Homeschooling

Dear Moriji,

one thought that comes to my mind is that school was a place where I was exposed early on to people that had other points of view, races, creeds, class, and so on. I think it can be a very valuable experience in developing a balanced worldview, one that includes acceptance of others that may appear different from oneself.

Since I was not schooled at home and don't know anyone that was (it is unheard of where I come from) I'll only speculate that at home you are exposed, at least in person, to only one view - that of the parents. That doesn't mean that they will be bad teachers or anything like that - many may still be able to teach well math, reading and writing. But for me, though, education was about much more than that.

Just some thoughts, I hope they help.

Regards,

Luis.

I would consider homeschooling if I had children. Their are advantages and disadvantages to homeschooling. One advantage is that the personal attention gives your child better success. Disadvantages are low socialization and in some cases unqualified educators. To me, providing the children with tools for success trumps hurting somebodies feelings by telling them they don't have the knowledge and specialized skills to do it themselves. Here's CA's credentialing system: http://www.ctc.ca.gov/credentials/teach.html

I've been discussing this on another site with someone who believes in homeschooling and here are our arguments. It's a work in progress, but let me know what you guys think so far:

-----

Other person's argument for it:

"We can't even fix our educational system, how are we going to do quality control on parents? I believe in the power of a people elected govt to provide services to its citizens, but forced indoctrination by the state system with no choice is just wrong on so many levels. So if you're rich and can afford a quality private school you automatically have an edge over someone in a lower socio-economic class who then has zero choice for their children's education. Drugs, gangs, poor facilities in your neighborhood a problem? Too bad, you have no choice for your kid."

"i definitely see this as less of an educational standards issue, though it may be dressed that way, and more of a state control issue. Trust me, school districts HATE charter schools and home schools, those are $$$ they are losing in state funds because they can't effectively educate the kids they are charged with educating."

My argument against it:

"I want to point out that this whole homeschooling and school vouchers argument reinforces the conservative world view. Conservatives want to get rid of government and shift the burden onto the individual. That's why they want to get rid of social security. Same goes with education. They want it to fail so they can push it back onto families."

"And they sell this idea like it's to people's benefit in that gives you more choices, but it doesn't. It effectively forces everyone to become teachers, even if they have no time or skill in doing that. I don't think it is fair to parents or their kids to put the burden on them."

"Your argument is that since public education isn't working, let's let it fail and yank them out and force every parent to become a teacher. That's what conservatives would like."

"My argument is that we should fix schools in the first place so there is no need for home schooling. Public education is something that just about every society has. And since children from many other countries who go to public schools tend to do better than us in various subjects, I don't see why we can't do this as well. Especially for a country that is only remaining super power and riches country in the world. It makes absolutely no sense."

Your arguments are very convincing - I enjoyed reading them.

I especially liked the way you finish it, with the comparison with other countries. I.e. our students aren't doing as well as students from other advanced countries, and the thing that's going to improve that is fixing our public schools. Plain common sense.

Conservatives just want to burden even further the already overstreched American parent. Again, it's just plain common sense that that only makes things worse.

Your argument made me see what the homeschooling argument is really about. With one hand, conservatives don't provide enough funding for public education to succeed, and with the other, they push parents to teach their children, therefore shifting - without saying so explicitly - the responsability of teaching from the society to the individual.

For a family in which both parents work, this is pretty much impossible. Therefore they put additional pressure for one of the parents to stay at home. Most of the time, it is going to be the woman.

So this is really strategic for the conservatives. It weakens public education and pushes women into the home.

"I want to point out that this whole homeschooling and school vouchers argument reinforces the conservative world view. Conservatives want to get rid of government and shift the burden onto the individual. That's why they want to get rid of social security. Same goes with education. They want it to fail so they can push it back onto families."

I'd be willing to bet that if you took a survey of conservatives, most would be stout advocates of government schooling. Their main difference with you is that they think those same schools should inculcate conservative values.

You imagine that all would be well if only we had the right people in power. I have no idea how you can assume or assure that the right people will always be in power, or even who the right people are other than that they have no qualms pretending to share your values.

