Kids these days

[BlueRidgeMark]

there is a lot of stuff learned when in a public school setting that would never be learned at home , alone. you learn to work with others, large groups, after school sports/activities, social skills, all sorts of stuff.

And where did you get the idea that homeschoolers do NOT learn all that?


The fact is, studies have shown homeschoolers are far better "socialized" than kids who go to regular schools (public or private).

Yes, there are oddballs in both groups (you never met a kid in public school who had no social skills?), but we're talking about norms, not exceptions.

 

[banshee67]

And where did you get the idea that homeschoolers do NOT learn all that?


The fact is, studies have shown homeschoolers are far better "socialized" than kids who go to regular schools (public or private).

Yes, there are oddballs in both groups (you never met a kid in public school who had no social skills?), but we're talking about norms, not exceptions.

how do you learn that while being home schooled?
you arnt in a building surrounded by 1000+ other kids in your age group, all the problems, situations and scenarios you might find yourself in, would be kind of hard to replicate in the comfort and safety of your living room with your kid sister watching tv next to you and mom cooking lunch.

"studies" on such topics hold about as much water as "political "polls" - they all mean nothing. you cant get answers that represent any population of people from asking a small group of people a question. i see no way possible for someone to develop the same social skills whhile they are home schooled alone, while all the other kids their age are at school 8 hours a day in a building full of peers in the same age group, arguing, playing, socializing, figuring problems for themselves , dealing with different personalities, compromising, sharing, etc
you can not duplicate real world environment with a stack of books and one on one teacher to student interaction.
where do homeschooled kids socialize? where do they meet new friends? i couldnt imagine someone telling me i couldnt go to public school... what a huge experience to miss out on.
i would say the exception to the norm in a public school would be the kid who wears all black and has no friends, there are a few of them everywhere.
the exception to the norm of a homeschooled child would be one with friends outside of his/her neighborhood , or friends that they didnt meet through their parents bringing them together for "play dates"
public school is more of a "real world" learning environment, home schooling is a controlled environment

 

[woodbooga]

I love my children too much and feel they have too much potential for me to ruin by home schooling them.

 

[smokinj]

I love my children too much and feel they have too much potential for me to ruin by home schooling them.

LOL, True here as well!

 

[teatersroad]

Interesting article :

http://www.theonion.com/articles/increasing-number-of-parents-opting-to-have-childr,17159/

 

[woodbooga]

where do homeschooled kids socialize? where do they meet new friends?

I can see where you're coming from and you raise some good points.

A lot of home school parents participate in networks and cooperatives. Oftentimes, 'classroom' learning is enhanced by field trips that are open to every family in the network - and it's possible for class-sized groups to participate in cooperative group activities akin to what you see in a traditional school setting.

One hurdle that persists is this: a lot of times, these networks are self-selecting and often only folks with one kind of world view participate. This can be a problem since part of a classical education involves being exposed to new and at times oppositional points of view. A very real risk is that an echo chamber is substituted for an education.

 

[teatersroad]

Home-schooled kids here are allowed to participate in the prep intramural sports programs and other extracurricular clubby merde. Lots do.

 

[BlueRidgeMark]

how do you learn that while being home schooled?
you arnt in a building surrounded by 1000+ other kids in your age group,

And where in real life do you spend your time surrounded by people your own age? In what job, or business, are your companions all selected on the basis of being the same age as you? Well, except for a few "bosses" of course.

School, as we now practice it, is a highly UN-real-life situation. There is nothing about it that prepares children for real life.

all the problems, situations and scenarios you might find yourself in, would be kind of hard to replicate in the comfort and safety of your living room with your kid sister watching tv next to you and mom cooking lunch.

That's not even close to what homeschooling is like. You are speaking from profound ignorance.

"studies" on such topics hold about as much water as "political "polls" - they all mean nothing. you cant get answers that represent any population of people from asking a small group of people a question.

Again, you are speaking from profound ignorance. In this case, ignorance of the particular studies that have been done on this subject, and ignorance of the science of such research in general.

where do homeschooled kids socialize?

Family, to start with, where they learn proper respect for authority, unlike public schools where the herd mentality tears that down.

where do they meet new friends?

After family comes many, many activities with other homeschoolers. Co-op teaching, park days, field trips, and the list goes on. Mixing with other children of VARIOUS ages and with adults just like in REAL life, and very much UNLIKE that highly artificial environment called "school".

i couldnt imagine someone telling me i couldnt go to public school...

