Rights are things we are born with. They must be taken from us and are usually not dependent on someone else's gifting them to us. Life. Liberty. Free speech...

 

I may not agree with his parents. Idk. Idk them or their side. But his side is not particularly flattering. Whining about going to Georgetown at the typical age when many students go? Boohoo. Whining that it's hard and he thinks mommy could have made it easier? Hello reality. Get used to it.

 

So far, I don't think his parents are necessarily that awful. Worse case, it sounds like they might simply not have known what his options were and are willing to let him help with younger siblings. Really that's not bad at all. How often has this board had "what would you do different now that you've graduated your kids or started high school with them?" threads? First borns are guinea pigs bless their hearts and need to show some mercy towards their parents for that.

[Parrothead]

We're making a lot of assumptions about what the parents did or did not do, based upon assumptions we're making about things we feel they should have known.

 

What if they didn't know? Seriously. What if they didn't?

 

My dad went to Stanford -- on a full ride as a CA Scholar (NMS semi-finalist). One would think he would have known that I was supposed to take the PSAT in 11th grade to qualify for the same type of scholarship he received. He didn't. He knew I had to take the SAT/ACT, but it was left up to me to figure out how/where that was supposed to happen. He was working 3 jobs to support the family (my mom was working 2). I didn't have the internet, either...I had a phone book.

 

There were things my parents did not know about college prep...and one would have thought they would. Guess what? I helped my little brother prep for college acceptances. I helped my parents understand what needed to happen. They did their best with what they knew. I didn't agree with all of their decisions -- and they don't agree with mine.

 

Also, in VA -- it is very rare to be in a county that allows home school kids to take classes PT at the local school. It is a county-by-county decision. It's not an option where we live.

 

Lastly, even if they hadn't taken the religious exemption option in VA, most likely there would have been zero issues -- as VA only requires a person meet the 4th stanine on standardized testing (which is below average).

:Iagree: I was in the same boat. My dad had two master's degrees by the time I was in high school. (He may have gotten another when I left home. I don't remember) I never heard one word about college except I needed to go. I suppose they thought the school would prepare me for college.

 

Luckily I get to try again.

[Parrothead]

I'm not talking about people who support minimal regulations, though. I disagree, but I understand the reasoning behind their thinking. I'm talking about the people who think it's perfectly fine and dandy for homeschooling parents to provide almost no education for their child. I think that even most zero-regs supporters think that parents have a moral obligation to provide a decent education, but some people seem to think that there's nothing wrong with teaching your kid to read and add, and nothing else. That's the thinking I just can't understand. I don't know why someone would support the right to simply not educate your kid unless they were doing a poor job themselves.

And yet many kids leave high school with a diploma functionally illiterate and don't know how to do enough math to make change. What about the parents of those kids.

 

I don't think either situation is ideal. But stuff happens. The road to hell and all that jazz.

 

Luckily this kid didn't get zero education. He got enough he was able to remediate high school within a year.