I'd be willing to bet that conservatives don't advocate government schools. It's the Republicans that want to get rid of the Department of Education.

And I guess you imagine that all would be well if every parent were burdened into becoming teachers, even if they have to work two jobs, overtime, skip out on sleep, or are just not qualified to teach.

"I'd be willing to bet that conservatives don't advocate government schools. It's the Republicans that want to get rid of the Department of Education."

As if there were no government schools before they created the Department of Education.
Usually they talk about local control of government schools, so I think the model conservatives cling to is the good old days when you were made to participate in prayer in school, like in my high school.

I get the impression that commenters have the idea that all homeschoolers are a bunch of Christian-conservative or conservative-Christian aliens.

There are many of those I am sure, but, at least here in CA, many home schooling families are simply doing what they think best for there children based upon their unique personal knowledge, and usually as a result of their experiences dealing with the government school system. Most of the families in our group would be described as liberal and many are either agnostic or atheist.

The most common of the issues that result in a decision to home school is the inability of our Prussian modeled system to accommodate developmental variation in children. Sometimes this means that parents do not wish their children to be drugged in order to fit into the classroom. Sometimes this means that their children are either bored or frustrated with the pace of school classes.

It is also not uncommon that the school will not, or cannot, deal with the issue of bullying.

The socialization issue is bogus. Socialization in government schools means that children are socialized by their peers, meaning that they learn behaviors from children that have not yet learned how to behave.

Our family, like many home schooling families, participates in group activities on a weekly basis. My daughter has many friends acquired through this venue. From my observation, I can tell you that there is a absence of status competition (cliquing), a absence of bullying, and an absence of peer pressure inducement to experiment with drugs.

Sometimes when we are at the park for our weekly gathering, I see kids who come to the park to hang out after school, and they are cussing and smoking and displaying an attitude of insolence that we do not observe in our kids.

Oh, I agree that the public school system is broken. That's my point. It needs to be fixed. It is outdated. It is meant to make you ready for working in the real world, rather than what's best for the kids to become who they are meant to be.

But on your point about socialization, I disagree. The idea that children are bad and need to be made good by parents is part of the conservative world view. The reason that so many children behave badly is because they are emulating their parents. It's important for children to learn socialization skills by being around their own kind.

And I can speak from experience. I grew up in a household with abuse of every kind imaginable. I won't go into the details here. But the one thing that saved me all those years was I was able to escape from it all by going to school. If I were home schooled, I would be screwed big time.

I have vivid memories of my mother interfering with my homework, insisting on changing the answers. She was almost always wrong. It was her sick and twisted way of making up for her goofing around while she was in school, as well as making me an extension of her ego. So before class, I would have to erase her answers and put mine in.

Now imagine if I was home schooled by this woman. She is obviously not qualified to teach, let alone parent.

PS. And please, don't tell me this is a rare exception, as I have a support site for abuse survivors and it is quite common.

"The idea that children are bad and need to be made good by parents is part of the conservative world view."

I don't think that and didn't intend such. I just think that children should be socialized by people who already know how to behave decently and sending them to school to be socialized by their peers in an unmonitored state is a crap shoot as far as results are concerned. Some kids will be good, some will be bad, and some may be on the fence.

As for you mother, she doesn't sound like the type that would choose to home school.

"don't tell me this is a rare exception, as I have a support site for abuse survivors and it is quite common."

It may be common, but I doubt it is the norm. And it has nothing to do with the subject of home schooling. We have to contend with the fact that there is deviance from the norm; it's a matter of degree. It's a good thing that government school worked for you, it's good that you went to a relatively decent school. Your experience speaks for some portion of the population, but certainly not for all.

Excuse me, but what makes you think my mother is not the type? Where you there? I don't think so. In fact, she's a kindergarten teacher now...

And I keep hearing this argument all the time, that what I'm talking about has nothing to do with homeschooling. IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH HOMESCHOOLING. The case involved in California is about child abuse. Look it up. And I'm sorry, but if by norm you mean the majority, then it probably is.

And no, government school didn't work for me. I went to a private school.