Nobody is telling anybody else's children they can't go to public school. If a parent prefers that his child learn to run with the herd, and get a sub-standard education, that his business.

what a huge experience to miss out on.
i would say the exception to the norm in a public school would be the kid who wears all black and has no friends, there are a few of them everywhere.
the exception to the norm of a homeschooled child would be one with friends outside of his/her neighborhood , or friends that they didnt meet through their parents bringing them together for "play dates"
public school is more of a "real world" learning environment, home schooling is a controlled environment

You have NO clue what homeschooling is like - you are condemning it based on caricatures painted by its enemies.

Hmmm. Come to think of it, that kind of "thinking" is pretty typical of what comes out of the government schools.

Maybe that's part of why the all Ivy League schools, along with almost all other universities, figured out that they really WANT homeschooled kids. They know how to get along with people of different backgrounds and ages, and they don't have to teach them remedial English and math before they can get them started on their college classes.

 

[Fronty Owner]

The home schooled kids I have met were ok.
the catch is they were public schooled till about 9th grade.
One parent was a PhD physicist. the other was a MS english teacher.

 

[JimiLL]

And where in real life do you spend your time surrounded by people your own age? In what job, or business, are your companions all selected on the basis of being the same age as you? Well, except for a few "bosses" of course.

School, as we now practice it, is a highly UN-real-life situation. There is nothing about it that prepares children for real life.






That's not even close to what homeschooling is like. You are speaking from profound ignorance.









Again, you are speaking from profound ignorance. In this case, ignorance of the particular studies that have been done on this subject, and ignorance of the science of such research in general.




Family, to start with, where they learn proper respect for authority, unlike public schools where the herd mentality tears that down.




After family comes many, many activities with other homeschoolers. Co-op teaching, park days, field trips, and the list goes on. Mixing with other children of VARIOUS ages and with adults just like in REAL life, and very much UNLIKE that highly artificial environment called "school".





Nobody is telling anybody else's children they can't go to public school. If a parent prefers that his child learn to run with the herd, and get a sub-standard education, that his business.



You have NO clue what homeschooling is like - you are condemning it based on caricatures painted by its enemies.

Hmmm. Come to think of it, that kind of "thinking" is pretty typical of what comes out of the government schools.

Maybe that's part of why the all Ivy League schools, along with almost all other universities, figured out that they really WANT homeschooled kids. They know how to get along with people of different backgrounds and ages, and they don't have to teach them remedial English and math before they can get them started on their college classes.

Whoa whoa... you have some good points... but you are just representing the far end of the spectrum.

Sorry to say.... home schooling cannot represent everything that can be experienced in a public level. And the same is true vice versa.

I do think that home schooled kids really do get the short end of the stick socially.....

Mark... did you grow up in a home schooled enviroment?? If not, it sounds like you did. And if you didnt, how many students were in your graduating class? How about the whole school, K-12??

When Banshee67 and myself graduated, there were 378 in our class, and nearly 1500 in the entire 4 grade school. I dont think any home schooled kids have the chance to make friends with 400 other kids their exact same age and for the most part same demographic. Not gonna happen.


Also... your answers to b-67 questions left a little to be desired...

Where do the kids socialize... Family...
How do they get a wide variety of influences... Family....
Who prepares children for life... Family...
Who do the kids make out and screw around with when they hit puberty.... FAMILY!!!!!

 

[kugss]

Who do the kids make out and screw around with when they hit puberty.... FAMILY!!!!!
love it!
We all know that there is book smarts and street smarts. Some are better at others. I know some really smart people that wounldnt know the first think to do for problem solving, and some really good problem solvers that are not that smart. The ones that are good at both are vert rare.

 

[unclemoustache]

there is a lot of stuff learned when in a public school setting that would never be learned at home , alone. you learn to work with others, large groups, after school sports/activities, social skills, all sorts of stuff. home schooling might be better for book smarts, but how would a 16 year old home schooled student act or feel around a bunch of 16 year olds that were public schooled and use to large groups of people

Ah yes, the old myth about home education. Think about this for a minute - people tend to become like who they hang around. Home educated kids hang around their parents, who are interested in training them to be productive members of society. Public schooled kids hang around kids their age, who are interested in ipods, cell phones, and looking cool. Seeing the majority of kids out there today (the OP put his finger on it) makes me want to keep my kids away from that kind of 'social' environment. Yes, I know there are exceptions, and that a small percentage of homeschooled kids give the rest a bad name, but I would argue that the majority of public educated kids give the rest a bad name. What kind of 'socialization' do you want?
I think this sums it up very well:

your assuming home school parents are educated and college graduate teachers are all stupid.well im proud of my public school learned kids,as for the neighbor that dropped out at 11th grade that home schools,well you can guess which ones will be flippen burgers.