My point is the problem is not government school or private school or home school. It is the educational paradigm. And by saying that government school is evil and home schooling is good, you are following the conservative argument that we must get rid of public education because only parents know what's best. Which is complete bull. Just because one is a parent doesn't automatically make one good or qualified.

I'm most concerned about the child's well being. Unfortunately, a lot of people are most concerned about the parent's well being. And the kids get forgotten about in the mix. Very sad.

I don't know anything about your mother other than what you mentioned. So she's a kindergarten teacher. Is the implication that she is the type who would home school?

Please show me where I said anything like "government school is evil and home schooling is good". I made specific mentions of particular instances that resulted in some parents deciding to home school and that's all. Many parents have no problem with government school and many children do well in government schools. I am a government school graduate.

And I'm glad the private school worked for you.

"I'm most concerned about the child's well being."

That's exactly what motivates many parents to home school. Many parents have given up jobs so they can home school their children. I personally know three parents who were public school teachers, including a father who gave up a teaching job to home school his kids.

Anecdotes of abuse in home school families have no more to do with home schooling anymore than anecdotes of abuse in public schools has to do with public schooling.

She became a kindergarten long after I left home. My point is, you were saying she would not home school. But she obviously has an interest in teaching. So I don't know where this "she doesn't seem like the type who would home school" comes from. I don't see how you can reach that conclusion based on what little I told you. I've barely said anything, yet she doesn't seem like the type?

"You imagine that all would be well if only we had the right people in power. I have no idea how you can assume or assure that the right people will always be in power, or even who the right people are other than that they have no qualms pretending to share your values."

This to me, seems like you are making the point that since we cannot assume that the right people wind up in power, government cannot be trusted. It sounds like a very libertarian position, which as we know is really a type of conservatism.

"That's exactly what motivates many parents to home school. Many parents have given up jobs so they can home school their children. I personally know three parents who were public school teachers, including a father who gave up a teaching job to home school his kids."

Those three parents all were teachers to begin with. Which means they have teaching credentials. I'm talking about those that don't. The court decision says that in order to home school, you need to have the right credentials. So all three of these parents would still be able to continue.

"Anecdotes of abuse in home school families have no more to do with home schooling anymore than anecdotes of abuse in public schools has to do with public schooling."

Agreed. And I believe BOTH are valid topics to talk about when it comes to education. You did mention bullying in public school, remember? Bullying and child abuse are huge problems, and need to be addressed along with education.

It was my impression that the subject had turned from the court decision to whether home schooling was a good idea and you stated your belief that home schooling was specifically part of a conservative plot so to speak, to undermine public schooling.

I gave examples of liberals who home school for reasons other than religious belief to show that this is not necessarily the case.

You also seemed to suggest that I held that "children are bad and need to be made good by parents", I view that I do not subscribe to.

"Those three parents all were teachers to begin with. Which means they have teaching credentials."

I'll have to ask them if they have found their credentialing of any use in their home schooling.

BTW, that was a little bit too much information about your mother. I hope she has matured since then, given what she does now.

"It was my impression that the subject had turned from the court decision to whether home schooling was a good idea and you stated your belief that home schooling was specifically part of a conservative plot so to speak, to undermine public schooling."

I still do believe this. It's part of the conservative agenda to get rid of public education.

"I gave examples of liberals who home school for reasons other than religious belief to show that this is not necessarily the case."

I agree. I never said that people home school just for religious beliefs or there weren't valid reasons for doing so. I'm just not a big fan of getting rid of public education and forcing every parent into becoming home schoolers.

"You also seemed to suggest that I held that children are bad and need to be made good by parents, I view that I do not subscribe to."

You talked about seeing misbehaving kids, in comparison to yours which are home schooled, thus making the case that home schooled kids behaved better because there were under direct parental supervision. This I do not agree with.

"I'll have to ask them if they have found their credentialing of any use in their home schooling."

I would hope so. If not, it means teachers are no better equipped to teaching kids than anybody else. It means anyone you meet on the street is just as qualified, which I find hard to believe. I remember having many bad teachers who obviously didn't know too much about child psychology. Maybe they need to go back for some more training.

"BTW, that was a little bit too much information about your mother. I hope she has matured since then, given what she does now."

I don't think so. Things like this shouldn't be kept in the dark. I'm very big on survivor activism, and one of the biggest problems is this view that it's this rarity that only happens in the shadows of society. Survivors live ordinary lives and are not ashamed to disclose life events which were not under their control. We hope to educate people of the serious nature of abuse and how it needs to be identified and stopped.

And by the way, this is not an immaturity issue. My mother has seriously psychological issues but chooses not do anything about it, as are so many others.

Dear Samgrove,

It seems to me that requiring children to be taught by someone that has demonstrated a certain level of proficiency can only benefit them, and by extension, the future of California. That is why certification is required for teachers. It may be so that, in some cases, the parent is qualified and willing to play that role. In that case, it only seems reasonable that the parent should be required to demonstrate similar levels of teaching proficiency. Otherwise, the child is being harmed, regardless of the parent's best intentions. And, as Moriji pointed out, sometimes parents' intentions aren't the best for the child to begin with.

I think that initiatives such as school vouchers and unlicensed homeschooling do undermine a quality, public education system accessible to all children, and that is why conservatives promote them.

Wanting one's children to thrive is only natural. When the public school system has serious problems, the solution is to fund it properly and give it the resources that it needs to work, so that quality education can be accessible to all children. That demands actions from our government that conservatives have been fiercely opposing - and that is why so many parents think of homeschooling as an alternative. Unlicensed and unsupervised homeschooling lets the government wash its hands of its responsibility for all California children, and places vulnerable children even further out of reach from trained people who can help them.

Regards,

Luis.

Luis says exactly what I've been trying to say (maybe better). I just don't think the solution to the problems in public education is to simply throw our hands up in the air and say it is beyond repair and thus push every child into home schooling. This is plain nuts and is not a "choice," even though conservatives like to frame it that way.

The conservative argument is that public education is bad because it has problems like drugs, bullying and so forth, and so the solution is home schooling which gives parents the freedom to do what's best for their child. But the problem I have with it being framed this way is that it paints teachers and others students as the problem, and parents as the solution. But parents can be just as much the problem as well.

As Luis so eloquently says, "sometimes parents' intentions aren't the best for the child to begin with." Or as I often say, the best intentions don't always produce the best results. Or as some others have said, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I gave my story as an example, but let's think of some parents we know in the limelight. Do you think Britney Spears should home school her children? Or how about Sherri Shepherd who thinks the world is flat and the ancient Greeks killed Christians, even though there were no Christians around at the time? Are these parents really qualified? I know you could make the case that they are not even fit to parent, but why make it even worse for their children? I'd rather have their kids go to public school where they are at least given differing points of view and where the boundaries between parenting and teaching is clearly separated.

I'm not personally against home schooling per se. But I would at the bare minimum want some kind of supervision for home schooling or require parents to take classes in child psychology and teaching children, preferably on a continuous basis. Is this too much to ask for?

Another way to look at it is that home schooling is not fair to either children or their parents. As for the children, they are not getting educated by a trained professional, but rather from someone who may not be fit to teach, even if the parent has the best intentions. The parent may lack the intellectual capacity or psychological capacity to handle the task of teaching. And the parents are also at a disadvantage since they are faced with the task of both raising and teaching their kids, while at the same time trying to make ends meet. This is a double whammy.

There are cases where it came work, for sure. But it is not this win-win situation that conservatives make it out to be.

Public Schools were created to create an informed citizenry. Home schooling robs children of the opportunity to become citizens of their communities and their country. Everyone has an interest in the education of the next generation and it should be community based and supported. Children have a right to an education that is not entirely under their parents' control. Privatization has not worked any better in the school than it has in government and business. We need to go the other way.


Some ideas:

Build from the bottom up by bringing back the small, neighborhood, public grade school. (As you probably know, they have been abolished in Berkeley and San Francisco.)

Offer parent education so that children come to school prepared to learn.

Require some form of parent participation, on week-ends for working parents.