You're assuming I'm assuming something, but your assumption is wrong. Most parents who home school are no more educated than public school teachers. It really has nothing to do with the educational level of the teacher, but rather the content of what is being taught, and the character that is learned in the classroom and the hallway.

Interesting article :
http://www.theonion.com/articles/increasing-number-of-parents-opting-to-have-childr,17159/

I do hope you all realized this was a tongue-in-cheek article. The humor is rather subtle. Notice he said "school-homed" rather than "home-schooled." It's a joke about raising children in the school. In case you didn't catch it, this quote from the article ought to make it clearer:
"Simply put, it's not the job of parents to raise these kids,".

A lot of home school parents participate in networks and cooperatives. Oftentimes, 'classroom' learning is enhanced by field trips that are open to every family in the network... One hurdle that persists is this: a lot of times, these networks are self-selecting and often only folks with one kind of world view participate. This can be a problem since part of a classical education involves being exposed to new and at times oppositional points of view. A very real risk is that an echo chamber is substituted for an education.

Are you saying that public school teaches both creation and evolution as valid theories? (yes, I'm saying that with a touch of sarcasm.) That George Washington, while he may have had his faults, was also a good and moral person? (The majority of history textbooks only say negative things about Washington.) Here's a good quote for you:
"Earlier this year, the New Jersey state Department of Education issued new history standards omitting all mention of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. Fortunately, after an uproar in the press, New Jersey's Department of Education backed down and agreed to include those famous names in the state's history standards. "
(citation: http://www.eagleforum.org/psr/2002/may02/psrmay02.shtml ) The rest of that article is also rather enlightening.

No, I'm afraid homeschoolers aren't the only ones with an educational bias. In fact, there's no one on the planet who doesn't have a bias (opinion). The question is not about reaching objectivity, but about 'which bias is the best bias to be biased with.'

Here's another interesting interview:
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vzNkW2eyR-I&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vzNkW2eyR-I&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

 

[needwood]

I bet you think your funny.....

I don't know if that was a joke or not RAMROD? H**l, if our path ever crosses ill cut with you man""""




































Your right, even I laughed...

 

[needwood]

I think that is is the parents that make the kids what they are. I am trying to teach my kids (ages 4 and 6 1/2) what a dollar is. If you want something you have to save for it. I make them work for something, don't just hand out the money, but we do have fun too. I just hope that some day they end up appreciating that I made them learn what a dollar was for. I tend to think of almost everything in terms of how many hours I would have to work to buy it, helps to talk myself out of lots.

The other day I was leaving a store and the kid in front of me dropped several pennies saying what can a penny buy anyway. My 4 year old bent right down and picked them up, and said more money for my bank.

I have learned that I get better results from calmly explaining and asking rather than screaming. That goes for my kids and a crew of men so there is no difference there. I have taken to asking for a favor to do it my way rather than the way they are doing it. Seems to get a favorable response most of the time.

My hat goes off to you sir"

 

[woodbooga]

Are you saying that public school teaches both creation and evolution as valid theories? (yes, I'm saying that with a touch of sarcasm.) That George Washington, while he may have had his faults, was also a good and moral person? (The majority of history textbooks only say negative things about Washington.) Here's a good quote for you:
"Earlier this year, the New Jersey state Department of Education issued new history standards omitting all mention of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. Fortunately, after an uproar in the press, New Jersey's Department of Education backed down and agreed to include those famous names in the state's history standards. "
(citation: http://www.eagleforum.org/psr/2002/may02/psrmay02.shtml ) The rest of that article is also rather enlightening.

No, I'm afraid homeschoolers aren't the only ones with an educational bias. In fact, there's no one on the planet who doesn't have a bias (opinion). The question is not about reaching objectivity, but about 'which bias is the best bias to be biased with.'

Here's another interesting interview:
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vzNkW2eyR-I&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vzNkW2eyR-I&amp;hl=en_US&amp;fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

The audio is out (temporarily I hope) so I could not view the video. Sorry.

Couple of things. While I strongly would hesitate to hitch my wagon to the reputation of our public school system, it does perform a time-tested socialization function. ( I hesitate to use that term, but I can't summon a synonym).

Even the Puritans - the great ancestors that so many of our founding generation recognized this need. In an age when education occurred at the hearthside, the dooryard, and the mechanick's workshop, they still implicitly recognized that children of a certain age required tutelage outside the context of the immediate family.