Make supervising instruction the main job of principals, or create the post of academic dean if the principal can only find time to deal with the bureaucracy.

Plan a school-wide curriculum to meet state standards.

Provide teachers with the curriculum and materials they need.

Exempt public school teachers from state and federal taxes. Not a big sacrifice for the government, a big aid in recruiting, and keeping teachers.

Return school taxes to local school boards.

Keep businesses in communities. Get Rotary etc. involved.

Federal aid to low economic area schools only





   

I am not particularly fond of the Prussian-German Model for education, with its goal of turning out fresh batches of citizens that are all more or less on the same page, who have all been exposed to the same program.... vetted by the best government-paid scientists. I guess there is really nothing to worry about. After all, the Government would never lie to The People...... right?

Seriously though... I think one of the problems with government schools is that they are just another example of a monopoly, and they exhibit the typical behavior that one would expect from a monopoly.... high prices and a product that leaves much to be desired. Don't get me wrong, the government schools can and do turn out many excellent students, and that is good thing. Oh, I know there is a small token amount of so-called competition, including both private schools and home-schooling, but their representation is similar to Apple's market share compared to that of Microsoft, which has also been labeled as monopolistic.

Throughout many of the above posts we see an almost desperate attempt to link home-schooling with some sort of conservative "plot". I am not a professional in the field of education, nor do I have access to any behind the scenes information, so I can only rely on my own personal experiences in this matter. Of the several examples that I have had personal knowledge of, there has been no preponderance of conservatives. In fact, I think all but one were either Hippie-Leftist or Classical-Liberal people.

I know, and have known, many persons who were home-schooled and who are being home schooled at this time, and it has been my experience that, to a person, they have all turned out to be excellent students, much clearer thinking than the majority of their contemporaries who attended government schools, and I noticed that they seem to be much better at relating to persons of different ages, adults and other kids..... perhaps because their experiences and time are not spent just with kids who are the exact same age. So far, those that have already grown up are very appreciative and understand what a huge benefit their parents have bestowed upon them.

Perhaps because the government schools are monopolistic, they tend to attract some people who are not interested in having to compete to demonstrate excellence, but may be attracted to the security of tenure, where after warming the chair for a number of years they can take home a pension paid for out of the community coffers. And unfortunately, many mentally unbalanced individuals have ended up as government certified teachers. In those cases, we are not just talking about damaging one or two Children. These "teachers" can end up damaging hundreds of Children before the system is forced to take action.

It seems that one of the posters is under the impression that there is some plot to try "forcing every parent into becoming home schoolers". The truth is that home-schooling is not for everybody, but just one option, a choice, for parents who are interested and who have are able to take on the responsibility. Leaving theory behind and just looking at results, it is obvious that it can be an excellent choice, and the people I know who have been home-schooled have become good, well-adjusted adults and a great asset to their communities.

This is the same argument. Government cannot be trusted and home schooling gives parents more choice. I respect your opinions, but you've added nothing new to the discussion and ignored all the points I made.

I've been advocating fixing public education, but once again, this is being ignored. There is no rule that says public education must follow the Prussian-German Model. None what so ever. I've said it is outdated and needs to change.

As for a plot, again you are ignoring the facts. Do conservatives want to fix public education? No. They want it to fail. And if public education fails, then what are your options? Either private school or home schooling. This to me is not a choice.

If you really wanted to give people some credible to choose from, you should help fix public education so it is an option worth considering. If it isn't, then it's a very bad "choice."

This same argument could be made on just about a number of other issues. Why not support privatized saving accounts? Isn't social security not working? Why not give people the choice? Or how about healthcare? Why force people to have healthcare? Shouldn't they be given a choice?

No one here who is pro-homeschooling has adequately explained while education should be treated differently than the rest. I just hear more libertarian arguments about giving people more choice.

Dear Crabapple,

I believe that children should be taught by people who are qualified to do so. That is the best way to make sure that their intellectual and social capabilities are well-developed. If parents want to deny their children the opportunity to go to school, they should at least demonstrate that they are qualified to teach them to the same level.

As for the public school system, if it is broken, it should be fixed, so that parents are again confident about the quality their children's education at school. This requires investments that conservatives have repeatedly and consistently opposed. It also requires putting a stop to conservative attacks on the dignity of public school teachers, who serve their country altruistically and, frequently, in precarious conditions. Allowing people to teach without certification is yet another of those attacks.

Thanks,

Luis.

If we really want to talk about choice, I would recommend we:

1. Fix our broken public education system
2. Make sure parents are required to have the proper credentials if they choose to homeschool

This would be a real choice. The public education system will be top of the line so anyone can sent their kids to it for free. If a parent is really interested in teaching, they can do the extra effort to get credentialed. This is a win-win situation for both parents and kids.

What people like crabapple are recommending is that we:

1. Stop funding our public education system and let it continue to deteriorate.
2. Placing the burden on parents to make ends meet and figuring out how to educate their kids on their own without any guidance or training.

This to me is not a choice.

Moriji has misstated my position on multiple occasions. Scanning earlier posts it is clear that Moriji committed the same fallacy with another poster. When one side has a weak case, or is unable to counter facts from the other, or becomes desperate, they sometimes do what Moriji has done..... just make stuff up.

Moriji writes:

"What people like crabapple are recommending is that we:

1. Stop funding our public education system and let it continue to deteriorate."

That is false. I never recommended such a thing.

and...
 
"2. Placing the burden on parents to make ends meet and figuring out how to educate their kids on their own without any guidance or training."

That is false. I never said any such thing.

Moriji is resorting to simple fear-mongering here. But perhaps more importantly, Moriji has provided us with excellent examples of the straw man fallacy.

"Straw man" is one of the best-named fallacies, because it is memorable and vividly illustrates the nature of the fallacy. Imagine a fight in which one of the combatants sets up a man of straw, attacks it, then proclaims victory.

As the "straw man" metaphor suggests, Moriji fabricated a counterfeit position, ascribed this position to Crabapple (me), then attacked the fabricated position. The Straw Man argument is typically weaker than the actual position, just as a straw man is easier to defeat than a flesh-and-blood one. Of course, this is no accident, but is part of what makes the fallacy tempting to commit, especially to a desperate debater who is losing an argument.

My writing time is limited, and I enjoy exchanging ideas with others. I try to be respectful of those whose ideas are different from my own, but it is difficult to maintain respect for "people like Moriji" who simply make stuff up when it suits them. Perhaps I was mistaken when thinking the original question was sincere, or that there was any intent on Moriji's part of having an intellectually honest debate.

I don't make up stuff as it suits me. I could ascribe the same to you, based on what you just wrote.

You have now personally attacked me, accused me of fear mongering and fabricating lies.

I said people like you recommend this. By people like you, I mean people who subscribe that government cannot be trust. If this is not your position, then I apologize. But this is what I got out from reading your posts. I don't remember reading a single instance anywhere where you stated your belief in funding public education. All you've said to date is it doesn't work.

And home schooling does put the burden on parents. Is it easy to home school? I don't think so.

Your straw man frame is interesting, as you view this as a fight. I'm just sharing my opinions. I never attacked you and I never proclaimed victory. If anyone is making stuff up, it is you.

Hi Moriji,

I wasn't sure if you wanted me to reply here, or to the private e-mail you sent me, but decided to go with this location.

In your post above you wrote:

"I don't remember reading a single instance anywhere where you stated your belief in funding public education."

That is correct, and exactly the point. Thank you for being honest in that remark. You never read a single instance where I stated anything, one way or another, about my beliefs regarding the funding of public education. Yet in your earlier post you wrote that:

"people like crabapple are recommending that we... Stop funding our public education system..."

That, you simply made up, and you got caught. But I am sorry that you are so upset... it is really not that big of a deal.

You also wrote that:

"All you've said to date is it doesn't work"

Again, that is false. I never said that. What I said was that the current public education system exhibits behavior typical of a monopoly.... high prices and a product that leaves much to be desired. I said "don't get me wrong, the government schools can and do turn out many excellent students, and that is good thing." I began my education in the public school system, and I would like to think that I turned out OK.