There is a lot of literature on what was called the 'putting out' system, whereby a child - upon entering adolescence - was put into the household of another reputable family in the town. This practice evolved for 2 reasons - one practical, the other developmental.

On the practical side, the adolescent was put into the home of a family whose patriarch practiced a trade that the youngster might learn. This was the 17th c. equivalent of starting in the mailroom of a business.

On the developmental side - well, the Puritans believed we were all the children of Adam and Eve. Our latent urge to corruptibility came into flower during adolescence. Rebelliousness and contempt for parental authority are part and parcel of that. (I won't even get into Puritans hang-ups regarding incest and bestiality - that's a whole other ball o' wax).

As reverence for parental authority waned, kids were put into the homes where the expectation was that the new head-of-household would take no guff and keep the kid on the straight and narrow.

As for the 1995 curriculum standards, and the exclusion of folks like George Washington. That's partly a function of the New Social History, partly a function of Boards of Education favoring Math and ELA over science and especially social studies, and partly a reflection of a wider historical amnesia amongst Americans.

I did read the story. I take issue with the writer's opinion of GW's greatest biographer. IMO, that was James Thomas Flexner. He, after all, coined the term "the indispensable man" the author bandies about in praise of that other biographer. oops.

 

[unclemoustache]

While I strongly would hesitate to hitch my wagon to the reputation of our public school system, it does perform a time-tested socialization function. ( I hesitate to use that term, but I can't summon a synonym).

Can you tell me what socialization function is, and how the public school system performs it? I was just working with 4 homeschooled kids, and told them about this discussion, and mentioned the 'big myth' of home schooling - lack of socialization. They all laughed and gave me many examples of how they were conversing just fine with public schoolers in various settings, and when it was discovered that they were home schooled, one of the publics asked, "don't you guys have social problems?" (Yes, that was a nice tactful question - sounds like they could use some social help). The homeschooler answered something to the effect that they had already been talking with them for 1/2 hour and hadn't had any difficulty.

Even the Puritans - the great ancestors that so many of our founding generation recognized this need. In an age when education occurred at the hearthside, the dooryard, and the mechanick's workshop, they still implicitly recognized that children of a certain age required tutelage outside the context of the immediate family.

On the developmental side - well, the Puritans believed we were all the children of Adam and Eve. Our latent urge to corruptibility came into flower during adolescence. Rebelliousness and contempt for parental authority are part and parcel of that. (I won't even get into Puritans hang-ups regarding incest and bestiality - that's a whole other ball o' wax).

As reverence for parental authority waned, kids were put into the homes where the expectation was that the new head-of-household would take no guff and keep the kid on the straight and narrow.

Basic education and trade school are two different things. The children of the puritans were sent to be apprenticed when they already had a full education - by the time they were around 15. There was nothing more they needed to learn, so they were considered men, and able to choose their profession. (We have the same thing, only we call it college, and it takes us 18 years or so to learn the basics.) Many of them stayed with the family and followed dad in his profession, but some wanted to do other things, and so left the home, but usually it was just across the street to the blacksmith, and they still lived at home, until they were ready to get married and start their own family.

As for the 1995 curriculum standards, and the exclusion of folks like George Washington. That's partly a function of the New Social History, partly a function of Boards of Education favoring Math and ELA over science and especially social studies, and partly a reflection of a wider historical amnesia amongst Americans.

Well, there's a problem with math in public school. My oldest took a standardized test a couple years ago to see how she matched up with public schooled kids her age. She outperformed them by a fair margin in every subject except math. The problem was that public schools are moving away from doing math, and are focused on talking about math. They don't learn the multiplication tables, but they learn the terminology - 'interger' 'equivolent' 'greater than' etc. My daughter didn't know the terms very well, but she knows how to do math. It seems to me that math class should teach math, not how to talk about it.

 

[bullseye13]

Well, there's a problem with math in public school. My oldest took a standardized test a couple years ago to see how she matched up with public schooled kids her age. She outperformed them by a fair margin in every subject except math. The problem was that public schools are moving away from doing math, and are focused on talking about math. They don't learn the multiplication tables, but they learn the terminology - 'interger' 'equivolent' 'greater than' etc. My daughter didn't know the terms very well, but she knows how to do math. It seems to me that math class should teach math, not how to talk about it.

You certainly have a good assessment of the current education system. Even on a college level which i am a recent grad from, there is a bizarre need to become familiar with these 10 terms which are similar to this other term. Now i'll give you a sentence, and you decipher these bullcrap math terms and tell me what all this BS equates to.