I do my best to follow a policy of non-aggression, and therefore I do not force people to do what I want. So, when you write that people like me want to burden others, it is false and annoying, as that is not my philosophy. What I wrote is what I know and have seen about Home Schooling. I clearly stated that it was not for everybody.

I have seen, over the decades, persons who just can't stand it when the results from SAT scores, academic markers, National Spelling Bee, etc. show such good results among the home schooled children. These people are always trying to come up with the reason why the results are, they claim over and over, inaccurate. I think it is more likely that seeing Home Schooling as good simply does not fit their paradigm, their worldview, and they are just so locked in to it that they are unable to permit reality to enter their consciousness.

You wrote that you were just stating your opinions.... and hey, what is wrong with that? The problem is that you were trying to state MY opinions as well. I try to avoid doing that, because it is risky, and involves guessing. It is very difficult to get in someone else's head, though it is very easy to BELIEVE we have gotten in someone else's head. We can sometimes delude ourselves.

It looks to me as if you are barking up the wrong tree. Home schooled kids are doing just fine when compared to public schooled kids. If you are concerned for children you should, IMO, keep you efforts concentrated on making public schools better, and I hope you and others who have the energy do so, succeed. I do not have any school-aged kids, but if I did, I would do as others I know have done, and that is that as the time approaches to school the kids you look at all the available alternatives, and then do your best to make a good choice.

Since you have set the stage, I will take the same risk... Moriji, I believe you are a very emotional person, and very passionate about this subject. I believe you are locked into a frame which is a struggle between a progressive worldview and a conservative worldview. I believe that your perceptions are constrained by this single-axis model, and that because I did not appear to hold the same progressive worldview as yourself, you made a leap, a flawed leap, and assumed that I held a conservative worldview. I think you got a little caught up, and your exuberance momentarily got the best of you. No harm done.

I am Human, and prone to occasional error just like anyone else. But I would ask, that if we do engage in future dialogue, that when you make a claim, for example a claim that I am making something up, please go ahead and quote me specifically so we can see exactly what you are talking about.

Peace

"That, you simply made up, and you got caught. But I am sorry that you are so upset... it is really not that big of a deal."

First, I am not upset. You think I am, but I am not. And second, I did not make it up or get caught. I said people like you believe this. I am not making this up. Perhaps I am/was wrong, but that's what I think/thought. Just because you didn't explicitly say so is besides the point. Maybe I'm wrong here, but I find someone who has your viewpoint wouldn't want to fund public education.

Also, my post was not directed at you crabapple, and that's where you are misunderstanding this. I was making a general statement about people who hold views such as yourself. You took this to be an attack on you. It is not. If I had not put "people like crabapple," in there, you wouldn't be upset, so next time I won't include your name.

But my point still remains. I am addressing the libertarian point of view, whether you or others explicit say what I am implying that you are saying.

"You wrote that you were just stating your opinions.... and hey, what is wrong with that? The problem is that you were trying to state MY opinions as well."

If that is the sole problem you had with what I said, then I will promise not to ever include your name when I criticize the libertarian point of view from now on. My arguments still stand though. They are just no longer directed at you.

Your arguments on public education embody the libertarian viewpoint rather well, so I think it's a good opportunity to understand that model. And in doing so, I made you the representative of it. Again, if you felt you were pigeon-hold, then I will take that back.

"Since you have set the stage, I will take the same risk... Moriji, I believe you are a very emotional person, and very passionate about this subject. I believe you are locked into a frame which is a struggle between a progressive worldview and a conservative worldview. I believe that your perceptions are constrained by this single-axis model, and that because I did not appear to hold the same progressive worldview as yourself, you made a leap, a flawed leap, and assumed that I held a conservative worldview. I think you got a little caught up, and your exuberance momentarily got the best of you. No harm done."

If you want to believe this, you may. But I am not locked into an ideologically battle between the two world views. I am here to strengthen progressives frames, so I want to come up with progressive views. That is what the site is about. If I want to argue which world view is better, I'd go to a different site.