It seems like math is moving to a more theoretical class than a class where you learn how to perform it. I really got a kick out of this part of your post because i have experienced it and know first hand how accurate this statement is.
I could never understand why i should take an advanced algebra or related class that i have no intention of ever using again in my life. Im not going to become a nuclear physicist, ect. I took a math class that was called "Business Math with Applications" That, by far, was the most useful math i ever took in my life.

 

[1harlowr]

Wouldn't it be great if all are kids were taught chemistry, algebra, physics, and English by their own parent's :jawdrop: I'm educated but know I couldn't teach all these subjects. As a matter of fact I haven't seen even a public school teacher that could teach English and algebra. 99% of parents couldn't either. Throw in spanish and history............
The home schooler's in your areas must be different than in my area where they are, as a whole, 1-2 years behind.
And yes, I do know what I'm talking about. I have experience with both sides of this issue.

 

[JimiLL]

Wouldn't it be great if all are kids were taught chemistry, algebra, physics, and English by their own parent's :jawdrop: I'm educated but know I couldn't teach all these subjects. As a matter of fact I haven't seen even a public school teacher that could teach English and algebra. 99% of parents couldn't either. Throw in spanish and history............
The home schooler's in your areas must be different than in my area where they are, as a whole, 1-2 years behind.
And yes, I do know what I'm talking about. I have experience with both sides of this issue.

Right. I dont think many parents are as well trained or have as much experience in teaching as teachers do (now didnt that sound stupidly obvious?)

Some (and i use that word with extreme intent) parents are capable of teaching kids up to a second or third grade level of information without any training. After that... it begins to take some extra education on your part before you can effectively train your kids.

Dont believe me? What if I asked you all to divide 63 in 3471? On paper? How many of you could do it?

Put it this way.....if your kids had to learn how to use a chainsaw.... would you rather have them learn from an avegage homeowner with very little cutting and saw skills or would you rather have them learn from a trained and certified professional?? The home owner might have effective enough experience with such devices that he could effectively teach a young person very core skills and basic knowledge, but after that when the real thinking begins hes going to become obsolete.

 

[woodbooga]

Can you tell me what socialization function is, and how the public school system performs it?

The classrooms that I knew growing up were an extension of the way that time and space are organized in an industrialized society - row seating (dame schools were less formal), periods begining and ending at the sound of a bell. The remnants of reforms that were introduced in the 19th century as America was transitioning from an agrarian to an industrial society. Just one example.

to wit...

I was just working with 4 homeschooled kids, and told them about this discussion, and mentioned the 'big myth' of home schooling - lack of socialization. They all laughed and gave me many examples of how they were conversing just fine with public schoolers in various settings, and when it was discovered that they were home schooled, one of the publics asked, "don't you guys have social problems?" (Yes, that was a nice tactful question - sounds like they could use some social help). The homeschooler answered something to the effect that they had already been talking with them for 1/2 hour and hadn't had any difficulty.

I in no way suggest that kids that don't attend a public, parochial, or preparatory school are social retards. I used to provide direct services to educators in all phases - public, private, and homeschool. Often interacting with the kids themselves. Amongst the latter, some of the finest young people I've met were taught at home. Conversely, some of the least well-adjusted too.

Basic education and trade school are two different things. The children of the puritans were sent to be apprenticed when they already had a full education - by the time they were around 15. There was nothing more they needed to learn, so they were considered men, and able to choose their profession. (We have the same thing, only we call it college, and it takes us 18 years or so to learn the basics.) Many of them stayed with the family and followed dad in his profession, but some wanted to do other things, and so left the home, but usually it was just across the street to the blacksmith, and they still lived at home, until they were ready to get married and start their own family.

The 'apprenticeship' aspect was only part and parcel of the overall system. At the core of the practice of putting out was the conviction that natural born parents were prone to 'over-indulging' the rebellious spirit of their own children. Since there was a strict social protocol on how household servants were to behave, the surrogate parents into whose families kids were put into were entrusted in maintaining the social order and proper respect for authority.

Well, there's a problem with math in public school. My oldest took a standardized test a couple years ago to see how she matched up with public schooled kids her age. She outperformed them by a fair margin in every subject except math. The problem was that public schools are moving away from doing math, and are focused on talking about math. They don't learn the multiplication tables, but they learn the terminology - 'interger' 'equivolent' 'greater than' etc. My daughter didn't know the terms very well, but she knows how to do math. It seems to me that math class should teach math, not how to talk about it.

I see where your coming from - and good for your daughter. Seems that in an ideal world, one should be able to do the math and be able to articulate the principles behind it. Might make for better relations between management and engineers - obviating Dilbertesque miscues and abominations like Stihl flippy-caps.