Anyway, you are right that I did think you have a conservative world view. Personally, it sounds like you're a biconceptual. And by the way, so am I. So no, I'm not constrained by a single-axis model. I just don't believe this is the right site to talk about what is the right way to view the world.

This site is biased. That is a fact. Even George Lakoff says so in his book Moral Politics. He says he cannot be impartial as he believes the progressive view is better.

This site is for promoting the progressive view point. That's it. It's that simple.

Of course, that is not to say that other views are not welcome, but when they do surface, people on here are going to point out how they don't fit into the progressive world view and that they embody the conservative world view. This has happened and will continue to happen.

He said the best education occurs in a good middle-class home. A good home has discussion, reading, writing and thinking. Unfortunately, most home schooling is regimented brainwashing - no different than the public schools. It is mostly an education in religious provinciality. The real home schooler, however, is the 4 to 5 hours of TV cliches that are presented every day.

It blows my mind that "progressives" would tell me that I should not homeschool and instead should turn my efforts toward reforming a school system that they acknowledge needs changing. In effect they are saying that I should sacrifice providing a quality education to my kids now so that maybe after some unspecified number of years (decades?) the public school system will be reformed. That is nuts. Plus it is very disturbing that so many believe that spending childhood under the supervision of parents is a bad thing. Never mind that for all of human history, except for about the last 120 years, this is how it was done. Check out "The Underground History of American Education" by John Taylor Gatto to better understand how and why the public school system was created.

Anyway, I'm happy that my kids have been spending time outside appreciating the natural world, learning about our nearby river and how to protect it, getting plenty of sleep, eating when they are hungry, receiving emotional support whenever they need it, socializing with kids and adults of all ages all through the week, observing people in a variety of jobs, taking classes and volunteering at the local public access TV channel, reading and writing without waiting for thirty other kids to calm down, learning that there is more to what is happening politically than the Disney version of civics taught in public schools, learning to do chores around the house, learning about evolution, and generally following their powerful, insatiable curiousity without bells to tell them when to stop.

I don't. I am struggling with this issue. As a progressive, I want public education to meet the needs of all children. As a parent, I know that is not happening. I called my school and expressed my concern that in her first year of high school, my hard working, dedicated, 4-point student was losing interest in school. I asked for some accomodations to meet her special interests (it would have cost the school $0). I was told if they did it for my daughter, they would have to do it for all students and therefore, "no". To me that answer was, she is one student in 1600 and her failure (or decreased success) is not an issue for them. They certainly weren't going to consider anything until she was in crisis...at risk of dropping out or failing.

I find this unacceptable. As progressive as I am, my first priority is my daughter, so we have dual-enrolled her in public high school and homeschool. She no longer has to waste her time in a PE class when she dances over 20 hours a week in a private program. She no longer cuts and pastes posters in her "writing" class. She will never again spend 8 weeks watching Star Wars videos in her 18 week literature class. She will no longer be required to attend school hour pep assemblies honoring the high school athletes when not one of them shows up for her extra curriculars (orchestra, and speech contests).

I love the shared experience of reading literature with my 15-year old daughter. It is fun to choose what to read. I take her papers from other classes and make them into writing assignments so she can work on her weaknesses and not spend hours doing comma worksheets and subject/verb agreement worksheets. It is not a perfect solution. My daughter will not have a high school diploma. But, as an alternative to keeping her interested...it is the only one available.

I guess it cannot be my stand to support my school whether right or wrong! I work very hard to help...but I also see a drastic need for alternatives...homeschooling is only an alternative to the elites who can manage it financially, timewise and have knowledge in subject areas. I am concerned about those who aren't qualified to homeschool and do (I am a former English teacher). However, there are so many resources available to children today, that if they are able to access those resources, they have potential to be successful.

I am concerned about homeschooling to keep your child separate from the world. That does not seem healthy and gives a child such a limited view of the world. Even though I am a writing teacher, my husband is a journalist, I eventually want our daughter to have someone else evaluate her writing to give her a different perspective.

I don't want my public school to fail. However, I want my daughter to achieve at her full potential. That wasn't going to happen without homeschooling.

Just my 2 cents....